How can 30% of nickel in Rossi’s reactor be transmuted into copper?

by Dott. Giuliano Bettini
Retired. Earlier: Selenia SpA, Rome and IDS SpA, Pisa
Also Adjunct Professor at the University of Pisa
Adjunct Professor at Naval Academy, Leghorn (Italian Navy)

In the present article I would like to answer a question posed by L. Kowalsky in a recent paper: how can 30% of nickel in Rossi’s reactor be transmuted into copper? “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler”, says a guy. I apologizes if I am too simplistic here.

The interest on Andrea Rossi’s Nickel-Hydrogen Cold Fusion technology is accelerating [1]. However, Rossi says that about 30% of nickel was turned into copper, after 6 months of uninterrupted operation. Kowalski [2]. says that “this seems to be impossible because the produced copper isotopes rapidly decay into Ni”. But how it works?

How it works
Following Focardi Rossi [3]. a Ni58 nucleus produces a Copper nucleus according to the reaction

Ni58 + p → Cu59

Copper nucleus Cu59 decays with positron (e+) and neutrino (ν) emission in Ni59 nucleus according to

Cu59 → Ni59 + ν + e+

Then (e+) annichilates with (e-) in two gamma-rays

e- + e+ → γ + γ

Starting [3] from Ni58 which is the more abundant isotope, we can obtain as described in the two above processes Copper formation and its successive decay in Nickel, producing Ni59, Ni60, Ni61 and Ni62. Because Cu63, which can be formed starting by Ni62, is stable and does not decay in Ni63, the chain stops at Ni62 (i.e. Cu63). Each process means some MeV.

Of course how can a proton p gets captured by the Ni58 nucleus? (and subsequent Ni59, Ni60, Ni61 and Ni62). Following Stremmenos [4]. a neutron-like particle, an electron proton pair, a mini-atom, a proton masked as a neutron, gets captured by the Ni58.

If the masked proton becomes a neutron the result is Ni59.
In order to have Cu59 (increase of atomic number from 28 to 29) the electron (of the masked proton) gets ejected from the nucleus. The masked proton becomes a proton.

The same process holds for all the subsequent transformations, until Cu63.
It remains to be understood the issue of the gamma radiation in the MeV range.

I am an electronic engineer, so I need easy numbers in order to understand.
However “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler”, says a guy. Maybe I am too simple here.
Let’s calculate.
MeV for each Ni transformation
I read that starting from Ni58 we can obtain Copper formation and its successive decay in Nickel, producing Ni59, Ni60, and Ni62. The chain stops at Cu63 stable.
For simplicity I assume all the Nickel in the reactor in the form Ni58.
For simplicity I suppose for each Ni58 the whole sequence of events from Ni58 to Cu63 and as a rough estimate I calculate the mass defect between (Ni58 plus 5 nucleons) and the final state Cu63.
Ni58 mass is calculated to be 57.95380± 15 amu
The actual mass of a copper-Cu63 nucleus is 62.91367 amu
Mass of Ni58 plus 5 nucleons is  57.95380+5=62.95380 amu
Mass defect is 62.95380-62.91367=0.04013 amu
1 amu = 931 MeV is used as a standard conversion
0.04013×931 MeV=37.36 MeV
So each transformation of Ni58 into Cu63 releases 37.36MeV of nuclear energy.
Nickel consumption
According to many blogs in the Internet “One hundred grams of nickel powder can power a 10 kW unit for a minimum of six months”.
How much of Ni58 should be transformed, in six months of continuous operation, in order to generate 10 kW?
I follow a procedure outlined in [2].
10 kW is thermal or electrical (?) power. The nuclear power must be larger. Assume a nuclear power twice:
20 kW = 20,000 J/s = 1.25 x 10**17 MeV/s.
Each transformation of Ni58 into Cu63 releases 37.36MeV of nuclear energy.
The number of Ni58 transformations should thus be equal to (1.25 x 10**17)/37.36 = 3.346 x 10**15 per second.
Multiplying by the number of seconds in six months (1.55 x 10**7) the total number of transformed Ni58 nuclei is 5.186 x 10**22.
This means 5 grams.
The order of magnitude is not exactly the same but seems to be plausible. This means also 5 grams of Nickel in Rossi’s reactor transmuted into (stable) Copper after six months of continuous operation at the rate of 10 kW.
Rossi says that about 30% of nickel was turned into copper, after 6 months of uninterrupted operation. At first glance this seems to agree with calculations based on simple assumptions.


890 comments to How can 30% of nickel in Rossi’s reactor be transmuted into copper?

  • M Han

    Hello Mr Rossi,
    Please let me know if you have demo unit at Rowan University with Peter Jansson.
    I would love to visit him there.
    Wishing You Success,
    Mike H

  • Joseph Fine

    Dr. Rossi,

    Let’s remember Philo Farnsworth. Farnsworth did pioneering work in Television and related TV Tube development. He also invented the Fusor device, which was related to his vacuum tube work.

    Philo founded, ‘ Farnsworth Television Labs ‘. Farnsworth Labs was purchased by ITT in 1949. He continued work at ITT and by 1960, had developed the ‘fusor’ device (using Inertial Elecrostatic Confinement or IEC). His initial design was further improved by Hirsch and Meeks.

    In 1961, ITT bought Hartford Insurance, Sheraton Hotels, Wonderbread and Avis Rent-a-Car etc. They also discontinued funding the Fusor. (So they refused the Fusor.)

    The Fusor device may be useful to the E-Cat effort if different ingredients would be used. (Such as H and Nickel.) Perhaps someone may find a way to develop a hybrid E-Cat.


  • […] F. MasseAndrea Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer @ Wikipedia –> It seems to work (the machine outputs 30 times the input).Andre Rossi says it is not “cold fusion” but rather low-energy […]

  • […] F. MasseAndrea Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer @ Wikipedia –> It seems to work (the machine outputs 30 times the input).Andre Rossi says it is not “cold fusion” but rather low-energy […]

  • Joseph Fine

    Alan DeAngelis,

    ‘Tantalizing’ comment. I had the same idea of starting with Tungsten. Unfortunately, according to Paolo, there is no ‘Wolfram’ or Tungsten to start with…to yield Tantalum.

    What Paolo Savaris’ mixture does contain is a tiny amount of Yb. The great mystery is why his tests produce increasing amounts of Yb. It is a very long way from Nickel to Yb. (I suggested Zirconium is involved, but that is just guessing.) Whether the (Yb, Hf, Ta) reactions produce useful energy is to be determined.


  • Andrea Rossi

    Mr “VEM”:
    I do not give information about the process inside the reactor.
    Warm regards,

  • VEM

    I’d like to discuss some aspect of the possible mechanism of this phenomenon.
    I wonder: Is there any spectroscopic data for nickel nuclei?
    Maybe there is an isolated one particle energetic level for a proton’s energies in the E-cat. In this case, as we know from quantum mechanics we will have resonant tunnel penetration of the protons into nuclei.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Craig:
    1- yes
    2- E-Cat
    3- no
    4- the first in October, follow up in november
    5- no
    Warm regards,

  • Dear Mr Rossi,

    Congratulations on your very promising technology. It will be a long wait until October, so thank you for continuing to answer questions on this site.

    Have you had a chance to think about how your technology will be marketed? What will be the official name you choose to call the technology. Several have been mentioned so far, e-cat, e-catalyzer, energy catalyzer, rossi catalyzer. Can you confirm the official product name you will choose for launch?

    Have you made any agreements / partnerships with official govt agencies eg: DoE to facilitate the rollout / distribution of your technology?

    Can you give an approximate month / date when your devices will go on sale to others in the industry. When do you anticipate the first commercial sale of an e-cat (after the 1MW plant is installed)?

    Have any of the MAJOR media asked for an interview yet?

    Free Energy Truth

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Ing. Rossi, Paolo Savaris, Joseph Fine:

    Maybe tantalum is formed in the following reaction:

    H(1) + W(N) > Ta(N-3) + He(4)

    All the best,

    Alan DeAngelis

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ing. Fabio Sanzani:
    Please contact me in November, after the start up of our 1 MW plant. Then I will have time to see what we can do to help each other.
    Warm regards,

  • fabiosanzani

    Buonasera Ing.Rossi
    per casualità Il ns. studio di ingegneria è a poche centinaia di metri da dove ha effettuato la dimostrazione il 14 gennaio c.a. (zona Roveri a Bologna per intendersi) e confesso, con grande rammarico, di non poter essere stato presente, anche se capisco che in questa fase la platea più adatta sono fisici e professori. Spero in futuro di poter essere presente ad una delle vostre dimostrazioni e/o incontri sulla materia od avere notizie sempre aggiornate, poiché nel mio campo di lavoro di progettazione termotecnica, la sua invenzione è una svolta epocale.
    Per intanto buon lavoro e le auguro ogni bene
    Fabio Sanzani

  • Joseph Fine

    Dr. Rossi, Paolo Savaris:

    It is easier to hypothesize a mechanism that produces Hafnium and Tantalum if there is Ytterbium in the mixture. Just as Nickel produces Copper in the E-Cat, a similar process may convert Yb to Hf and subsequently Hf becomes Ta. The pathway from Yb to Hf, however, suggests alpha capture.

    However, to explain Yterbium (Yb) element 70 production requires somewhat more imagination. The only thing that comes to mind, is that Zirconium (Zr) element 40 might react with Zinc (Zn) element 30. I don’t thing it adds up in terms of atomic weight, but that’s what I came up with so far.


  • savaris paolo

    Ing. Rossi …
    Here is a very quick report on the Ni-H system tests that I conducted.
    The tests were performed on little plates made from Nickel metal powder. The material was subjected to high pressure and formatted in the form of plate (36*10 mm2 – weight between 5-6 grams). Then the plates were subjected to heat cycle with temperature rise until 465-500°C (lasted 45-60 minutes).
    The interaction with Hydrogen was achieved thanks to alkali hydrides and transition metal hydride mixed with Nickel powder. Several tests were performed with Nickel and minor components, such Titanium, Zirconium, and oxides of alkali metals.
    XRF chemical analysis were performed on the original components and plates after heat treatments. Concentrations were observed over 1% wt for Cobalt and Tantalum up to 0,5% (Ytterbium up 0,3%, Hafnium up 0,19%)- always from concentrations of few ppm in the original materials. Other minor anomalies were detected for Br, Cl, Zn, Si, Mg, P, Si.

    Thanks for your attention
    Best regards
    Paolo Savaris

  • Italo A. Albanese

    About the direct electricity generation: If a hydrogen “mini-atom” joins a nickel atom as a proton, the spare electron should be expelled from the resulting copper nucleus with a very strong energy. This high energy electron could leave the copper atom, pass a semiconductor layer (silicon carbide should resist the e-cat inner temperature) and been collected from the negative pole of the “e-cat battery”, with the inner nickel core as the positive. This generator will be very similar to the “betavoltaics” tritium-powered battery used in pacemakers and in space satellites since 40 years ago.

    Thank you for your work,
    Italo A.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Carlos Perez,
    Prof Sven Kullander and Orof. Hanno Essèn will test in Sweden will make more tests with our E-Cat in Sweden within this year.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr V. Godbole:
    We are working on this issue.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    I agree; in any case I never answer on things I do not know, and I have no experience with radioactive wastes. My knowledge is based on experience from experimental empirical results.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Luke Mortensen:
    Until end October we will stay exclusively focused on the 1 MW plant for Greece.
    Warm Regards,

  • Luke Mortensen


    Sounds like a Razor/Razorblade business model. Or the Printer/Inkcartridge model. Best not to set the consumeable prices too low or the market will get used to the lower consumeable price. Its hard to change prices later.

    Any business-related press releases coming the near future?


  • Joseph Fine

    Dr. Rossi, Dr. Chris Pagel,

    Earlier in this blog, Dr. Pagel asked if Energy Catalyzer technology could be misused to transform elements from a low level or zero level radioactive state to a more radioactive form. And you answered it was not possible.

    I’d like to turn the question around. Do you think for some elements and some values of pressure, temperature, catalysts et cetera (similar to E-Cat operating conditions) that it might be possible to induce transmutations in harmful radioactive material to “decrease” their radioactivity levels. That may be too much to expect. One technological miracle is sufficient. You have your hands full for the forseeable future. But, in view of the disaster at the reactor complex in Japan, it would be amazing if there was even the slightest possibility of this happening.

    Best regards,

    J. F.

  • V. Godbole

    Dear Andrea

    The number of Rossi modules that can be linked parallel is unlimited but what is the upper limit of the number that can be linked in series? For electricity production a large number in a series link will be necessary. Is electricity production really possible this way? What about a direct conversion of energy to electricity?

  • Carlos Perez

    Dear Ing. Rossi:

    I would first like to congratulate you and Dr. Focardi on your excellent and groundbreaking work. The world needs more people like you, trying to find solutions to the huge problems we have.

    Although my background is as a computer engineer and I don’t have much knowledge of nuclear physics, I’m worried about the world’s energy problem and for some time I have been following your work with a lot of hope.

    I would like to know if Dr. Hanno Essen and/or Dr. Sven Kullander have carried out further tests to your E-Cat device after the test conducted on March 29 in Bologna (if i remember well) or else the approximate date that those further tests are expected to happen.

    In addition I would also like to know the aproximate date on which they will publish a report based on those tests.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Rossi.


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ing. Luca Neri:
    Every 6 months the modules have to be changed by our experts. Refilled modules are put on, the used ones are brought to our factory for the refill.
    Warm regards,

  • Ing. Luca Neri

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    as many others, I have been really excited by your invention and I’m looking forward to the first practical applications.
    My question is about the fuel of your e-cat (Nickel + catalyst) that I guess will be produced by your company: the end user will be able to recharge the device and restart it after the original fuel is exhausted, or a more complex maintenance procedure is needed, involving the intervention of a trained technician?
    Thanks in advance for your kind attention.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Luke Mortensen:
    1- ! MW plants for heat / air conditioned production in the immediate term; electric power eventually
    2- as above
    3- confidential
    4- no
    Warm regards,

  • Luke Mortensen

    Sticking with fun questions that do not get into trade secrets:
    1. Which E-Cat business application does your company have the most interest in? (example: home/business heating, etc) It was unclear if the 1MW was to be converted to electricity or to heat for their boilers.

    2. Which E-Cat application do you have the most personal interest? (example: propulsion, power production, etc)

    3. Did your initial experimentation involve other elements for fuel other than Nickel? Whats special about nickel that led you to experiment on it among other elements?

    4. Could E-Cat be used to enrich other elements? This would make the discovery more valuable.

    ~Luke Mortensen

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Chris Pagel:
    No, it is not possible, for many reasons. This is not a Pandora crate, is a very complex technology.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Alan De Angelis:
    I insist: Fe comes from the walls.
    Warm regards,

  • Chris Pagel

    Eng. Rossi,

    I am merely a cat and dog veterinarian, my atomic physics is mostly forgotten, I just barely remember electron shell diagrams. Forgive the simplicity of my question:

    Question: Is there any risk of taking other easily obtainable elements and transmuting them to incredibly dangerous elements? For example, an evil entity (be they a lone madman, an organization like Al Qaeda, or government like North Korea) takes a quantity of naturally mined Uranium, and transmutes it into Plutonium or Thorium? Cheap and readily available Bismuth into highly toxic/ radioactive Polonium to make a “dirty bomb?” There are *many* elements that are one or two protons away from being toxic to living organisms in small quantities.

    Please, ease my over-simplistic and primitive fear that basement transmutation is going to be like Pandora’s box.

    I’m sure buggy-whip makers bemoaned the dangers of the automobile, but a car accident is not the same danger as fistfuls of Plutonium in the wrong hands.

    I know you won’t divulge exactly which elements your process works with aside from Ni, I’m only looking for a broad reassurance it’s very narrowly limited to Ni.

    -Chris Pagel, DVM

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Dear Ing. Rossi:

    More than likely the majority of iron that is found with the nickel is just coming off the wall of the reactor (as was mentioned before). However, I was wondering if some of the iron could be formed by the following reaction:

    H(1) + Ni(61) > Co(58) + He(4) 0.489 MeV

    Co(58) > Fe(58) (by electron capture)

    This is just an obsessive thought that I had to unload. Again, don’t feel obliged to reply. I don’t want to give your patent attorney an aneurysm.

    Happy Easter,

    Alan DeAngelis

    P.S. This blog has really taken-off! Soon you’ll have more fans than this guy:

  • Davide C.

    A brief interview with Dr. Rossi

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear HRG:
    You can be sure, on my dead body, this technology will be put at the service on People.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Of course we talk of explosions under control, to stress the modules: the so called “distructive proofs”.
    Warm regards,

  • HRG

    Dr. Rossi:
    There are a lot of companies and governments that stand to lose a great deal if your invention is ever commercialized, and its still a long time until October. I am concerned you may be offered large sums of money to stop the commercialization of the E-Cat technology, or to sell it to people who would. You don’t strike me as the type of person that would accept such a buy-out, but I think a lot of people would be reassured to hear you rule it out.
    Happy Easter.

  • eernie1

    to V Godbole: The Hydrogen atom possessing the extra electron charge is called a free radical. Free radicals are the most chemically reactive substances causing chain reactions to occur and are found in all explosive reactions,formation of ozone and many other chemical formations. They are involved with cancers in the body because of their destructive activity. I am not claiming a chemical reaction is occuring, I am saying that the activity of the free radical allows the hydrogen free radical to penetrate the Nickel outer shells and engage in a fusion reaction with the Nickel nucleous. There is no reason to believe that this could not happen with other metals,more research and experimentation may reveal other possible combinations. At the present time only the Nickel reaction has been demonstrated by Rossi to be effective. One other aspect I forgot to mention is that the formation of free radicals and their lifetimes is highly dependent on proximity to each other when formed making them very sensitive to the pressure and temperature of their environment. Thus Rossi must be precise in controlling Hydrogen pressure and temperature. The addition of other Hydrogen isotopes such as Deuterium will also be effective in quenching the radical formation thus shutting down the energy device. d.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Tony, thanks to you and…

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Luke Mortensen:
    1- when for the first time I got substantial gain of energy, that kind of gain which is beyond any reasonable doubt
    2- 37 (all recorded, with the supposed reasons of the event)
    Warm Regards

  • Tony

    Was there a mistake in the patent? I’m interested and I’m sure you hope this is my last post. Also, my numbers using the MeV for Ni transformation above results in very little error from the measured results and not the (30g – 5g) or 25 gram error stated above.

    The patent on page 14 claims that 58g of nickel is the same as “30,000 ton of oil”. That’s a huge error based on my calculation.

    Nickel to Copper (58g) with Einstein’s equation from line 9 page 14 is 963 GJ.

    The article above seems to indicate that the energy should be 37.36MeV/atom * 1.602*10^-13J/MeV * 6.00214*10^23atom/58g or 359.25 GJ per 58g but I’ll address that below.

    1 tonne of crude oil (6.841 barrels) is 42 GJ (Wikipedia)
    That means 58gNi transformation is the equivalent of 963/42 or 22.93 tonne or 156.8 barrels of oil.
    The patent stated 30,000 tonne of mineral oil. That’s a big difference!

    Referring to the 10kW test:
    10kW * 24 h/day * 30 days/month * 6 months = 43200kWh
    1kWh = 3.6 MJ (Wikipedia)
    Test resulted in 43200kWh * 3.6MJ / 1kWh = 155.52 GJ
    If 58g was converted at this rate then that would have been 155.52 GJ *58g/30g or 300.67 GJ

    Not bad in that the heat produced was 300.67/963 or 31.22% of the patent theoretical but practically 58g replaces 300.67 GJ * 1 tonne / 42 GJ * 6.841 Barrels / 1 tonne = 48.97 Barrels. Impressive.

    Referring back to the article above and using 359.25GJ per 58g which may now be a more accurate number since the patent was filed with perhaps a better understanding today of the process. The measured versus this new theoretical is now 300.67GJ/359.25GJ or about 84% of the theoretical. This appears to me to be within measurement error given that any published numbers are probably approximate numbers. Also was the output power accurately logged the whole time? 30g and 10kW seem like well rounded numbers to me so that would contribute to a third party’s error. It’s now possible that the math works within measurement error which lends to better proving the theory.

    As an aside:
    Oil production in 2006 was 29.806 GBarrels (British Petroleum estimate)
    29.806 GBarrels 58gNi/48.97Barrels = 35.3 GgNi = 35.3 ktonneNi

    In 2003 nickel production was 1.4 million tonnes (1400ktonne). (some link from Wikipedia)
    That tells me that 35.3 / 1400 or 2.52% of the worlds Nickel production could replace 100% of the world’s oil production for 1 year.

    I didn’t get the opportunity to have someone review my calculations before posting so I look forward to anyone’s comments.


  • V. Godbole

    to eernie1

    Such a chemical (10^-10 m) analogy does not work at distances of one fermi (10^-15 m).

    One has to also explain why only Ni and H react thus and not other combinations.

  • Luke Mortensen

    You’ve been working on these reactors for some time. Instead of asking about technical details which you cannot provide, perhaps you could tell us some of the *fun* parts of being an inventor.

    1. What were a few of the most exciting moments as you invented these reactors over the last few years? (moments of discovery!)

    2. Another fun question: How many reactors have you blown up?
    (You have experimented to determine the safest size/pressures/temperatures. Stress testing is important!)

    ~Luke Mortensen

  • Tony

    I hope this gets a laugh. Growing up in Canada (relevant because our Nickels were made of Nickel) I remember a saying “Is that a roll of Quarters in your pocket or are you happy to see me?” I got a chuckle when I thought of, “Do you have a Nickel in your pocket or are you happy to see me?” I’m not sure if people would get that joke today other than the ones reading here, but in a year, in public, it will be a hoot as we all should have smiles on our faces.

    Again, all the best and again I say thanks to you…

  • eernie1

    I have a simple analogy taken from my chemistry days dealing with molecular reactions that may be applicable to the Rossi nuclear reaction. Rossi has succeeded with his secret ingredient to remove a proton from a hydrogen molecule without removing one of the electrons. He is left with a proton with two negative electrons looking for a positively charged center to interact with. Add some kinetic energy in the form of heat,and you have a fast moving component trying to find a center such as a Nickel nucleous to interact with. Since the Nickel electrons shield some of the columbic forces of the nucleous,the proton can manage to get close enough to enter the Nickel nucleous and fuse to create the copper isotopes and whatever excess energy in whatever quantities.Read Lynus Pauling’s “The Nature of The Chemical Bond”for more information on calculating energy wells and barriers.

  • D.Chambers

    Dear Mr. Casali,

    It’s looking like we’ll all be wondering until maybe sometime in October or November.

    I’m also a big fan of the E-cat and the vindication it will bring to those researchers that have worked so hard in this field.

    Waiting patiently,
    D. Chambers

  • Joseph Fine

    Mr Alessandro Casali:

    The initial reaction is “ignited” by use of the heater. Once started, if not enough electrical resistance heat is provided, water flow continues to remove heat from the reactor and hydrogen cools down. Hydrogen pressure and temperature decrease but nuclear reactivity may increase. Increased heat in the reactor should solve the problem of cooler hydrogen, but the hydrogen-nickel reactivity probably increases much faster than hydrogen pressure and temperature can respond. I suggested adding deuterium to replace hydrogen, since Deuterium doesn’t work in this system, but it’s cheaper to raise Hydrogen temperature and pressure.

    That’s my guess.


  • Alessandro Casali

    Dear Mr. Chambers,
    thanks a lot for your explanation.

    That’s a very clever conclusion but then i miss the point for keeping input energy after reaction has started if you only need to increase water flow in order to stop reaction.

    I’m totaly with the e-cat, just trying fo figure out a bit how it works.

    Best Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear David G:
    Congratulations to Dr Lonnie G. Johnson: if it will really work, 60% of efficiency is a very high achievement for the Seebeck effect. When he will have a mature and ready to work product we will be very interested to buy them to try to couple them with our generators.
    Warm Regards,

  • David G

    Mr. Rossi,

    You may want to communicate with Lonnie G. Johnson, Ph.D. regarding the Johnson Thermoelectric Converter System (JTEC) he is developing.

    In simple terms, the JTEC takes thermal energy and converts it into electrical energy at a rate of 60% efficiency.


Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>