Cold nuclear fusion

by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

Direct Download

Abstract
Recent accelerator experiments on fusion of various elements have clearly demonstrated that the effective cross-sections of these reactions depend on what material the target particle is placed in. In these experiments, there was a significant increase in the probability of interaction when target nuclei are imbedded in a conducting crystal or are a part of it. These experiments open a new perspective on the problem of so-called cold nuclear fusion.

PACS.: 25.45 – deuterium induced reactions
Submitted to Physics of Atomic Nuclei/Yadernaya Fizika in Russian

Introduction
Experiments of Fleischmann and Pons made about 20 years ago [1], raised the question about the possibility of nuclear DD fusion at room temperature. Conflicting results of numerous experiments that followed, dampened the initial euphoria, and the scientific community quickly came to common belief, that the results of [1] are erroneous. One of the convincing arguments of skeptics was the lack in these experiments of evidence of nuclear decay products. It was assumed that “if there are no neutrons, therefore is no fusion.” However, quite a large international group of physicists, currently a total of about 100-150 people, continues to work in this direction. To date, these enthusiasts have accumulated considerable experience in the field. The leading group of physicists working in this direction, in our opinion, is the group led by Dr. M. McKubre [2]. Interesting results were also obtained in the group of Dr. Y. Arata [3]. Despite some setbacks with the repeatability of results, these researchers still believe in the existence of the effect of cold fusion, even though they do not fully understand its nature.  Some time ago we proposed a possible mechanism to explain the results of cold fusion of deuterium [4]. This work considered a possible mechanism of acceleration of deuterium contaminant atoms in the crystals through the interaction of atoms with long-wavelength lattice vibrations in deformed parts of the crystal. Estimates have shown that even if a very small portion of the impurity atoms (~105) get involved in this process and acquires a few keV energy, this will be sufficient to describe the energy released in experiments [2].  This work also hypothesized that the lifetime of the intermediate nucleus increases with decreasing energy of its excitation, so that so-called “radiation-less cooling” of the excited nucleus becomes possible. In [5], we set out a more detailed examination of the process.  Quite recently, a sharp increase of the probability of fusion of various elements was found in accelerator experiments for the cases when the target particles are either imbedded in a metal crystal or are a part of the conducting crystal. These experiments compel us to look afresh on the problem of cold fusion.

Recent experiments on fusion of elements on accelerators
For atom-atom collisions the expression of the probability of penetration through a Coulomb barrier for bare nuclei should be modified, because atomic electrons screen the repulsion effect of nuclear charge. Such a modification for the isolated atom collisions has been performed in H.J. Assenbaum and others [6] using static Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The experimental results that shed further light on this problem were obtained in relatively recent works C. Rolfs [7] and K. Czerski [8]. Review of earlier studies on this subject is contained in the work of L. Bogdanova [9]. In these studies a somewhat unusual phenomenon was observed: the sub-barrier fusion cross sections of elements depend strongly on the physical state of the matter in which these processes are taking place. Figure 1 (left) shows the experimental data [8], demonstrating the dependence of the astrophysical factor S(E) for the fusion of elements of sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of the matter that contains the target nucleus 7Li. The same figure (right) presents similar data [7] for the DD reaction, when the target nucleus was embedded in a zirconium crystal. It must be noted that the physical nature of the phenomenon of increasing cross synthesis of elements in the case where this process occurs in the conductor crystal lattice is still not completely clear.

Figure 1. Up – experimental data [8], showing the energy dependence of the S-factor for sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of matter that contains the nucleus 7Li.  Down – the similar data [7] for the reaction of DD, when the target nucleus is placed in a crystal of zirconium. The data are well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV.

The phenomenon is apparently due to the strong anisotropy of the electrical fields of the crystal lattice in the presence of free conduction electrons. Data for zirconium crystals for the DD reactions can be well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV. It is natural to assume that the corresponding distance between of two atoms of deuterium in these circumstances is less than the molecular size of deuterium. In the case of the screening potential of 300 eV, the distance of convergence of deuterium atoms is ~510ˆ12 m, which is about an order of magnitude smaller than the size of a molecule of deuterium, where the screening potential is 27 eV. As it turned out, the reaction rate for DD fusion in these conditions is quite sufficient to describe the experimental results of McKubre and others [2]. Below we present the calculation of the rate process similar to the mu-catalysis where, instead of the exchange interaction by the muon, the factor of bringing together two deuterons is the effect of conduction electrons and the lattice of the crystal.

Calculation of the DD fusion rate for “Metal-Crystal” catalysis
The expression for the cross section of synthesis in the collision of two nuclei can be written as

where for the DD fusion

Here the energy E is shown in keV in the center of mass. S(E) astrophysical factor (at low energies it can be considered constant), the factor 1/E reflects de Broglie dependence of cross section on energy. The main energy dependence of the fusion is contained in an expression

that determines the probability of penetration of the deuteron through the Coulomb barrier. From the above expressions, it is evident that in the case of DD collisions and in the case of DDμcatalysis, the physics of the processes is the same. We use this fact to determine the probability of DD fusion in the case of the “metal-crystalline” DD-catalysis.  In the case of DDμ- catalysis the size of the muon deuterium molecules (ion+) is ~5×10ˆ13m. Deuterium nuclei approach such a distance at a kinetic energy ~3 keV. Using the expression (1), we found that the ratio of σ(3.0 keV)/σ(0.3 keV) = 1.05×10ˆ16. It should be noted that for the free deuterium molecule this ratio [ σ(3.0keV)/σ(0.03keV)] is about 10ˆ73.  Experimental estimations of the fusion rate for the (DDμ)+ case presented in the paper by Hale [10]:

Thus, we obtain for the “metal-crystalline” catalysis DD fusion rate (for zirconium case):

Is this enough to explain the experiments on cold fusion? We suppose that a screening potential for palladium is about the same as for zirconium. 1 cmˆ3 (12.6 g) of palladium contains 6.0210ˆ23(12.6/106.4) = 0.710ˆ23 atoms. Fraction of crystalline cells with dual (or more) the number of deuterium atoms at a ratio of D: Pd ~1:1 is the case in the experiments [2] ~0.25 (e.g., for Poisson distribution). Crystal cell containing deuterium atoms 0 or 1, in the sense of a fusion reaction, we consider as “passive”. Thus, the number of “active” deuterium cells in 1 cmˆ3 of palladium is equal to 1.810ˆ22. In this case, in a 1 cmˆ3 of palladium the reaction rate will be

this corresponds to the energy release of about 3 kW. This is quite sufficient to explain the results of McKubre group [2]. Most promising version for practical applications would be Platinum (Pt) crystals, where the screening potential for d(d,p)t fusion at room temperature is about 675 eV [11]. In this case, DD fusion rate would be:

The problem of “nonradiative” release of nuclear fusion energy
As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed.

Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances  Coulomb repulsion.

The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case,


Here ν is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time τ. According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have:

Here ν° is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantum-mechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term ν°. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 10ˆ22  sˆ-1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810ˆ22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4×10ˆ3 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.3×10ˆ18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.1×10ˆ11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10ˆ-19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term ν°. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 10ˆ12-10ˆ14 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10ˆ-16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state.  The energy dissipation mechanism of the compound nucleus 4He* with virtual photons, discussed above, naturally raises the question of the electromagnetic-nuclear structure of the excited compound nucleus.

Fig. 3. Possible energy diagram of the excited 4He* nucleus is presented.

Figure 3 represents a possible energy structure of the excited 4He* nucleus and changes of its spatial configuration in the process of releasing of excitation energy. Investigation of this process might be useful to study the quark-gluon dynamics and the structure of the nucleus.

Discussion
Perhaps, in this long-standing history of cold fusion, finally the mystery of this curious and enigmatic phenomenon is gradually being opened. Besides possible benefits that the practical application of this discovery will bring, the scientific community should take into account the sociological lessons that we have gained during such a long ordeal of rejection of this brilliant, though largely accidental, scientific discovery. We would like to express the special appreciation to the scientists that actively resisted the negative verdict imposed about twenty years ago on this topic by the vast majority of nuclear physicists.

Acknowledgements
The author thanks Prof. S.B. Dabagov, Dr. M. McKubre, Dr. F. Tanzela, Dr. V.A. Kuzmin, Prof. L.N. Bogdanova and Prof. T.V. Tetereva for help and valuable discussions. The author is grateful to Prof. V.G. Kadyshevsky, Prof. V.A. Rubakov, Prof. S.S. Gershtein, Prof. V.V. Belyaev, Prof. N.E. Tyurin, Prof. V.L. Aksenov, Prof. V.M. Samsonov, Prof. I.M. Gramenitsky, Prof. A.G. Olshevsky, Prof. V.G. Baryshevsky for their help and useful advice. I am grateful to Dr. VM. Golovatyuk, Prof. M.D. Bavizhev, Dr. N.I. Zimin, Prof. A.M. Taratin for their continued support. I am also grateful to Prof. A. Tollestrup, Prof. U. Amaldi, Prof. W. Scandale, Prof. A. Seiden, Prof. R. Carrigan, Prof. A. Korol, Prof. J. Hauptmann, Prof. V. Guidi, Prof. F. Sauli, Prof. G. Mitselmakher, Prof. A. Takahashi, and Prof. X. Artru for stimulating feedback. Continued support in this process was provided with my colleagues and the leadership of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and I am especially grateful to Prof. R. Parkey, Prof. N. Rofsky, Prof. J. Anderson and Prof. G. Arbique. I express special thanks to my wife, N.A. Tsyganova for her stimulating ideas and uncompromising support.

References
1. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, M. W. Anderson, L. J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electro anal. Chem. 287, 293 (1990).
2. M. C. H. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi, and P. Haglestein, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2000, Lerici (La Spezia), Ed. F. Scaramuzzi, (Italian Physical Society, Bologna, Italy, 2001), p 3; M. C. H. McKubre, In Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings Of The 10th International Conference On Cold Fusion;  Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 21-29 August, 2003, Ed by P. L. Hagelstein and S. R. Chubb, (World Sci., Singapore, 2006). M. C. H. McKubre, “Review of experimental measurements involving dd reactions”, Presented at the Short Course on LENR for ICCF-10, August 25, 2003.
3. Y. Arata, Y. Zhang, “The special report on research project for creation of new energy”, J. High Temp. Soc. (1) (2008).
4. E. Tsyganov, in Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 1981–1989. Original Russian text published in Yadernaya Fizika, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 2036–2044.
5. E.N. Tsyganov, “The mechanism of DD fusion in crystals”, submitted to IL NUOVO CIMENTO 34 (4-5) (2011), in Proceedings of the International Conference Channeling 2010 in Ferrara, Italy, October 3-8 2010.
6. H.J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A – Atomic Nuclei 327, p. 461-468 (1987).
7. C. Rolfs, “Enhanced Electron Screening in Metals: A Plasma of the Poor Man”, Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006.
8. A. Huke, K. Czerski, P. Heide, G. Ruprecht, N. Targosz, and W. Zebrowski, “Enhancement of deuteron-fusion reactions in metals and experimental implications”, PHYSICAL REVIEW C 78, 015803 (2008).
9. L.N. Bogdanova, Proceedings of International Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Topics, Dubna, June 18–21, 2007, published by JINR, E4, 15-2008-70, p. 285-293
10. G.M. Hale, “Nuclear physics of the muon catalyzed d+d reactions”, Muon Catalyzed Fusion 5/6 (1990/91) p. 227-232.
11. F. Raiola (for the LUNA Collaboration), B. Burchard, Z. Fulop, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.31, 1141 (2005); Eur. Phys. J. A 27, s01, 79 (2006).

by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

Direct Download

3,497 comments to Cold nuclear fusion

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Mi corregga se sbaglio.E cat 10 kW a piena potenza consuma 1,67 kWh el per 10 kWh term,al costo indicativo di 0,15 euro/kWh sono 0,25 eu per avere 10 kWh term quindi 0,025 eu/kWh term,più costo ricarica e manutenzione.A piena potenza si scalda la casa con un asciugacapelli.Il costo per kWh term a metano mi risulta essere circa 0,103 eu.Direi che questa Ford T fa già mangiare la polvere alle auto a benzina più moderne.
    Mi sono piaciute le sue considerazioni sullo studio,la cultura è uno strumento meraviglioso e necessario che è acquisibile in ogni momento,l’intelligenza invece è una dotazione di fabbrica.

    Saluti G. Guerrini

  • Dear Dr. Rossi:

    My wife’s family in Thailand is interested in the E-Cat.
    Can you say about when you will be able to give the name and contact information for your distributor for Thailand E-Cat sales?

    Wishing you success with your production efforts.

    Best Regards,

    Daniel G, Zavela

  • Omega Z

    Questions. I’m trying to determine when it’s practical or not practical to use a 10Kwh E-cat based on Cop 6. Cost/Benefit.

    1. E-cat requires 1.6+ Kw to produce 10Kw. Yes or No.

    2. Run 24/7 for 730 hours(1 month) would be 1.6+ would be approximately 1170 Kwh. Yes or No or how many?

    3. Starting with 15C input. At 60C E-cat water output would be approximately 3 liters per minute. Yes or No.

    4. It’s been stated by some that the Maximum core temp would be determined by the melting point of Nickel.
    As the E-cat produces some Copper, Wouldn’t copper or other elements in the core with lower melting points determine the maximum core temp that’s achievable.

    Thanks in advance. Good luck Rossi.
    Omega Z

    Asking Questions is how we learn. Thus the E-cat was Born.

  • John DiRico

    Dear Mr. Rossi
    I’m very pleased to read Frank Acland’s article this morning about the progress being made with the home E-Cat and the 1MW plant to be delivered in a few weeks, also the fact that you may be working with Siemens AG to develop a turbine for the production of electricity. that’s great news, I have preordered 2 E-cats at the Ecat.com site as soon as the web site went up. can you confirm that my preorder is in. Last year I had solar panels installed and I was one of the first one in my town just north of Boston, and I am very pleased with them they are now generating about half of my electricity I’m currently using, now I see a few of my neighbors having them installed also. On a sunny day my solar panels are currently generating about 27KW per day, and it should get better as the day get longer. Let me tell you it’s very exiting to see the electric meter spin backward. Can you tell me how much energy is required to run the Ecat? and will the energy from the solar panels be enough to run the Ecat? I read in one of your answers that you will visit some of your customers when the home Ecats will be installed, I’m hoping to be one of your first customers here in Massachusetts and It would be an honor to meet you and to personally thank you for all your hard work.

    Thanks again and Best regards
    John D

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    1- I think that it is not important what a student studies, but how he studies. In anything you study there is the Infinite, and if you study very well one thing you get the capacity to learn and you can apply this capacity to everything. Once you have learnt to fish, you can fish what you want
    2- Interesting
    3- 0.3 cents
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Robert Curto

    First thanks to: Dr Andrea Rossi.
    He said the World suppl
    of Nickel will last many thousands of years.

    Next thanks to: Dr. Joseph Fine
    He said the cost of Nickel is 2 cents a gram.

    Also thanks to: Sterling D. Allan, on his excellent web site
    he said one gram of Nickel (cost 2 cents) can Generate E-CAT energy the same as 4 Barrels of Oil (cost $420)

    If that doesn’t excite
    you, Bury you because you are already dead !

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Joseph Fine

    Germany, Japan and many other countries (including the US) face increased costs for electricity – with serious economic impact. This is partly due to restrictions on nuclear power plants and partly due to increased energy costs for fossil fuels.
    (* Natural gas being exceptions.)

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,druck-816669,00.html

    1) When the E-Cat can produce electricity and product demand soars, you will have to work an impossible 32 hours per day (or more) instead of “only” 16 hours per day. Since there are only 24 hours per day, you probably need some help. What should students and/or professionals study to prepare themselves for the Energy future?

    2) A new Enzyme, CTec3, by Novozymes, will likely reduce the cost of Ethanol production. Although I am against Ethanol subsidies, I think Ethanol costs can be reduced further via E-Cat produced heat to substitute for other process heat sources. Have you considered E-Cat thermal energy as a source of heat in this area? There are a lot of Ethanol refineries and some may use E-Cats.

    3) What do you expect the cost will be of thermal kWh? I have read that costs for (E-Cat) electricity will be about 1 cent per kWh. Does that mean heat will be about 1/3 to 1/2 cents per kWh?

    Joseph Fine

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,druck-816669,00.html

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Piero:
    You are right, we are studying the issue.
    But a burner means: chimney, combustion room, and still a big problem in energy focusing. We are studying the issue, though. In industrial applications it is viable, but ib the domestic E-Cats it is quite problematic. I agree, of course, on the fact that thermal energy would cost less.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    You are right,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Antonello Lai:
    To make very low prices we must produce 1 million pieces per year. Ask to any engineer what does mean to make a factory of this kind, you will understand how difficult it is and how many time it takes…I could sell now the E-Cats, but at a price ten times higher, which could be a tremendous mistake under a strategic point of view. I know you read this blog with attention, so I am sure you know why we have to be able to produce at low prices.
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Antonello Lai

    Gentile Dott. Rossi premetto che non sto scrivendo per fare una polemica perchè sono suo sostenitore e lo ho espresso svariate volte in precedenti email, ma mi chiedevo se Lei potesse dare una reale giustificazione al ritardo nel commercializzare il prodotto.

    Fino ad ora infatti poco si è compreso delle reali motivazioni del ritardo. Le chiedo quindi se potesse di far chiarezza.

    Da quello che fino ad ora ho compreso i soldi ci sono, considerato allora che la gestione elettronica mi rifiuto di pensare che possa necessitare più di 1 mese di lavoro, visto che si tratta solo di realizzare una gestione a microcontrollore dell’aparattto, mi chiedo quale sia il vero motivo del ritardo. Io mi sono risposto in questo modo.

    a)Sta prendendo tempo sperando che arrivi l’approvazione dei prevetti Eu e Wipo oppure
    b)La reazione non ha ancora ad oggi la corretta stabilità che lei ritiene sia necessaria per commercializzarlo

    Cordiali saluti
    Antonello L.

  • Joseph Fine

    Robert Curto, Andrea Rossi:

    The price of Nickel is not 8 cents but about 2 cents per gram. The market price is about $9 per pound or $20 per kilogram. Of course, if you only buy a few grams instead of several kilograms or tons, you pay more per unit.

    As the price of oil increases, the price advantage of Nickel might become clear to the news media. Perhaps, the Internet has obviated the news media.

    “Obviate” obviates the need of “need”.

    Joseph

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    ….anche Einstein credo fosse solito fare questi errori di distrazione! 😉

    saluti G Guerrini

  • Piero

    Mr.Rossi, given that self-sustained mode is still unpractical, and following the line of thought of Pekka, i think that replacing the electric heather with an (electronically controlled) gas or kerosene burner – like those used in webasto heating units for boats or RVs) could dramatically improve the cost per kwh while keeping the setup simple. May be a 2.0 version of the ecat for places where electricity is too expensive or altogether missing. Just my two cents. All the best

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Robert Curto:
    The Nickel reserves are for many thousand years and our consune is negligible. Good comment, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Pekka Janhunen:
    Yes, you can cpiple the E-Cat with a heat pump.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
    Yes, I confirm that the E-Cat with a power of 10 kW should go for sale at a price between 600 and 900 US$. You are right, I made a typo! I have corrected it after your correction.
    Thank you and
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Per evitare fraintendimenti,nel suo penultimo post c’è un errore ed intendeva Prezzo/10 kW ?

    Saluti G. Guerrini

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,
    In addition to heating the reactor by an electric resistor, combustion heat or solar heat, it should be possible to use a heat pump operating between the reactor coolant and the core. Such heat pump would need less electric power than a resistor. For example if the “COP” of the heat pump would be 2, the electric power needed would be only 1/12 instead of 1/6. Assuming 30% efficiency in the electric generator, it would increase the efficiency of electricity production from 0.3-1/6=13.3% to 0.3-1/12=21.7%, a factor of 1.63 improvement. Despite the added complexity, it might be worth investigating in the industrial 1 MW setup, if not for the home device.

  • Robert Curto

    I believe the correct spelling is Cartridge.

    Robert

  • Robert Curto

    Please scroll down to the question from:
    Emily Sutton Feb. 24,
    11:09A
    Scroll back up to the answer from:
    Andrea Rossi Feb. 24,
    6:10P

    I would like to make a few commemts, I believe they are accurate, if not someone please correct me.
    Nickel is one of 3 Fuels, the other two are also inexpensive.
    The World has enough Nickel for a few hundred years.
    The cost of Nickel is
    8 cents a Gram.
    The E-CAT uses a few grams every 6 months.
    That is why the cost of
    the Fuel Cartage is in the tens of dollars.

    How about the 30 year life ?
    IF the cost is 700 dollars, that is 24 dollars a year, or 2 dollars a month !

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hughd:
    1- I do not foresee any increase of the Coefficient Of Performance.
    2- The constant self-sustaining will be possible when we will be able to make electricity, because at that point the electricity made by one E-Cat will drive other E-Cats, so that their system will be constantly self sustained.
    Thank you for your very good considerations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Helmut H.:
    Sorry to correct you, but I said that within October the sales will start, sending to the People that made the pre-orders the real offers. I always said that we hope to start the sales within the next winter, but that I suppose that in any case we will start within 18 months. Nothing is changed; in any case remember that we are making from zero a factory able to produce in a robotized line 1 million of E-Cats per year, reducing the prices from 5000-6000 US$/10 kW to 600-900 $/10 kW ! Have you a faint idea what this does mean? Bumps in the road can happen and delay, not stop, us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Helmut H.

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    you wrote:
    “Dear Christian Bistriceanu:
    1- the launch in the market will be made, I hope, within the next year, or at worst within 18 months.”

    Next year or 18 months from now (again)? This is a big negative surprise. You stated you hope to bring the E-Cat in October this year or in the coming Winter to the market. What has happened?

    Kind regards,
    Helmut

  • Hughd

    Mr. Rossi,

    It is quite fortunate that the new E-Cat energy source can be economically marketed and delivered in a small (10 kW), low cost ($700-$900) non-subsidized unit to begin with.

    If the E-Cat had to be first sold as a large 1 Giga watt subsidized plant the introductory period of this new technology would take years.

    This leads to my questions:
    1) What can be forecast for increasing the COP of 6? If yes, in what time period?
    2) Do you see a future E-Cat that can be provided with a stable self-sustaining mode? If yes, in what time period?

    Best regards,
    Hughd

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Emily Sutton:
    First of all, I am honoured that in your University you gave attention to my work. Thank you indeed.
    Here are the answers:
    1- No, we will supply the charges and the refills with inside all the E-Cat needs. By the way: we buy nickel in Brasil.
    2- The expected life span of an E-Cat is 30 years
    3- The spent charges are sent back to us for recycling
    4- I am really grateful to you for your attention, which honours my work. We will send you free an E-Cat when we will put them in the market. In change I will ask that you put it in operation and send to Leonardo Corporation all your suggestions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
    We take your message as a good wish!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Christian Bistriceanu:
    1- the launch in the market will be made, I hope, within the next year, or at worst within 18 months.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Christian Bistriceanu

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I am following the E-CAT story for more than a year and I have also ordered two of them. I know you may have possibly answered this question indirectly but I’ll give it a try. Do you by now a possible day or month for the actuall launch of the 10kW device? If you cannot foresee a date or a month yet, have any major steps been overcomed so very soon you can have an estimate date?
    Thanks again for your work and I keep my fingers crossed that I will be able to use an E-Cat later this year 😉

    Best regards,
    Christian

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Wonderful!!Mi pre-prenoto per un apparato di produzione energia elettrica per venderla alla rete!(:

    saluti ottimisti G.Guerrini

  • Mats Heijkenskjold

    Dear Mr Rossi

    To comment Mr Giovanni Guerrini on Tesla turbine:

    I do not think there is a real problem with the weight of the discs for a small turbine. To use titanium will only increase cost.
    The surface finish of the discs should be very smooth. Not like in cylinders of combustion engines where you need a microstucture of “channels” to keep the lubricant oil on the surface.
    The discs could more easily being produced by normal surface grinding for mass production.

    Best regards

    Mats Heijkenskjold

  • Emily Sutton

    Dr. Rossi,

    First of all, congratulations on your successes. I have been following your work since December of last year and I’m thrilled to see your research materializing.
    I am a student at Appalachian State University in North Carolina. We have an excellent program in Sustainable Development and Appropriate Technology, and I am majoring in both. In discussing your machine with professors, and throughout my research, a few questions have still be unanswered.

    1. I know your energy catalyst does not use palladium. This is great. The resource is rare and difficult to mine. Nickel, on the other hand, is much more plentiful. Would your consumers be required to supply their own nickel powder for the fuel? If so, where does it come from?
    2. Also, what is the expected life span of a home unit? When the reaction chambers are replaced after six months, are they thrown away or sent back to be cleaned and reused?

    This is a stretch, but when these units become commercially available, the school may be interested in utilizing this technology for a pilot project in the Appalachian region.

    Emily Sutton

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ivan:
    When we will accept public investors we will give public information. Now is too soon.
    For more info, please contact
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
    The evolution is very fast, everyday we are modifying something.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
    The price will be 700-900 US$ per the E-Cat of 10 kW. This is the way we will make useless the reverse engineering.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Salvatore Boi:
    Thank you to you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Salvatore Boi

    All nights can’t I sleep thinking at your ecat and its implications; also I’m in list for one ecat and I can’t find rights words in order to write how much amazing the ecat is. Thankyou for your job, Dott. Great ANDREA ROSSI.
    Best regards,
    Salvatore Boi, Cagliari – Italy

  • Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I still follow this blog from time to time, and I still wish you a lot of succes, but reffering to the recent questions of Valeria and Piero on this blog, I remember I made similar remarks on my blog in october 2011:

    My personal and first impression was that the E-cat was more suitable for industrial applications (1MW plants or more) and not so much as a small home unit. I summoned several reasons for this:

    i) That there still is the need of feeding the e-cat from the grid with an energy consumption of 1/6 of the total thermal energy the e-cat produces. (This remark is the same as in the recent questions of Valeria and Piero on this blog.)

    ii) the E-cat, as it operates now, cannot easily be switched on and off, because it takes (relatively much) time to start-up and also generates a lot of residual heat after it is switched off. So doesn’t that mean that the E-cat, like it operates now, is more effective when it’s used in continuous mode, generating energy to processes in a continuous way, so that you don’t loose time and energy when switching on and off all the time.

    I then concluded that the E-cat was more fit for industrial applications (bigger plants, like the 1MW plant) and/or as common heating for whole appartment blocks, where it has to deliver the energy to many users, so that it operates in a more contineous mode/way.

    Do you have a solution for this potential problem of (possible) energy-loss in single home-applications? (A 10 kw E-cat consumes 1.667 kW electrical energy from the grid)

    (Nevertheless, a boiler can be heated for some hours at night, and central heating usually works contineously, but I’m one of these guys that just uses a gas-heater at small pace, with low energy-consumption, and compare this with a 10 kW E-cat that still consumes 1.667 kW electrical energy continuoesly, witch for me is too much).

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Il prezzo stimato al pubblico di circa 700 us dollars dell’e cat prodotto su ampia scala,è inteso per un apparato da 10 kW o è da intendersi prezzo per kW?Grazie.

    Saluti G.Guerrini

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Cop 6 vuole dire energia elettrica al solo costo di ricarica (con efficenza del 33%)che è irrisorio,poi c’è l’ammortamento della macchina che si dovrebbe pagare prima che il prezzo dell’energia scenda.A quel punto si ha energia quasi gratis,mentre le nuove macchine avranno un cop maggiore e così via,seguendo l’evoluzione “dalla Ford T alla formula 1″(citazione)…niente male!
    Saluti G. Guerrini

  • Ivan

    Mr Rossi, could you please advice which is the best way to invest in the e_cat, shares etc.
    Do you have a waiting list?
    Kind Regards.
    Ivan.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Rampado Dr Roberto:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
    I am not an expert of this issue,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Charlie Sutherland:
    We are working as much as possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Joseph,
    Intriguing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea,

    If you produce 6 kWh of Thermal energy output for each 1 kWh of Electric input and it takes 3 kWh of Thermal output (from the reactor) to generate each 1 kWh of Electrical Energy ( from the generator), then for each reactor input of 1 kWh Electric you can generate 2 kWh of Electric output. That’s useful. With multiple doubling stages, just as in the checkerboard story, you would need 64 reactors of admittedly increasing complexity and cost, to produce 2^64 kWh of Electrical output. That is a big number! About 1.8*10^19 kWh. I hope you are not designing your generating plants in this fashion. (As the tenth, eleventh etc. stages become much more difficult to build and operate.)

    Joseph

  • It seems your e-cat’s arrival into the world is not a moment too soon. We may be needing lots of heat if the latest prediction from Russia’s space engineer on the coming ice age is correct.

    http://russia-ic.com/news/show/13717#.T0Q3Ms7rk9C

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Geniale la turbina di Tesla,la butto lì da ignorante:utilizzare il titanio per risolvere il problema del peso eccessivo dei dischi, con finitura superficiale mutuata dalle varie che si usano nelle canne cilindri dei motori moderni e magari usare un fluido organico?

    Saluti G. Guerrini

  • Rampado Dr Roberto

    Caro Dr Rossi,
    se l’E-Cat eroga calore a 300°-400°C con un COP di 6, non è assolutamente difficile abbinarlo ad un motore che con un rendimento del 17% garantisca il completo sostentamento elettrico necessario per l’E-Cat stesso.
    Cordialità.

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    if the E-Cat delivers heat at 300°C-400°C with a COP equal to 6, an heat hengine with 17% yield covers the complete E-cat electrical demand.
    Best regards.

    Rampado Dr Roberto

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dan Absher:
    The COP is 6: this means that we make thermal kWh with 1 electric kWh.
    The prices are different in the different locations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

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>