United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

 

uspto_seal_big

 

Sigillo

 

Alloro del brevetto

.

Read the whole US Patent
Download the ZIP file of US Patent

 

11,464 comments to United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

  • Andrea Rossi

    LookMoo:
    I think there is not political interference.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • LookMoo

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    If you read the court documents (your law suite) and your view on IH actions (or lack thereof) you notice that IH’ s action often goes hand-in-hand with IH meetings in Washington with policy makers and political advisers (of course this is only the tip of the iceberg as records of emails and phone calls have yet to surfaced).

    Mr. Mats Lewan wrote before these record surfaced,.. that there was no sign of political interference in the process.

    What do you think??

  • Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    I cannot disclose data of the report before it is disclosed in Court.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    Not me, the ERV did this.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,
    Are you saying that you were generous and conservative enough to just account for the latent heat of vaporisation as the output energy? And even less an arbitrary 10%?

    The enthalpy of vaporization, (symbol ∆Hvap) also known as the (latent) heat of vaporization or heat of evaporation, is the energy (enthalpy) that must be added to the substance, typically a liquid, to transform a quantity of that substance into a gas.

    Best regards,
    Patrick

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Can you give us a range of temperature for the super heating without providing exact figures?

    For example, was the output steam always at least 110C or higher? 105C or higher?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Vessela Nikolova:
    I read again your book: very nice: this second edition is really more complete than the first one .
    Again good luck !
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Oystein Lande:
    It’s ok, thanks for your comprehension.
    The circuit was complex, but yes, the steam was superheated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Oystein Lande

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    I’m sorry. Was just curious of what principles were used. We will wait for later then.

    About your answer to Sebastian:

    Does this imply that heating was done in stages?
    I mean one core was boiling water and the next was superheating the steam from boiler section?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Sebastian:
    Good question. Yes, the ERV ignored also the energy spent to heat the steam above the boiling point, as well as the energy necessary to raise the temperature of the water from circa 60-70 °C to the boiling point, to be conservative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Sebastian

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you for your response earlier today. It clarifies things a bit.

    I do have one more question:

    You told Mats Lewan that to be conservative, the ERV ignored the energy corresponding to heating the inflowing cooled water (at about 60˚C) to boiling temperature.

    Did the ERV also ignore the energy corresponding to heating the vaporized water to temperatures above boiling point?

    Thank you!

  • Andrea Rossi

    DvH:
    My attorney reccommended to me not to disclose the Report of the ERV before its disclosure in Court, because it should be uncorrect. For obvious reasons, I comply.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bernie:
    No.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Luis Navarro:
    Thank you for the link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Oystein Lande:
    Let me repeat another time: I cannot disclose even parts of the Report of the ERV before it is disclosed in Court. All I can say is that the measurements have been made by a nuclear engineer expert of nuclear power plants, certifications and validations. Do you think we ( or you ) have to explain to him how to measure the energy consumed and the energy produced by a boiler during one year ?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Sebastian:
    No, the value of 100.1 has been invented by the usual clowns.
    I repeat that I cannot disclose the data of the Report of the ERV before it is disclosed in Court.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    DvH:
    As you know, I cannot disclose the data of the ERV Report before it is disclosed in Court.
    Obviously the measurements necessary to calculate the energy output and the energy input have been made.
    I repeat that such measurements have been made by a nuclear engineer expert of nuclear power plants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • DvH

    Hello Mr Rossi,

    most international readers of this blog may not know the details of american law-system. What kind of procedure is it?
    Greetings
    dvh

  • DvH

    Hello Mr Rossi,

    a few days ago (16th may) Frank Acland asked for some confirmation about the measurents during THE TEST : he asked and you confirmed that fluid flow and deltaT was measured to get the generated heat.
    Obviously electric input energy was also measured and logged…
    Did you measure fluid pressure at container inlet and at container outlet ? you know – as Shakespeare said: STEAM OR NO STEAM – THAT IS THE QUESTION ! if the customer (JM) REQUIRED HOT WATER, then you must take care to AVOID steam. If the customer REQUIRED STEAM, then you must avoid WATER.
    How was that done ?
    greetings
    dvh

  • Sebastian

    Dear Andrea,

    Could you tell us if the output temperature of the 1MW plant was indeed 100.1 degrees C?

    This is the value that the IH people have been posting on the forums, so if you could confirm/deny, it would be helpful.

    Many thanks!

  • Dear Andrea,

    trhe Sunday edition, about LENR doors of my blog,
    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-22-2016-other-doors-to-lenr.html

    More important than it seems a la prima vista/first sight,

    best,
    Peter

  • Oystein Lande

    Dear mr Rossi,

    Did you see my question on steam quality?

    Was it measured?

  • Luis Navarro

    Dear Andrea and fellow followers of JONP,
    What previous post by Robert Dorr refers to is this article http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/are-industrialheat-and-darden-executing-a-apcowhitehousegs-agenda-to-slow-down-lenr-blackswan-break-through-since-2012/
    Regards
    Luis

  • Bernie

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    It is very interesting to follow your progress with the QuarkX,along with following the story with IH and the lawsuit. Because LENR can be considered a disruptive technology I am sure it is in the best interest of many to stay aware of all you do. Can you tell us about contacts (if any) you have had with President Obama, Military officials, NASA, Wall street bankers etc..
    Thanks
    Bernie Morrissey

  • Andrea Rossi

    Robert Dorr:
    Yes, I saw it, but it was much time before we met, therefore surely LENR were not in his mind at that time, as I know. I am surprised he asked to meet the President, because I always talked very well to him of the President Obama, that I consider one of the most courageous and illuminated Presidents of the History of this Great Country, while Darden always was dismissive about the issue, and used to say that the President Obama is a “communist”.
    Not surprisingly, opportunism won versus sincerity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Robert Dorr

    Andrea,

    I was just wondering if you had seen the newly found information that Tom Darden met with President Obama in January 2012 shortly before he contacted you in early 2012?

    Thank you for your hard work.

    Robert Dorr

  • Andrea Rossi

    Vessela Nikolova:
    Thank you for your information and the links of it to the new edition of your book.
    I already read it: it is a new edition that contains very interesting updates: congratulations for finding them.
    GOOD LUCK !!!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Luis Navarro:
    Thank you for the links,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Vessela Nikolova

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Complimenting what you are doing with the tenacity that distinguishes you and sure that justice will finally triumph, I would like to inform you that it is just available on AMAZON the second updated edition of my book ” E-Cat The new Fire – The biography of Andrea Rossi “.
    Now it is a paper book and also an E-book for Kindle. For the moment both are only in Italian language.
    Here below are the links to the two versions:

    Paper book:
    http://www.amazon.it/E-Cat-Il-Nuovo-Fuoco-Biografia/dp/8894003280/

    E-book:
    https://www.amazon.it/Cat-Il-Nuovo-Fuoco-Biografia-Andrea-ebook/dp/B01FSZXZI0

    I am also preparing the English version, which will be ready soon.
    Greetings to you and all the Readers of the JoNPVessela Nikolova

    P.S. I made a new post on my blog
    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/

  • Luis Navarro

    Dear Andrea,
    There is a very informative and helpful LENR daily newsletter provided by Torkel at http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/
    which I find highly informative and helpful in looking for up-to-date news for LENR. I would like to bring it to the attention of your readers as I am sure they will find as informative as I do. All you have to do is supply your name and email address.
    See also: http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/prime-internet-real-estate-lenr-com-is-now-a-property-of-hydro-fusion/
    Things are hotting up !
    Best regards
    Luis

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    Today, Sunday May 22, she is working well and still very promising.
    F8.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Seymour:
    Thank you for your attention to the work of our Team,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Seymour

    Dr Rossi:
    your strategy is the best possible: stay away from chatters and focus on the E-Cat in the market. No chatter, no slander will be able to stop your E-Cat, once it will be massively in the market.
    Godspeed,
    Seymour

  • Bob

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,

    Can we have an update about the F8 ?
    Regards,
    Bob

  • Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Yes, I hope by that date the preliminar R&D will be completed ( F8 ).
    Thank you for your attention and sustain.
    By the way, I am working with her right now while I’m answering to uou and she is good.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea,

    You mentioned that your R&D includes stability, safety, start/stop procedures and efficiency tasks for the Quark that you need to complete. Anything to add?

    Will this R&D be over before the important test with the potential customer/partner in June? (F8)

    You have been given vision that no man has ever had. We appreciate you sharing your journey with us. Thank you if you can inform us for this update, I know you updated us on May 12, 16 about these items.
    May your journey continue to be guided by deep insight,

    Tom

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Too soon to answer.
    F8.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the interesting information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Information about the charactristics of the QuarkX will be given after the completion of the R&D on course. F8.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Andrea,

    Ego Out Saturday edition Info and LENR in context

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-21-2016-lenr-was-my-yesterdays.html

    A splendid weekend,
    Peter

  • Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, can we make a rough comparison between a diode (vacuum tube) and the QuarkX?
    In both there are anode, cathode and an electric field between the two.

    In the diode the electrons are emitted by the incandescent cathode; in QuarkX the electrons are made available by the reaction.

    In both so there is an electric current in output. While in diode the output power is (at maximum) equal to the input power (COP = 1), in QuarkX the output power is superior to that input (COP >> 1).

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  • Ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi: take a look to this latest information about Tom Darden and Cherokee:

    Fees, Fees and More Fees:
    How Private Equity Abuses Its Limited Partners and U.S. Taxpayers
    By Eileen Appelbaum and Rosemary Batt*
    May 2016

    SEC Enforcement
    Despite the mounting evidence of private equity abuses and potentially illegal behavior, SEC enforcement actions have been minimal, with only six actions against PE general partners between 2014 and 2016. In 2014, the SEC targeted two small private equity firms — Lincolnshire Management and Clean Energy Capital — for infractions that were relatively minor. In 2015, KKR paid $30 million to settle an enforcement action for misallocating expenses in failed buyout deals; Blackstone paid $39 million to settle charges of improper fee allocation; Fenway Partners paid modest fines for failing to share fee income with investors; and Cherokee Investment Partners paid minimal fines for inappropriate expense charges. The SEC allowed the PE firms in these cases to pay fines with no admission of guilt.

    SEC Enforcement
    After Andrew Bowden’s shocking “sunshine” speech detailing private equity firms’ abuses of fee income, enforcement action was slow to follow — with only six actions brought between the spring of 2014 and 2016. In 2014, the SEC targeted two small private equity firms — Lincolnshire Management and Clean Energy Capital — for infractions that were relatively minor. More serious cases were filed in 2015, when the SEC brought enforcement actions against KKR, three Blackstone Group funds, Fenway Partners, and Cherokee Investment Partners

    Also in November 2015, the SEC settled an enforcement action against Cherokee Investment Partners for misallocation of expenses. The SEC charged the small PE firm with inappropriately charging its PE funds for expenses incurred in complying with SEC regulations without disclosing this to the fund’s investors. Cherokee Investment Partners neither admitted nor denied the SEC charges, but it reimbursed the funds for the full amount of expenses (a little over $456,000) and paid a fine of $100,000.
    37 37 SEC (2015d).
    Fees, Fees and More Fees: How Private Equity Abuses Its Limited Partners and U.S. Taxpayers

    SEC Enforcement
    Despite the mounting evidence of private equity abuses and potentially illegal behavior, SEC enforcement actions have been minimal, with only six actions against PE general partners between 2014 and 2016. In 2014, the SEC targeted two small private equity firms — Lincolnshire Management and Clean Energy Capital — for infractions that were relatively minor. In 2015, KKR paid $30 million to settle an enforcement action for misallocating expenses in failed buyout deals; Blackstone paid $39 million to settle charges of improper fee allocation; Fenway Partners paid modest fines for failing to share fee income with investors; and Cherokee Investment Partners paid minimal fines for inappropriate expense charges. The SEC allowed the PE firms in these cases to pay fines with no admission of guilt.

    http://cepr.net/images/stories/reports/private-equity-fees-2016-05.pdf

    https://thenewfire.wordpress.com/lenr-ecat-the-fog-of-british-and-american-energy-companies/

    https://thenewfire.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/lenr_ecat_fog.pdf

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Allow me to expand the question. Do you currently believe that the QuarkX technology can competitively be the source of energy to generate commercial electrical power as would be required to either be a source of electrical power for the grid or as a source of electrical power to support local electrical needs (such as appliances, lights, computers. etc.).

    If yes, do you believe this would be accomplished through the thermal output, the electrical output or both outputs of the QuarkX technology?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Mohammad Quinci:
    Thank you for your sustain.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    P.F.:
    Right now: she is in goos standing, regular and still very promising.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    All this information will be given after the completion of the preliminar R&D on course.
    Anyway, your assumptions are groundless, and this is understandable, due to your lack of information ( my “fault” ).
    F8.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Regarding your QuarkX development…

    If you used this emerging technology to generate heat by boiling a fluid (e.g., water) and running a turbine, the current industrial technology is around 40% efficient (Carnot plus turbine efficiency). That is, for around 2.5W of output thermal energy, 1W of electrical energy is generated.

    You have indicated that the QuarkX technology can produce direct electrical energy (plus some thermal energy). If this is correct, then there will still be a conversion efficiency to convert the electrical energy produced into useable electrical energy that can be sent on the grid and/or be used to run appliances, etc. Assuming an average conversion efficiency is say, 85%, the QuarkX must have an electrical generation efficiency of greater than 47% to be economically viable compared to the thermal approach suggested above.

    Questions:
    1. Is this analysis correct, given the assumptions stated?
    2. Is the electrical conversion efficiency stated above what you believe you can achieve or are you assuming something better?
    3. Are there overriding factors beside efficiency that would favor a QuarkX direct electrical mode of electrical power generation?

  • P.F.

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Uodate of today for the QuarkX ?

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>