Bernie Koppenhofer:
If the results will be encouraging, our plan is pretty good.
Besides, as I said, we must not expect miracles or miracolous products, but useful energy sources to be integrated in the global energy system.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
It is clear you are intending to industrialize the E-Cat “in-house” rather than license your technology to outside entities. It would seem to me there are a number of reasons why you might choose this approach
a) You are concerned about losing trade secrets and having IP stolen
b) You think you can do it better than other industrial players
c) You are concerned about your technology being buried
d) You want to be able to adjust quickly to R&D advances
e) You think you can save money doing it on your own
f) You love your work and don’t want to lose control of the E-Cat’s destiny
Which of these reasons (if any) apply in your case. Are there others?
Steven N Karels: If you believe in climate change, as I do and apparently Dr. Rossi does too, our planet just might not have enough time for Leonardo to learn how to scale and market the E-Cat, it will take them years to reinvent scale and create market penetration. There could be billions of dollars worth of destruction and lives lost in the mean time. Why gamble, (f9) we need a Manhattan Project for scaling this new fire as fast as possible.
Italo R.:
You are right.
By the way, the scientists of the Atomic Institute of China made an important replication of the Lugano test.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
News of today speak of pollution in China 50 times higher than tolerable.
I think that the Chinese will be among the first to build reactors LENR with technology E-Cat. For them it is a matter of life or death.
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
If the acceptance of eCat technology was instantly and universally accepted, then Andrea Rossi would have a major problem. But the acceptance of eCat technology (F9) will be somewhat gradual and “trend leaders” are needed convince their Management to risk millions to convert over to eCat (again F9). So the demand curve will be positive but the slope will not be infinite. Therefore, Andrea Rossi has some time (a few years? – again F9) to build up a manufacturing capability.
I would also guess that he has a two year technology lead before his competition can reach his technology. So time is limited but sufficient for his growth curve – IMHO.
Dear Andrea,
1) Can we please have an update on the E-Cat X and the 1MW plant today?
2) Did you update all 4 reactors with the “we have understood and fixed it” solution?
3) Have you already seen a difference in the performance from the upgrade?
4) Did the SSM percentage improve with this update?
Thank you including me in the family on the blog. God bless you!
May I ask why you’re bothering with production? If it is solely to profit from your (incredible and amazing) discovery, I think it would be more efficient and perhaps even more profitable to transparently demonstrate and share your technology and profit from the collapse of the carbon bubble. There are trillions dollars/euros to be made from the decline of the fossil fuel industry. Just a thought.
Dr. Rossi: Do you agree, inventing the new fire was and continues to be a great, monumental accomplishment, but scaling it up requires the expertise of outside corporations that have “been there and done that”?
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It is very promising that nothing has happened so far which has led you to cancel the test. However, even if the test fails, it is still a huge success. It proves without any doubt that the Rossi effect is an useful source of energy. In the long run, it is the discovery of a new source of energy that is important, not the immediate commercialization.
As soon as the Expert Responsible for Validation has published a report, there will be no problem to obtain enough capital to speed up development of e-cats with a factor ten. You may no longer have to live in a container sixteen hours a day. We may have cars, airplanes and even Mars rockets propelled by e-cats sooner than we can imagine.
Best Wishes
Gunnar Lindberg
You talk about becoming a “major producing company” if tests are positive.
Will you need to build facilities on a similar scale to those of major auto companies, where parts manufactured by outside suppliers are shipped to the factory where the assembly of the final product takes place?
Gian Luca:
I am not able to answer your question, because the tests on course have not been completed. It is obvious that the sole real thing that will dissipate any doubt about a product is the product itself. Until we will not have diffused in the market our product anybody can doubt whatever he wants and maybe he is right. We are working hard to arrive to the product massively diffused in the market, but we need to complete the tests and after the tests, if they will confirm positive results, we will have to make an even harder work to pass from reactors handmade in a small factory to a major producing company. A huge work I have already done in this sense too, but more and more work has to be done.
About ITER: their next test will be very interesting. As I always said, all energy sources must be integrated; we do not need a silver bullet, but a well organized artillery.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
They speak and still exist on the ITER project but not of LENR. Giuliano Preparata and Emilio del Giudice had already established in 1990/1991 … ITER is a waste of money that could instead be invested in new and already evident in low-energy nuclear reactions.
A year from now what will happen as ECAT will certainly be a reality beyond a reasonable doubt ?
Thanks
Are you reluctant to proclaim that the Rossi effect is real and valid, before the end of the current test in progress? If so, I wonder why, since you have worked with the E-Cat for so many years now.
I am sure there are times when things are not going well and you
feel discouraged. But I wish to encourage you to look back on all
that you have accomplished and, in spite of the many oppositions, what
you have done. Yours is a Holy Crusade. Your path is yours alone and
no one else can fulfill it in the way that you can. Sure, your team
is wonderful but you are the “glue” that holds them together. Your
Vision is the light that illuminates their path.
Psalms 29:18 says “Without vision the people will parish”. I
encourage you to continue the “good fight”. Your technology (F9) has
the potential of saving our world.
Mr Andrea Rossi,
You make well to defend and protect your intellectual property: this is the sole way to attract the investments necessary to build the colossal enterprise you are going to do.
Godspeed,
Elen
I remember that from time to time the Carnot Cycle has come in discussions in this blog.
I just read an interesting article in SpaceDaily the web site on a Microscopic Brownian Carnot Engine developed by a team in the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. After reading it I thought it might be of interest to you too.
I would like to pass on my continued best wishes to you and your team. I can well appreciate the hard work you are all doing, even projects based on well known phenomena can take large teams decades to fully build and verify especially when they are pushing the envelope of that technology. That you are doing something this new on this scale in a few years is amazing to me, its a huge achievement.
Every problem found and resolved in verification in new and novel systems adds robustness and reliability when it is distributed and harder to study or fix. Also i have found most problems lead to new and better understanding of the system and technology I work on. I suspect this is true of all new systems. Sometimes we end up with thing taking a little longer than we hope but we end up with something better because of it. Personally I would say it gives me greater confidence when I hear you finding and fixing these problems not less. It means your testing and verification is good. But like many who read your pages all my hopes and prayers are with your team and test going well and achieving your aims within your hoped for schedule.
Xavier:
It is not true that LENR related papers have not been yet accepted on peer reviewed publications: the most important and dense of consequences peer reviewed publication in the world is the publication of the United States Patent Office. The peer reviewing at the USPTO is made by at least 2 specialists of the matter of which the patent belongs and it lasts at least 2-3 years; if you visit the USPTO buildings in Alexandria, Virginia (USA) you will see that there are several buildings that form a citadel, with inside thousands of Examiners, divided in sections each specialized in a matter; in a matter like ours there are all engineers, physicists or chemists of very high level; after you deposit a patent application their peer reviewing makes checks that any other peer reviewed magazine does not: for example a research in all the world that nothing similar has been published ( in any form or source); the peer reviewed publication of an approved USPTO patent has consequences that no other publication has in the industrial, technological and commercial echelons and fields of applications of the world.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Marco:
The next verification will be only one: the good operation of the E-Cats in the houses and/ot the factories of our Customers. Thank you anyway for your interesting suggestion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
as far as I know most, if not all, nuclear processes produce neutrinos. So it is not a bad idea to put an E-Cat near a neutrino detector, as the one under the Gran Sasso mountain in Italy, to see if some neutrino above the background is detected. This could be the final proof that a nuclear process is occurring…
I know that this is very difficult, because these facilities are probabily reserved much in advance for important researches, but cound be worth a try to search a research group willing to do this verification…
Alessandro Coppi:
The sums are wrong: F9 has not give the verdict, because the test is still on course. When the tests will have been completed, I will make my decisions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Andrea,
let us make some sums: F9 has given his verdict, the technology works, but it is not mature at all.
It is not admissible that an apparatus bought from the shelves will require so many repair within a year.
Nobody can believe that a massive production of a such device may be performed, the firm would destined to fail.
What will be the next move? another year long test, of a second generation, reactor? In which manner the time to the market can be reduced?
Aji:
I work on the plant 7 days a week to make my 16 hours shift, obviously also today; the plant is working well; right now it is 04.00 p.m. and I am biking, because my turn begins at 05.30 p.m. but the plant is OK, otherwise I would have been informed.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Karl- Henrik Malmqvist:
Thank you for your intelligent comment. What you write is correct. The 1 MW E-Cat will have to continue to work for the Customer also after the end of the tests on course; I will not change the charges unless it will be necessary, so at last we will know how long they last.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
John:
Think to that guy that jumped down from the 110th floor of a skyscraper, to test the exchange of gravitons between his body and the Earth, arrives at the level of the 29th floor and yells: “So far, so good”.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I find it a little bit hard to believe, since as of October 13th, 2015 the customer was “happy with the amount of energy produced so far”, that it would be unknown to you at this moment whether the E-Cat was an “energy source far beyond possible chemical processes”, or not. This sounds like NDA speak.
Dear Andrea,
You said that there has been different types of problems with the 250 kW units that you and your team have had to deal with. As an engineer it is easy for me to imagine these types of problems : Leakage, pump failure, valve problems, problems with thermocouples, problems with flow transducers, wireing problems, problems with amplifiers, adjusting and improving digital Control loops etc. You and your team probably already have designed an improved 250 kW unit that will have much less problems. Probably some external improvements already have been incoporated in the present units.
If the four 250 kW units will continue to run until feb 2016 they must be refuelled. Has this been decided or is it more likely to replace them with improved versions?
Regards,
Karl-Henrik
With the results so far from running your 1 MW plant, would you say that cold Fusion / LENR / Rossi Effect is now an absolute proven fact?
That is: There is an energy source far beyond possible chemical processes, which is the source of heat in your 1 MW plant?
In that case it is more a matter of finding the optimal cost effective design to exploit this energy source, which is what you have been doing this year and going forward….
Bernie Koppenhofer:
If the results will be encouraging, our plan is pretty good.
Besides, as I said, we must not expect miracles or miracolous products, but useful energy sources to be integrated in the global energy system.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
It is clear you are intending to industrialize the E-Cat “in-house” rather than license your technology to outside entities. It would seem to me there are a number of reasons why you might choose this approach
a) You are concerned about losing trade secrets and having IP stolen
b) You think you can do it better than other industrial players
c) You are concerned about your technology being buried
d) You want to be able to adjust quickly to R&D advances
e) You think you can save money doing it on your own
f) You love your work and don’t want to lose control of the E-Cat’s destiny
Which of these reasons (if any) apply in your case. Are there others?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Steven N Karels: If you believe in climate change, as I do and apparently Dr. Rossi does too, our planet just might not have enough time for Leonardo to learn how to scale and market the E-Cat, it will take them years to reinvent scale and create market penetration. There could be billions of dollars worth of destruction and lives lost in the mean time. Why gamble, (f9) we need a Manhattan Project for scaling this new fire as fast as possible.
Steven N. Karels:
Right: Henry Ford did not start the production of cars after highways have been made.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
You are right.
By the way, the scientists of the Atomic Institute of China made an important replication of the Lugano test.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
News of today speak of pollution in China 50 times higher than tolerable.
I think that the Chinese will be among the first to build reactors LENR with technology E-Cat. For them it is a matter of life or death.
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Bernie and Andrea,
If the acceptance of eCat technology was instantly and universally accepted, then Andrea Rossi would have a major problem. But the acceptance of eCat technology (F9) will be somewhat gradual and “trend leaders” are needed convince their Management to risk millions to convert over to eCat (again F9). So the demand curve will be positive but the slope will not be infinite. Therefore, Andrea Rossi has some time (a few years? – again F9) to build up a manufacturing capability.
I would also guess that he has a two year technology lead before his competition can reach his technology. So time is limited but sufficient for his growth curve – IMHO.
Tom Conover:
1- E-Cat 1 MW : not bad, E-Cat X very promising, working.
2- yes
3- no, it was not a matter of performance
4- no
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gunnar Lindberg:
Thank you for your kind words.
For now, I have just to work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Bernie Koppenhofer:
Same thing many said to Bill Gates.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Kevin:
Thank you for your insight, but I’m afraid that things are much more complex and all the energy sources will be integrated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
1) Can we please have an update on the E-Cat X and the 1MW plant today?
2) Did you update all 4 reactors with the “we have understood and fixed it” solution?
3) Have you already seen a difference in the performance from the upgrade?
4) Did the SSM percentage improve with this update?
Thank you including me in the family on the blog. God bless you!
Tom
Dear Mr. Rossi,
May I ask why you’re bothering with production? If it is solely to profit from your (incredible and amazing) discovery, I think it would be more efficient and perhaps even more profitable to transparently demonstrate and share your technology and profit from the collapse of the carbon bubble. There are trillions dollars/euros to be made from the decline of the fossil fuel industry. Just a thought.
Kevin
Dr. Rossi: Do you agree, inventing the new fire was and continues to be a great, monumental accomplishment, but scaling it up requires the expertise of outside corporations that have “been there and done that”?
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It is very promising that nothing has happened so far which has led you to cancel the test. However, even if the test fails, it is still a huge success. It proves without any doubt that the Rossi effect is an useful source of energy. In the long run, it is the discovery of a new source of energy that is important, not the immediate commercialization.
As soon as the Expert Responsible for Validation has published a report, there will be no problem to obtain enough capital to speed up development of e-cats with a factor ten. You may no longer have to live in a container sixteen hours a day. We may have cars, airplanes and even Mars rockets propelled by e-cats sooner than we can imagine.
Best Wishes
Gunnar Lindberg
Frank Acland:
That’s my dream…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
You talk about becoming a “major producing company” if tests are positive.
Will you need to build facilities on a similar scale to those of major auto companies, where parts manufactured by outside suppliers are shipped to the factory where the assembly of the final product takes place?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Gian Luca:
I am not able to answer your question, because the tests on course have not been completed. It is obvious that the sole real thing that will dissipate any doubt about a product is the product itself. Until we will not have diffused in the market our product anybody can doubt whatever he wants and maybe he is right. We are working hard to arrive to the product massively diffused in the market, but we need to complete the tests and after the tests, if they will confirm positive results, we will have to make an even harder work to pass from reactors handmade in a small factory to a major producing company. A huge work I have already done in this sense too, but more and more work has to be done.
About ITER: their next test will be very interesting. As I always said, all energy sources must be integrated; we do not need a silver bullet, but a well organized artillery.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Fusion-Energy-Facing-A-Major-Test-This-Month.html
They speak and still exist on the ITER project but not of LENR. Giuliano Preparata and Emilio del Giudice had already established in 1990/1991 … ITER is a waste of money that could instead be invested in new and already evident in low-energy nuclear reactions.
A year from now what will happen as ECAT will certainly be a reality beyond a reasonable doubt ?
Thanks
Maria Bianca:
You bet.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Elen C.:
Thank you for your intelligent comment,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Seneca Cox:
I agree,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven N Karels:
Thank you from the heart,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Because until remains something to do, it is as if you did nothing.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Are you reluctant to proclaim that the Rossi effect is real and valid, before the end of the current test in progress? If so, I wonder why, since you have worked with the E-Cat for so many years now.
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Andrea,
I am sure there are times when things are not going well and you
feel discouraged. But I wish to encourage you to look back on all
that you have accomplished and, in spite of the many oppositions, what
you have done. Yours is a Holy Crusade. Your path is yours alone and
no one else can fulfill it in the way that you can. Sure, your team
is wonderful but you are the “glue” that holds them together. Your
Vision is the light that illuminates their path.
Psalms 29:18 says “Without vision the people will parish”. I
encourage you to continue the “good fight”. Your technology (F9) has
the potential of saving our world.
Steve
Dr Andrea Rossi
You are right: a US Patent is a per reviewed publication.
S.C.
Mr Andrea Rossi,
You make well to defend and protect your intellectual property: this is the sole way to attract the investments necessary to build the colossal enterprise you are going to do.
Godspeed,
Elen
Dear Andrea
Of course a US Patent id a peer reviewed publication!
Cheers,
Maria
Stephen:
Thank you for your insight.
Warm Regards
A.R.
I remember that from time to time the Carnot Cycle has come in discussions in this blog.
I just read an interesting article in SpaceDaily the web site on a Microscopic Brownian Carnot Engine developed by a team in the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. After reading it I thought it might be of interest to you too.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Brownian_Carnot_engine_999.html
I would like to pass on my continued best wishes to you and your team. I can well appreciate the hard work you are all doing, even projects based on well known phenomena can take large teams decades to fully build and verify especially when they are pushing the envelope of that technology. That you are doing something this new on this scale in a few years is amazing to me, its a huge achievement.
Every problem found and resolved in verification in new and novel systems adds robustness and reliability when it is distributed and harder to study or fix. Also i have found most problems lead to new and better understanding of the system and technology I work on. I suspect this is true of all new systems. Sometimes we end up with thing taking a little longer than we hope but we end up with something better because of it. Personally I would say it gives me greater confidence when I hear you finding and fixing these problems not less. It means your testing and verification is good. But like many who read your pages all my hopes and prayers are with your team and test going well and achieving your aims within your hoped for schedule.
Best Regards
Stephen
Xavier:
It is not true that LENR related papers have not been yet accepted on peer reviewed publications: the most important and dense of consequences peer reviewed publication in the world is the publication of the United States Patent Office. The peer reviewing at the USPTO is made by at least 2 specialists of the matter of which the patent belongs and it lasts at least 2-3 years; if you visit the USPTO buildings in Alexandria, Virginia (USA) you will see that there are several buildings that form a citadel, with inside thousands of Examiners, divided in sections each specialized in a matter; in a matter like ours there are all engineers, physicists or chemists of very high level; after you deposit a patent application their peer reviewing makes checks that any other peer reviewed magazine does not: for example a research in all the world that nothing similar has been published ( in any form or source); the peer reviewed publication of an approved USPTO patent has consequences that no other publication has in the industrial, technological and commercial echelons and fields of applications of the world.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Xavier:
The US Patent is a peer reviewed publication.
Cheers,
Eve
Marco:
The next verification will be only one: the good operation of the E-Cats in the houses and/ot the factories of our Customers. Thank you anyway for your interesting suggestion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
as far as I know most, if not all, nuclear processes produce neutrinos. So it is not a bad idea to put an E-Cat near a neutrino detector, as the one under the Gran Sasso mountain in Italy, to see if some neutrino above the background is detected. This could be the final proof that a nuclear process is occurring…
I know that this is very difficult, because these facilities are probabily reserved much in advance for important researches, but cound be worth a try to search a research group willing to do this verification…
Best Regards,
Marco.
Dr Andrea Rossi:
What do you respond to those who say that no peer reviewed publication has been made on the LENR?
Thank you,
Xavier
Alessandro Coppi:
The sums are wrong: F9 has not give the verdict, because the test is still on course. When the tests will have been completed, I will make my decisions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
John:
It is a very complex and difficult work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.from inside the plant
Hi Andrea,
let us make some sums: F9 has given his verdict, the technology works, but it is not mature at all.
It is not admissible that an apparatus bought from the shelves will require so many repair within a year.
Nobody can believe that a massive production of a such device may be performed, the firm would destined to fail.
What will be the next move? another year long test, of a second generation, reactor? In which manner the time to the market can be reduced?
Best regards
Alessandro Coppi
Dear Andrea Rossi,
See, I would take your parable to mean that the effect definitely works, but how reliably is the (literally) billion dollar question.
Best Regards,
-John
Ugo:
Of course and this also helps the security.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Aji:
I work on the plant 7 days a week to make my 16 hours shift, obviously also today; the plant is working well; right now it is 04.00 p.m. and I am biking, because my turn begins at 05.30 p.m. but the plant is OK, otherwise I would have been informed.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Karl- Henrik Malmqvist:
Thank you for your intelligent comment. What you write is correct. The 1 MW E-Cat will have to continue to work for the Customer also after the end of the tests on course; I will not change the charges unless it will be necessary, so at last we will know how long they last.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
John:
Think to that guy that jumped down from the 110th floor of a skyscraper, to test the exchange of gravitons between his body and the Earth, arrives at the level of the 29th floor and yells: “So far, so good”.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I find it a little bit hard to believe, since as of October 13th, 2015 the customer was “happy with the amount of energy produced so far”, that it would be unknown to you at this moment whether the E-Cat was an “energy source far beyond possible chemical processes”, or not. This sounds like NDA speak.
Best Regards,
-John
Dear Andrea,
You said that there has been different types of problems with the 250 kW units that you and your team have had to deal with. As an engineer it is easy for me to imagine these types of problems : Leakage, pump failure, valve problems, problems with thermocouples, problems with flow transducers, wireing problems, problems with amplifiers, adjusting and improving digital Control loops etc. You and your team probably already have designed an improved 250 kW unit that will have much less problems. Probably some external improvements already have been incoporated in the present units.
If the four 250 kW units will continue to run until feb 2016 they must be refuelled. Has this been decided or is it more likely to replace them with improved versions?
Regards,
Karl-Henrik
Al:
Probably Leonardo Corp will commercialize in a mixed system.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Lande:
it is impossible to answer before knowing if the final results will be positive.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi,
With the results so far from running your 1 MW plant, would you say that cold Fusion / LENR / Rossi Effect is now an absolute proven fact?
That is: There is an energy source far beyond possible chemical processes, which is the source of heat in your 1 MW plant?
In that case it is more a matter of finding the optimal cost effective design to exploit this energy source, which is what you have been doing this year and going forward….
regards
Lande
Ivo:
If the tests will allow a massive production, it will be commercialized in all Europe, therefore also in Italy.
Warm Regards,
A.R.