The 10W NGU is sold for $25 = $2.5/Watt. Now that there is a new core 100W I would believe your Licensee will sell it for $2.5/Watt = $250. But honestly, it could be sold for a much lower price while still maintaining the business margin. Could it be so that the 100W core is only a performance upgrade of the 10W core so that the price for the 100W could be 0.25$/Watt? Thank you if you can answer.
First of all, I would like to offer my apologies for my earlier complaints regarding the possible delay in deliveries to smaller customers.
Like many of us, I have been trying for quite some time to understand the technology behind the E-Cat as thoroughly as possible, which also allows me to speak about it with enthusiasm to others. It remains a fascinating concept—especially since so many continue to claim that it contradicts the laws of nature, quod non.
While thinking, reading, and researching the possible phenomena involved, I quickly realized how incredibly complex—and above all, costly—the research materials must be that are needed to create and refine the core of the E-Cat. I therefore have great respect for the major customers and investors supporting your product. After all, your team could just as well have discovered that it might never become economically viable.
From now on, I will patiently await my turn for delivery.
in your reply to Italo R. you said, the 1 MW reactors will not be made by means of 10 watt modules.
Is this decision the result of the tests your licensee performed in the last weeks?
How long will this decision delay the producton of the 1 MW reactors? Several month? 1 year or more?
Dr. Rossi,
I believe the current configuration of the 1 MW 22 kV generator relies on a very large number of 10 W units (approximately 100,000).
Given the complexity of this approach, I believe this is why your licensee has asked you to evaluate the development of more powerful 500 W units.
This would reduce the total required to just 2,000 units, significantly speeding up assembly.
My question is: while we wait for the 500 W units, is production of the 1 MW generator with 10 W units still progressing?
In any case, this remains an incredible important milestone in the energy sector.
1: Can multiple 22kV NGUs on an electricity grid perform any or all of the the functions listed in [1:] without the addition of Synchroverters to each 22kV NGU?
2: If the answer is no, then how could such a grid operate in a stable and controllable fashion under severe transients?
3: Can 22kV NGUs be programmed to depend on demands sent from the grid operator?
=============
[1:]https://www.synvertec.com/solution-overview
An algorithm for grid stability
The Synchronverter transforms renewable energy inverters into cutting-edge grid stabilizing devices. With the addition of the Synchronverter, inverters play an active role in the stabilization of grids whose considerable renewable energy source (RES) proportions would otherwise create significant instability.
The Synchronverter’s unique technology performs:
1: Stabilization: The grid’s instantaneous reaction (frequency regulation) capabilities are greatly enhanced.
2: Spinning Reserve: The grid is able to mitigate generation loss or an increase in load.
3: Voltage Control: The grid can support power quality and accommodate changes to system voltage levels (reactive power regulation).
4: Standalone: Grids work effectively in “island” mode (lack of grid referencing).
5: Smoothing: Production management of flexible and non-dispatchable load (capacity firming).
=============
[2:] https://www.synvertec.com/solution-overview
The Synchronverter is a patented control algorithm that interacts with inverter switches and emulates the mechanical and electrical properties of a synchronous generator. An algorithm for grid stability
The Synchronverter transforms renewable energy inverters into cutting-edge grid stabilizing devices. With the addition of the Synchronverter, inverters play an active role in the stabilization of grids whose considerable renewable energy source (RES) proportions would otherwise create significant instability.
By integrating with existing renewable energy inverters, the Synchronverter transforms them into a virtual synchronous generator device – without any inverter design changes. This is accomplished via an add-on control device that integrates with the inverter’s controller and utilizes a small, ultra-fast-response energy bank.
The Synchronverter enhances yields and maximizes the utilization of electricity provided by renewable energy sources in traditional and micro/smart grid topologies. The Synchronverter is IP protected, easy-to-implement and extremely well tested in diverse conditions.
The algorithm causes conventional AC/DC converters to mimic synchronous generators and create the inertia required for generating a stabilizing effect.
The Synchronverter mimics local control loops similar to synchronous generators’ classical control, generating the active participation of power sources in grid stabilization. This is accomplished in harmony with other generators on the grid.
The control algorithm computes the induced voltages on the virtual generator’s stator winding (from the currents, angular position and angular velocity) at any given moment, without lags or tracking errors.
Droop coefficients and complex non-linear droop curves can be easily imposed via the control processor software. They can also be programmed to depend on demands sent from the grid operator.
The difference between 230V and 240V is primarily due to historical voltage standards that have been harmonized to a single nominal voltage for greater compatibility. While 240V was historically the standard in countries like the UK, and 220V was common in mainland Europe, the 230V standard and wider tolerance bands (e.g., +10%/-6%) were established to ensure that appliances would work in both regions. In practice, most modern electrical systems still operate within a range that is compatible with both, and modern devices are designed to handle this variation, so the practical difference is negligible.
================
[3:] https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/12/14/ever-heard-of-synchroinverters-grid-stabilizing-devices-connecting-renewables-to-distributed-energy-resources/
14 Dec 2021 — Synchroinverters are a special kind of smart inverter that mimics a synchronous generator and are able to avoid grid voltage frequency fluctuations and faults.
…
“The inverter will react to any changes in the grid in the same way a generator would; just much faster, in a cost-effective way, and [they] thereby play an active role in grid stability,” the spokesperson went on to say. “It is important to stress that the provision of frequency and voltage support is done simultaneously.”
…
can be embedded into any three-phase inverter.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
you’re now also developing 500-watt ecat units. Is there a size limit, or are 1 kW, 10 kW, 100 kW, etc. units theoretically feasible in the future?
Best regards
Franz
Dear Dr. Rossi,
the EU has decided to completely abandon Russian gas from 2028. Is it possible that a contract is being prepared behind the scenes between the EU member states, Leonardo and licensees? Will this be a breakthrough for the ECAT?
I mean, without this ECAT alternative…politicians can’t be that naive. Can they?
Kind regards
R.Brand
Does the R&D team that are testing the new 100 Watt and 500 watt monolithic cores using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to check for transmutation damage during the tests of these units.
Sono contento di quello che sta accadendo. E’ dal 2011 che ti seguo costantemente, anche se non intervengo su questo forum. Mi piace che continui a condividere con tutti noi le informazioni sugli sviluppi. Ho sempre un po paura per te. Ci sono in ballo cose grandi. E’ una rivoluzione che spingerà l’umanita ad accelerare la conoscenza della vita. Mi preocccupo delle parti della società che giustamente tenterà di rallentare questo processo per proteggersi da questo tsunami. Potreggiti Andrea. Vola basso anche se nel tuo piccolo stai volando alto. Sto anche cambiando la mia opinione. Pensavo di staccarmi dalla dipendenza dal pagare l’energia ai fornitori e rendermi libero. Questi ultimi cambiamenti mi hanno fatto provare una brutta sensazione. Ma alla fine ho capito che era il mio egoismo a provocare questo senzazioni. Poi ho capito. La cosa importante è che abbiamo energia pulita. La dipendenza e l’indipendenza entrambi sono da evitare. Mi piace sempre il concentto di interdipendenza. Quindi ho cambiato idea. Non mi serve un ecat, mi serve che questa tecnologia segui la strada piu efficace per immettersi in funzione e che “gradualmente” trasformi il mondo. Questa e’ filosofia ma penso che sia qualcosa che possa aiutare anche altri a riflettere.
ENGLISH:
I’m happy with what’s happening. I have been following you constantly since 2011, even if I don’t intervene on this forum. I love that you continue to share information about developments with all of us. I’m always a little scared for you. There are big things at stake. It is a revolution that will push humanity to accelerate the knowledge of life. I worry about the parts of society that will rightly try to slow this process to protect themselves from this tsunami. Stand by Andrea. Fly low even if in your own small way you are flying high. I’m also changing my opinion. I thought I would break away from the addiction to paying energy suppliers and set myself free. These latest changes gave me a bad feeling. But in the end I realized that it was my selfishness that was causing these feelings. Then I understood. The important thing is that we have clean energy. Dependence and independence both are to be avoided. I always like the concept of interdependence. So I changed my mind. I don’t need an ecat, I need this technology to follow the most effective path to be put into operation and to “gradually” transform the world. This is philosophy but I think it’s something that can help others to reflect too.
Andrea, se trovi errori nelle traduzione correggili , ho usato il traduttore di google.
I see that Steve D, now on October 19, operates with figures of 3.3 W/cm^3 which in in opposision to the data-sheet.
Since a liter is 1000 cm^3, an effect of 3.3 W per cm^3 would -given approx. 3.3 kW/liter!!! The data-sheet say: 0,120kW/liter.
In my question 1, from yesterday, there is a call to take a closer look at some numbers that are actually strongly contradictory in the pointed out data-sheet. My interpretations here are based on the following:
A 10 W Ecat with a diameter of 6 cm and a height of 3 cm has a volume of: (h x Pi x R^2) = (3 cm x 3.14 x 3 cm^2 = close to 85 cm^3). One liter is, as known: 1000 cm^3. 85cm^3 is therefore close to 1/12 of a liter.
With 10W power, this becomes: 10W x 12 = close to 120W/ liter. Here, the data-sheet therefore agrees with the stated 0.120 kW/liter!!!
10 such simple units thus constitute 100W and have a volume of 10 x 0.085 liters = 0.85 liters.
From a volume of 10 liters, you get a maximum of 1.2 kW.
If you want 3kW, the required volume is 3 kW : 0.120 kW/liter = 25 liters!!!
An increase in power to 0.270 kW/liter for larger systems therefore appears to be an error and must be corrected.
A combination of several units may only give a lower figure than 120W/liter.
To question 2, I can actually self give you an answer as follows:
The original 100W unit had, as far as I remember, the dimensions: 7 cm x 7 cm x 9 cm = 441 cm^3.
This gives an output of: 100W : 0.441 liter = approx. 227 W/liter.
This then gives approx. 47% direct volume savings.
A combination of 10 pcs. such “old” 100W units, then provide 1kW and occupy a volume of 4.41 liters.
The volume of my ordered NGU 3kW is stated, in the data sheet, as a volume of 11.3 liters.
This means that it must provide 3.77 kW/liter??? This is incorrect in relation to the basic data given in the fact-sheet.
From the performance of the “old” 100W unit it appears that the energy density in ZPE, including approx. 10% loss, must be: 227 : 0.9 = approx. 250W/liter.
Having this figure scientifically confirmed seems to be a necessity for those who are to deliver Ecat.
Regarding the weight ratios, I recommend that you do the calculation yourself, as I am unsure of the figures given in the aforementioned data-sheet.
Questions 4 and 5 are very important in this context. Both deal with whether the technology, you are currently using, is “infinitely scalable” in a single cell.
Is it possible to make a single Ecat cell that produces 1 MW or more??? And Why not?
Svein:
1. no
2. I am not able to answer so far
3- I am not able to answer so far
4. I do not understand exactly your question: please rephrase more specifically
5. Same as in 4
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Martin:
Please see the data shets on http://www.ecat.com
Specific situations will be discussed when the Clients will be contacted for the deliveries,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Is the 100 Watt Ecat 230V – 50 Hz supplied with a DC to AC converter ?
And what if we now want to connect 4 Ecats of 100 W = 400 W to the grid ?
Will 1 converter for the 400 W – 230 V be supplied, or will there still be 4 ?
And is that 1 or 4 converters included in the price of the Ecat ?
If not, what will the cost be ?
.
Thanks
Martin
Dear Andrea
You recently confirmed to WaltC that the ratio between volume and power production for the 100 W module was more favorable than for the 10 W module.
In E-Cat-Power-NGU-DataSheet-2024-12-3.pdf the figures appear to be the same at 0.12 kW/liter.
For composite units from 1 to 10 kW the figure appears to be the same at 0.27kW/liter, but with increasing kW/kg.
This leads to new questions:
1. Are there any changes here today and what are these figures now?
2. Are the production costs per kW reduced when the module sizes increase?
3. When will more detailed information about the 500 W modules be available?
4. Do you see a size limitation for individual modules, in the reactor technology you currently use?
5. Where, if so, does this boundary seem to lie?
Regards, Svein
Steve D:
I confirm what I have already said in my former answers about the 500 W; the 500 W is still a prototype and so far no final data are available,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Thanks for the great info about the 100 W units, and now even 500 W units! I have been hoping for this development, good job!
Larger units will simplify assembling into larger power banks. Maybe even 1kW and more may be achieveable further down the road.
Another advantage may be that a single 100 W unit may take up less space than ten 10 W units?
Also congratulations with the first 1 MW order, that is an important step for you and your partner!
Indeed, the choice to build individual modules capable of delivering higher power outputs, up to 500W, would allow for much less complex assembly for devices requiring high power (e.g., 1 MW).
A smaller number of modules for the same total power output would require less wiring and easier internal assembly.
It would likely reduce the overall volume while increasing reliability (fewer devices susceptible to failure).
I realize this is a technological challenge, but one you’ll be able to tackle with all your experience.
Dr Rossi,
Is it true that Agip Nucleare (ENI Group) in 1980 bought your technology to make oil from organic wastes patented in 1977 ?
Best,
Johnny Beaumont
Dear Andrea
The announcement about maintaining the production of the 100 W units was interesting.
Based on the announcement that 22kV – 1 MW plants will be the first in regular production, this seems reasonable, especially if quality benefits can be achieved in addition.
In this context, I would like to ask if there are also thoughts about larger units?
1 kW and preferably also 10 kW could be relevant if production, price and quality conditions, in large plants, can be improved by increasing the size of the individual units.
In terms of energy, however, 10 Watts must be considered a miniaturization.
Regards: Svein
Italo R.:
In the year 1977 I patented the system to make fuel from organic wastes; the patent expired in 1997. Eventually I made an industry based on that patent; for more info about its destiny see: http://www.ingandrearossi.com
In the year 2000 I made another patent on the same matter in the USA ( USPTO Patent # 6,051,110, granted on April 18 2000, expired in the year 2020 ), in collaboration with the CEO of BioEnergy’s wood treatment facility, located in New Hampshire, of which I was an employee.
After my patents, many imitations have been made around the world, even with modifications, included the system to make fuel from organic wastes presently made in Italy by ENI.
When I patented it in 1977 the most common comment was “This is an impossible invention”…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
a 21-year-old student, Julian Brown, invented Plastoline, a reactor that apparently produces fuel oil from plastic through a pyrolysis reaction using microwaves generated with electricity from solar panels. This is the link:
Dr. Rossi,
It’s interesting to hear of a potential, new 100 W unit. Do you think it is possible that the 100 W unit will have higher volumetric power density (kW/liter) than the 10 W unit?
SULLA. “RIVISTA “CHE. OGNI QUALTANTO SEGUO MI PARE CHE FRA POCO DOVREI ESSERE CONTATTATO PER FISSARE LA. DATA PER LA SPEDIZIONE DEI MIEI “ECAT” !!! IO. MI RIPETO FORSE , MA SPERO DI ESSERE CONTATTATO IL PRIMA POSSIBILE E ORDINARE 2 “ECAT” DA 20 MEGA DI TIPO TRIFASE !!!!!!!!!!!!
ENGLISH:
My group is interested to order up to 20 MW Threephase
Dear Dr. Rossi,
There are many of us who are eager to see that your fantastic invention is real. Do you and your Partners intend to announce when the first 22kW 1 MW installation in the sub-station is operational? And if so, will you share a photo of the sub-station with the container? It would be a day for a great celebration. Thank you.
Kind regards,
Calle H
Dear Dr. Rossi,
The 10W NGU is sold for $25 = $2.5/Watt. Now that there is a new core 100W I would believe your Licensee will sell it for $2.5/Watt = $250. But honestly, it could be sold for a much lower price while still maintaining the business margin. Could it be so that the 100W core is only a performance upgrade of the 10W core so that the price for the 100W could be 0.25$/Watt? Thank you if you can answer.
Kind regards,
Calle H
Dear Andrea Rossi,
First of all, I would like to offer my apologies for my earlier complaints regarding the possible delay in deliveries to smaller customers.
Like many of us, I have been trying for quite some time to understand the technology behind the E-Cat as thoroughly as possible, which also allows me to speak about it with enthusiasm to others. It remains a fascinating concept—especially since so many continue to claim that it contradicts the laws of nature, quod non.
While thinking, reading, and researching the possible phenomena involved, I quickly realized how incredibly complex—and above all, costly—the research materials must be that are needed to create and refine the core of the E-Cat. I therefore have great respect for the major customers and investors supporting your product. After all, your team could just as well have discovered that it might never become economically viable.
From now on, I will patiently await my turn for delivery.
With respectful regards,
Koen
Hergen:
1- yes
2- no delays, as far as I am aware of,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
in your reply to Italo R. you said, the 1 MW reactors will not be made by means of 10 watt modules.
Is this decision the result of the tests your licensee performed in the last weeks?
How long will this decision delay the producton of the 1 MW reactors? Several month? 1 year or more?
Kind regards,
E. Hergen
R.Brand:
Good question,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Franz:
I am not able to answer, so far,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Sara:
No,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Paul Dodgshun:
I am not able to answer your questions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
The 1 MW plants will not be made by means of 10 W modules,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
I believe the current configuration of the 1 MW 22 kV generator relies on a very large number of 10 W units (approximately 100,000).
Given the complexity of this approach, I believe this is why your licensee has asked you to evaluate the development of more powerful 500 W units.
This would reduce the total required to just 2,000 units, significantly speeding up assembly.
My question is: while we wait for the 500 W units, is production of the 1 MW generator with 10 W units still progressing?
In any case, this remains an incredible important milestone in the energy sector.
Kind regards,
Italo R.
1: Can multiple 22kV NGUs on an electricity grid perform any or all of the the functions listed in [1:] without the addition of Synchroverters to each 22kV NGU?
2: If the answer is no, then how could such a grid operate in a stable and controllable fashion under severe transients?
3: Can 22kV NGUs be programmed to depend on demands sent from the grid operator?
=============
[1:]https://www.synvertec.com/solution-overview
An algorithm for grid stability
The Synchronverter transforms renewable energy inverters into cutting-edge grid stabilizing devices. With the addition of the Synchronverter, inverters play an active role in the stabilization of grids whose considerable renewable energy source (RES) proportions would otherwise create significant instability.
The Synchronverter’s unique technology performs:
1: Stabilization: The grid’s instantaneous reaction (frequency regulation) capabilities are greatly enhanced.
2: Spinning Reserve: The grid is able to mitigate generation loss or an increase in load.
3: Voltage Control: The grid can support power quality and accommodate changes to system voltage levels (reactive power regulation).
4: Standalone: Grids work effectively in “island” mode (lack of grid referencing).
5: Smoothing: Production management of flexible and non-dispatchable load (capacity firming).
=============
[2:] https://www.synvertec.com/solution-overview
The Synchronverter is a patented control algorithm that interacts with inverter switches and emulates the mechanical and electrical properties of a synchronous generator. An algorithm for grid stability
The Synchronverter transforms renewable energy inverters into cutting-edge grid stabilizing devices. With the addition of the Synchronverter, inverters play an active role in the stabilization of grids whose considerable renewable energy source (RES) proportions would otherwise create significant instability.
By integrating with existing renewable energy inverters, the Synchronverter transforms them into a virtual synchronous generator device – without any inverter design changes. This is accomplished via an add-on control device that integrates with the inverter’s controller and utilizes a small, ultra-fast-response energy bank.
The Synchronverter enhances yields and maximizes the utilization of electricity provided by renewable energy sources in traditional and micro/smart grid topologies. The Synchronverter is IP protected, easy-to-implement and extremely well tested in diverse conditions.
The algorithm causes conventional AC/DC converters to mimic synchronous generators and create the inertia required for generating a stabilizing effect.
The Synchronverter mimics local control loops similar to synchronous generators’ classical control, generating the active participation of power sources in grid stabilization. This is accomplished in harmony with other generators on the grid.
The control algorithm computes the induced voltages on the virtual generator’s stator winding (from the currents, angular position and angular velocity) at any given moment, without lags or tracking errors.
Droop coefficients and complex non-linear droop curves can be easily imposed via the control processor software. They can also be programmed to depend on demands sent from the grid operator.
The difference between 230V and 240V is primarily due to historical voltage standards that have been harmonized to a single nominal voltage for greater compatibility. While 240V was historically the standard in countries like the UK, and 220V was common in mainland Europe, the 230V standard and wider tolerance bands (e.g., +10%/-6%) were established to ensure that appliances would work in both regions. In practice, most modern electrical systems still operate within a range that is compatible with both, and modern devices are designed to handle this variation, so the practical difference is negligible.
================
[3:] https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/12/14/ever-heard-of-synchroinverters-grid-stabilizing-devices-connecting-renewables-to-distributed-energy-resources/
14 Dec 2021 — Synchroinverters are a special kind of smart inverter that mimics a synchronous generator and are able to avoid grid voltage frequency fluctuations and faults.
…
“The inverter will react to any changes in the grid in the same way a generator would; just much faster, in a cost-effective way, and [they] thereby play an active role in grid stability,” the spokesperson went on to say. “It is important to stress that the provision of frequency and voltage support is done simultaneously.”
…
can be embedded into any three-phase inverter.
Dr Rossi,
Are you partecipating to the management of the global licensee of Leonardo Corporation ?
Dear Dr. Rossi,
you’re now also developing 500-watt ecat units. Is there a size limit, or are 1 kW, 10 kW, 100 kW, etc. units theoretically feasible in the future?
Best regards
Franz
Dear Dr. Rossi,
the EU has decided to completely abandon Russian gas from 2028. Is it possible that a contract is being prepared behind the scenes between the EU member states, Leonardo and licensees? Will this be a breakthrough for the ECAT?
I mean, without this ECAT alternative…politicians can’t be that naive. Can they?
Kind regards
R.Brand
axil:
We do not have any transmutations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Does the R&D team that are testing the new 100 Watt and 500 watt monolithic cores using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to check for transmutation damage during the tests of these units.
Svein:
Thank you for your insight.
My answers remain,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Francesco Poscetti:
Thank you for your support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Sono contento di quello che sta accadendo. E’ dal 2011 che ti seguo costantemente, anche se non intervengo su questo forum. Mi piace che continui a condividere con tutti noi le informazioni sugli sviluppi. Ho sempre un po paura per te. Ci sono in ballo cose grandi. E’ una rivoluzione che spingerà l’umanita ad accelerare la conoscenza della vita. Mi preocccupo delle parti della società che giustamente tenterà di rallentare questo processo per proteggersi da questo tsunami. Potreggiti Andrea. Vola basso anche se nel tuo piccolo stai volando alto. Sto anche cambiando la mia opinione. Pensavo di staccarmi dalla dipendenza dal pagare l’energia ai fornitori e rendermi libero. Questi ultimi cambiamenti mi hanno fatto provare una brutta sensazione. Ma alla fine ho capito che era il mio egoismo a provocare questo senzazioni. Poi ho capito. La cosa importante è che abbiamo energia pulita. La dipendenza e l’indipendenza entrambi sono da evitare. Mi piace sempre il concentto di interdipendenza. Quindi ho cambiato idea. Non mi serve un ecat, mi serve che questa tecnologia segui la strada piu efficace per immettersi in funzione e che “gradualmente” trasformi il mondo. Questa e’ filosofia ma penso che sia qualcosa che possa aiutare anche altri a riflettere.
ENGLISH:
I’m happy with what’s happening. I have been following you constantly since 2011, even if I don’t intervene on this forum. I love that you continue to share information about developments with all of us. I’m always a little scared for you. There are big things at stake. It is a revolution that will push humanity to accelerate the knowledge of life. I worry about the parts of society that will rightly try to slow this process to protect themselves from this tsunami. Stand by Andrea. Fly low even if in your own small way you are flying high. I’m also changing my opinion. I thought I would break away from the addiction to paying energy suppliers and set myself free. These latest changes gave me a bad feeling. But in the end I realized that it was my selfishness that was causing these feelings. Then I understood. The important thing is that we have clean energy. Dependence and independence both are to be avoided. I always like the concept of interdependence. So I changed my mind. I don’t need an ecat, I need this technology to follow the most effective path to be put into operation and to “gradually” transform the world. This is philosophy but I think it’s something that can help others to reflect too.
Andrea, se trovi errori nelle traduzione correggili , ho usato il traduttore di google.
Con rispetto e ammirazione
Francesco Poscetti
Dear Andrea
Thanks for the answers.
I see that Steve D, now on October 19, operates with figures of 3.3 W/cm^3 which in in opposision to the data-sheet.
Since a liter is 1000 cm^3, an effect of 3.3 W per cm^3 would -given approx. 3.3 kW/liter!!! The data-sheet say: 0,120kW/liter.
In my question 1, from yesterday, there is a call to take a closer look at some numbers that are actually strongly contradictory in the pointed out data-sheet. My interpretations here are based on the following:
A 10 W Ecat with a diameter of 6 cm and a height of 3 cm has a volume of: (h x Pi x R^2) = (3 cm x 3.14 x 3 cm^2 = close to 85 cm^3). One liter is, as known: 1000 cm^3. 85cm^3 is therefore close to 1/12 of a liter.
With 10W power, this becomes: 10W x 12 = close to 120W/ liter. Here, the data-sheet therefore agrees with the stated 0.120 kW/liter!!!
10 such simple units thus constitute 100W and have a volume of 10 x 0.085 liters = 0.85 liters.
From a volume of 10 liters, you get a maximum of 1.2 kW.
If you want 3kW, the required volume is 3 kW : 0.120 kW/liter = 25 liters!!!
An increase in power to 0.270 kW/liter for larger systems therefore appears to be an error and must be corrected.
A combination of several units may only give a lower figure than 120W/liter.
To question 2, I can actually self give you an answer as follows:
The original 100W unit had, as far as I remember, the dimensions: 7 cm x 7 cm x 9 cm = 441 cm^3.
This gives an output of: 100W : 0.441 liter = approx. 227 W/liter.
This then gives approx. 47% direct volume savings.
A combination of 10 pcs. such “old” 100W units, then provide 1kW and occupy a volume of 4.41 liters.
The volume of my ordered NGU 3kW is stated, in the data sheet, as a volume of 11.3 liters.
This means that it must provide 3.77 kW/liter??? This is incorrect in relation to the basic data given in the fact-sheet.
From the performance of the “old” 100W unit it appears that the energy density in ZPE, including approx. 10% loss, must be: 227 : 0.9 = approx. 250W/liter.
Having this figure scientifically confirmed seems to be a necessity for those who are to deliver Ecat.
Regarding the weight ratios, I recommend that you do the calculation yourself, as I am unsure of the figures given in the aforementioned data-sheet.
You can find your own datasheet here: https://ecatthenewfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/E-Cat-Power-NGU-DataSheet-2024-12-3.pdf Take a thorough look at this before you gives me you answer.
Questions 4 and 5 are very important in this context. Both deal with whether the technology, you are currently using, is “infinitely scalable” in a single cell.
Is it possible to make a single Ecat cell that produces 1 MW or more??? And Why not?
Regards: Svein
Svein:
1. no
2. I am not able to answer so far
3- I am not able to answer so far
4. I do not understand exactly your question: please rephrase more specifically
5. Same as in 4
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Martin:
Please see the data shets on http://www.ecat.com
Specific situations will be discussed when the Clients will be contacted for the deliveries,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
axil:
1- no
2- n.a.
3- it does not happen
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Are you seeing transmutation of elements and/or matter destruction occur while the 100W and 500W cores are in operation?
Have you taken steps to avoid this issue from causing availability/reliability problems?
Does the partner understand that these types of issues arise when the power density of the cores increase beyond the 10 watt level.
Dear Andrea ,
Is the 100 Watt Ecat 230V – 50 Hz supplied with a DC to AC converter ?
And what if we now want to connect 4 Ecats of 100 W = 400 W to the grid ?
Will 1 converter for the 400 W – 230 V be supplied, or will there still be 4 ?
And is that 1 or 4 converters included in the price of the Ecat ?
If not, what will the cost be ?
.
Thanks
Martin
Dear Andrea
You recently confirmed to WaltC that the ratio between volume and power production for the 100 W module was more favorable than for the 10 W module.
In E-Cat-Power-NGU-DataSheet-2024-12-3.pdf the figures appear to be the same at 0.12 kW/liter.
For composite units from 1 to 10 kW the figure appears to be the same at 0.27kW/liter, but with increasing kW/kg.
This leads to new questions:
1. Are there any changes here today and what are these figures now?
2. Are the production costs per kW reduced when the module sizes increase?
3. When will more detailed information about the 500 W modules be available?
4. Do you see a size limitation for individual modules, in the reactor technology you currently use?
5. Where, if so, does this boundary seem to lie?
Regards, Svein
Viggo Kleven:
Thank you for your kind support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steve D:
I confirm what I have already said in my former answers about the 500 W; the 500 W is still a prototype and so far no final data are available,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
The 100W and prototype 500W reactors are good news. I repost below your earlier correspondence with SNK.
1) Is the volume of the 100W reactor greater than the 10W?
2) Is the volume of the 500W reactor greater than the 100W?
3) Does the below discussed rule still apply, otherwise can you clarify the 100W and 500W reactor volumes?
4) If rule has changed have other features been introduced such as a drive rate increase?
2024-08-01 14:21 Steven Nicholes Karels
Dear Andrea Rossi,
So, the power output linear proportional to the reactor volume? Or approximately 3.3W per CC?
2024-08-01 15:13 Andrea Rossi
Steven Nicholes Karels:
It is proportional: yes, moreless 3.3 W/cm^3
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Thanks for the great info about the 100 W units, and now even 500 W units! I have been hoping for this development, good job!
Larger units will simplify assembling into larger power banks. Maybe even 1kW and more may be achieveable further down the road.
Another advantage may be that a single 100 W unit may take up less space than ten 10 W units?
Also congratulations with the first 1 MW order, that is an important step for you and your partner!
Kind regards
Viggo Kleven
Joachim:
No, the 500 W module is still undee R&D,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Johnny Beaumont:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
Thank you for your suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
Indeed, the choice to build individual modules capable of delivering higher power outputs, up to 500W, would allow for much less complex assembly for devices requiring high power (e.g., 1 MW).
A smaller number of modules for the same total power output would require less wiring and easier internal assembly.
It would likely reduce the overall volume while increasing reliability (fewer devices susceptible to failure).
I realize this is a technological challenge, but one you’ll be able to tackle with all your experience.
Kind regards,
Italo R.
Dr Rossi,
Is it true that Agip Nucleare (ENI Group) in 1980 bought your technology to make oil from organic wastes patented in 1977 ?
Best,
Johnny Beaumont
Dear Andrea Rossi,
In terms of the 10W, the 100W, and the prototype 500W units, doe each of these different types have a single reactor?
Dear Dr. Rossi,
i have pre-ordered 1 KW ecat. Has it been decided yet whether these will consist of 10 watt, 100 watt or 500 watt ecat units?
Joachim
Svein:
Yes, we are testing 500 W prototypes, upon request of the Global Licensee,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea
The announcement about maintaining the production of the 100 W units was interesting.
Based on the announcement that 22kV – 1 MW plants will be the first in regular production, this seems reasonable, especially if quality benefits can be achieved in addition.
In this context, I would like to ask if there are also thoughts about larger units?
1 kW and preferably also 10 kW could be relevant if production, price and quality conditions, in large plants, can be improved by increasing the size of the individual units.
In terms of energy, however, 10 Watts must be considered a miniaturization.
Regards: Svein
Italo R.:
In the year 1977 I patented the system to make fuel from organic wastes; the patent expired in 1997. Eventually I made an industry based on that patent; for more info about its destiny see:
http://www.ingandrearossi.com
In the year 2000 I made another patent on the same matter in the USA ( USPTO Patent # 6,051,110, granted on April 18 2000, expired in the year 2020 ), in collaboration with the CEO of BioEnergy’s wood treatment facility, located in New Hampshire, of which I was an employee.
After my patents, many imitations have been made around the world, even with modifications, included the system to make fuel from organic wastes presently made in Italy by ENI.
When I patented it in 1977 the most common comment was “This is an impossible invention”…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
WaltC:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
a 21-year-old student, Julian Brown, invented Plastoline, a reactor that apparently produces fuel oil from plastic through a pyrolysis reaction using microwaves generated with electricity from solar panels. This is the link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmen/comments/1mqi7pn/julian_brown_creates_plastoline_a_plastic_waste/?tl=it
Could it be real?
This process reminds me what you did with Petroldragon many years ago.
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Dr. Rossi,
It’s interesting to hear of a potential, new 100 W unit. Do you think it is possible that the 100 W unit will have higher volumetric power density (kW/liter) than the 10 W unit?
Best Wishes,
WaltC
Don Zucchiatti:
Good question: it has been decided to make also 100 W units after series of tests,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
Will the 100 W unit be made up of one 100 W unit or ten 10 W units ?
Donz
Calle H:
This decision will not depend on me,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
I passed on your message to our Global Licensee.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
SULLA. “RIVISTA “CHE. OGNI QUALTANTO SEGUO MI PARE CHE FRA POCO DOVREI ESSERE CONTATTATO PER FISSARE LA. DATA PER LA SPEDIZIONE DEI MIEI “ECAT” !!! IO. MI RIPETO FORSE , MA SPERO DI ESSERE CONTATTATO IL PRIMA POSSIBILE E ORDINARE 2 “ECAT” DA 20 MEGA DI TIPO TRIFASE !!!!!!!!!!!!
ENGLISH:
My group is interested to order up to 20 MW Threephase
Dear Dr. Rossi,
There are many of us who are eager to see that your fantastic invention is real. Do you and your Partners intend to announce when the first 22kW 1 MW installation in the sub-station is operational? And if so, will you share a photo of the sub-station with the container? It would be a day for a great celebration. Thank you.
Kind regards,
Calle H