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

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

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

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

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

Ni58 + p → Cu59

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

Cu59 → Ni59 + ν + e+

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

e- + e+ → γ + γ

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

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

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

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

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


1,013 comments to How can 30% of nickel in Rossi’s reactor be transmuted into copper?

  • Dr Rossi:
    Can you update about the safety certification for the domestic units?

  • Congratulations for the important work of your team of Industrial Heat. Millions of persons, Andrea, are looking for your results. A real plant, at last, not the usual toy on a table we are looking at since 25 years. A real plant that makes real work. A real commercial breakthrough. This is the reason of envy and ferocity against you from the usual gang. Godspeed, Andrea: the world is with you.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Warm Regards,

  • Hi, Andrea Rossi:
    Magnificent skill, we all are defending your job.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Electric Vehicles:
    It will take time, at least several years, before seing E-Cats coupled with car electric power modules, but our team will start experiments in this field too probably in 2016.
    Warm Regards,

  • Do you think the E-Cat will be useful for electric vehicles?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gary Aeling:
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Happy New Year also to you and, obviously, to all our Readers.

  • I am impressed with your work, real I am a fan.
    You overcome hurdles that should have destroyed anyone else, but you got reinforced by that experience. I am sure your 1 MW plant in the factory of the customer of IH will sign a history page.
    I read you love music, we have good stuff, if you need something we are glad to be at your service.
    Godspeed in 2015
    Gary Aeling

  • […] read, cold fusion berkeley, cold fusion a revolutionary technology and how is Rossi doing it. Share this:TwitterFacebookGoogleLike this:Like Loading… October 11, 2014October 15, 2014 […]

  • […] the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Andrea Rossi’s blog, a frequent poster asked Rossi several questions about Rossi’s USA […]

  • […] Rossi recently stated on his blog, the Journal of Nuclear Physics, that the third party tests will end on December 16th. This is good news for those of us who have […]

  • […] want their personal autos to run on LENR power. Steven Karels, a frequent poster to Rossi’s blog, Journal of Nuclear Physics, has been exploring the topic for some […]

  • […] Rossi informed his readers on the Journal of Nuclear Physics of the newest attempt of outsiders to cash in on his invention. There are several certified groups […]

  • […] days, talked about his E-Cats and progress toward certification and verification. A poster to the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Mark Saker, recently asked Rossi several questions about the progress toward […]

  • […] has been much discussion on the Journal of Nuclear Physics recently about the use of a catalyst in the reactions within the E-Cats and Hot Cats. Andrea Rossi […]

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Juha Pukkinen:
    Buy your oil, the domestic E-Cats will need more, more time for the certifications. We are ready with the industrial, not with the domestic.
    Very sorry,
    Warm Regards,

  • Juha Pukkinen

    Hei Andrea, winter season is reaching and i wonder my heating oil order. I gave my address to first 10 000 pre-order list. Should i fill up my tank or just half. 🙂 Have you consider to make swarm number for first 1000 device. Best wishes.JP

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Fabio:
    1- The domestic E-Cats for now are not available , waiting for certification.
    2- When the domestic E-Cats will be for sale, we will give all the commercial and technical information.
    Warm Regards,

  • fabio i

    Hi Dr. Rossi, I would like to ask 2 questions:
    1) The E-Cat with gas heater is already ready also for the domestic utilizations?
    2) Whereas gas boilers do not reach a cop of 1 while the ‘E-CAT reaches a cop of 6 I expect to consume 1/6 of the gas?

  • africanus

    Dear Mr. Bettini,

    I have some comments on your article:

    1. The copper isotopes Cu-59, Cu-60, Cu-61 and Cu-62 do not decay into the corresponding Nickel isotopes by positron emission, but by electron capture. See:

    2. The Nickel isotopes Ni-60, Ni-61 and Ni-62 are stable isotopes, they do not decay at all. See:

    3. The Nickel isotope Ni-59 does not decay into Cu-59 by a beta decay, it decays to 100% into Co-59 by an electron capture (t1/2 = 76000a). See:

    Conclusion: None of your claims is backed up factually, your article is seriously flawed.

  • […] to Joseph Fine, a frequent poster on Andrea Rossi’s Journal of Nuclear Physics, the E-Cat does not vent steam to the atmosphere. The water is passed “through an external heat […]

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Jorge Martinez:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,

  • Jorge Martínez

    Señor Rosi tiene la respuesta, excelnte trabajo y felicidades por esta tecnología estaremos atentos al desarrollo de la misma, en horabuna, tine la respuesta

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Scott L.:
    We have a factory, but for safety and security reasons it is under another name and we will not disclose it until the situation is like the present. What counts for our Customers is that our products work well.
    Warm Regards,

  • ScottL

    Hello Mr. Rossi,

    I’m having a running disagreement with colleague. He contends that you don’t own a factory in Miami Florida, but perhaps have a subcontractor. I contend you have said you have a factory, implying ownership either by you or by your corporation. Could you clarify so I can be assured of my interpretation. Thank you kindly.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Christian Scholl:
    The principle is this, yes, but it will be simplyfied.
    Warm Regards,

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Domestic E-Cat will be delivered with differents heat exchanger: boiler for hot water, heat exchanger for hot air, full cupper electrode to replace steatite water heater ?
    Best regards,


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gregory Lee:
    Thank you. I just fight to make this technology arrive to the point to be really useful, not just a narcisistic theoretical ballet.
    Warm Regards,

  • Gregory Lee

    Dear Dr. A.Rossi

    I’ve been following your research and news everyday for a long while. I am so greatful for your strength and such superb expertise in battlefield manouvers in both the political and economical minefields where so many have failed.

    Long live The king !

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Argon S.:
    Please detail who you are, where you are and activity to
    Warm Regards,

  • Argon S.

    Dear Andrea Rossi!
    Several months ago has sent you the letter with the small wholesale requirement. The answer that has been considered has come.
    Now it is time prepares for installation and service E-cats. Our region is cold, considerable demand on E-cats is guaranteed. I have desire to become your local representative on their installation and service. And wait for your business answer.
    Warm Regards for you!

  • Simon Derricutt

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    Please feel free to edit or delete these remarks should they prove useful to you.

    It seems to me that the size limitation on your devices is because of the necessity to use powdered catalyst, the requirement to have Casimir gaps in the catalyst, the requirement to closely control the temperature of operation and the difficulty of controlling that temperature across a powder. If there were a way to improve the heat-transfer whilst maintaining the physical properties then the reactor size could be increased, and thus the system could be made cheaper per kilowatt.

    If your nickel (plus maybe other metals) material could be produced in foil of around 1 micron in thickness, and if this foil were to be corrugated with a wavelength of around 6-10 microns, and if successive layers of this foil were stacked at right-angles to each other, then the necessary Casimir gaps would be produced. If the foil is cut first into an annulus, and this is threaded on to a central rod-shaped core that is an interference fit to the annulus, then you would have better heat conduction from the working edges to the core. A number of cores could then be held between heat-conductive plates. Control of the temperature of these outer plates would then give a much tighter control of the temperatures of all the stacks of foil. With better control there would be less chance of thermal runaway, and so the reactor may be made much larger.

    There is a possibility of varying the gap dimensions by compressing the stack, and this would be largely reversible. Each stack could be tuned to work the same as all the others.

    If the catalyst were simply isotopes of Nickel, it should be possible to electroplate a rotating graphite core that is pre-scored with the corrugations and peel off the plated layer. Control of thickness would be by varying the plating current and the rotation of the graphite core (though of course the core could be any conductive material that Nickel will not adhere to). If other materials are involved then possibly a sputtering technique could work to produce the corrugated foil.

    I would expect that nano powders can vary significantly in the packing density and gaps they generate (and thus power generated), and this suggestion of using foils may improve the manufacturing repeatability. It may also mean lower power output per gram of nickel since there would be less gaps in total.

    I hope this suggestion is helpful, and not just a path you have tried and found to be a failure.

    Best regards, Simon

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Simon Derricut:
    Shielding is a very delicate issue. We studied very throughly this aspect of our tech, with the help of Prof. Sergio Focardi.
    Warm Regards,

  • Simon Derricutt

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Patents are very expensive and provide little protection. It is logical to avoid them until absolutely necessary, though this does seem to annoy people who want to know exactly how it works.

    I would like to see electrical generators in the 4-10KW range to be made available for people to buy. By moving power generation into individual houses the problems of electricity transmission and associated 30% or so losses would be removed. By coincidence a small family car running at 80km/h needs around 10KW – if the maximum power is 10KW it won’t accelerate very fast, but a bit of energy storage will fix that problem.

    I appreciate that the main initial focus will need to be on industrial sized units, but once these are proven and the bugs ironed out of the control systems it would be good to make domestic-sized ones.

    One thing that surprised me in the MW generator is that it is made up of many small units that are individually screened. If the reaction is sensitive to physical size, would it not be better to manufacture a matrix of small units and shield/insulate the resulting block?

    Best regards and wishing you total success, Simon

  • Gentilissimo Prof. Rossi,
    le copio quì di seguito l’articolo apparso sul nuovo numero di Energie Magazine in edicola dalla prossima settimana.
    Grazie infinite per il suo lavoro!

    L’Energia di domani… OGGI!

    La data del 28 ottobre 2011 verrà ricordata come il punto di svolta del futuro energetico dell’umanità, infatti presso un’azienda di Bologna è avvenuto il collaudo
    del primo impianto LENR da 1 MW. Non si è trattato di un test di laboratorio
    ma della consegna ufficiale di un prodotto commerciale.

    Cos’è un impianto LENR?
    Questa sigla indica un dispositivo in cui avvengono reazioni nucleari a bassa energia, tecnologia meglio conosciuta con il termine fusione fredda.
    La parola nucleare fa immediatamente riaffiorare l’orrore per quanto accaduto a marzo a Fukushima, ma oggi stiamo parlando di qualcosa di totalmente differente.

    Fissione e fusione nucleare.
    I reattori nucleari che sono stati costruiti e installati in tutto il mondo basano il loro funzionamento sulla fissione nucleare, che è un fenomeno mediante il quale i nuclei atomici di sostanze come l’uranio e il plutonio si dividono producendo altre sostanze radioattive e rilasciando enormi quantità di energia. La reazione di fusione nucleare, invece, che è il meccanismo mediante il quale il sole e le altre stelle irradiano nell’universo luce e calore, funziona attraverso la fusione, cioè l’unione, di nuclei di idrogeno per formare elio. Diversamente dall’uranio e dal plutonio, né l’idrogeno né l’elio sono radioattivi.
    Da trent’anni i fisici nucleari cercano di riprodurre in forma controllata ciò che avviene nel Sole, ma si prevede che queste ricerche porteranno un risultato tra 10 o 20 anni; altri scienziati hanno seguito una strada differente, ipotizzando che si potessero ottenere reazioni di fusione in condizioni non così estreme come quelle che esistono nel nucleo delle stelle; questa tecnologia è stata chiamata fusione fredda.

    Fusione fredda.
    Nel 1989 due scienziati americani Martin Fleischmann e Stanley Pons annunciarono di avere ottenuto una reazione di questo tipo e altri scienziati, tra cui il fisico Giuliano Preparata, studiarono questi fenomeni, ma fino ad oggi questi argomenti sono rimasti relegati ad uno stretto ambito accademico. Nel 2009 un ingegnere italiano, Andrea Rossi, presenta una domanda di brevetto per un dispositivo per la produzione di reazioni esotermiche tra nichel e idrogeno; Andrea Rossi sviluppa il progetto con la collaborazione di un fisico, il Prof. Sergio Focardi e a gennaio di quest’anno viene presentato il prototipo del dispositivo.Questo evento viene praticamente ignorato dai mass media, ma in seguito al test del 28 ottobre il reattore di Rossi e Focardi è una realtà.

    Come funziona?
    Nell’E-Cat, questo è il nome commerciale del dispositivo, avviene una reazione tra idrogeno e nichel, quest’ultimo si trasforma lentamente in rame e durante la reazione viene prodotto calore.

    Quanta energia produce?
    In un’intervista rilasciata da Andrea Rossi alla rivista Cold Fusion Now, lo scienziato ha dichiarato che 1 grammo di nichel produce la stessa energia di 517 chilogrammi di petrolio.

    Questo sistema verrà utilizzato solo per il riscaldamento o può produrre energia elettrica?
    Tra i sistemi per la produzione di energia elettrica, le centrali termoelettriche a gas o a carbone, le centrali nucleari e le centrali termodinamiche basano tutte il loro funzionamento sulla trasformazione di energia termica in energia elettrica, pertanto anche l’E-Cat potrà essere utilizzato per questo scopo.

    Quanto costa?
    Un dispositivo da 10kW sufficiente a colmare il fabbisogno energetico di un’abitazione media dovrebbe costare circa 5000 Euro, questo prezzo è però destinato a ridursi.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Christian Scholl:
    We are working on that.
    Warm Regards,

  • Dear Rossi,

    I am glad de see your breakthrough on electricity production.
    Water steam at 450°C increases greatly the energy conversion but with high pressure.
    Have you tried other fluids, like molten salts, exotic gases?

    A second heat exchanger is necessary to transfer excess calories to heat homes.
    Why not adding a third water-air exchanger to continue the electricity production if period heating is over?

    Best regards,


  • onizuka

    Dr. Rossi are you familiar with Dr.Mills hydrino theory whereby atomic hydrogen can be catalyzed to a lower than “ground” state using elements with certain electron energy levels releasing large quantities energy compared to any known chemistry. Is your process some offshoot of Dr. Mill’s process? His company is also currently licensing the power generation technology to utilities around the world. His process also was produced as a result of his theory of the electron orbitsphere which is seemingly set to surplant much of the hocus pocus found in quantum mechanics.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Marco Russetti:
    You can contact
    Warm Regards,

  • marco russetti

    ing rossi buongiorno,
    sarebbe cosi cortese da entrare in contatto email con me?
    ci occupiamo di produzione di energia elettrica da fonti alternative e leggendo di Lei
    ci sono venute idee molto interessanti

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Christian Scholl:
    We made a huge amount of contrlos related to the sagety impact of all the radiations that can escape the reactor and we always founf the impact irrilevant respect the background. The measurements have been made by scientists specialized in the field (the ones that, for example, test the impact of PET systems in the hospitals).
    Warm Regards,

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Many radiofrequencies have biological effects (wifi, DECT, GSM, UMTS, etc..)
    If there is a RF source inside, are you sure it is not harmfull?

    Best regards,


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Richard Pollack:
    We will release more info about this issue when I will have in my hands the patent approved.
    Warm Regards,

  • Dear Andrea Rossi, Many scientists and “citizen scientists” are following this story with great interest. I reside in West Virginia, a part of the United States where the energy debate seems to be primarily whether to use coal, or natural gas. I join with the multitude that wishes you great success! I am also intrigued by the fact that you are further evidence of the “music/science” synergy. I look forward to hearing about RF or sonic components of your process. Richard Pollack

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mike Strandell:
    Yes, but is too low.
    Warm Regards,

  • What consideration has been taken for the capture of the highly energetic proton for application of its ev potential directly to an electrical conversion system.

    This energy should be apparent.

  • Konstantin

    Focus of your reactor is possible that he was able to work in a very narrow thermal range (so earlier and could not be anyone to run a stable response),is not it? I’ve read about similar work of Arata, but it produces a lower energy output and using D2, then the publication of it died down – in general I see many similarities in mechanism of reaction…
    I am well in your deliberations and wish you every success.
    Best Regards from Ukraine.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Jorge Jimenez:
    muchas gracias!
    Warm Regards,

  • Enhorabuena! por todos los años de estudios y de sacrificios, de pruebas continuas y de resultados fallidos, hasta que lograron los resultados que muchos estamos observando en cada paso que siguen realizando con la Fusión en frío por un método que parece seguro y muy comprobado. Sé por lo que leo que, muy pronto ustedes llegarán a una respuesta integral que explique con toda rigurosidad científica el nuevo fenómeno que se está teniendo, sin que ustedes pierdan el secreto de la fórmula. Pero algo más importante ya está sucediendo, y se trata de la credibilidad que día con día esto va teniendo y la veracidad de que el negocio de una energía futura más limpia y barata vendrá para todos.
    Vivo en un país que usa mayormente energías renovables para producir energía eléctrica, pero nuestro sistema podría evitar que en los meses secos debamos usar energías de combustibles contaminantes, y así, mantener el medio ambiente y el precio bajo de la energía eléctrica.
    Felicidades por este gran acierto!. Solo espero poder ver pronto uno o varios de estos E-Cat de 1MW, haciendo parte de nuestros procesos de producción. Sr. Rossi, Que Dios le siga dando luz a su camino por siempre!.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Elena Benvenuti:
    I think the article on
    is interesting.
    Warm Regards,

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>