Current power plants have a 40% efficiency and a little less for nuclear power plants 36%.
Do you think that with a E-Cat 1 MW coupled with a steam turbine you would get a similar or better performance than these plants?
Dear Andera.
A. Will the robots be able to complete the E-Cat module consisting of 100 QX reactors, the controls and the heat exchanger of the basic fluid heater version?
B. May the robots also be able to connect the 4 kW modules to bigger assemblies?
C. How many minutes of manual effort require å 40 kW unit of the basic version?
D. How many of these will the production capacity you now are installing handle each hour?
E. What will be the approx. weight and volume of a 4 kW module?
F. Witch pressure on the fluid side will the modules withstand?
All best, regards Svein Henrik.
Will you be introducing industrial sized system first, also what electrical output device do you think you will end with (e.g steam turbine, stirling etc).
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Congratulations for the convincing test of Stockholm. I appreciated also the fact that the base of the Ecat QX was in transparent plexiglas, which eliminated any conjecture about ” what’s there?”: same thumbs up for the fact that you gave to Mats Lewan both the water pump and the base of the resistances. Well done.
Cheers
Brian
@Frank Acland:
Andrea is working to reach as fast as possible this paramount achievement to industrialize the cheaper and cleanest energy source of the history. He is achieving this goal with modest funds, absolutely not comparable to the immense funding at disposition of the most powerful concerns of the world.
There is no other feat the the mankind history comparable to what Andrea is doing.
Chuck Davis
Frank Acland:
Speaking seriously: I want to present the new industrialized E-Cat as soon as possible. There is not a particular reason about 2018, problem is that I am impatient to start.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
> The Kilopower by NASA uses radioactivity for generating heat, then converted to electricity using a Stirling system. It could use a QuarkX for heat instead of radioactivity
Yes! And again about space news, SpaceX will attempt the first launch of its new giant rocket, the Falcon Heavy, on Feb. 6, from the historic Launch Pad 39A — the same one used for NASA’s Apollo moon missions and space shuttle flights — at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, window opening 1:30 p.m. EST (1830 GMT). For its debut flight, the Falcon Heavy is carrying Elon Musk’s Tesla Roadster into space. If successful (not easy), will deliver a Tesla Roadster into a heliocentric orbit that will eventually send the midnight-cherry-red electric car by Mars.
Dear Andrea I hope that in the next production of quark X “industrial” are also expected systems of 500 or 250 thermal Kw that certainly would have greater market than those of 1 Mw. I know that is a dangerous topic to be treated but we know that the goal is to to obtain autonomous generators of customized dimensions allowed by the modularity that you have achieved, not networks from large generators.
Best wishes
Neri
Bill Hayes:
a- the description will be given at the presentation of the product
b,c,d- the name will be for all the Ecats followed by the number in Watts of the power
Warm Regards
A.R.
You recently used the term: “Fluid Heater Basic Version” in a response to a question. I was wondering if the fluid heater is your prototype industrial product (basic version) and that it consists of the integration of 100 QX devices mounted on a heat-exchanger platform and electrical wiring connections to the QX devices, plus a cable that connects to an external electronics controller?
a. Is this an accurate description of a Fluid Heater Basic Version?
b. What will you call individual QX units: QX Reactor, QX Module, QX Unit, or QX device?
c. What will you call the integrated array of 100 QX reactors mounted on a heat-exchanger and associated wiring: Fluid Heater, Fluid Heater Module, or Fluid Heater Assembly?
d. Are you planning to call these system components by different names in the future?
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions, if you can at this time.
Craig:
It is on course, even if now my focus is in the launch of the fluid heater basic version. I want at any cost to present the product within this year.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
In the new context of Leonardo, after the intervention of the new partners, will you conserve the direction of the industrialization process? I think it will be fundamental.
Godspeed,
S.
John:
Yes, it is absolutely true. Many other Countries have granted the patent: the area where our patent has been approved covers the 90% of the world’s GDP. The investments in this sector of our IP have been intense, as well as the work to arrive to this result, but at the end we got it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Is it true that your US Patent has been granted also by the European Patent office and from the Canada Patent Office? The success with all these three patent offices would make your patent very solid, because they are the most selective patent offices of the world and it is very difficult to be approved by all of them…it is a veritable “Triple Crown”!
Cheers
John
Rodney Nicholson:
Thank you for your insight.
The core of what we are theorizing is simpler to be understood in the video with the Summary of 6 minutes of the 4 hours of the 2 videos combined of the event of Stockholm.
You can find it also on http://www.ecat.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Most of my background is in economics, but I do have some basic background in the sciences …… Dr. Gullstrom is functioning at a level a few orders of magnitude above my capabilities.
Nevertheless, here is a thought: The conventional wisdom appears to be that E=MC^2 is the ultimate source of energy. As if it is believed there could not be a better way of generating energy than H + H = He, simply because that is how the sun is believed to generate its energy. But it is known, for example, that quasars produce(d) huge quantities of energy by some method or other, and it is not clear to me that the method by which they produced energy is fully understood.
Previously it was posted here (I forget who it was) that the energy claimed to be produced by the E-cat QX in one year appears to be the equivalent of converting 20% of the mass of the E-cat’s tiny fuel charge into energy which, the poster suggested, seemed surprising high.
So here is my point/question: Is it possible that the mechanism by which the E-cat produces energy might be unrelated to the conversion of mass to energy, and is by a completely different, new, process.
So in summary, perhaps your E-cat LENR isn’t fusion at all. Perhaps it is a method far superior to mere fusion. If this were the case it would, among other things, explain the absence of harmful radiations.
Thank you for tolerating dumb questions like this one on your blog!
Yes, in general it is absolutely like a ponzi scheme, but some part of this critique could be made nowadays for the value of a large number of other financial assets, like hyperinflated currencies or stock shares. It is evident that in these days, ie, the fall of dollar, the institutional purchase of bonds and suppression of gold price are instrumental to artificially inflate wall street and sustain the debt financing. In my opinion, this is also a dangerous scheme where many people will enter the market and eventually be burned.
About bitcoin, usually, they answer that there is an intrinsic value due to the “scarcity” of the mined cons (after a projected amount, it is not possible extract coins any more); this is ridiculous, because the inflation of countless coins is there to show the absurdity of that supposed ingrained “deflation”.
If you run through my post, I think that there are some applications, linked to the blockchain concept, that could some day bring some, very few of these coins to be adopted in market exchanges. I could not exclude at all, that there is some possible application in your market sector too. There were some people discussing it also in Frank Acland’s site.
Orsobubu:
Thank you for the explication, but allow me: if I run like crazy around a pillar with enormous efforts to reach the distance of 10 thousand miles remaining in the same point, this has too an intrinsic value, because this is made by an enormous expense of Joules. Think how many steaks, spaghetti, you name it, I eat it, to complete 10 thousand miles around the circumference of a pillar, not to mention the shoes. Problem is that this incorporated value has no worth because does not incorporate any value of use, therefore its objective value of exchange is purely virtual. To me it looks like a ponzi scheme: the ones that will remain with the bitcoins in their hands at the end of the speculation process, will be able to sell to nobody their bitcoins, as expensive to be made as they might have been.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
And also, needless to say, when you Andrea note that “what is the principal of their value?
A currency incorporates work and assets of the Countries it is coined from, but a bitcoin what incorporates, apart the algorythm it comes from?”, as usual you’re focusing the exact, most important issues of all in a very short and condensed sentence, as only you are capable of doing. The “incorporated assets of the countries” is the key to understand why these coins could make some people very rich, but will surely fail their original supreme purpose of democratize society in a capitalistic, imperialistic-centered economy.
Hi Andrea, as usual I’m flattened for the huge progress of your work! Fantastic, I’m very optimistic!
About bitcoin, perhaps I can help you to understand it a little. I have some friends who left their work to dedicate to these cryptocurrencies exchanges instead (!). Imagine you deciding overnight to leave the Ecat project forever and starting trade in digital coins with your little laptop in your bedroom, closing this blog and saying goodbye Fabiani, ABB and all of your team!! Crazy!!
When some reader suggest you bitcoin as a financial system, this is interesting, think about it in this way.
Start assuming there are more than 1500 digital coins today, with at large the same concepts, so when I say bitcoin I intend any coin of them. First there is bitcoin as a storage of value, like gold. Really, the system of “extracting” them by very complex calculations is similar to the huge effort of mining gold, so you have an intrinsic value of the needed human work (computer construction, computer running, etc). Then, the value floats up and down like gold in the market. And similarly you have moments of wild speculation, so that in december cryptocurrencies hit an highest price 30 times the peak of the biggest previous speculation bubble in history, the famous Tulip bubble in 1637, which was itself at least double in size of the previous biggest, the NASDAQ dot com bubble in 2001. Apart from this, on the long time you can consider valuable or not bitcoin as a storage value like any other financial asset.
Then there is the blockchain function, a really interesting concept I’m sure it will adopted in infinite cases in every sector of human activity in the future (also in energy production) because it is a virtual register where all types of transaction can be written down forever without any mean of frauds, errors, corruption, etc. It is a game changing technology and it will wipe out numberless of manual clerk workers in the same way of Ecat, robots, automation etc will wipe out countless old wage workers around the world. It is, intrinsecally, an absolute “communist” instrument of production, it generates enormous quantity of user value, intended as usefulness for mankind, but containing absolute thin quantities of human work (it needs a programmer and a very small staff to create and run a blockchain), so having the potentiality to destroy huge quantities of exchange value (money, in averaged cycle, is only produced with human work).
This is very good for a communist society (no more 8 hours daily work shifts, only robots, no more scammers, thieves, every sector of human activity planned and controlled by blockchain nodes around the world without need of market, banks, money, etc, only the efficiency and correctness of transactions and scientific procedures for everybody. But this is also useful in capitalism of course. Imagine ie the mechanism of payment of ecat consumption. With a blockchain you are in perfect control of the process of production and distribution. Or imagine Andrea Rossi making a donation of some million dollars in bitcoin to charity and to the orsobubu. No more fear of being stolen or mismanaged by thieves or boureaucracy.
Of course, you will ask what is the need of bitcoins if we can use blockchain marxistically without need of money at all. But this is another fantastic example of contradiction in our capitalistic societies. So, bitcoin was born as a reaction of some very clever people to the economic crisis due to subprimes in US in 2008: no more banks, state centralization, taxation, etc, a sort of rebellion, also mistakenly called a revolution, against these enemies of the people, in need to reappropriate of their finances. But they invented blockchain inside a capitalistic economy, and they ruined it at all. Because with bitcoin, which is money, you replicates all the faults of fiat money, dollar, euro, etc. and you can clearly see the financial bubbles, the bitcoin robberies, the scams in cryptocurrencies, the speculation, the extreme social inequality in favor of whealthy people after they collected hundreds of bitcoins without having any merit for this. Not to mention the obvious fact that banks and states are organizing to reinstall the control over the digital coins.
Bitcoins are designed to work hand in hand with blockchain, but obviously we could imagine an analogue system without the need of any coin at all. In this sense, bitcoin, as money, reflects the same concept of any other real world coin, because it is the transformation of surplus value – exploited surplus human work – in capital. Exactly for these reasons, in these months new astonishing capitalistic applications of bitcoin and blockchain are rising. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of new startups in this field. There are start ups also in the energy sector.
I will make an example. Take indahash, it is a new coin based on a blockchain, working this way. There is a firm wanting to advertise his products via an “influencer”, a well known guy appearing on social media, facebook, etc; the influencer is no more contacted, hired and payed in dollars directly by the firm; instead, the firm contacts indahash, which contacts the influencer: and both of them are payed in indahash coins so there is a circulation of indahash coins between 3 different users: the influencers, the brands and their audience. Brands use indahash coins for marketing campaigns. When an influencer receives the indahash coin, he has the possibility to exchange them for products of a brand, to get discounts on the purchase of the product and to be always informed about the news. The influencers can also create their own coins and use them to increase their number of followers through the use of prizes and games. The influencers’ audience can use thecoins received and exchange them for exclusive prizes, such as gadgets signed by influencers, meetings and social activities. The blockchain assures the absolute correctness and intangibility of all these transactions.
You can only start to imagine the infinite, parasitic variety of – in my opinion – absolutely useless ways (I call them the degradation of a rotten, imperialistic society) of application of this system in overall markets, with the absurdity of a duplication of money systems instead of a unique medium such the dollar. Nations grew through centuries of wars and millions of deaths to centralize the markets and the respective coins, to create a geographical space with an uniform profit rate, and now some programmers, thinking they are semi-gods holding the key to create worldwide distributed wealthness , aim to decentralize everything and duplicate the procedures. Very weird and perverse!
But why some one of your readers propose cryptos as a way of finance your corporation? You could find incredibly creative ways to apply them to such an important industry as yours, but in strict regard to financing, I see it this way. In the “old” system, a company needing to collect big funds, needed to go public in stock markets, with all the difficulties and problems with it. A more modern way was the concept of crowdfunding, collect fund from voluntary sustainers, or ask business angels, like in your case with IH. With cryptos, you can make a Leonardo corp digital coin (symbol: ECAT, you always have to design a symbol and a 3-4 letter shortcut for your coin hehe) based on a public blockchain, then start “mining” it in the millions, then start a public sell of these undervalued coins to the public. Since your business model is light-years ahead of the generality of other cryptocurrency startups, and based on ultra-solid products, your coin will capitalize in very short time billions of value: the sustainers will be rich (not the orsobubu, because he is marxist and dont collects coins – but accepts donations), Leonardo corp will have all the funds it needs without going public, and all of your customers will have extra premium services, ie to pay their heat without any glitch (for example, there is a coin designed to make micro-payments on a fly, such consumption going into electrical bills, where the system is embedded inside bulb lamps without the need of an electric company, since the production of electricity could be decentralized as well, thank to the ecat of course!).
Raffaele Bongo:
I think better.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
dear A. Rossi
Current power plants have a 40% efficiency and a little less for nuclear power plants 36%.
Do you think that with a E-Cat 1 MW coupled with a steam turbine you would get a similar or better performance than these plants?
Hope a big success for 2018
Best regards
Raffaele
Dear Andera.
A. Will the robots be able to complete the E-Cat module consisting of 100 QX reactors, the controls and the heat exchanger of the basic fluid heater version?
B. May the robots also be able to connect the 4 kW modules to bigger assemblies?
C. How many minutes of manual effort require å 40 kW unit of the basic version?
D. How many of these will the production capacity you now are installing handle each hour?
E. What will be the approx. weight and volume of a 4 kW module?
F. Witch pressure on the fluid side will the modules withstand?
All best, regards Svein Henrik.
Brian:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Manuel Cilia:
All the options are possible, sepending on the specific situations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Thanks to your stamina we are going to reduce the global warming .
Godspeed,
T.J.
Dear Dr Rossi
Will you be introducing industrial sized system first, also what electrical output device do you think you will end with (e.g steam turbine, stirling etc).
Thank you
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Congratulations for the convincing test of Stockholm. I appreciated also the fact that the base of the Ecat QX was in transparent plexiglas, which eliminated any conjecture about ” what’s there?”: same thumbs up for the fact that you gave to Mats Lewan both the water pump and the base of the resistances. Well done.
Cheers
Brian
Ulrich F. Sackstedt:
Thorium is a radioactive product from the decay of Uranium. We do not use radioactive materials.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr Rossi,
Is the new Russian technology based on the use of thorium reactors a possible competitor of the Ecat?
Ulrich
@Marco, Regarding
“……characteristics in a scientific theory?”
In my opinion the most important thing in a new theory of any sort is that it makes predictions that can be proven by physical experiments.
When the various predictions are confirmed by several experiments we may conclude that the theory is right.
So for any LENR theory to be valid, it must be able to make some predictions that can be confirmed by experiments.
Marcellus Cheram:
I am in Miami, focused in the industrialization of the Ecat QX.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea Rossi,
In this period where are you working?
Cheers
Marcellus
@Frank Acland:
Andrea is working to reach as fast as possible this paramount achievement to industrialize the cheaper and cleanest energy source of the history. He is achieving this goal with modest funds, absolutely not comparable to the immense funding at disposition of the most powerful concerns of the world.
There is no other feat the the mankind history comparable to what Andrea is doing.
Chuck Davis
Frank Acland:
Speaking seriously: I want to present the new industrialized E-Cat as soon as possible. There is not a particular reason about 2018, problem is that I am impatient to start.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Because the 2018 comes earlier than 2019.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Why is it so important to you to start the mass production and have the product presentation in 2018?
Best wishes,
Frank Acland
Neri Accornero:
You are right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Marco:
I leave the answer to our Readers.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello ,anyone knows here what are characteristics in a scientific theory? grazie
Italo R., James:
> The Kilopower by NASA uses radioactivity for generating heat, then converted to electricity using a Stirling system. It could use a QuarkX for heat instead of radioactivity
Yes! And again about space news, SpaceX will attempt the first launch of its new giant rocket, the Falcon Heavy, on Feb. 6, from the historic Launch Pad 39A — the same one used for NASA’s Apollo moon missions and space shuttle flights — at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, window opening 1:30 p.m. EST (1830 GMT). For its debut flight, the Falcon Heavy is carrying Elon Musk’s Tesla Roadster into space. If successful (not easy), will deliver a Tesla Roadster into a heliocentric orbit that will eventually send the midnight-cherry-red electric car by Mars.
It seemed Andrea and Musk were in contact
http://e-catworld.com/2015/05/07/rossi-on-telsla-motors-and-elon-musk-we-are-in-contact/
so i wonder if Andrea will take the time to go to the show…
Dear Andrea I hope that in the next production of quark X “industrial” are also expected systems of 500 or 250 thermal Kw that certainly would have greater market than those of 1 Mw. I know that is a dangerous topic to be treated but we know that the goal is to to obtain autonomous generators of customized dimensions allowed by the modularity that you have achieved, not networks from large generators.
Best wishes
Neri
Bill Hayes:
a- the description will be given at the presentation of the product
b,c,d- the name will be for all the Ecats followed by the number in Watts of the power
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
You recently used the term: “Fluid Heater Basic Version” in a response to a question. I was wondering if the fluid heater is your prototype industrial product (basic version) and that it consists of the integration of 100 QX devices mounted on a heat-exchanger platform and electrical wiring connections to the QX devices, plus a cable that connects to an external electronics controller?
a. Is this an accurate description of a Fluid Heater Basic Version?
b. What will you call individual QX units: QX Reactor, QX Module, QX Unit, or QX device?
c. What will you call the integrated array of 100 QX reactors mounted on a heat-exchanger and associated wiring: Fluid Heater, Fluid Heater Module, or Fluid Heater Assembly?
d. Are you planning to call these system components by different names in the future?
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions, if you can at this time.
Bill Hayes
Craig:
It is on course, even if now my focus is in the launch of the fluid heater basic version. I want at any cost to present the product within this year.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Laun:
“hydrinos” do not exist.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
S.:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
In the new context of Leonardo, after the intervention of the new partners, will you conserve the direction of the industrialization process? I think it will be fundamental.
Godspeed,
S.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
What do you think of the “hydrinos” theory?
Dear Andrea,
What about the jet engine R&D?
All the best,
Craig
Prof:
I woudn’t mind.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Jack the Ripper:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Nahm:
Thank you for your opinion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
John:
Yes, it is absolutely true. Many other Countries have granted the patent: the area where our patent has been approved covers the 90% of the world’s GDP. The investments in this sector of our IP have been intense, as well as the work to arrive to this result, but at the end we got it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Labor:
I think so.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi
Are you still on schedule to start to deliver the Ecat QX 1 MW within this year?
Dear Andrea,
Is it true that your US Patent has been granted also by the European Patent office and from the Canada Patent Office? The success with all these three patent offices would make your patent very solid, because they are the most selective patent offices of the world and it is very difficult to be approved by all of them…it is a veritable “Triple Crown”!
Cheers
John
Dr Andrea Rossi
You are doing nothing of all you say and we will never see any industrialized prodict: am I right or am I right?
Mr Rossi,
Will internet play a fundamental role in the sales organization for the Ecat?
dr Rossi,
When you will retire, would you like to teach LENR in some college?
Orsobubu:
Interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Rodney Nicholson:
Thank you for your insight.
The core of what we are theorizing is simpler to be understood in the video with the Summary of 6 minutes of the 4 hours of the 2 videos combined of the event of Stockholm.
You can find it also on
http://www.ecat.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea:
Most of my background is in economics, but I do have some basic background in the sciences …… Dr. Gullstrom is functioning at a level a few orders of magnitude above my capabilities.
Nevertheless, here is a thought: The conventional wisdom appears to be that E=MC^2 is the ultimate source of energy. As if it is believed there could not be a better way of generating energy than H + H = He, simply because that is how the sun is believed to generate its energy. But it is known, for example, that quasars produce(d) huge quantities of energy by some method or other, and it is not clear to me that the method by which they produced energy is fully understood.
Previously it was posted here (I forget who it was) that the energy claimed to be produced by the E-cat QX in one year appears to be the equivalent of converting 20% of the mass of the E-cat’s tiny fuel charge into energy which, the poster suggested, seemed surprising high.
So here is my point/question: Is it possible that the mechanism by which the E-cat produces energy might be unrelated to the conversion of mass to energy, and is by a completely different, new, process.
So in summary, perhaps your E-cat LENR isn’t fusion at all. Perhaps it is a method far superior to mere fusion. If this were the case it would, among other things, explain the absence of harmful radiations.
Thank you for tolerating dumb questions like this one on your blog!
Rodney.
Yes, in general it is absolutely like a ponzi scheme, but some part of this critique could be made nowadays for the value of a large number of other financial assets, like hyperinflated currencies or stock shares. It is evident that in these days, ie, the fall of dollar, the institutional purchase of bonds and suppression of gold price are instrumental to artificially inflate wall street and sustain the debt financing. In my opinion, this is also a dangerous scheme where many people will enter the market and eventually be burned.
About bitcoin, usually, they answer that there is an intrinsic value due to the “scarcity” of the mined cons (after a projected amount, it is not possible extract coins any more); this is ridiculous, because the inflation of countless coins is there to show the absurdity of that supposed ingrained “deflation”.
If you run through my post, I think that there are some applications, linked to the blockchain concept, that could some day bring some, very few of these coins to be adopted in market exchanges. I could not exclude at all, that there is some possible application in your market sector too. There were some people discussing it also in Frank Acland’s site.
Frank Acland:
Enough.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Orsobubu:
Thank you for the explication, but allow me: if I run like crazy around a pillar with enormous efforts to reach the distance of 10 thousand miles remaining in the same point, this has too an intrinsic value, because this is made by an enormous expense of Joules. Think how many steaks, spaghetti, you name it, I eat it, to complete 10 thousand miles around the circumference of a pillar, not to mention the shoes. Problem is that this incorporated value has no worth because does not incorporate any value of use, therefore its objective value of exchange is purely virtual. To me it looks like a ponzi scheme: the ones that will remain with the bitcoins in their hands at the end of the speculation process, will be able to sell to nobody their bitcoins, as expensive to be made as they might have been.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
And also, needless to say, when you Andrea note that “what is the principal of their value?
A currency incorporates work and assets of the Countries it is coined from, but a bitcoin what incorporates, apart the algorythm it comes from?”, as usual you’re focusing the exact, most important issues of all in a very short and condensed sentence, as only you are capable of doing. The “incorporated assets of the countries” is the key to understand why these coins could make some people very rich, but will surely fail their original supreme purpose of democratize society in a capitalistic, imperialistic-centered economy.
Hi Andrea, as usual I’m flattened for the huge progress of your work! Fantastic, I’m very optimistic!
About bitcoin, perhaps I can help you to understand it a little. I have some friends who left their work to dedicate to these cryptocurrencies exchanges instead (!). Imagine you deciding overnight to leave the Ecat project forever and starting trade in digital coins with your little laptop in your bedroom, closing this blog and saying goodbye Fabiani, ABB and all of your team!! Crazy!!
When some reader suggest you bitcoin as a financial system, this is interesting, think about it in this way.
Start assuming there are more than 1500 digital coins today, with at large the same concepts, so when I say bitcoin I intend any coin of them. First there is bitcoin as a storage of value, like gold. Really, the system of “extracting” them by very complex calculations is similar to the huge effort of mining gold, so you have an intrinsic value of the needed human work (computer construction, computer running, etc). Then, the value floats up and down like gold in the market. And similarly you have moments of wild speculation, so that in december cryptocurrencies hit an highest price 30 times the peak of the biggest previous speculation bubble in history, the famous Tulip bubble in 1637, which was itself at least double in size of the previous biggest, the NASDAQ dot com bubble in 2001. Apart from this, on the long time you can consider valuable or not bitcoin as a storage value like any other financial asset.
Then there is the blockchain function, a really interesting concept I’m sure it will adopted in infinite cases in every sector of human activity in the future (also in energy production) because it is a virtual register where all types of transaction can be written down forever without any mean of frauds, errors, corruption, etc. It is a game changing technology and it will wipe out numberless of manual clerk workers in the same way of Ecat, robots, automation etc will wipe out countless old wage workers around the world. It is, intrinsecally, an absolute “communist” instrument of production, it generates enormous quantity of user value, intended as usefulness for mankind, but containing absolute thin quantities of human work (it needs a programmer and a very small staff to create and run a blockchain), so having the potentiality to destroy huge quantities of exchange value (money, in averaged cycle, is only produced with human work).
This is very good for a communist society (no more 8 hours daily work shifts, only robots, no more scammers, thieves, every sector of human activity planned and controlled by blockchain nodes around the world without need of market, banks, money, etc, only the efficiency and correctness of transactions and scientific procedures for everybody. But this is also useful in capitalism of course. Imagine ie the mechanism of payment of ecat consumption. With a blockchain you are in perfect control of the process of production and distribution. Or imagine Andrea Rossi making a donation of some million dollars in bitcoin to charity and to the orsobubu. No more fear of being stolen or mismanaged by thieves or boureaucracy.
Of course, you will ask what is the need of bitcoins if we can use blockchain marxistically without need of money at all. But this is another fantastic example of contradiction in our capitalistic societies. So, bitcoin was born as a reaction of some very clever people to the economic crisis due to subprimes in US in 2008: no more banks, state centralization, taxation, etc, a sort of rebellion, also mistakenly called a revolution, against these enemies of the people, in need to reappropriate of their finances. But they invented blockchain inside a capitalistic economy, and they ruined it at all. Because with bitcoin, which is money, you replicates all the faults of fiat money, dollar, euro, etc. and you can clearly see the financial bubbles, the bitcoin robberies, the scams in cryptocurrencies, the speculation, the extreme social inequality in favor of whealthy people after they collected hundreds of bitcoins without having any merit for this. Not to mention the obvious fact that banks and states are organizing to reinstall the control over the digital coins.
Bitcoins are designed to work hand in hand with blockchain, but obviously we could imagine an analogue system without the need of any coin at all. In this sense, bitcoin, as money, reflects the same concept of any other real world coin, because it is the transformation of surplus value – exploited surplus human work – in capital. Exactly for these reasons, in these months new astonishing capitalistic applications of bitcoin and blockchain are rising. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of new startups in this field. There are start ups also in the energy sector.
I will make an example. Take indahash, it is a new coin based on a blockchain, working this way. There is a firm wanting to advertise his products via an “influencer”, a well known guy appearing on social media, facebook, etc; the influencer is no more contacted, hired and payed in dollars directly by the firm; instead, the firm contacts indahash, which contacts the influencer: and both of them are payed in indahash coins so there is a circulation of indahash coins between 3 different users: the influencers, the brands and their audience. Brands use indahash coins for marketing campaigns. When an influencer receives the indahash coin, he has the possibility to exchange them for products of a brand, to get discounts on the purchase of the product and to be always informed about the news. The influencers can also create their own coins and use them to increase their number of followers through the use of prizes and games. The influencers’ audience can use thecoins received and exchange them for exclusive prizes, such as gadgets signed by influencers, meetings and social activities. The blockchain assures the absolute correctness and intangibility of all these transactions.
You can only start to imagine the infinite, parasitic variety of – in my opinion – absolutely useless ways (I call them the degradation of a rotten, imperialistic society) of application of this system in overall markets, with the absurdity of a duplication of money systems instead of a unique medium such the dollar. Nations grew through centuries of wars and millions of deaths to centralize the markets and the respective coins, to create a geographical space with an uniform profit rate, and now some programmers, thinking they are semi-gods holding the key to create worldwide distributed wealthness , aim to decentralize everything and duplicate the procedures. Very weird and perverse!
But why some one of your readers propose cryptos as a way of finance your corporation? You could find incredibly creative ways to apply them to such an important industry as yours, but in strict regard to financing, I see it this way. In the “old” system, a company needing to collect big funds, needed to go public in stock markets, with all the difficulties and problems with it. A more modern way was the concept of crowdfunding, collect fund from voluntary sustainers, or ask business angels, like in your case with IH. With cryptos, you can make a Leonardo corp digital coin (symbol: ECAT, you always have to design a symbol and a 3-4 letter shortcut for your coin hehe) based on a public blockchain, then start “mining” it in the millions, then start a public sell of these undervalued coins to the public. Since your business model is light-years ahead of the generality of other cryptocurrency startups, and based on ultra-solid products, your coin will capitalize in very short time billions of value: the sustainers will be rich (not the orsobubu, because he is marxist and dont collects coins – but accepts donations), Leonardo corp will have all the funds it needs without going public, and all of your customers will have extra premium services, ie to pay their heat without any glitch (for example, there is a coin designed to make micro-payments on a fly, such consumption going into electrical bills, where the system is embedded inside bulb lamps without the need of an electric company, since the production of electricity could be decentralized as well, thank to the ecat of course!).
Dear Andrea,
What is your satisfaction level with the prototype you have made, so far?
Best wishes,
Frank Acland
Andy:
Yes, apart the external design that has to be done by a stylist.
Warm Regards,
A.R.