In some of your answers you mention again and again that it is important that the Ecat is powered by a power supply that is connected to the electrical supply network.
a) Does the ECat need the electrons that are available through the ground connection of the electrical supply network?
b) If a) is correct, would it not be sufficient just to connect the ECat to the earth connection, i.e. to the neutral or protective conductor?
c) Does this connection simply serve to protect the user?
d) If inductive loads – motors, pumps – are connected to the ECat – does it have anything to do with the reactive power, which is then compensated via the electrical supply network, for example?
e) If this connection to the electrical supply network is so important for the functioning of the ECat, is an application of the ECat in cars possible at all?
f) Are you not allowed to answer this question exactly?
Dear Dr. Rossi,
thank you again for your great work!
Every pre-order contains the clause that if the 1,000,000 pre-orders are not reached, the pre-order becomes void and legally all orders worldwide are also void.
If this would happen, the motivation of the ECat supporters to start everything all over again would most likely decrease a lot.
In 2 days we will start December 2022.
So we have 31 days left to start delivery.
So I ask very kindly: What is the state of things regarding the pre-orders? Will Leonardo be able to deliver in December? Are there enough ECat SKLep 100W and Ecat Mini ready for delivery? Can the first packages already be shipped?
Can we together start the era of decentralized, earth-friendly energy supply with the help of the ECat still in 2022?
Will there be a big pre-Christmas surprise?
Please Andrea, take a little time and give us clarifying answer.
Dear Andrea,
I ordered 40 Ecat SKLep 100W with 12VDC in/out and 2 Ecat SKLep 220VAC in/out.
This has happened on 4 different dates.
Sometimes I didn’t get confirmation. I only have confirmation of 10 VDC and 2 220VAC models.
Those orders may be fulfilled in any combination of product versions you have available.
Do you already know if production would start in 2022?
Dr Rossi
Now that you have some initial results from multiple assemblies of miniSKLEP what in your opinion is likely to be first to market:-
1) the miniSKLEP?
2) the SKL EP (assembly)?
3) both available from the start?
Bedy:
Good question: we are making measurements with assemblies to check this issue precisely. Theoretically there should not be differences, but the Ecat is an anomalous thing. We will have soon a precise answer. We think the consume/unit in the assemblies is less, but we are trying to determine a consolidated formula.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Claudio Varotto:
The Ecat put in parallel will have a Vo of 12 V; then the assembly is connected to an inverter, as it happens with the P.V. systems.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Good evening Dr. Rossi, I ask you this question because it seems to me that the subject has never been discussed so far
treaty:
Personally I opted for 30 SKLep with input and output in direct current 12 volts and therefore for
me the problem does not arise but I think I intercept the need of those who opt for the exit in
alternating current 220 volts asking how do you think or have you already proceeded experimentally to realize the synchronization of the phase of
2 or more modules ( in my case it would be 300 mini SKLeps ) .
Without error, the mini SKleps with alternating current output can be compared to inverters connected in parallel electrical configuration and I am aware that normally the inverters can be paralleled at the input but not at the output, except for the predisposed models, and in any case in limited numbers.
Thank you for your reply and best regards
To be clear the Watt (abbreviated W) is the International System of Units’ (SI) standard unit of POWER (energy per unit time), the equivalent of 1 Joule of energy used in 1 second.
A Watt-hour (abbreviated Wh) is a unit of ENERGY, equivalent to 1 watt of power used over 1 hour.
A Wh represents 3,600 Joules of energy.
A kWh represents 3.6 megajoules of energy.
Watts are power.
Whs & kWhs are energy as the Watt value and time base are supplied.
@ readers of the JoNP
I am reading around comments comparing the convenience of solar panels vs Ecat SKLep, but it seems to me that there is a remarkable lack of knowledge about an elementary fact, that is the difference between power and energy, which means between the Watt and the Watthour, that is what really counts. In fact, the bill we receive from our electricity provider is not based on the Watts ( power ), but the Watthours ( energy ).
An Ecat with a power of 10 Watts, actually generates 10 Whatthours per hour, so its power is fully turned into energy 24 hours per day,360 days per year. A completely different situation is that of the solar panels: they turn all their power into energy only for max 2 hours per day, as a yearly average.
We must consider the during 12 sunless hours per day solar panels’ production of energy is zero and during 12 hours per day they average, at the most, 10 to 20% of efficiency in generation of energy respect their power: for this reason, it is obvious that the Watthour generated by the Ecat is much cheaper, almost by an order of magnitude.
Not to mention the fact that the efficiency of solar panels decreases every year, while the Ecat SKLep is assumed not to decrease in efficiency for 100000 hours.
All the best,
Prof
Dr. Rossi, a small question. Assume I have an E-cat unit which takes input power from the grid, and stores some power in a battery system. When the grid power fails, the switches are still open to the inoperative, but grounded grid.
When the power fails, the E-cat could draw power from the battery system, and is still connected to the grid…
Would the system continue to function with battery power, but grounded to the grid?
Thanks!
Ron Stringer
Here is a link to an article on ECW today written by a reader who has created a spreadsheet that people can use to make simulations of different conditions using E-Cat for making domestic electricity.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
I watched carefully the video of the live streaming in https://twitter.com/leonardocorpor3
and observing it, mainly during the night , when there are not other light sources, it seems to me that it should be around 2-300 Lux and 2-3 W: am I in the ballpark ?
Cheers
Renè
Thank you for your respectful comments on my original posting. I agree with your comments. The first applications of SKLep technology will likely be in long duration, continuous electrical power generation. Obviously, there are other costs and factors which make a comprehensive comparative analysis beyond the scope of this brief posting.
IMHO, AR will eventually need to lower the cost per Watt figure to gain acceptance into additional marketplaces. I would guess he has priced it to be more competitive as compared to Solar Panel technology – keeping in mind that Solar only works for a small portion of the 24-hour day.
Thank you for your clear calculations. The figures for Europe are now somewhat different:
The European Commission proposed this week to cap the maximum price for gas on the wholesale market at €275 per MWh. (27.5 cents per kWh)
If that gas has to be converted into electricity or another energy carrier and transported to the end users, you can roughly calculate that this price times six will be charged to the end users.
This is 1.5 €/kWh. EUR vs USD is not that different these days.
At that price, the ECAT is more competitive, but probably not yet for short-term, very large consumption peaks, such as preparing a hot meal on a stove for an hour a day. Certainly not here in Belgium where we have a real food culture with rich meals in several courses.
For myself, I have calculated that it is possible to get by with 4kW without having to plan very much, whereby the constant consumption of refrigerators, computers, ventilation, lighting and waterbeds can be turned on indefinitely, and there is also always room for one device of 2200 Watt, or, when no such devices are in use, for heating a boiler via resistances that keeps the underfloor heating at the right temperature or maintains a rational amount of hot sanitary water.
Cooking is done on a propane stove and the (future) electric car will have its own ECAT system, but for me that will only happen once mass production has started. I can continue to use my current fleet with thermal engines for another five to ten years because I am very committed to maintenance and repairs. As soon as Leonardocorp. starts to deliver the devices, the interested companies will integrate that technology en masse for mobility applications. We, as individuals, do not have to invest time and energy in those matters.
In terms of technology, I would define “sustainable” as: techniques that can be repaired indefinitely with easily replaceable parts that are in turn recyclable. Because many of the appliances that we are used to throwing away when they are a few years old, and replacing them with new ones, are made for their production at an energy cost of barely 1 or 2 cents per kWh, or even less if they are made in a country where gas or coal are extracted. And I don’t think the ECAT will reach that price per kWh anytime soon.
Finally: I hope that the combination of a large ECAT with a resistance heater is more sustainable than a small ECAT with a heat pump.
Dear Rossi
I imagine in a few years when a grid connection is not essential, of having a portable 10kw ecat or whatever is needed, unplugging it from the house, connecting it to the electric car, towing a boat to the lake and launching the boat, then connecting the portable 10kw ecat to the electric boat and spend the day on the lake. After realizing it didn’t cost one two or three hundred dollars in gas, I could go out the next day without worrying about the cost. Or even just when going on a long trip adding the portable ecat to the car when needed.
Donz
@Steven Nicholes Karels:
Assuming your math is right, which I doubt, you forgot the environmental costs of the other energy sources.
Respectfully,
Waleda
Hi Andrea,
0- if I order 4kW worth of ECat SKLep, can I connect it all at once to a similar DC source (lab power supply), and in the same way as the live stream instance?
I would like to cut the wires in the distribution box in my house between the main RCD and the fuses of the various circuits. Then place one more fuse between the RCD and one socket, and finally plug the lab power supply into this socket.
The Lab Power Supply then supplies continuous voltage to the Ecat SKLep array.
To the combined output of the ECATS I would like to connect a pure sine wave inverter (12VDC or 24VDC or 48VDC input) and then power all fuses of the house circuits from this inverter.
I can organize my power consumption so that I always have enough with this configuration.
The intention is never to feed energy back into the grid.
When I move, I want to be able to take all this with me and restore the original connection of the house to the electricity grid.
Apart from the ECat, I only want to be able to work with common materials that are standard for sale in the shop. I count on a total budget of 12,000 to 15,000 €. This budget is immediately available.
1. Do I need anything else between the ECatSKLep array and the inverter, eg a battery or capacitors and a controller to ensure that the intermediate circuit always has the correct input voltage from the inverter by controlling the operation of the ECatSKLep devices?
2. Are there readers of this blog or Leonardocorp customers who have developed and tested such configurations and from whom I could order the whole? I could do all of that myself, but I’m afraid I’d get into a fight with my wife if she even thinks her sewing machine broke from being hooked up to “my” crafts.
It has been fun reading the various ideas and concepts proposed on how the Mini-SKLep technology might be used. But it is time for a dose of reality.
The SKLep units have consistently been priced at the $2.50 USD per Watt of output electrical power. Unless an application can run nearly constantly for a number of years, the application will not be cost effective compared to normal electricity usage.
For Example, let us assume the cost of electricity is $0.20 per kW-hr.
A 1kW electrical output SKLep device (without considering surrounding required interfaces) would cost $2,500 USD. The SKLep has an advertised lifetime of 100,000 hours. Therefore, the cost avoidance by using the 1 kW SKLep over electricity would be $20,000 at a cost of $2,500. This assumes that the SKLep device is working all the time.
100,000 hours is about 11.4 years. If the application only uses the SKLep 1/10 of the time, then over the 11.4-year lifetime, the cost avoidance would be $2,000 with the acquisition cost of the SKLep still at $2,500. True, the SKLep 100,000 hours is operating time, but would you want to wait 114 years for the 100,000 hour lifetime to be reached?
Another example. Suppose you wanted a 300 W “hand warmer” for hunting or fishing trips. The electricity produced could be used to warm outer garments that could accept and use electricity for heating purposes. The acquisition cost is about $750. You plan on going hunting or fishing 2 or 3 times per year. Does a $750 SKLep make economic sense? Perhaps, or maybe a simple fuel-based unit that is 1/10 the cost would be acceptable.
A counterargument is that we can sell the excess electrical power on the Grid. Assuming the Electrical company and local authorities allow you to do this – a potential problem.
The aforementioned $0.20 USD per kW-hr is usually divided into supply ($0.10 USD per kW-hr) and distribution costs ($0.10 USD per kW-hr). The Electric company will only credit you with the supply cost ($0.10 USD per kW-hr) of energy supplied, and usually 70-80% of that value. So, providing 1 kW-hr of electricity back into the Grid, if allowed and metered, will generate on $0.07 to $0.08 USD per kW-hr of excess power produced. Therefore, under a 100,000 hour lifetime, the 1 kW SKLep would be credited with $7,000 to $8,000 USD, this is equivalent to $about $600 to $700 USD per year. So, it might take several years to pay off the acquisition cost. Longer, if the SKLep were not used continuously.
My point is – consider the life cycle costs of the application. This would include acquisition, surrounding required interfaces, maintenance, and removal costs. Then compare it to what you are trying to replace with the SKLep technology. Generally, continuous, long-term applications will make economic sense.
Rod Carbuncal:
Thank you for your attention to the work of our Team; Monday December 5th at 11:30 Rome time the same operation will be repeated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Tesla will start the sales of their Tesla Semi – to replace diesel power Semis used to transport the “18-wheel” trailers for commercial shipping. The Semis will be charged at Tesla Supercharging stations with a new Mega Charger. The Mega Charger is estimated to have an output of 1 MW – 4 times that of the current V3 Superchargers.
These will be installed at existing Tesla Supercharger sites or at new dedicated Seni Mega Charger sites. This might be an application for your 1 and 2 MW shipping container units. Conceptually, when not in use charging a Tesla Semi, the unused generated electrical power could be sold to the electrical Grid. Typical Tesla automobile Supercharger sites have 6 or more Superchargers. The Mega Chargers would require a greater separation because of the Semi size and trailer issues. But similar multi-Mega Charger stations would be likely. 100 such 1MW units would reach your required goal of 1 million 100W units.
Assuming 10 Mega Chargers per Semi Supercharging location and 10 such stations, you would reach your goal. When the Semi becomes available, a much larger network of Mega Chargers would be required.
When not in use, these 1 MW and 2 MW electrical output units would act as decentralized power generation units, decreasing the transmission loss to local users. Thoughts?
Dr Rossi,
Will you show us on December 5th at 11:30 the measurement with the Peak-Tech 3430 in live streaming ? So we too will read the 4th, fifth, and sixth decimal of Ampères of current consumed by the Ecat SKLep ?
Best Regards,
Wilhelm
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Thank you very much for your work.
In some of your answers you mention again and again that it is important that the Ecat is powered by a power supply that is connected to the electrical supply network.
a) Does the ECat need the electrons that are available through the ground connection of the electrical supply network?
b) If a) is correct, would it not be sufficient just to connect the ECat to the earth connection, i.e. to the neutral or protective conductor?
c) Does this connection simply serve to protect the user?
d) If inductive loads – motors, pumps – are connected to the ECat – does it have anything to do with the reactive power, which is then compensated via the electrical supply network, for example?
e) If this connection to the electrical supply network is so important for the functioning of the ECat, is an application of the ECat in cars possible at all?
f) Are you not allowed to answer this question exactly?
Cordially from Germany
Claus
Dear Dr. Rossi,
thank you again for your great work!
Every pre-order contains the clause that if the 1,000,000 pre-orders are not reached, the pre-order becomes void and legally all orders worldwide are also void.
If this would happen, the motivation of the ECat supporters to start everything all over again would most likely decrease a lot.
In 2 days we will start December 2022.
So we have 31 days left to start delivery.
So I ask very kindly: What is the state of things regarding the pre-orders? Will Leonardo be able to deliver in December? Are there enough ECat SKLep 100W and Ecat Mini ready for delivery? Can the first packages already be shipped?
Can we together start the era of decentralized, earth-friendly energy supply with the help of the ECat still in 2022?
Will there be a big pre-Christmas surprise?
Please Andrea, take a little time and give us clarifying answer.
Friendly Greatings from Germany
Claus
Mez:
3
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Koen Vandewalle:
All your pre-orders have been received.
Answer: I hope so,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I ordered 40 Ecat SKLep 100W with 12VDC in/out and 2 Ecat SKLep 220VAC in/out.
This has happened on 4 different dates.
Sometimes I didn’t get confirmation. I only have confirmation of 10 VDC and 2 220VAC models.
Those orders may be fulfilled in any combination of product versions you have available.
Do you already know if production would start in 2022?
With thanks,
Koen
Dr Rossi
Now that you have some initial results from multiple assemblies of miniSKLEP what in your opinion is likely to be first to market:-
1) the miniSKLEP?
2) the SKL EP (assembly)?
3) both available from the start?
Thank you if you can answer
Warm regards
Mez
Bedy:
Good question: we are making measurements with assemblies to check this issue precisely. Theoretically there should not be differences, but the Ecat is an anomalous thing. We will have soon a precise answer. We think the consume/unit in the assemblies is less, but we are trying to determine a consolidated formula.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
when more Ecats are assembled is the consume per unit the same as when the unit is single, or does it change turning more or less ?
Bedy
Ludwig:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Did you see this ?
https://lenr.wiki/index.php?title=Die_Energie_aus_dem_Ecat_SKLep
Claudio Varotto:
The Ecat put in parallel will have a Vo of 12 V; then the assembly is connected to an inverter, as it happens with the P.V. systems.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Good evening Dr. Rossi, I ask you this question because it seems to me that the subject has never been discussed so far
treaty:
Personally I opted for 30 SKLep with input and output in direct current 12 volts and therefore for
me the problem does not arise but I think I intercept the need of those who opt for the exit in
alternating current 220 volts asking how do you think or have you already proceeded experimentally to realize the synchronization of the phase of
2 or more modules ( in my case it would be 300 mini SKLeps ) .
Without error, the mini SKleps with alternating current output can be compared to inverters connected in parallel electrical configuration and I am aware that normally the inverters can be paralleled at the input but not at the output, except for the predisposed models, and in any case in limited numbers.
Thank you for your reply and best regards
Cyrus:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ron Stringer:
With a battery it cannot work, but with a backup connected to the grid yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
@Engineer48 and Prof,
I agree with you both
Weleda
@Engineer48
That is right, cannot be confusing, is pretty clear, and corresponds exactly to what I said
@prof
To be clear the Watt (abbreviated W) is the International System of Units’ (SI) standard unit of POWER (energy per unit time), the equivalent of 1 Joule of energy used in 1 second.
A Watt-hour (abbreviated Wh) is a unit of ENERGY, equivalent to 1 watt of power used over 1 hour.
A Wh represents 3,600 Joules of energy.
A kWh represents 3.6 megajoules of energy.
Watts are power.
Whs & kWhs are energy as the Watt value and time base are supplied.
Yes it can be confusing.
@Prof
You are right
JPR
@ readers of the JoNP
I am reading around comments comparing the convenience of solar panels vs Ecat SKLep, but it seems to me that there is a remarkable lack of knowledge about an elementary fact, that is the difference between power and energy, which means between the Watt and the Watthour, that is what really counts. In fact, the bill we receive from our electricity provider is not based on the Watts ( power ), but the Watthours ( energy ).
An Ecat with a power of 10 Watts, actually generates 10 Whatthours per hour, so its power is fully turned into energy 24 hours per day,360 days per year. A completely different situation is that of the solar panels: they turn all their power into energy only for max 2 hours per day, as a yearly average.
We must consider the during 12 sunless hours per day solar panels’ production of energy is zero and during 12 hours per day they average, at the most, 10 to 20% of efficiency in generation of energy respect their power: for this reason, it is obvious that the Watthour generated by the Ecat is much cheaper, almost by an order of magnitude.
Not to mention the fact that the efficiency of solar panels decreases every year, while the Ecat SKLep is assumed not to decrease in efficiency for 100000 hours.
All the best,
Prof
Dr. Rossi, a small question. Assume I have an E-cat unit which takes input power from the grid, and stores some power in a battery system. When the grid power fails, the switches are still open to the inoperative, but grounded grid.
When the power fails, the E-cat could draw power from the battery system, and is still connected to the grid…
Would the system continue to function with battery power, but grounded to the grid?
Thanks!
Ron Stringer
Dear Andrea,
Here is a link to an article on ECW today written by a reader who has created a spreadsheet that people can use to make simulations of different conditions using E-Cat for making domestic electricity.
https://e-catworld.com/2022/11/26/financial-simulation-of-e-cat-in-a-domestic-grid-system/
You and your readers might find it useful.
Best regards,
Frank Acland
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
I watched carefully the video of the live streaming in
https://twitter.com/leonardocorpor3
and observing it, mainly during the night , when there are not other light sources, it seems to me that it should be around 2-300 Lux and 2-3 W: am I in the ballpark ?
Cheers
Renè
@Steven Nicholes Karels- Thank you for your answer; you are right, solar and wind do not give energy 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.
Best
Weleda
Koen Vandewalle and Weleda,
Thank you for your respectful comments on my original posting. I agree with your comments. The first applications of SKLep technology will likely be in long duration, continuous electrical power generation. Obviously, there are other costs and factors which make a comprehensive comparative analysis beyond the scope of this brief posting.
IMHO, AR will eventually need to lower the cost per Watt figure to gain acceptance into additional marketplaces. I would guess he has priced it to be more competitive as compared to Solar Panel technology – keeping in mind that Solar only works for a small portion of the 24-hour day.
To the US Readers of the JoNP:
Happy Thanksgiving Holidays to you all and your families,
Andrea Rossi
Don Zucchetti:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
@Steven Nicholes Karels,
Thank you for your clear calculations. The figures for Europe are now somewhat different:
The European Commission proposed this week to cap the maximum price for gas on the wholesale market at €275 per MWh. (27.5 cents per kWh)
If that gas has to be converted into electricity or another energy carrier and transported to the end users, you can roughly calculate that this price times six will be charged to the end users.
This is 1.5 €/kWh. EUR vs USD is not that different these days.
At that price, the ECAT is more competitive, but probably not yet for short-term, very large consumption peaks, such as preparing a hot meal on a stove for an hour a day. Certainly not here in Belgium where we have a real food culture with rich meals in several courses.
For myself, I have calculated that it is possible to get by with 4kW without having to plan very much, whereby the constant consumption of refrigerators, computers, ventilation, lighting and waterbeds can be turned on indefinitely, and there is also always room for one device of 2200 Watt, or, when no such devices are in use, for heating a boiler via resistances that keeps the underfloor heating at the right temperature or maintains a rational amount of hot sanitary water.
Cooking is done on a propane stove and the (future) electric car will have its own ECAT system, but for me that will only happen once mass production has started. I can continue to use my current fleet with thermal engines for another five to ten years because I am very committed to maintenance and repairs. As soon as Leonardocorp. starts to deliver the devices, the interested companies will integrate that technology en masse for mobility applications. We, as individuals, do not have to invest time and energy in those matters.
In terms of technology, I would define “sustainable” as: techniques that can be repaired indefinitely with easily replaceable parts that are in turn recyclable. Because many of the appliances that we are used to throwing away when they are a few years old, and replacing them with new ones, are made for their production at an energy cost of barely 1 or 2 cents per kWh, or even less if they are made in a country where gas or coal are extracted. And I don’t think the ECAT will reach that price per kWh anytime soon.
Finally: I hope that the combination of a large ECAT with a resistance heater is more sustainable than a small ECAT with a heat pump.
Kind regards,
Koen
Dear Rossi
I imagine in a few years when a grid connection is not essential, of having a portable 10kw ecat or whatever is needed, unplugging it from the house, connecting it to the electric car, towing a boat to the lake and launching the boat, then connecting the portable 10kw ecat to the electric boat and spend the day on the lake. After realizing it didn’t cost one two or three hundred dollars in gas, I could go out the next day without worrying about the cost. Or even just when going on a long trip adding the portable ecat to the car when needed.
Donz
@Steven Nicholes Karels:
Assuming your math is right, which I doubt, you forgot the environmental costs of the other energy sources.
Respectfully,
Waleda
Darko:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Maico:
Never say never
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Koen Vandewalle:
0- yes
1- depends on the situations and the type of components
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Andrea,
0- if I order 4kW worth of ECat SKLep, can I connect it all at once to a similar DC source (lab power supply), and in the same way as the live stream instance?
I would like to cut the wires in the distribution box in my house between the main RCD and the fuses of the various circuits. Then place one more fuse between the RCD and one socket, and finally plug the lab power supply into this socket.
The Lab Power Supply then supplies continuous voltage to the Ecat SKLep array.
To the combined output of the ECATS I would like to connect a pure sine wave inverter (12VDC or 24VDC or 48VDC input) and then power all fuses of the house circuits from this inverter.
I can organize my power consumption so that I always have enough with this configuration.
The intention is never to feed energy back into the grid.
When I move, I want to be able to take all this with me and restore the original connection of the house to the electricity grid.
Apart from the ECat, I only want to be able to work with common materials that are standard for sale in the shop. I count on a total budget of 12,000 to 15,000 €. This budget is immediately available.
1. Do I need anything else between the ECatSKLep array and the inverter, eg a battery or capacitors and a controller to ensure that the intermediate circuit always has the correct input voltage from the inverter by controlling the operation of the ECatSKLep devices?
2. Are there readers of this blog or Leonardocorp customers who have developed and tested such configurations and from whom I could order the whole? I could do all of that myself, but I’m afraid I’d get into a fight with my wife if she even thinks her sewing machine broke from being hooked up to “my” crafts.
Kind Regards,
Koen
To All JONP Readers,
It has been fun reading the various ideas and concepts proposed on how the Mini-SKLep technology might be used. But it is time for a dose of reality.
The SKLep units have consistently been priced at the $2.50 USD per Watt of output electrical power. Unless an application can run nearly constantly for a number of years, the application will not be cost effective compared to normal electricity usage.
For Example, let us assume the cost of electricity is $0.20 per kW-hr.
A 1kW electrical output SKLep device (without considering surrounding required interfaces) would cost $2,500 USD. The SKLep has an advertised lifetime of 100,000 hours. Therefore, the cost avoidance by using the 1 kW SKLep over electricity would be $20,000 at a cost of $2,500. This assumes that the SKLep device is working all the time.
100,000 hours is about 11.4 years. If the application only uses the SKLep 1/10 of the time, then over the 11.4-year lifetime, the cost avoidance would be $2,000 with the acquisition cost of the SKLep still at $2,500. True, the SKLep 100,000 hours is operating time, but would you want to wait 114 years for the 100,000 hour lifetime to be reached?
Another example. Suppose you wanted a 300 W “hand warmer” for hunting or fishing trips. The electricity produced could be used to warm outer garments that could accept and use electricity for heating purposes. The acquisition cost is about $750. You plan on going hunting or fishing 2 or 3 times per year. Does a $750 SKLep make economic sense? Perhaps, or maybe a simple fuel-based unit that is 1/10 the cost would be acceptable.
A counterargument is that we can sell the excess electrical power on the Grid. Assuming the Electrical company and local authorities allow you to do this – a potential problem.
The aforementioned $0.20 USD per kW-hr is usually divided into supply ($0.10 USD per kW-hr) and distribution costs ($0.10 USD per kW-hr). The Electric company will only credit you with the supply cost ($0.10 USD per kW-hr) of energy supplied, and usually 70-80% of that value. So, providing 1 kW-hr of electricity back into the Grid, if allowed and metered, will generate on $0.07 to $0.08 USD per kW-hr of excess power produced. Therefore, under a 100,000 hour lifetime, the 1 kW SKLep would be credited with $7,000 to $8,000 USD, this is equivalent to $about $600 to $700 USD per year. So, it might take several years to pay off the acquisition cost. Longer, if the SKLep were not used continuously.
My point is – consider the life cycle costs of the application. This would include acquisition, surrounding required interfaces, maintenance, and removal costs. Then compare it to what you are trying to replace with the SKLep technology. Generally, continuous, long-term applications will make economic sense.
Dear Dr Rossi
do you think it is still possible to reach the million pre-orders by 12/31/2022?
Regards Maico
Dear Dr. Rossi,
Do you want potential investors to contact you?
Best regards,
D.
Darko:
I do not know,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
Is there a chance that you will soon find a risk-taking investor who will not insist on pre-orders?
Best regards,
D.
Steven N. Karels:
Good ideas,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Rod Carbuncal:
Thank you for your attention to the work of our Team; Monday December 5th at 11:30 Rome time the same operation will be repeated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Andrea,
Thanks for the info on the change in the video,
Good luck,
Roddy
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Tesla will start the sales of their Tesla Semi – to replace diesel power Semis used to transport the “18-wheel” trailers for commercial shipping. The Semis will be charged at Tesla Supercharging stations with a new Mega Charger. The Mega Charger is estimated to have an output of 1 MW – 4 times that of the current V3 Superchargers.
These will be installed at existing Tesla Supercharger sites or at new dedicated Seni Mega Charger sites. This might be an application for your 1 and 2 MW shipping container units. Conceptually, when not in use charging a Tesla Semi, the unused generated electrical power could be sold to the electrical Grid. Typical Tesla automobile Supercharger sites have 6 or more Superchargers. The Mega Chargers would require a greater separation because of the Semi size and trailer issues. But similar multi-Mega Charger stations would be likely. 100 such 1MW units would reach your required goal of 1 million 100W units.
Assuming 10 Mega Chargers per Semi Supercharging location and 10 such stations, you would reach your goal. When the Semi becomes available, a much larger network of Mega Chargers would be required.
When not in use, these 1 MW and 2 MW electrical output units would act as decentralized power generation units, decreasing the transmission loss to local users. Thoughts?
Dear Readers:
Please go to
http://www.rossilivecat.com
to find comments published in other posts of this blog,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Heinz Sause:
It is a 1 Euro coin, put there to give a first sight understanding of the dimensions of all the components.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Rick 57:
Thank you for your intelligent suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello Mr. Rossi, the live video shows an object between the lamp and the power supply. what is that ?
Greetings to Rome Kindly, Heinz Sause
Dear Andrea,
instead of deploying recharge columns on the territory, you could propose to Tesla an eCat based charger directly mounted on each car.
In this way the driver would need only a common grid connection to recharge for free almost everywhere…
In order to avoid a price increase many pay per use solutions could be adopted.
Best Regards,
Riccardo
Wilhelm:
Yes, the cameras of the live streaming will see the operation, as they did on November 20,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Will you show us on December 5th at 11:30 the measurement with the Peak-Tech 3430 in live streaming ? So we too will read the 4th, fifth, and sixth decimal of Ampères of current consumed by the Ecat SKLep ?
Best Regards,
Wilhelm