“Richard:
“I think I understood your question and I confirm my answer; the Einstein equation is valid for nuclear reactions, but the Zero Point Energy does not depend on a nuclear reactions.
Warm Regards,
“A.R.”
Would it be fair to say that energy (mass) is conserved because the ‘aether’ (if that is the right word to use) is depleted of the tiniest imaginable proportion of its energy, while our world environment is enriched by the same quantity of it?
1. Does the energy produced by the Ecat conform to the principle that energy = mass times the speed of light squared?
and Andrea’s reply to that.
So it seems that ZPE and MC² exist in parallel. Most likely in varying proportions.
That would mean that we would have to re-evaluate the mass and energy of stars and planets, where it seems to me totally impossible that we can get further than a rough estimate.
How much ZPE does an unstable atomic nucleus generate, and how much ZPE do atomic nuclei generate among themselves in more extreme circumstances, depending on the environmental factors that occur?
The next conversation with the physics and chemistry teacher of my youngest daughter (15) at the parent-teacher meeting promises to be interesting again 😉 Otherwise I won’t have so many conversation partners about that “matter”.
Curious who will produce the first comprehensible “artist impression” about the functioning of ZPE and the E-CAT.
Dear Dr. Rossi
Portability of the NGU higher power units is one of their big pluses…you can take them to the currently used area to run a heater for instance, living room in daytime, bedroom at night.
Therefore please consider having a method for easy carrying of these units…imbedded handle or finger cutouts for instance.
Regards
DrLG
Dr Rossi,
Does the safety certification made for the Ecat include the absence of electromagnetic emissions that exceed the tolerances allowed by the related requirements ?
Norma
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Yet another eCat NGU Application – tunnels
“The primary electrical consumption in tunnels is primarily driven by their lighting systems, with ventilation systems also contributing significantly, making lighting the largest energy consumer despite only representing a portion of the installed power in a tunnel; other factors like safety devices (CCTV), pumping systems (in case of water seepage), and traffic signal systems also contribute to the overall electrical consumption within a tunnel.”
Typical annual consumption ranges from 200 kW-hr/meter to 1,000 kW0hr/meter (for immersion tunnels).
For example, a “cut and cover” 1-kilometer tunnels might consume 200 MW-hrs annually, while an immersed tunnel of the same length will consume 1,000 MW-hrs annually.
Since the electrical requirements for tunnels include 24/7 continuous operation and they are typically remote, they are ideal candidates for Ecat NGU technology.
If the apparatus works as declared and deliveries begin, the media and economic shock will be inevitable.
Experience teaches us that disruptive innovations are first ignored, then ridiculed and finally accepted as obvious. We are probably still in the skepticism phase, but if Rossi has really achieved a reliable and scalable device, the transition will be unstoppable.
Possible socio-economic impacts
-Almost free energy → Drastic reduction in production, transportation, heating, cooling, etc. costs.
– Accelerated automation → If energy is abundant, the use of robotics will increase exponentially.
– Reduction of working hours → With productivity growing, less work will be necessary to maintain social well-being.
– End of dominance of multinational energy companies → Oil and gas companies could suffer a similar blow to the one digital photography dealt to Kodak.
– New geopolitical balance → If energy needs are no longer a problem, many international tensions (linked to oil and gas) could reduce.
Possible reactions and obstacles
__ Resistance from energy giants → As happened with Tesla, they will try to discredit or slow down adoption.
__Regulations and bureaucracy → Possible regulatory obstacles to avoid too rapid diffusion.
__ Academic skepticism → Until it is published in leading scientific journals, many will consider it not very serious.
__ Technical challenges in mass production → Even if the device works, a huge industrial effort will be needed to produce it on a large scale.
Richard:
I think I understood your question and I confirm my answer; the Einstein equation is valid for nuclear reactions, but the Zero Point Energy does not depend on a nuclear reactions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Quantum EverSource just published a very nice post about Andrea Rossi and the ECAT ZPE-Generator on their Blog:
«Andrea Rossi: Decades of Determination and the Birth of E-Cat Technology”
Few figures in the world of energy innovation embody perseverance and vision quite like Andrea Rossi. For decades, Rossi has pursued a singular goal: creating a technology capable of liberating humanity from its dependence on traditional energy sources. His groundbreaking invention, E-Cat technology, is the culmination of tireless effort, relentless experimentation, and unwavering resolve in the face of skepticism and opposition.»
Thank you for your response to my question as to whether the Ecat conforms to the principle of energy = mass times c squared. You stated that the Ecat does not work that way and cited your research paper that explains the mechanism of the Ecat energy production from zero point energy. However, my question was not directed at the mechanism of energy production by the Ecat. Rather, my question was directed at the consequences of the energy production on the mass of the system, based on the traditional understanding that whenever energy is released from or stored into a system, whether the mechanism is chemical, nuclear, or mechanical (as in a spring), or in this case, zero point energy, that there is a corresponding change in the mass of the system. Thank you for your attention to this question.
This is a manual for Australia
The PV String Input Data is of direct relevance to SKLep selection and configuration. A 3kW SKLep with series connection internally delivers 360V and lies in the middle of the MPPT and Full Load DC Voltage Ranges :
PV/SKLep String Input Data
Max. DC Input Power (W) 4680W 6500W
PV Input Voltage (V) 370V (100V~500V)
MPPT Range (V) 125~425V
Full Load DC Voltage Range (V) 240~425V
Start-up Voltage (V) 150V
PV Input Current (A) 11A+11A
No. of MPPT Trackers 2
No. of Strings Per MPPT Tracker 1+1
You described exactly the issues that I wanted to address. Any implemented “system”, which includes the smart inverters, whether powered by Solar or by NGU, must include the feature to stop providing power to the Grid, or, provide power to the Grid, to maintain the Grid capacity at the required level.
This is not an NGU problem. It is an inverter problem of how the Grid will operate when inverters become widespread. The ideal systems likely include battery systems that can discharge energy into the Grid when demand is highest and the battery systems are charged when the demand is low.
NGU technology has the advantage over Solar and Wind in that it is continuous and constant. With NGU technology, the Future is Bright!
1: Agreed but qualified. What is the definition of ‘system’? Is that just the inverter or the inverter plus SKLep generator?
Can the grid detect whether its AC power comes from solar panels or SKLeps via the identical inverter? I do not know the answer. You could argue that a continuous supply of electricity from SKLeps gives the game away, particularly if you are collecting payment for exported electricity, as I am from my solar panels.
There are inverters that can block electricity export while allowing import. They can also block in both directions. My draft plan for my SKLep installation includes this feature.
2: The UK grid already has a problem with excess power at times. In that event grid control instructs generators to shut down and the generators get paid serious money not to generate. It is called curtailment and the end users pay for something they do not receive.
3: I have put this question to government. There are government schemes to help. What can be said is that the capital cost of SKLeps can be recovered from the sale of generated electricity. A 1kW SKLep would generate 24*365=8760 kWh per year, if run continuously. At, say, a price of 10 p per kWh paid to generators that would produce an income of £876 per year to give a payback period of 2000/876=2.3 years.
4: My solar array and inverter have run maintenance free for ten years and have paid for themselves, except for the need to bird-proof the panels. Twenty pidgeons became homeless.
With a choice of electricity at 24 p per kWh and 2 p per kwh, I would detach from the grid (and from the mains gas) at a saving of £500 per year in standing charges and about £2000 per year for gas and electricity. What the gas and electricity people do thereafter ceases to have any interest. If the government wants me to supply power, they will have too pay me properly. Perhaps I should also add that after 10 years, when SKLeps are replaced, the 2 p per kwh drops to 2*0.3=0.6 p per kwh. It really is a ‘no-brainer’.
1. Does the energy produced by the Ecat conform to the principal that energy = mass times the speed of light squared?
2. If so, does the Ecat lose mass over time as energy is produced?
3. If so, is that a factor in the working lifespan of the Ecat?
4. If so, can the working lifespan be extended or restored by replacing some component of the Ecat that has lost mass over time?
You did an excellent analysis. I do believe that there are additional considerations in a home-based NGU power generation compared to a Grid Substation NGU power situation.
1. Technical: Residential systems must be professionally installed for both safety reasons and Grid accessibility certifications.
2. Grid control: Too much of a good thing… Power generation of energy going into the Grid must be controlled so as to not overload the Grid. Off-Grid configurations protect the Grid but then do not provide power to the Grid.
3. Funding depth: Residential owners have limited financial resources compared the Grid companies.
4. Maintenance: All systems must be maintained. Grid companies have “armies” of maintenance people. Residential owners must call on relatively expensive firms to provide scheduled or emergency service.
I suggest that a substation unit(s) that could independently direct electrical power to the users and, independently, direct power back to the Gris when it is needed is a better configuration. It would be designed and installed by highly qualified specialists, maintained in a professional manner, and controlled as demand (user or Grid) changes.
For the cost of $2500 per kW, over a period of 100,000 hrs, the averaged cost, ‘Ceterus Paribus’, would be $2500/kw /100000 hr or $2.50 * 10^3 *10^-5 = $0.025 kW-hr.
With no other issues! In the UK, that would be ~ 2 pence per kW-hr. In the US, the average cost of electricity is $0.16/kW-Hr which is a factor of 0.160/.025 = 6.4 * the ‘NGU’ kW-Hr Cost to the Consumer.
And there is no guarantee that utility costs will stay constant, let alone decrease. If there will be mass production of E-Cats, future costs could decrease in the near future, depending on the application.
And, if I’m not mistaken, the time to produce significant numbers of 1 MW, 10 MW or even 100 MW plants, will not take decades.
The unit cost per kW is, or was, $2500 or £ 2022 (at todays rates). Not per kW-Hr. I assume everything else is dimensionally correct. But I’ll look at it later. It’s too cold in New Jersey right now, w/o my kW-Hrs.
Dr. Rossi,
for some particular types of applications, it would be useful if the output power of the Ecat could be continuously adjustable at will based on the value of an external analog control signal as input.
Such a signal could be for example a voltage between 1 and 5 VDC or a current between 10 and 50 mADC (these signals are industry standards).
In the example of a signal from 1 to 5 VDC, the output from the Ecat would be zero for a signal from zero to 1 VDC, while it would grow in direct proportion to the value of the signal until reaching the maximum power for a signal of 5 VDC.
Being able to modulate the power generated by the Ecat at will and continuously would allow the continuous and precise regulation of a multitude of electrical and/or thermal processes.
Have you considered that the included startup battery could also allow remote activation if it powered a low power Bluetooth connection for example. This could be very handy for difficult to reach locations even something as simple as ceiling lights for example.
Other uses could be low power diagnostic leds, start up keys for security, sensor triggered start up for example when it’s dark or cold or someone enters a room. Actually it could support smart home technology etc generally.
On a more engineering level: Sustaining a Low power ram status for diagnostic reports following failure
I’m sure there are other possibilities and that you have considered this possibility already. But I thought it worth mentioning Incase.
Steven Nicholes Karels writes at 2025-01-22 17:34 :-
A thought on how to increase the national electricity power generation.
Increasing the generation of electricity will also require upgrades to the electricity distribution system.
Not necessarily true and very much an issue in the UK where grid currents are expected by the government to double or treble.
Consider a nominal substation. It receives some amount of Higer Voltage power, A Watts, converts to a Lower Voltage, and distributes, A Watts, to multiple users.
Assume an Ecat NGU power system located at the substation. It generates 2 x A Watts. So, A Watts flow to the Lower Voltage users. And, A Watts flow back to the Grid at the Higher Voltage Grid. The same distribution system can now handle twice the total power.
Obviously, an over-simplification. But it might have some merit in distributing the power generation.
Thoughts?
There is a missing factor in Stevens’ assessment: cost. At a unit cost of £2000 per kwh, SKLep electricity costs 2000*100/100,000=2 p/kwh when the SKLep lasts 100,000 hours at full power. Grid electricity costs 24 p per kwh in the UK. Electricity from the local transformer will be charged at this higher rate, whereas SKLep electricity generated behind the meter will cost nothing but depreciation. There are also UK payment schemes for exported electricity, so a profit can be made that can pay the depreciation.
There is also a financial bonus in using 1kW SKLeps in 25 million homes. It can halve the electrical currents and by Ohm’s Law that reduces the power losses in the grid wires and distribution cables by a factor of four. Current losses are about 4% on the grid and 8% on the distribution cables which would reduce to about 3%. The 9% reduction is 61*0.09=5.5 gigawatts at grid peak load. The 5.5 gigawatt reduction would remove the need for two extra Hinkley Point C nuclear power stations at a saving of about £100 Billion (let us see if the government can ignore that number) in capital spend.
I am trying to get the UK government to recognize this fact. In the presence of SKLeps, promoting wind turbines and solar panels together with a trebling of the grid and distribution systems to power heating and electric car charging, is misleading and a vast waste of money. I reckon 11kw of SKLeps will allow me to meet peak domestic loads and disconnect from the grid and mains gas.
Jeff Smathers:
It depends on the power: for households the Ecat’s body is enough, for industrials it is necessary a real ground connection.
Warm Regards
A.R.
A thought on how to increase the national electricity power generation.
Increasing the generation of electricity will also require upgrades to the electricity distribution system.
Consider a nominal substation. It receives some amount of Higer Voltage power, A Watts, converts to a Lower Voltage, and distributes, A Watts, to multiple users.
Assume an Ecat NGU power system located at the substation. It generates 2 x A Watts. So, A Watts flow to the Lower Voltage users. And, A Watts flow back to the Grid at the Higher Voltage Grid. The same distribution system can now handle twice the total power.
Obviously, an over-simplification. But it might have some merit in distributing the power generation.
You’ve undoubtedly heard today’s AI Infrastructure talks to build $500 Billion dollars worth of AI server data centers throughout the U.S. Wouldn’t that be an amazing opportunity for Quantum Eversource to supply either primary or backup power services? They’re actively seeking energy alternatives at the moment.
I’m sure it’s already crossed peoples’ minds– hard to miss.
I could be wrong, clearly, but once the E-Cat becomes broadly available via Quantum Eversource, the release represents not just one major scientific breakthrough, but multiple. For example:
1) The realization of a new, abundant, renewable, non-polluting energy source. (Major new energy sources typically come along, at most, once a century.)
2) The discovery of a novel physics-based pathway for utilizing the energy source. (The opening up of a new quantum pathway, could unleash all sorts of new follow-on discoveries.)
3) A device capable of generating heat, based on the source and pathway– with limited scalability.
4) A device capable of generating electricity directly, without heat as an intermediate product– with high scalability. (Direct conversion of energy to electricity is a rare technical achievement.)
One other point of consideration– to go from ‘discovery of an energy source’ to ‘broad availability’ in such a short span of years, is not only rare, it’s never been done before! (As far as I know, at least.)
Congratulations are absolutely in order– after delivery, of course! 😉
To Richard:
“2025-01-25 09:37 Andrea Rossi
“Richard:
“I think I understood your question and I confirm my answer; the Einstein equation is valid for nuclear reactions, but the Zero Point Energy does not depend on a nuclear reactions.
Warm Regards,
“A.R.”
Would it be fair to say that energy (mass) is conserved because the ‘aether’ (if that is the right word to use) is depleted of the tiniest imaginable proportion of its energy, while our world environment is enriched by the same quantity of it?
Rodney.
Dear Richard,
Regarding your post:
Richard
January 24, 2025 at 7:40 AM
Dr Rossi,
1. Does the energy produced by the Ecat conform to the principle that energy = mass times the speed of light squared?
and Andrea’s reply to that.
So it seems that ZPE and MC² exist in parallel. Most likely in varying proportions.
That would mean that we would have to re-evaluate the mass and energy of stars and planets, where it seems to me totally impossible that we can get further than a rough estimate.
How much ZPE does an unstable atomic nucleus generate, and how much ZPE do atomic nuclei generate among themselves in more extreme circumstances, depending on the environmental factors that occur?
The next conversation with the physics and chemistry teacher of my youngest daughter (15) at the parent-teacher meeting promises to be interesting again 😉 Otherwise I won’t have so many conversation partners about that “matter”.
Curious who will produce the first comprehensible “artist impression” about the functioning of ZPE and the E-CAT.
Kind regards,
Koen
Dear Dr. Rossi
Portability of the NGU higher power units is one of their big pluses…you can take them to the currently used area to run a heater for instance, living room in daytime, bedroom at night.
Therefore please consider having a method for easy carrying of these units…imbedded handle or finger cutouts for instance.
Regards
DrLG
Norma:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Thank you for the suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Does the safety certification made for the Ecat include the absence of electromagnetic emissions that exceed the tolerances allowed by the related requirements ?
Norma
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Yet another eCat NGU Application – tunnels
“The primary electrical consumption in tunnels is primarily driven by their lighting systems, with ventilation systems also contributing significantly, making lighting the largest energy consumer despite only representing a portion of the installed power in a tunnel; other factors like safety devices (CCTV), pumping systems (in case of water seepage), and traffic signal systems also contribute to the overall electrical consumption within a tunnel.”
Typical annual consumption ranges from 200 kW-hr/meter to 1,000 kW0hr/meter (for immersion tunnels).
For example, a “cut and cover” 1-kilometer tunnels might consume 200 MW-hrs annually, while an immersed tunnel of the same length will consume 1,000 MW-hrs annually.
Since the electrical requirements for tunnels include 24/7 continuous operation and they are typically remote, they are ideal candidates for Ecat NGU technology.
Thoughts?
Camillo:
Thank you for your support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
If the apparatus works as declared and deliveries begin, the media and economic shock will be inevitable.
Experience teaches us that disruptive innovations are first ignored, then ridiculed and finally accepted as obvious. We are probably still in the skepticism phase, but if Rossi has really achieved a reliable and scalable device, the transition will be unstoppable.
Possible socio-economic impacts
-Almost free energy → Drastic reduction in production, transportation, heating, cooling, etc. costs.
– Accelerated automation → If energy is abundant, the use of robotics will increase exponentially.
– Reduction of working hours → With productivity growing, less work will be necessary to maintain social well-being.
– End of dominance of multinational energy companies → Oil and gas companies could suffer a similar blow to the one digital photography dealt to Kodak.
– New geopolitical balance → If energy needs are no longer a problem, many international tensions (linked to oil and gas) could reduce.
Possible reactions and obstacles
__ Resistance from energy giants → As happened with Tesla, they will try to discredit or slow down adoption.
__Regulations and bureaucracy → Possible regulatory obstacles to avoid too rapid diffusion.
__ Academic skepticism → Until it is published in leading scientific journals, many will consider it not very serious.
__ Technical challenges in mass production → Even if the device works, a huge industrial effort will be needed to produce it on a large scale.
Richard:
I think I understood your question and I confirm my answer; the Einstein equation is valid for nuclear reactions, but the Zero Point Energy does not depend on a nuclear reactions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Jorn-Erik Ommang, Eng:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Benjamin:
Yes, I confirm,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Quantum EverSource just published a very nice post about Andrea Rossi and the ECAT ZPE-Generator on their Blog:
«Andrea Rossi: Decades of Determination and the Birth of E-Cat Technology”
Few figures in the world of energy innovation embody perseverance and vision quite like Andrea Rossi. For decades, Rossi has pursued a singular goal: creating a technology capable of liberating humanity from its dependence on traditional energy sources. His groundbreaking invention, E-Cat technology, is the culmination of tireless effort, relentless experimentation, and unwavering resolve in the face of skepticism and opposition.»
Read more here: https://www.quantumeversource.com/post/andrea-rossi-decades-of-determination-and-the-birth-of-e-cat-technology
Dr. Rossi,
Thank you for your response to my question as to whether the Ecat conforms to the principle of energy = mass times c squared. You stated that the Ecat does not work that way and cited your research paper that explains the mechanism of the Ecat energy production from zero point energy. However, my question was not directed at the mechanism of energy production by the Ecat. Rather, my question was directed at the consequences of the energy production on the mass of the system, based on the traditional understanding that whenever energy is released from or stored into a system, whether the mechanism is chemical, nuclear, or mechanical (as in a spring), or in this case, zero point energy, that there is a corresponding change in the mass of the system. Thank you for your attention to this question.
Steven Nicholes Karels
There is more to inverters than a simple DC to AC conversion!
https://www.sunsynk.org/manuals
https://www.solarmyworld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Installer_Manual_-_English_v3.0_2.pdf
This is a manual for Australia
The PV String Input Data is of direct relevance to SKLep selection and configuration. A 3kW SKLep with series connection internally delivers 360V and lies in the middle of the MPPT and Full Load DC Voltage Ranges :
PV/SKLep String Input Data
Max. DC Input Power (W) 4680W 6500W
PV Input Voltage (V) 370V (100V~500V)
MPPT Range (V) 125~425V
Full Load DC Voltage Range (V) 240~425V
Start-up Voltage (V) 150V
PV Input Current (A) 11A+11A
No. of MPPT Trackers 2
No. of Strings Per MPPT Tracker 1+1
Dr Rossi,
Can you confirm that the Ecat has obtained a safety certification by a certification third party ?
Best,
Benjamin Gonzalez
paul dodgshun,
You described exactly the issues that I wanted to address. Any implemented “system”, which includes the smart inverters, whether powered by Solar or by NGU, must include the feature to stop providing power to the Grid, or, provide power to the Grid, to maintain the Grid capacity at the required level.
This is not an NGU problem. It is an inverter problem of how the Grid will operate when inverters become widespread. The ideal systems likely include battery systems that can discharge energy into the Grid when demand is highest and the battery systems are charged when the demand is low.
NGU technology has the advantage over Solar and Wind in that it is continuous and constant. With NGU technology, the Future is Bright!
Richard:
The Ecat does not work that way.
Please go to
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
to find the theoretical bases of the Ecat process,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels
1: Agreed but qualified. What is the definition of ‘system’? Is that just the inverter or the inverter plus SKLep generator?
Can the grid detect whether its AC power comes from solar panels or SKLeps via the identical inverter? I do not know the answer. You could argue that a continuous supply of electricity from SKLeps gives the game away, particularly if you are collecting payment for exported electricity, as I am from my solar panels.
There are inverters that can block electricity export while allowing import. They can also block in both directions. My draft plan for my SKLep installation includes this feature.
2: The UK grid already has a problem with excess power at times. In that event grid control instructs generators to shut down and the generators get paid serious money not to generate. It is called curtailment and the end users pay for something they do not receive.
3: I have put this question to government. There are government schemes to help. What can be said is that the capital cost of SKLeps can be recovered from the sale of generated electricity. A 1kW SKLep would generate 24*365=8760 kWh per year, if run continuously. At, say, a price of 10 p per kWh paid to generators that would produce an income of £876 per year to give a payback period of 2000/876=2.3 years.
4: My solar array and inverter have run maintenance free for ten years and have paid for themselves, except for the need to bird-proof the panels. Twenty pidgeons became homeless.
With a choice of electricity at 24 p per kWh and 2 p per kwh, I would detach from the grid (and from the mains gas) at a saving of £500 per year in standing charges and about £2000 per year for gas and electricity. What the gas and electricity people do thereafter ceases to have any interest. If the government wants me to supply power, they will have too pay me properly. Perhaps I should also add that after 10 years, when SKLeps are replaced, the 2 p per kwh drops to 2*0.3=0.6 p per kwh. It really is a ‘no-brainer’.
Dr Rossi,
1. Does the energy produced by the Ecat conform to the principal that energy = mass times the speed of light squared?
2. If so, does the Ecat lose mass over time as energy is produced?
3. If so, is that a factor in the working lifespan of the Ecat?
4. If so, can the working lifespan be extended or restored by replacing some component of the Ecat that has lost mass over time?
Thank you for your answers.
paul dodgshun,
You did an excellent analysis. I do believe that there are additional considerations in a home-based NGU power generation compared to a Grid Substation NGU power situation.
1. Technical: Residential systems must be professionally installed for both safety reasons and Grid accessibility certifications.
2. Grid control: Too much of a good thing… Power generation of energy going into the Grid must be controlled so as to not overload the Grid. Off-Grid configurations protect the Grid but then do not provide power to the Grid.
3. Funding depth: Residential owners have limited financial resources compared the Grid companies.
4. Maintenance: All systems must be maintained. Grid companies have “armies” of maintenance people. Residential owners must call on relatively expensive firms to provide scheduled or emergency service.
I suggest that a substation unit(s) that could independently direct electrical power to the users and, independently, direct power back to the Gris when it is needed is a better configuration. It would be designed and installed by highly qualified specialists, maintained in a professional manner, and controlled as demand (user or Grid) changes.
Thoughts?
Frank Acland:
The industrialization of the SSM circuit,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Prof Joseph Fine:
We are working very hard !
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
Paul Dodgshun, Andrea Rossi.
For the cost of $2500 per kW, over a period of 100,000 hrs, the averaged cost, ‘Ceterus Paribus’, would be $2500/kw /100000 hr or $2.50 * 10^3 *10^-5 = $0.025 kW-hr.
With no other issues! In the UK, that would be ~ 2 pence per kW-hr. In the US, the average cost of electricity is $0.16/kW-Hr which is a factor of 0.160/.025 = 6.4 * the ‘NGU’ kW-Hr Cost to the Consumer.
And there is no guarantee that utility costs will stay constant, let alone decrease. If there will be mass production of E-Cats, future costs could decrease in the near future, depending on the application.
And, if I’m not mistaken, the time to produce significant numbers of 1 MW, 10 MW or even 100 MW plants, will not take decades.
Dr. Rossi, Start the Reactor! Save the Earth.
Dear Andrea,
What is the major focus of your work in these present days?
Best wishes,
Frank Acland
Prof:
Thank you for the update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Here are the stats of the publication
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
Total Readings: 155000, more than all the millions of publications on Researchgate,
and counting…
Prof
Italo R.:
Thank you for the suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Paul Dodgshun,
The unit cost per kW is, or was, $2500 or £ 2022 (at todays rates). Not per kW-Hr. I assume everything else is dimensionally correct. But I’ll look at it later. It’s too cold in New Jersey right now, w/o my kW-Hrs.
Joseph Fine
Dr. Rossi,
for some particular types of applications, it would be useful if the output power of the Ecat could be continuously adjustable at will based on the value of an external analog control signal as input.
Such a signal could be for example a voltage between 1 and 5 VDC or a current between 10 and 50 mADC (these signals are industry standards).
In the example of a signal from 1 to 5 VDC, the output from the Ecat would be zero for a signal from zero to 1 VDC, while it would grow in direct proportion to the value of the signal until reaching the maximum power for a signal of 5 VDC.
Being able to modulate the power generated by the Ecat at will and continuously would allow the continuous and precise regulation of a multitude of electrical and/or thermal processes.
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Stephen:
Thank you for your suggestion,
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
Have you considered that the included startup battery could also allow remote activation if it powered a low power Bluetooth connection for example. This could be very handy for difficult to reach locations even something as simple as ceiling lights for example.
Other uses could be low power diagnostic leds, start up keys for security, sensor triggered start up for example when it’s dark or cold or someone enters a room. Actually it could support smart home technology etc generally.
On a more engineering level: Sustaining a Low power ram status for diagnostic reports following failure
I’m sure there are other possibilities and that you have considered this possibility already. But I thought it worth mentioning Incase.
Best Regards
Stephen
Steven Nicholes Karels writes at 2025-01-22 17:34 :-
A thought on how to increase the national electricity power generation.
Increasing the generation of electricity will also require upgrades to the electricity distribution system.
Not necessarily true and very much an issue in the UK where grid currents are expected by the government to double or treble.
Consider a nominal substation. It receives some amount of Higer Voltage power, A Watts, converts to a Lower Voltage, and distributes, A Watts, to multiple users.
Assume an Ecat NGU power system located at the substation. It generates 2 x A Watts. So, A Watts flow to the Lower Voltage users. And, A Watts flow back to the Grid at the Higher Voltage Grid. The same distribution system can now handle twice the total power.
Obviously, an over-simplification. But it might have some merit in distributing the power generation.
Thoughts?
There is a missing factor in Stevens’ assessment: cost. At a unit cost of £2000 per kwh, SKLep electricity costs 2000*100/100,000=2 p/kwh when the SKLep lasts 100,000 hours at full power. Grid electricity costs 24 p per kwh in the UK. Electricity from the local transformer will be charged at this higher rate, whereas SKLep electricity generated behind the meter will cost nothing but depreciation. There are also UK payment schemes for exported electricity, so a profit can be made that can pay the depreciation.
There is also a financial bonus in using 1kW SKLeps in 25 million homes. It can halve the electrical currents and by Ohm’s Law that reduces the power losses in the grid wires and distribution cables by a factor of four. Current losses are about 4% on the grid and 8% on the distribution cables which would reduce to about 3%. The 9% reduction is 61*0.09=5.5 gigawatts at grid peak load. The 5.5 gigawatt reduction would remove the need for two extra Hinkley Point C nuclear power stations at a saving of about £100 Billion (let us see if the government can ignore that number) in capital spend.
I am trying to get the UK government to recognize this fact. In the presence of SKLeps, promoting wind turbines and solar panels together with a trebling of the grid and distribution systems to power heating and electric car charging, is misleading and a vast waste of money. I reckon 11kw of SKLeps will allow me to meet peak domestic loads and disconnect from the grid and mains gas.
Paul Dodgshun
Ambrogio:
I am delighted to read that,
Warm Regards
A.R.
Jeff Smathers:
It depends on the power: for households the Ecat’s body is enough, for industrials it is necessary a real ground connection.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Thank you for the suggestion,
Warm Regards
A.R.
Italo R.:
Thank you for the suggestion
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
many governments in the world are investing huge amounts of capital in the Energy Sectors where Ecat could very well be used.
Do you think it would be useful for your partner to conduct actions/contacts with these governments to propose your solutions?
Although it is certainly too early, it could be useful to anticipate the times for effective planning of large-scale production and economic returns.
My Best Regards,
Italo R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
A thought on how to increase the national electricity power generation.
Increasing the generation of electricity will also require upgrades to the electricity distribution system.
Consider a nominal substation. It receives some amount of Higer Voltage power, A Watts, converts to a Lower Voltage, and distributes, A Watts, to multiple users.
Assume an Ecat NGU power system located at the substation. It generates 2 x A Watts. So, A Watts flow to the Lower Voltage users. And, A Watts flow back to the Grid at the Higher Voltage Grid. The same distribution system can now handle twice the total power.
Obviously, an over-simplification. But it might have some merit in distributing the power generation.
Thoughts?
Hello Andrea,
I am so happy for you and the many who know what you have is real and about to change our world….
I have of course a question again.
When you have spoken of a proper ‘ground’ for the ECat, do you mean
1. A chassis and or frame electrical ground,
2. An ‘earth’ ground or may use be a large body of water with proper electrodes.
3. A ‘mass’ ground which may require a significant physical gravitational mass such as the earth for proper operation.
Thank you sincerely, Jeff Smathers
Dr Rossi,
More persons are confirming to replicate your process following the instructions contained in the paper
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particles_interactions
Best
Ambrogio
WaltC:
Thank you for you support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Drew Glista,
Also,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
WaltC:
Thank you for the information,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
You’ve undoubtedly heard today’s AI Infrastructure talks to build $500 Billion dollars worth of AI server data centers throughout the U.S. Wouldn’t that be an amazing opportunity for Quantum Eversource to supply either primary or backup power services? They’re actively seeking energy alternatives at the moment.
I’m sure it’s already crossed peoples’ minds– hard to miss.
Best Wishes,
WaltC
Dr. Rossi:
Will the production e-cats be “Made in the USA”?
Drew G.
Dr. Rossi,
I could be wrong, clearly, but once the E-Cat becomes broadly available via Quantum Eversource, the release represents not just one major scientific breakthrough, but multiple. For example:
1) The realization of a new, abundant, renewable, non-polluting energy source. (Major new energy sources typically come along, at most, once a century.)
2) The discovery of a novel physics-based pathway for utilizing the energy source. (The opening up of a new quantum pathway, could unleash all sorts of new follow-on discoveries.)
3) A device capable of generating heat, based on the source and pathway– with limited scalability.
4) A device capable of generating electricity directly, without heat as an intermediate product– with high scalability. (Direct conversion of energy to electricity is a rare technical achievement.)
One other point of consideration– to go from ‘discovery of an energy source’ to ‘broad availability’ in such a short span of years, is not only rare, it’s never been done before! (As far as I know, at least.)
Congratulations are absolutely in order– after delivery, of course! 😉
Best Wishes,
WaltC
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Yes
Warm Regards
A.R.
Ambrogio:
Congratulations!
Warm Regards
A.R.
Gavino Mamia,
It depends on the match between the Voltage of the van and the one of the Ecat,
Warm Regards
A.R.