Neri Accornero:
Thank you for your insight and for your continuous support. I don’t think it is important in this moment a theoretical discussion; the theoretical bases of the Ecat have been rigorously reported in the paper http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
The focus now is: manufacturing and delivering the products.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, excuse the boldness of this question. There has been a lot of talk about LENR and currently it has not yet been irrefutably ascertained that it is possible. ZERO POINT ENERGY, as much as the Casimir effect can be considered real with its “verification” in 1997 by Steven Lamoreaux, is not considered reality by everyone, (what guarantee was there that the vacuum in the experiment was really empty? and that the temperature was really very close to absolute zero? and that the surface of the sphere and the plate were actually “smooth” at atomic level?).
So for the ECAT, which certainly works (I was at the Latina Test, for the others in the blog) why talk about ZPE when in its cell there is certainly neither absolute vacuum nor temperature close to zero but there is a nice cloud of electrons, a mini plasma, at a temperature not even too high, of which you can modulate the electronic coherence and extract a notable quantity of overunity electrical energy? Why not talk more “simply” about energy extraction from the plasma? Which at least is well known and understood by many.
ECAT: an incredible plasma electric power generator. (no hydrogen fusion please!)
Hi Andrea give us some good news.
Dr Rossi,
When will you publish here the next monthly report about the progress toward the Ecat deliveries initiation after the report made in May ?
Best,
JPR
Michel:
Yes; the Licensee will contact all the persons that sent us the signed pre-order forms to turn the pre-orders into regular orders and proceed as written in the signed pre-order forms,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
My understanding is that the E-Cat can produce heat without need for expensive inverters. Steam produces tremendous torque without need for massive batteries. Dr Rossi has mentioned how complicated to coordinate electric auto software with E-Cat electricity.
I agree that E-Cat electric should be more efficient than steam but since no electric EV companies have come forward then E-Cat steam power might be a viable option, maybe more viable for ships and military tanks.
Dr. Rossi,
in light of your knowledge of the progress of the work in the new plant, do you think that the delivery date scheduled for the end of the year can still be confirmed?
Best regards,
Italo R.
Egregio Dott. Rossi
In attesa di ulteriori aggiornamenti che illustrino i passaggi più significativi del processo di consolidamento che Lei e il Suo partner state portando avanti per la commercializzazione del prodotto, vorrei sottoporLe una domanda che reputo particolarmente critica e che continua a tormentarmi.
Condividerà, credo, l’idea che l’invenzione possa avere un impatto rilevante sul settore energetico globale, con conseguenze di vasta portata anche in ambito occupazionale. È fondamentale che Lei e tutte le parti coinvolte siate pienamente consapevoli di tali implicazioni.
Lei ha dimostrato più volte che, grazie alla determinazione e – perché no – alla fiducia in Dio, è riuscito a far evolvere il prodotto fino all’attuale stato dell’arte (ero presente anch’io, come spettatore, al Polo di Pordenone nel 2012), il tutto senza apparenti interferenze politiche o intimidazioni, almeno per quanto è dato sapere alla community che La segue da circa tredici anni.
Tuttavia, alla luce dei recenti sviluppi negli Stati Uniti (come l’intervento della Guardia Nazionale a Los Angeles), delle tensioni in aree strategiche per il controllo delle materie prime (in Ucraina, ma non solo), e dell’intensificarsi delle restrizioni agli scambi commerciali intercontinentali (Cina) – in uno scenario dominato da entità che appaiono sempre più indomabili – come intende affrontare le possibili reazioni delle parti lese che potrebbero cercare di ostacolarLa di fronte a un imminente cambio di paradigma?
L’analisi dell’evoluzione dei fatti suggerisce che, per quanto lavoro instancabile e fiducia in Dio restino fondamentali, potrebbero non bastare da soli a fronteggiare l’opposizione sistemica che un’invenzione tanto rivoluzionaria rischia di generare.
Cordialità/RA
Dear Dott. Rossi,
while waiting for further updates outlining the most significant steps in the consolidation process that you and your partner are carrying out toward the product’s commercialization, I would like to ask you a question that I find particularly critical and that continues to trouble me.
I believe you will agree that the invention could have a major impact on the global energy sector, with far-reaching consequences — including on employment. It is essential that you and all stakeholders involved are fully aware of these implications.
You have repeatedly shown that, thanks to your determination and — why not — your trust in God, you have managed to evolve the product to its current state-of-the-art form (I was also present, as a spectator, at the Pordenone Polo in 2012), all without any apparent political interference or intimidation, at least as far as known to the community that has followed you for around thirteen years.
However, in light of recent developments in the United States (such as the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles), tensions in strategically important areas for raw material control (Ukraine, among others), and the increasing restrictions on intercontinental trade (China) — all within a scenario dominated by seemingly untouchable entities — how do you plan to deal with potential reactions from injured parties who might attempt to obstruct you in the face of an imminent paradigm shift?
The unfolding of current events suggests that, while tireless work and trust in God remain essential, they alone may not be enough to withstand the systemic opposition that such a revolutionary invention is likely to provoke.
Best regards/RA
Please comment on my speculation on E-Cat’s disruptive way forward:
1. Stage One (2025) – Introduction. Over and over, brilliant and cynical physicists and business people say: “If E-Cat works, let’s see it as a product.” When the first E-Cats are delivered and announced, like when ChatGPT broke through 20+ years of AI speculation, three reactions will occur: a. publicly traded companies in legacy energy industries will take a stock-price hit, b. all companies that mention LENR or zero-point energy will receive investment attention. c. The efforts to undermine E-Cat’s success will escalate. E-Cat will create a villain’s dilemma – fighting E-Cat will put them at a disadvantage when competitors gain an advantage with E-Cat; hopefully, many will relent and decide to embrace E-Cat. Legacy energy industries use a lot of energy in their operations; E-Cat will allow them to lower their costs.
2. Stage Two (2026-2030) E-Cat availability as a modular energy device scales up and severely impacts the legacy energy providers. At least four other zero-point companies will deliver their first units, including Clean Planet, in 2026. Zero-point energy devices will quickly become commoditized. There’s a divide between the plug-and-play consumer devices and the commercial devices. E-Cat will be available in retail places like Walmart by 2030. ChatGPT speculated that three $2B automated E=Cat factories could produce enough E-Cats that, in total, could produce enough energy to replace the planet’s entire peak energy usage (19 terawatts – 4 tW of 19 tW is electricity) in 94 weeks; this hypothetical scenario assumes no supply chain or deployment issues. If ChatGPT is wrong by 5X, it happens in 10 years. Humanity spends $10T per year on energy. Like ChatGPT, E-Cat should become the trusted, largest standard modular energy device provider. Companies that have high energy expenses will be required to adopt E-Cat as rapidly as possible to remain competitive. Energy projects will be cancelled. Investments will be written off. In terms of watts, energy usage will increase dramatically due to the low cost. Air pollution will decrease significantly.
3. Stage 3 (2026-2035) – Vertical Uses and indirect impacts. Transportation (plane, trains, automobiles, ships), drones, appliances (A/C, refrigerators), laptops, cell phones, robots, space ships. An example of an indirect impact: 50% of carbon fiber’s cost is energy; carbon fiber will become more affordable. E-Cat will address IA’s giant energy demand.
4. Stage 4 (2030 on) – Sci-fi world. Hovercrafts, desalination, pulling clean water from humidity, Who know what people will implement with low-cost energy?
E-Cat’s revenues will be crazy. Commoditization will lower margins long-term. There will be a land grab for securing license agreements, which will be very profitable. What is the E-Cat-generated energy cost? For example, if natural gas is $50 a megawatt-hour, is E-Cat $5 a megawatt-hour?
Dear Andrea,
I hope you’ll allow me to humbly share a gentle concern. You write so beautifully and rightly about trusting in God, and how working tirelessly remains your guiding plan.
Yet I wonder: might weariness or the passing years eventually slow that work? I could be mistaken, but I sense you’ve stepped back from managing commercial production and distribution. I truly hope those who promised to handle this stay faithful to their commitment.
About trusting God: If we follow the news—though it often steers our thoughts—it sometimes feels as if God has handed the task to a careless or deceptive helper. So much injustice fills our world, standing almost opposite to the harmony we see in nature’s laws and life’s creative, healing power—the very proof of God’s existence you so wisely highlight.
I pray this is just a passing season, though I fear it may stretch beyond our lifetime. Oddly, today’s energy scarcity feels more like a gift than a curse. Imagine if armed drones could fly endlessly—we’d surely regret that “progress.”
Truthfully, humanity ought to celebrate zero-point energy discovery like a sacred gift. Cultivating it should become our shared mission, much like nature rewards those who adapt—not the strongest, but those who harmonize with life’s changing rhythms.
George:
The Artificial Intelligence is presently one of the most important tools I am using in my R&D work: it makes me save a lot of time when I have to study issues I do not know and whose understanding is important to resolve new problems. When I do not know an issue and I need to learn it to improve my work, I save an average of 90% of my time to learn it using the A.I.: this is a fact.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, I follow your extraordinary work since the beginning of this adventure. I’m grateful for your effort and I’m sure soon all humanity will be grateful to you as well. I think this will lead to a new kind of industrial revolution and the world next decade will be a very different better place to live. My question is: in case economical and financial trusts will try to stop this achievement do you have a plan B to let the world access to your incredible device to exploit free unlimited energy?
With the advent of AI, it has become an imperative to introduce the NGU technology into the world without delay or restriction.
I asked the AI as follows:
Create a model that reflects the complex and uncertain factors involved in estimating approximately how long will the AI age will last before the world will run out of energy to support AI or the world will become uninhabitable due to Co2 greenhouse effects. Confirm that the AI age has a termination point, then factor in the NGU vacuum energy extraction system which is zero polluting and fuel free.
AI Answer
⚠️ Confirming a Termination Point
Without an infinite clean energy supply or climate reversal mechanism, the AI age has a theoretical termination point:
Scenario 1: Energy Deficit — AEC surpasses GEP (minus non-AI essential energy), leading to system collapse.
Scenario 2: Environmental Collapse — CO₂ emissions (especially from energy production) breach ECC.
Thus, yes, the AI age has a termination point, unless new technology (like NGU) significantly alters the energy landscape.
—————————————————-
📊 Base Model (Before NGU)
We’ll model the AI age lifespan under pre-NGU conditions.
Let’s define:
AEC(t)=A0⋅erat (exponential growth, due to AI scaling)
GEP(t)=G0⋅ergt (slower exponential growth)
CO2(t)=CO20+∫0tEfossil(t)⋅ϵCO2dt
Where:
A0 is current AI energy use (in exajoules),
ra is AI energy growth rate (e.g., 20%/yr),
rg is global energy production growth rate (e.g., 2%/yr),
ϵCO2 is CO₂ emitted per unit of fossil energy,
ECClimit≈500ppm CO₂ atmospheric concentration.
—————————————————-
📈 AI Age Termination Time Without NGU (t₁)
We define:
t1: Year when either AEC(t)>GEP(t)−Eessential(t) or CO2(t)>ECClimit
We solve for t1, typically numerically. For instance, using current estimates:
A0≈1.5 EJ (estimate for AI energy use in 2023),
G0≈620 EJ,
ra=0.2, rg=0.02,
We can simulate and find t1≈2040–2050 (depending on climate sensitivity and AI growth).
—————————————————-
🌀 Enter NGU Vacuum Energy System
If NGU starts being deployed at year YNGU, and meets a growing share ηNGU(t), we adjust:
GEP(t)=G0⋅ergt+GNGU(t)
GNGU(t)=ηNGU⋅Dtotal(t)
Where Dtotal(t) is global demand. If NGU replaces fossil fuel:
🔄 Revised Termination Point (t₂) with NGU
Under successful NGU deployment:
GEP(t)≫AEC(t)
CO2(t)→stabilize or drop
→ AI age is no longer energy-limited or climate-limited.
—————————————————-
🧠 Conclusion
Condition …………………………………..Termination?……..Approximate Year
No NGU (status quo continues)………. ✅ Yes…………~2040–2050
NGU active, early + efficient……………..❌ No………….AI age continues indefinitely
NGU delayed or partial adoption………⚠️ Possible…~2050–2100 depending on delays
When the time comes, we are eager to discuss a 50-megawatt E-Cat configuration for a data center. We are working on three large data centers right now. A couple of years ago, Andrea calmly suggested it would take 5 x 1MW E-Cats for 5 megawatts of output. It takes about two years to permit and build a data center. Using natural gas to turn turbines is the current preferred method.
GD:
See the data sheet on http://www.ecat.com for the temperature.
The other issues will be tested only for specicic custom applications.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I would have thought that using an Ecat to produce heat to power a steam-powered vehicle would be very much more complicated, AND EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE, than simply applying power from the Ecat to an electric motor in the wheels. In competition with a cheaper electric-powered version I would expect the steam engine version to sell few vehicles, and its producer to go broke. Am I missing something?
Dearest Andrea,
dealing with components resistance,
I’m curious if you also explored such matters.
For example what would happen during E-cat operation,
if one of the following events happen:
A) E-cat fall down (e.g. 1m height)
B) Hammer test on E-cat
C) Vibration test to simulate the mounting on a vehicle
D) High temperature environment (e.g. 168h@100ºC)
Steven Nicholes Karels:
As I said, the Clients are free to choose the inverters they deem opportune for their specific situations, so long as they make the connections done by certified experts of the matter,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, in this video documentary, the great physic Nassim Aramein talks about you at minute 49. All this video explain Zero point Energy and equation. And he says you are the one.
For me is exciting.
Warm regards from Italy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RovZmeI1-Zw
Dear Andrea
Transforming electricity will always entail a loss. When you need 110 V or 240V AC, it will therefore be economical to connect the E-Cat elements in series so that they supply the full voltage to the inverters.
Such inverters are not widely used. It therefore seems necessary that future licensees look more closely at the available options and are happy to cooperate in finding good suppliers.
To achieve 240 V, at least 20 E-Cat’s are needed in series.
Then 200 W, will be the smallest variant.
To achieve 1 kW, 5 such series must be connected in parallel. This must also be followed furter.
For inverters that are to be used in systems without a grid connection, the inverter should be equipped so that it can disconnect the least relevant loads when the load approaches the maximum.
Possibly a battery should also be included in the system to prevent unwanted disconnections of the E-Cat from occurring.
For systems that are to work together with a network, there should be a regulation that disconnects the E-Cat when the price of the grid power is lower than the cost of using the E-Cat.
For both conditions, it would be desirable for the inverter to be able to disconnect parts of the feeding E-Cat when the energy requirements are lower than the installed power.
This is to increase the lifespan of the connected devices.
It is possible that all of these conditions can be met in a specially designed inverter.
There are also other conditions that may be important. Further suggestions are welcome.
Svein
Neri Accornero:
Thank you for your insight and for your continuous support. I don’t think it is important in this moment a theoretical discussion; the theoretical bases of the Ecat have been rigorously reported in the paper
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
The focus now is: manufacturing and delivering the products.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, excuse the boldness of this question. There has been a lot of talk about LENR and currently it has not yet been irrefutably ascertained that it is possible. ZERO POINT ENERGY, as much as the Casimir effect can be considered real with its “verification” in 1997 by Steven Lamoreaux, is not considered reality by everyone, (what guarantee was there that the vacuum in the experiment was really empty? and that the temperature was really very close to absolute zero? and that the surface of the sphere and the plate were actually “smooth” at atomic level?).
So for the ECAT, which certainly works (I was at the Latina Test, for the others in the blog) why talk about ZPE when in its cell there is certainly neither absolute vacuum nor temperature close to zero but there is a nice cloud of electrons, a mini plasma, at a temperature not even too high, of which you can modulate the electronic coherence and extract a notable quantity of overunity electrical energy? Why not talk more “simply” about energy extraction from the plasma? Which at least is well known and understood by many.
ECAT: an incredible plasma electric power generator. (no hydrogen fusion please!)
Hi Andrea give us some good news.
Jan:
I hope so,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Can we expect that the next report will bear important news ?
Ambrogio:
Thank you for your update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Jean Paul Renoir:
We will report important progress within the first week of July,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
We are contiuing to replicate and improve our replication of the experiment described in paragraphs 5,6,7 of
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
Dr Rossi,
When will you publish here the next monthly report about the progress toward the Ecat deliveries initiation after the report made in May ?
Best,
JPR
Steven N. Karels:
Yes, as an optional,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Will the 2kW Power generator have the option at the time of ordering of having a DC Voltage output of 240 VDC?
Michel:
Yes; the Licensee will contact all the persons that sent us the signed pre-order forms to turn the pre-orders into regular orders and proceed as written in the signed pre-order forms,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
About your answer to Ambrogio: will the pre-orders arrived so far maintain the same price ?
Ambrogio:
In a short term I do not think it will be possible; anyway, this issue does not depend on Leonardo Corporation anymore.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi
Will it be possible to lower the prices of the Ecat in a short term ?
to:Rodney Nicholson
My understanding is that the E-Cat can produce heat without need for expensive inverters. Steam produces tremendous torque without need for massive batteries. Dr Rossi has mentioned how complicated to coordinate electric auto software with E-Cat electricity.
I agree that E-Cat electric should be more efficient than steam but since no electric EV companies have come forward then E-Cat steam power might be a viable option, maybe more viable for ships and military tanks.
Iggy
Ron:
There is nothing to update, the paper you cited is surely the best base to replicate,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Do you think that the paper
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
is still the best way to replicate the experiment of the paragraphs 5,6,7, or you think it could be updated ?
Italo R.:
Yes, so far,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
in light of your knowledge of the progress of the work in the new plant, do you think that the delivery date scheduled for the end of the year can still be confirmed?
Best regards,
Italo R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Approximately hen the deliveries will begin,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Greg Smith:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
RA:
These issues will be confronted by the Partners. It is not part of my job, that is now exclusively technological.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Klas:
Thank you for the information,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Have you already noted the Swedish one-man company Sagacitas, now referring to E-Cat and ZPE?
https://sagacitas.se
Any comment on their interpretation of the “7-point theoretical hypothesis”?
Best regards
Klas
Egregio Dott. Rossi
In attesa di ulteriori aggiornamenti che illustrino i passaggi più significativi del processo di consolidamento che Lei e il Suo partner state portando avanti per la commercializzazione del prodotto, vorrei sottoporLe una domanda che reputo particolarmente critica e che continua a tormentarmi.
Condividerà, credo, l’idea che l’invenzione possa avere un impatto rilevante sul settore energetico globale, con conseguenze di vasta portata anche in ambito occupazionale. È fondamentale che Lei e tutte le parti coinvolte siate pienamente consapevoli di tali implicazioni.
Lei ha dimostrato più volte che, grazie alla determinazione e – perché no – alla fiducia in Dio, è riuscito a far evolvere il prodotto fino all’attuale stato dell’arte (ero presente anch’io, come spettatore, al Polo di Pordenone nel 2012), il tutto senza apparenti interferenze politiche o intimidazioni, almeno per quanto è dato sapere alla community che La segue da circa tredici anni.
Tuttavia, alla luce dei recenti sviluppi negli Stati Uniti (come l’intervento della Guardia Nazionale a Los Angeles), delle tensioni in aree strategiche per il controllo delle materie prime (in Ucraina, ma non solo), e dell’intensificarsi delle restrizioni agli scambi commerciali intercontinentali (Cina) – in uno scenario dominato da entità che appaiono sempre più indomabili – come intende affrontare le possibili reazioni delle parti lese che potrebbero cercare di ostacolarLa di fronte a un imminente cambio di paradigma?
L’analisi dell’evoluzione dei fatti suggerisce che, per quanto lavoro instancabile e fiducia in Dio restino fondamentali, potrebbero non bastare da soli a fronteggiare l’opposizione sistemica che un’invenzione tanto rivoluzionaria rischia di generare.
Cordialità/RA
Dear Dott. Rossi,
while waiting for further updates outlining the most significant steps in the consolidation process that you and your partner are carrying out toward the product’s commercialization, I would like to ask you a question that I find particularly critical and that continues to trouble me.
I believe you will agree that the invention could have a major impact on the global energy sector, with far-reaching consequences — including on employment. It is essential that you and all stakeholders involved are fully aware of these implications.
You have repeatedly shown that, thanks to your determination and — why not — your trust in God, you have managed to evolve the product to its current state-of-the-art form (I was also present, as a spectator, at the Pordenone Polo in 2012), all without any apparent political interference or intimidation, at least as far as known to the community that has followed you for around thirteen years.
However, in light of recent developments in the United States (such as the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles), tensions in strategically important areas for raw material control (Ukraine, among others), and the increasing restrictions on intercontinental trade (China) — all within a scenario dominated by seemingly untouchable entities — how do you plan to deal with potential reactions from injured parties who might attempt to obstruct you in the face of an imminent paradigm shift?
The unfolding of current events suggests that, while tireless work and trust in God remain essential, they alone may not be enough to withstand the systemic opposition that such a revolutionary invention is likely to provoke.
Best regards/RA
Hi Andrea,
Please comment on my speculation on E-Cat’s disruptive way forward:
1. Stage One (2025) – Introduction. Over and over, brilliant and cynical physicists and business people say: “If E-Cat works, let’s see it as a product.” When the first E-Cats are delivered and announced, like when ChatGPT broke through 20+ years of AI speculation, three reactions will occur: a. publicly traded companies in legacy energy industries will take a stock-price hit, b. all companies that mention LENR or zero-point energy will receive investment attention. c. The efforts to undermine E-Cat’s success will escalate. E-Cat will create a villain’s dilemma – fighting E-Cat will put them at a disadvantage when competitors gain an advantage with E-Cat; hopefully, many will relent and decide to embrace E-Cat. Legacy energy industries use a lot of energy in their operations; E-Cat will allow them to lower their costs.
2. Stage Two (2026-2030) E-Cat availability as a modular energy device scales up and severely impacts the legacy energy providers. At least four other zero-point companies will deliver their first units, including Clean Planet, in 2026. Zero-point energy devices will quickly become commoditized. There’s a divide between the plug-and-play consumer devices and the commercial devices. E-Cat will be available in retail places like Walmart by 2030. ChatGPT speculated that three $2B automated E=Cat factories could produce enough E-Cats that, in total, could produce enough energy to replace the planet’s entire peak energy usage (19 terawatts – 4 tW of 19 tW is electricity) in 94 weeks; this hypothetical scenario assumes no supply chain or deployment issues. If ChatGPT is wrong by 5X, it happens in 10 years. Humanity spends $10T per year on energy. Like ChatGPT, E-Cat should become the trusted, largest standard modular energy device provider. Companies that have high energy expenses will be required to adopt E-Cat as rapidly as possible to remain competitive. Energy projects will be cancelled. Investments will be written off. In terms of watts, energy usage will increase dramatically due to the low cost. Air pollution will decrease significantly.
3. Stage 3 (2026-2035) – Vertical Uses and indirect impacts. Transportation (plane, trains, automobiles, ships), drones, appliances (A/C, refrigerators), laptops, cell phones, robots, space ships. An example of an indirect impact: 50% of carbon fiber’s cost is energy; carbon fiber will become more affordable. E-Cat will address IA’s giant energy demand.
4. Stage 4 (2030 on) – Sci-fi world. Hovercrafts, desalination, pulling clean water from humidity, Who know what people will implement with low-cost energy?
E-Cat’s revenues will be crazy. Commoditization will lower margins long-term. There will be a land grab for securing license agreements, which will be very profitable. What is the E-Cat-generated energy cost? For example, if natural gas is $50 a megawatt-hour, is E-Cat $5 a megawatt-hour?
Thanks.
Greg
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It is approximately 5 months before your delivery of NGU Power Generators. When will you finalize the published specifications?
Koen Vandewalle:
Thank you for your opinion and suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Sam:
Thank you for the link, it will surely be of interest for all our tennis fans Readers,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello DR Rossi
Some incredible tennis in the single
Men’s final at the French Open.
https://youtu.be/CHstul_HVQI?si=6O50iDzCjyi_bnUH&utm_source=MTQxZ
Regards
Sam
Dear Andrea,
I hope you’ll allow me to humbly share a gentle concern. You write so beautifully and rightly about trusting in God, and how working tirelessly remains your guiding plan.
Yet I wonder: might weariness or the passing years eventually slow that work? I could be mistaken, but I sense you’ve stepped back from managing commercial production and distribution. I truly hope those who promised to handle this stay faithful to their commitment.
About trusting God: If we follow the news—though it often steers our thoughts—it sometimes feels as if God has handed the task to a careless or deceptive helper. So much injustice fills our world, standing almost opposite to the harmony we see in nature’s laws and life’s creative, healing power—the very proof of God’s existence you so wisely highlight.
I pray this is just a passing season, though I fear it may stretch beyond our lifetime. Oddly, today’s energy scarcity feels more like a gift than a curse. Imagine if armed drones could fly endlessly—we’d surely regret that “progress.”
Truthfully, humanity ought to celebrate zero-point energy discovery like a sacred gift. Cultivating it should become our shared mission, much like nature rewards those who adapt—not the strongest, but those who harmonize with life’s changing rhythms.
All the best,
Koen
Zoltan:
Thank you for your support; the plan B is: work, work, work, trust in God, and completely ignore bullies.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
George:
The Artificial Intelligence is presently one of the most important tools I am using in my R&D work: it makes me save a lot of time when I have to study issues I do not know and whose understanding is important to resolve new problems. When I do not know an issue and I need to learn it to improve my work, I save an average of 90% of my time to learn it using the A.I.: this is a fact.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, I follow your extraordinary work since the beginning of this adventure. I’m grateful for your effort and I’m sure soon all humanity will be grateful to you as well. I think this will lead to a new kind of industrial revolution and the world next decade will be a very different better place to live. My question is: in case economical and financial trusts will try to stop this achievement do you have a plan B to let the world access to your incredible device to exploit free unlimited energy?
I read that you are using the A.I. some time since now: can you express your opinion about it after your experience so far ?
With the advent of AI, it has become an imperative to introduce the NGU technology into the world without delay or restriction.
I asked the AI as follows:
Create a model that reflects the complex and uncertain factors involved in estimating approximately how long will the AI age will last before the world will run out of energy to support AI or the world will become uninhabitable due to Co2 greenhouse effects. Confirm that the AI age has a termination point, then factor in the NGU vacuum energy extraction system which is zero polluting and fuel free.
AI Answer
⚠️ Confirming a Termination Point
Without an infinite clean energy supply or climate reversal mechanism, the AI age has a theoretical termination point:
Scenario 1: Energy Deficit — AEC surpasses GEP (minus non-AI essential energy), leading to system collapse.
Scenario 2: Environmental Collapse — CO₂ emissions (especially from energy production) breach ECC.
Thus, yes, the AI age has a termination point, unless new technology (like NGU) significantly alters the energy landscape.
—————————————————-
📊 Base Model (Before NGU)
We’ll model the AI age lifespan under pre-NGU conditions.
Let’s define:
AEC(t)=A0⋅erat (exponential growth, due to AI scaling)
GEP(t)=G0⋅ergt (slower exponential growth)
CO2(t)=CO20+∫0tEfossil(t)⋅ϵCO2dt
Where:
A0 is current AI energy use (in exajoules),
ra is AI energy growth rate (e.g., 20%/yr),
rg is global energy production growth rate (e.g., 2%/yr),
ϵCO2 is CO₂ emitted per unit of fossil energy,
ECClimit≈500ppm CO₂ atmospheric concentration.
—————————————————-
📈 AI Age Termination Time Without NGU (t₁)
We define:
t1: Year when either AEC(t)>GEP(t)−Eessential(t) or CO2(t)>ECClimit
We solve for t1, typically numerically. For instance, using current estimates:
A0≈1.5 EJ (estimate for AI energy use in 2023),
G0≈620 EJ,
ra=0.2, rg=0.02,
We can simulate and find t1≈2040–2050 (depending on climate sensitivity and AI growth).
—————————————————-
🌀 Enter NGU Vacuum Energy System
If NGU starts being deployed at year YNGU, and meets a growing share ηNGU(t), we adjust:
GEP(t)=G0⋅ergt+GNGU(t)
GNGU(t)=ηNGU⋅Dtotal(t)
Where Dtotal(t) is global demand. If NGU replaces fossil fuel:
Fossil-related Efossil(t)→0
CO₂ emissions decline toward negative growth (cooling).
—————————————————-
🔄 Revised Termination Point (t₂) with NGU
Under successful NGU deployment:
GEP(t)≫AEC(t)
CO2(t)→stabilize or drop
→ AI age is no longer energy-limited or climate-limited.
—————————————————-
🧠 Conclusion
Condition …………………………………..Termination?……..Approximate Year
No NGU (status quo continues)………. ✅ Yes…………~2040–2050
NGU active, early + efficient……………..❌ No………….AI age continues indefinitely
NGU delayed or partial adoption………⚠️ Possible…~2050–2100 depending on delays
greg smith:
When ready, our licensee’s commercial branch will contact you to better understand,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
When the time comes, we are eager to discuss a 50-megawatt E-Cat configuration for a data center. We are working on three large data centers right now. A couple of years ago, Andrea calmly suggested it would take 5 x 1MW E-Cats for 5 megawatts of output. It takes about two years to permit and build a data center. Using natural gas to turn turbines is the current preferred method.
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/06/05/texas-data-centers-gas-power-plants-ai/
Greg
GD:
See the data sheet on http://www.ecat.com for the temperature.
The other issues will be tested only for specicic custom applications.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
To Iggy Dalrymple:
I would have thought that using an Ecat to produce heat to power a steam-powered vehicle would be very much more complicated, AND EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE, than simply applying power from the Ecat to an electric motor in the wheels. In competition with a cheaper electric-powered version I would expect the steam engine version to sell few vehicles, and its producer to go broke. Am I missing something?
Rodney.
Dearest Andrea,
dealing with components resistance,
I’m curious if you also explored such matters.
For example what would happen during E-cat operation,
if one of the following events happen:
A) E-cat fall down (e.g. 1m height)
B) Hammer test on E-cat
C) Vibration test to simulate the mounting on a vehicle
D) High temperature environment (e.g. 168h@100ºC)
Warm Regards
Gianluca
Iggy Dalrymple:
Thank you for your opinion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
domenico canino:
Thank you for your support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Svein:
Thank you for your suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steve D:
As I already said, I cannot add to these issues more information than what is described in
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
As I said, the Clients are free to choose the inverters they deem opportune for their specific situations, so long as they make the connections done by certified experts of the matter,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Prof:
Thank you for the update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Juseph:
Please go to paragraph 5, 6, 7 of the paper you cited,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, in this video documentary, the great physic Nassim Aramein talks about you at minute 49. All this video explain Zero point Energy and equation. And he says you are the one.
For me is exciting.
Warm regards from Italy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RovZmeI1-Zw
Dear Andrea
Transforming electricity will always entail a loss. When you need 110 V or 240V AC, it will therefore be economical to connect the E-Cat elements in series so that they supply the full voltage to the inverters.
Such inverters are not widely used. It therefore seems necessary that future licensees look more closely at the available options and are happy to cooperate in finding good suppliers.
To achieve 240 V, at least 20 E-Cat’s are needed in series.
Then 200 W, will be the smallest variant.
To achieve 1 kW, 5 such series must be connected in parallel. This must also be followed furter.
For inverters that are to be used in systems without a grid connection, the inverter should be equipped so that it can disconnect the least relevant loads when the load approaches the maximum.
Possibly a battery should also be included in the system to prevent unwanted disconnections of the E-Cat from occurring.
For systems that are to work together with a network, there should be a regulation that disconnects the E-Cat when the price of the grid power is lower than the cost of using the E-Cat.
For both conditions, it would be desirable for the inverter to be able to disconnect parts of the feeding E-Cat when the energy requirements are lower than the installed power.
This is to increase the lifespan of the connected devices.
It is possible that all of these conditions can be met in a specially designed inverter.
There are also other conditions that may be important. Further suggestions are welcome.
Svein