NyTeknik Publishes Detailed Report of the October 6th E-Cat Test in Bologna;

Swedish technology magazine NyTeknik has published their report of the October 6th, 2011 testing that took place in Bologna. It comes in two parts: a news story about the event, and a detailed report which covers many particulars and measurements of the test.

Some interesting points from the news report: Professor Roland Petterson of Uppsala University states, ““I’m convinced that this works, but there is still room for more measurements.” Also we learn that the 1 MW Plant that was supposed to be shipped to a customer in the USA had not been shipped by Rossi because of contractual terms that were unacceptable. The 1MW plant demo is still scheduled to take place; however, the location or customer is still unannounced.

The detailed report explains that the E-Cat ran in self-sustain mode for around three and a half hours and in this state Mats Lewan reports that,”output temperature inside the E-cat was stable about 114 degrees centigrade, and water could be felt boiling putting a hand on top of it. The external temperature was between 60 and 85 degrees centigrade.”

  • Frank


    Because the temperature measuremts at the heat exchanger inlet and outlet seems to be done very poor, I checked wheter the (calculated maximum) energy in the steam created by the e-cat matches with the claimed temperature gain in the heat-exchanger.
    The result is disillusioning: Even when you assume that all the water flow into the e-cat is converted into steam, the energy in this steam is far lower (approximately only half) of the claimed energy in the cooling water temperature increase in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger.

    Of course, the calculation is based on the statement in the test report, that the (condensed) water flow of the primary loop was 0,91g/sec.

    • Gordon Docherty

      Last week, on another website I was wondering if, when nickel and a metal oxide reached the right temperature immediately around the heating filament in the e-cat, a localized burst of energy (a powerful shock wave, or “explosion”, enhanced by having Hydrogen hanging around dissociated Oxygen!) was released that dissociated other hydrogen molecules from H2 into H1 atoms that then slammed into the atoms in the surrounding Nickel lattice, possibly assisted by Casimir cavities to focus and enhance the blast effect – a sort of reverse sonoluminescence process in that it involves a now expanding bubble slamming the hydrogen into the nickel lattice. So this, in other words, is one of the major roles the catalyst plays, why it is needed, and why energy initially needs to be added until thing get hot enough.

      Now It wouldn’t be the first time that a blast (in this case, intense microblast, but the idea is the same) was used to push particles together…and I understand in those other cases, quite a lot of energy is released as neutrons slam into surrounding metal atoms that split to produce more neutrons and so on – once the initial energy is added, away the ride goes!

      Anyway, if this were the case, then a set of filament wires running between two plates and packed around with finely ground “porous Nickel” (for want of a better term) together with the “metal oxide” in the presence of a vacuum to which hydrogen was then added under pressure would enhance the effect by providing more opportunity for localized thermite reactions next to the very many (very hot) fine heating elements to react (interplay) with the hydrogen introduced under pressure – maybe this is also why, when air / oxygen is present, the effect is not seen, as the free oxygen simply reacts with the hydrogen too soon, before any thermite reaction can occur.

      Now, such a hypothesis could easily be tested by any decent chemistry lab (without breaking the bank), by exploring the effects of using different pressures, geometries and mixtures and finding the optimum values for each.

      If thermite reactions near the heating filaments were playing a role then, in the limit (wires getting smaller and more numerous, like hairs, and heating more instant), an even more powerful fusion-based energy release system could be developed, scalable from a matchbox upward (initial external energy sources aside). Further, by synchronizing “energy pulses” through the material, preferably using electromagnetic energy, a high speed energy “wave” could be created to travel through the device to enhance the effect still further (though preferably not radially, as such a wave could be used to create a super-powerful implosion into a chamber of deuterium / tritium, something that would release rather too much energy…)

  • iivari

    Based on this, no infinite gain:


    Look at the input Energy in the third figure. It never goes to zero. However, the plotted power at the “power resistor” (4th and 5th figure) seems to be at zero, so maybe the 15 MJ plotted (“energy in”) after 15:36 time stamp in the third figure is just a simple typo.

  • s

    The test clearly passed. Output was at least 87Megajoules of energy and total input was ~34 Megajoules. This is > than a 53Megajoule energy gain which is very significant. And, the actual output energy was much more because the ecat was still over 100C and the delta T across the exchanger was over 2C when the data recording was stopped. And, there was a bias in the heat exchanger thermistors that reduced measured output energy.

    It’s interesting that people are saying the test failed or even lost energy when the numbers say otherwise. Perhaps wait until after you have calculated all the numbers for the entire test before commenting.

    • jjjioman

      I’ve seen calculations that one single ecat core alone could high enough moderately compressed hydrogen to produce 588 MJ.

    • jjjioman

      That’s nothing! rossi claims to use nickle. Not sure what the energy density of nickel is, but the known energy density of boron as a usable fuel is 138 MJ/L. At 50cm x 60cm x 35cm, that comes to nearly 15,000 MJ!! I don’t think rossi’s 34 MJ is must of an achievement.

    • s

      The argument against the ecat for 9 months was that the steam measurements were taken incorrectly and that caused the excess heat. Now, since this test has completely obliterated that argument, the argument is that there is some exotic power source stored in the ecat making the excess heat.

      The argument that it has an internal hidden power source is questionable because if it went on market, it would have a warranty or guarantee if it failed to work. Why would someone spend so much money to design and build something they knew would be returned by the customer when it failed after the hidden energy ran out?

      I wonder if people making arguments against the ecat are in industries threatened by the ecat if it works.

      • jjjioman

        * Yes, there are a lot of issues with the eCat. One at a time.

        * Compressed hydrogen is not some “exotic power.” It’s been around for decades.

        * About once or twice per year there’s a huge free energy fake. These people show no or very little interest in making $. Why is a truckload of people who support these fakes time after time, and these supporters always seem oblivious why anyone or group would want to do that. Come on! Obvious answer is that someone or group is trying to keep the LENR & free energy research reputation destroyed.

        Massive free energy investigation is coming your way, soon. What ever group that’s been creating these fakes every year will be caught, just like big oil was caught recently paying anti global warmest millions of dollars under the table.

    • s

      Other scientists have gone on record that they internally checked the Ecat for hidden wires or fuel sources before tests and before they allowed their name to be used supporting it, I believe. I’ll take the word of those scientists that the Ecat has no internal power sources.

      There must have been hundreds if not thousands of blog pages written saying the ecat’s excess heat was due to errors in steam measurement. Since that argument has been thoroughly shattered, it’s on to the next straw to grasp at…

      • I agree with you, the “excess heat was due to errors in steam measurement” argument is thoroughly shattered by this test. In addition, Rossi has demonstrated a stable self-sustaining mode. These two accomplishments are a lot for the October 6th test.

  • Olivier

    The damage to LENR research is already done by repeated unscientific and obscure tests in non-neutral places, claimes over claimes and an apparatus that has a name and a price before tested in a independent laboratory.

    • jjjioman

      Ain’t that the sad truth. And who are all of these people who keep supporting these obvious fakes? Perhaps a team that’s working together to keep such research destroyed?

    • fred


    • gillana

      non so bene l’inglese spero che troverai un traduttore inglese-italiano.
      cosa importa dov’è il luogo dove è fatto un esperimento se molti invitati a fare test sull’esperimento sono famosi e competenti e sono state fatte tutte le prove del caso , quando l’esperimento è riuscito sia prima che dopo non sono stati trovati trucchi o apparecchi truffaldini o sospetti?

      • I started with google translate and enhanced your comment a bit:

        I do not know English well I hope you will find a translator English-Italian.
        What does it matter where the place where you did an experiment. Those invited to do several tests on the experiment are known and competent. They have made ​​all the appropriate tests. The experiment worked! Both before and after were not found equipment for tricks or anything fraudulent or suspicious?

  • arian

    if you go to http://www.e-cat.com you redirect to http://www.kpcb.com/.

    • This is very interesting. Not only are we directed to KPCB, but there is no mention on the site that I can find of the e-cat. This would be consistent with a breakdown in negotiations between the American company and Dr. Rossi. Could it be that Rossi is much more of an inventor than a negotiator?