Following Bologna Test, Andrea Rossi Works Towards 1 MW Plant Launch, Seeks Help in Designing an E-Cat “For the People”

Following the recent Bologna E-Cat test, Andrea Rossi is looking ahead to furthering his development of the E-Cat. He seems satisfied with the results of the Bologna test; his only public comments about it have been in an email to PESWiki where he said that it performed according to his standards. He stated:

“PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT BEFORE THE SELF SUSTAINING MODE THE REACTOR WAS ALREADY PRODUCING ENERGY MORE THAN IT CONSUMED, SO THAT THE ENERGY CONSUMED IS NOT LOST, BUT TURNED INTO ENERGY ITSELF, THEREFORE IS NOT PASSIVE. ANOTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION: IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE REPORT, YOU WILL SEE THAT THE SPOTS OF DRIVE WITH THE RESISTANCE HAVE A DURATION OF ABOUT 10 MINUTES, WHILE THE DURATION OF THE SELF SUSTAINING MODES IS PROGRESSIVELY LONGER, UNTIL IT ARRIVES TO BE UP TO HOURS. BESIDES, WE PRODUCED AT LEAST 4.3 kWh/h FOR ABOUT 6 HOURS AND CONSUMED AN AVERAGE OF 1.3 kWh/h FOR ABOUT 3 HOURS, SO THAT WE MADE IN TOTAL DURING THE TEST 25.8 kWh AND CONSUMED IN TOTAL DURING THE TEST 3.9 kWh. iN THE WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO, WHICH MEANS NOT CONSIDERING THAT THE CONSUME IS MAINLY MADE DURING THE HEATING OF THE REACTOR DURING THE FIRST 2 HOURS, WE CAN CONSIDER THAT THE WORST POSSIBLE RATIO IS 25.8 : 3.9 AND THIS IS THE COP 6 WHICH WE ALWAYS SAID. OF COURSE, THE COP IS BETTER, BECAUSE, OBVIOUSLY, THE REACTOR, ONCE IN TEMPERATURE, NEEDS NOT TO BE HEATED AGAIN FROM ROOM TEMPERATURE TO OPERATIONAL TEMPERATURE.”

There has been considerable debate from the E-Cat following public as to whether the Bologna test was convincing or not, and there are a wide range of opinions about it’s success. Some people say it was an unmitigated failure, others seeing it was entirely convincing, and there are a host of opinions in between those two extremes. (Check comments on this site for examples!)

Rossi does not seem to be spending a lot of time dwelling on this test as he is now looking towards the launch of the 1 MW plant. It’s unclear as to where the plant will be when he does launch — right now it seems to be firmly set in Bologna Italy, and it will presumably take considerable time and work to get it shipped and set up in a new location in just a couple of weeks.

In addition to getting the 1 MW plant ready, Rossi is apparently struggling to come up with a satisfactory design for a small E-Cat. Today on his web site he issued this appeal:

“The E-Cat basic module “for the People”, that we will put in commerce within months, will be 40 cm long, 40 cm large, 40 cm high, will weight 60 kg, the shape of a cube. I need a design cheap ( I want to put it in commerce at a price of 500 euros per kW) but nice, very nice. I will buy the design which I will choose and everybody has my honour word that I will not use designs not paid. I need it within two months.
Go to the report of Nyteknik (google “Nyteknic E-Cat Test October 6″) to see the pipes position: that will be it.
Please send proposals to [email protected]
I am sure that from the enthusiasm od our Readers will pop up a masterpiece.”

Rossi’s business plans are still a mystery, and he’s surely taking an unconventional approach by looking for help at this point from the general public — but that is his style. No one can accuse Rossi of being conventional! Perhaps this little square box will be Rossi’s equivalent of the Model T — a cheap and simple machine that will be able to provide heat (perhaps in time electricity) to the general population. Maybe the idea is that just like with his 1 MW plant, you will be able to connect multiple boxes together to ramp up power capabilities.

There is still plenty of mystery surrounding this work — how Rossi is going to pull everything together is still unclear, especially now we hear that the US launch may not happening. Rossi has not, however announced a delay — we’re still looking at the last week in October and Rossie seems to be forging ahead with determination to do what he has said he is going to do.

  • Hyman Rosen

    Let us make plans for what we will do with our pony once it’s delivered.

  • lergrain

    The most adamant critic of Mr. Rossi seems to be Steven Krivit. I watched a full 44 minutes video presentation given by Mr. Krivit (2007). Krivit is an authority, and knowledgeable about the field of LENR. In his presentation, he summarizes all the experiments done in the field of LENR over the preceding 18 years. Krivit does not deny the possibility of LENR, he even mentioned the involvment of weak nuclear reactions, hevay metals, hydrogen, etc… and the data (of which Krivit confirms that these were never refuted) of experiments where excess heat was indeed generated. Then it seems all the more strange that Krivit is such an avid critic of Mr. Rossi’s E-CAT. Is Krivit pushing Rossi so hard in order to obtain finally more details? We can understand that Mr. Rossi does not reveal such details at this instance. Perhap Mr. Krivit and Mr. Rossi clash because of different “style”. Perhaps Mr. Krivit smells a hoax, because of the way the E-CAT is presented to the public and the media, and the “lot soo scientific” measurements performed during the various tests Mr. Rossi had “witnesses from all over the world” attend. Perhaps Mr. Krivit bases his crtiticism on the reaml of “mystery” surrounding the launch of the 1 MW test, the Defkalion “soap”, etc… I guess we will all find out in the coming months. I cannot imagine that Mr. Rossi is exposing himself so much, while at the same time knowing it is all a hoax. His career would be over for ever if that was the case. Either the coming months will reveal the E-CAT to be reality, the rest is a matter of “normal” business cycles and engineering to perfect it and bring it to market. If that is the case, Mr. Krivit can always hide behing the fact that his criticism was inspired by the not so scientific tests conducted so far, the “personality” of Mr. Rossi, the “mystery” surrounding this whole E-CAT project, and finally the fact that he himself, Krivit, always believed that LENR is possible. If it turns out to be a hoax, Mr. Krivit can cry victory. Let’s hope Rossi’s E-CAT confirms Mr. Krivit’s belief in LERN.

  • Stasulos

    Nickel is at the end of the “stellar staircase”. Its permutation into copper requires input of energy, unlike the reactions up until it, which release energy (like Fe into Ni).

    Also, there is no such measurement unit as kWh/h.

  • Rich

    I agree with this completely. It seems to me that a “consumer version” might be difficult to manage. I’m fairly sure the thing works, the problem is that starting and controlling the reaction is not as simple as flipping a switch.

    • http://fake.com laca

      “…is not as simple as flipping a switch.”

      Yes, but not much complicated. It definitely needs control electronics but it is not such an expensive thing.

    • http://www.nickelpower.org Bruce Fast

      I plan to be one of the first purchasers of a home unit. (I will have to convince my wife.) I don’t know about the other buyers, but I am quite capable of doing significantly more than flipping a switch. Hopefully the other first purchasers will be “handy” as well.

  • Maarten

    The system will be most easily adopted when the need for new infrastructure and changed behaviour is kept minimal. Advancing the system and applying it to new uses and systems can only be achieved in a further stage. People are conservative beings. If I would apply those conditions to the situation in my country (Belgium), this results in the following picture.

    The home appliance would mainly be used for heating purposes. It can replace all appliances that work on gas (boilers, geysers). Don’t forget that the system still needs electricity for every cycle start-up. So even if you convert the power to electricity, you need a subscription to the energyprovider (or a big-ass batterypack..). Sending constant ‘large’ amounts of electricity to the grid may be (considered) a risk for the stability of the network. So it’s not certain that the regulators will allow home e-cats to deliver energy to the grid. And if it’s not, the system isn’t too efficient anymore considering the fluctuating home demand.

    The production of energy is best organised by the energy-providers (as it is the case now). This has a lot of advantages. The user does not need to change its behaviour. Risks don’t lie with the end user. Prices will be a lot lower (though the government energy regulator needs to play its roll well. But bigger plants are usually cheaper plants per produced volume.). The foreign import of energy will become unnecessary. Small energy-providers can be the first to step up and take the leap. This way they can finally break the monopoly of the big provider(s).

    The most thorough revolutions are those who are planned cautiously, introduced gradually, giving the public the time to adapt their minds to the idea. The real consequences will only be able to become perfectly clear in a few years, when insidious changes have changed the critical masses’ minds and way of looking at things.

    I’m just trying to say that in this phase, not every decision leads automatically to the optimal result, and success and the rate of success is dependent on implementation strategy.

  • http://www.fake.com laca

    Well, Chris has presented us a rough energy/cost calculation of a 1KW (cost is 500 euro) unit. Here it is:

    1kw Rossi unit: 500 Euros
    Daily production: 24 kWh
    6 month(182 days) production: 4368 kWh
    0.10 Euro/kWh * 4368 kWh = 436.8 Euros

    In my opinion it is wrong beacause he calculates if this device produce electricity. But it is definitely not! Better to compare this thing to a gas heater.
    4386KWh is ok, but it is thermal energy. So in MJ it is : 4.386 x 3600 = 15,789.6 MJ
    Let’s assume that 1 m^3 natural gas has caloric value of 36 MJ/m^3.
    In this case 15,789.6 ÷ 36 = 438.6 m^3 natural gas can produce the same thermal energy as Rossi’s 1KW unit. For domestic natural gas we can calculate some 0.5 euro / m^3 (might be cheaper).
    This means that 438÷2= 219 Euro is the cost of the produced energy. Taking into account the additional maintenance cost we can extrapolate that at least (min) 3 half year cycle is needed to come back the investment.
    Considering the fact that the Rossi’s device don’t require expensive materials and it is relatively simple it seems at this point Mr Rossi behaves too selfish.
    I’ll rather wait for the Chinese version.

    Better solution would be one payment of a big sum from all countries of the world making this invention free for the mankind.

    • londo

      This is not how u calculate the cost of the energy produced by this device. To avoid the arbitrary assumption of 6 month, instead, insert the cost of capital, i.e., interest rate. Typically today, solar as well as nuclear use 5% annual interest rate in their calculations.

      Hence, 500*0.05/(24*365) = 0.29 €cent/kWh

      One should for sure add the cost of the magic Ni dust (if there is such a thing) produced by Rossi which would give us a different number. Consider this just an example.

  • Brama

    I have been following this for some time now … and what once felt like “wow” now looks like “hmmm”.

    Now, you should not judge the book by his cover, but:
    – a digital bathroom scale in a scientific test?
    – crappy pictures?
    – the test object looks like bricks wrapped with aluminum foil?
    – a report that is a school paper article at best?
    – now asking for design proposals over the internet?
    … and we could go on and on.

    What is Mr. Rossi doing or trying to do? At least he will not convince the mainstream in this way. Any student would have done this in a more professional way.

    Why did he do this test anyway? What does he gain out of it? Nothing, other then waking up copy-cats (if it works).

    Why is he asking for a design? Is he going to build and sell them by himself? He will need an experienced partner with the production facilities and production know-how … it should be easy for that partner to come up with a design and he would even do it for free. btw … what are the requirements for that design?

    If it works and he wants recognition for it, he should publish it and make it available for public.

    If it works and he is trying to secure financial benefit out of it, the he needs an advisor pretty quick. He is doing many mistakes at once:
    – he is promoting a product not ready for market (would be even worse if he got the media attention he wanted)
    – he is publishing too much or the wrong things and in the wrong way without achieving benefits out of it
    – he has no strategy (otherwise we would not see all this happening)
    – he has no reliable partner as he feels forced to publish things he should not do or in a way that a reliable and experienced partner would not allow him to do.

    Dear Mr. Rossi, we are living in times, where a “secret” in a product will last for max 3 months, then it will be lost (with or without patent). Do yourself a favor:
    – stop doing tests and publications without a proper goal.
    – build up a nice looking prototype, test it, get it stable (on your own)
    – find a big partner (GE, Siemens, Mitsubishi, etc) and convince them.
    – find a financial solution with the partner(s) that suits your needs (like 1 U$ per installed KW)

    If your e-cat works and you go on like this, you will loose it all.

    • Lou Tengzelius

      Bravo! Cognizant comment! PS: LENR does work, believe it!

      • Brama

        It is not for me to judge if it works or not 😉

        … and it is not about believing … we need to wait and see (and maybe hope) until a product is on the market and it is confirmed that only Ni + H and H2O are involved in the process.

        It just puzzles me why he is doing what he is doing and the way he is doing it. It is a waste of time, energy and potentially jeopardizing everything he wants to achieve. It is dragging him into emotional discussions. He is making and publishing (or at least allowing) substandard tests without benefit. He is not creating the image of a professional counterpart for a big and experienced partner he needs.

        Why prove something to the public if it works? Prove it to a partner and sell it. Deal done. Why focus on design? Let the professionals for these applications do that.

    • http://www.nickelpower.org Bruce Fast

      I’m sorry, but there is a HUGE amount of weight put on the bathroom scale.

      First, Rossi ISN’T A SCIENTIST — HE’S AN INVENTOR AND AN ENGINEER.
      The difference between a scientist and an engineer is that an engineer can use a bathroom scale to get +- a couple of pounds where a scientist needs a million dollar instrument.

      Second, the smaller parts were weighed with a scientists scale. It was only the full device, an 80kg object, that was weighed on a DIGITAL bathroom scale.

      Third, the important factor being measured was temperature differential. If the scale were out by 20%, therefore, it would not have affected the results in any way. As long as the before and after are done on the same scale, the error generally cancels out.

      Finally, THIS WASN’T A “scientific test”, IT WAS A DEMO. We are all hoping that Rossi will release an e-cat into the hands of a couple of universities. It would have been nice had he done so months ago. However, this still isn’t a “scientific test”.

    • Georg Krause

      Good points.

      Mr. Rossi needs help. No so much with the engineering, but with the way he is trying to make his e-cat a success. Being an engineer by myself I can understand him quite well. What Mr. Rossi needs is a top down approach not a bottom up. We, the interested community, can help him to bring his invention to the attention of the right people. This will give the Mr. Rossi the acceptance he needs and helps him to develop an open strategy.

      Thanks again Brama.

  • vaughan granfield

    1st its hard to get a patent on a principal which isnt understood but works, but they have done this befor for an invention called a electrical transformer ,no problem ther.And thats not the only example thers a whole pile of them
    2nd the e/cat has been estimated to be worth in the reagion of 1 to 2 trillion, Rossi i think will be rich soon even if he only gets half he will have a nice pension and house 3rd Would you like to buy a DIY almost radiation proof cold fusion reactor ,my petal would kill me in my sleep. and just imagine explaining why johnny looks green when the lights go out .No i think ill be buying the real deal for my family if and when it comes

  • Cornholio

    From what I’ve seen of the tests, both the critics and the supporters have something to hold up.

    The experimental setup and results were enough to show that more energy come out of the E-cat during the test than was put in due to electricity. That doesn’t rule out all fakes, but at this point a fake would have be very sophisticated because there just wasn’t enough space to accommodate large batteries or to burn fuel to generate the heat.

    The critics can also point to the less-than perfect experimental setup and the fact that the unit did not produce 20KW of output power even using generous estimates of the output power.

    What I think is that Rossi *has* stumbled onto something here, but he hasn’t perfected it. I think that culturally and professionally he is given to exaggeration. I’m not saying he’s intentionally dishonest, but he sees the success of the E-cat and needs to amp up the numbers to appear bigger than he is… I think this is sort of an Italian cultural thing more than an intentional scam.

    So, while I do think the E-cat is the first step in what could turn out to be a very successful form of new energy, I’m also not holding my breath waiting for a product I’ll be able to buy at the store next January like some people are expecting. Lots of people say “oh it’s just engineering,” but the “just engineering” is often > 90% of the work needed to succeed.

  • Renzo

    My prediction is that within a week the first home E-Cat is sold, someone will have reverse engineered it and discovered the catalyst. And after a week the secret sauce will available somewhere in internet. Within a month thousands of nerds will be busy building their own e-cat device. In the end some hobbysts will die or get intoxicated but most will suceed to build an ecat for themselves, for their relatives and for their friends. Let alone all the illegal copies made in China. There is no burocracy, law or police that can stop this. Any action from a State to ban, restrict or tax will serve no purpose but to foster a black market.
    I mean… probably it is not even necessary for an e-cat to be actually sold to the public. Once it is officialy confirmed by a university and it gets widespread media attention, the same nerds above will try to replicate it. This could take many months instead of a week before someone finds a working solution but the scenario at the end will be the same.

  • FH

    What’s European Union doing? My suggestion: they should award big sum of price money distributed to all researchers who’ve done work on Ni-H LENR, provided that it works as claimed by Rossi et al. These loser in EU burn Billions for nothing and provide no help for EU citizens with great work. With price money in prospect , Rossi could make all details public. Either it works or not. If Rossi is right he and others have a great award, if he’s wrong EU pays nothing.

  • Lou Tengzelius

    Sudden clarity. The early E-Cats were copper tubes containing reaction mixture. Heat from a resistance wire wound around them is supplied by a variable 60 cycle power source. Heat to begin the reaction and then power down to maintain the alternating magnetic field within. The Brillouin web site confirms use of pulsed magnetic fields having catalytic effects. The iron powder contained in the Rossi reaction mix as a finely divided ferromagnetic agent capable of energizing the nickel in preparation for pseudo neutron absorption. How clever of the LENR advocates to adjust temperature, pressure, pulse generation and reaction quantity resulting in opening a new era of opportunity and profit. Then the world of 20th century Physics is turned upside down with undeniable concepts from not only Guglinski, Santilli, Fleishman/Pons and Rossi but many more who suffered through the experiences of being on the outside of “conventions”. A remarkable and dramatic revolution has begun. I still struggle with attempts to clarify a theoretical, mathematical and geometric representation of ether space, two electrons, a proton, a nucleus, all known forces and the transformations which yield what we call Cold Fusion. Lou Tengzelius

  • kirk

    Time magazine man of the year: Andrea Rossi
    Nobel Prize: Focardi/Rossi

    Unbelievable! I would be more skeptical if I wasn’t familiar with the work of Dr. Randy Mills of Blacklight Power……… creating excess heat (excess of a chemical reaction) using nickel and hydrogen and a catalyst…but apparenly without pressure (Rowan university was able to independently replicate a 1.6x to 6x increase in energy

    Finally! The world will soon see!

  • John Littlemist

    This certainly begins to look like an energy revolution and Rossi will very likely to be the “Man of the year” in Time magazine soon.

    But I think Rossi is a bit naive regarding the acceptance of E-Cats “for the People” as a widespread solution for decentralized energy generation. And I mean specifically the acceptance by authorities. It is a nuclear device producing lethal gamma rays, and no matter how good the shieldings are, they simply will not be accepted to be used in households. It’s a matter of security. National authorities will ban E-cats to be used in households.

    • vaughan granfield

      If I remember the common halogen light bulb emits gamma in a higher amount than rossi’s e/cat that’s in the 300 to 500 watt range . The amounts are low .Still it would be nice to answer the problem of possible leakages

  • daniel maris

    Well at 500 Euros per KW it won’t exactly be cheap. I guess a small house might need something like 10KWs of heat to keep it warm in the middle of winter. That’s before you put in costs for the piping, and – presumably – there will be costs for fuel and maintenance (though maybe offset by payment for copper production?).

    I think we are a long way from consumer heaven with this proposal.

    Surely if they are going to have a real use, they will firstly be used as area generators and heat sources in apartment and office blocks.

    I hope I am wrong on the economics but solar power is v. expensive and they’ve only recently got that down to about a dollar a watt (for thin film). This is 50 Euro cents per watt, but it’s clearly going to need a lot more in terms of fuel, maintenance and safety.

    • Francesco CH

      @daniel maris

      Rossi means that an E-Cat for domestic use will cost 5000 euros to buy.

      (Assuming that the E-Cat for normals houses will be a 10kW E-Cat)

      • daniel maris

        Well a standard 10KwE boiler would actually cost a lot less than 5000 Euros!

        • Francesco CH

          100% right, but let me write it anyway. . .

          Well a standard 10KwE boiler would actually cost a lot less than 5000 Euros!

          WELL BUT IT IS NOT A NUCLEAR REACTOR ! ! !

        • Chris

          Rossi’s device would be cheap to fuel, but expensive to buy. It should get cheaper to buy as the technology matures, and the fuel will remain cheap (no shortage of nickel).

          A boiler is cheap to buy, but expensive to fuel. It will remain cheap to buy and most likely get more expensive to fuel as world hydrocarbon consumption increases.

          • daniel maris

            Chris –

            That might well turn out to be the case but I don’t think there are any guarantees.

            For one thing the cost of wind power is continuing to fall. It’s already competitive with coal – and I think it actually beat local natural gas in a tender exercise recently in Brazil. But there’s also a lot of natural gas to be had. No sign of that running out in the next 50 years would be my guess. And we haven’t really seen the exploitation of wave, tidal current and sea current yet.

            Going back to your earlier comments, it should be pointed out that potentially Photovoltaic panels can operate for 24 hours – the reason being that they could absorb the infrared spectrum (e.g. with a two sided panel) of infrared radiation given up by earth at night.

            Also, the E cat doesn’t seem to be a continuous device in terms of domestic needs. If it has to be “fired up” for three hours, it’s usefulness may be limited. Of course, there may be ways around that (is that why there are three chambers, so it can be fired up in series??? – but even then where do you store the power if you’re not using it? – not much point in having a machine that fires up automatically, creates a load of energy, but then you don’t use it – although I guess, if it’s creating electricity you could sell it back to the grid).

            There are a lot of issues to address with a domestic E Cat – bigger plants seem more feasible to me.

    • Chris

      Solar only works when the sun is shining and the ratings for it are the MAXIMUM production during the peak sunlight of the day, in summer. I.E. the output is not continuous.

      According to Rossi, his device produces it’s output CONTINUOUSLY, 24/7 and only needs to be refueled once every six months.

      You are comparing apples to oranges when using solar as your comparison.

      1kw Rossi unit: 500 Euros
      Daily production: 24 kWh
      6 month(182 days) production: 4368 kWh
      0.10 Euro/kWh * 4368 kWh = 436.8 Euros

      You can see that even with conservative costs for grid power (mine in California are considerably higher) it almost pays for itself in 6 months. You would be lucky if solar paid you back in ten years.

      So, yes, your economics are very wrong.

      • daniel maris

        Chris –

        I was not doing a direct comparison. But some people here having been talking as if we are witnessing the dawn of a new era of virtually free energy. Clearly we are not there yet! I put that forward as a corrective.

        But your comparison is not a direct one either. The 0.10 Euro per KwH cost for mains electricity delivers a really flexible system off which you could maybe run 100s Kws of power-using machines. But your 1Kw E Cat only delivers a max of 1 Kw.

        I would think for many households they probably need at least 30-40 Kw minimum for heating, TVs, computers, cooking and other needs.

        Let’s take the lower figure – that would be 15,000 Euros. And of course we don’t know what the figures for fuel and maintenance would be. In other words you have to buy a lot of capacity that you will rarely need.

        I’m not being a party pooper – just a realist.

        If the E cat does achieve X6 energy gain I think it’s first uses would be in area-based generation and electricity generation in big apartment and office blocks. I doubt it will immediately replace small domestic units.

        • Chris

          I used the 1kW system for example. The size is irrelevant for the payback period. If your peak usage is five times as much electricity, then you get a system five times as large.

          I agree that the system would have to be sized to meet the highest peak demand. However, that peak demand would not include heating (the largest share of household energy consumption for anyone in the northern latitudes), as the Rossi device would generate copious amounts of excess heat that would not need to be converted to electricity. Infrastructure to distribute that heat would still be an additional cost, but that technology has existed for a very long time and is very robust and economical. None the less, If an air conditioner is not in use, then most people do not exceed 7 kW of peak use throughout the day. That’s enough for twenty-eight 42″ flat panel televisions, or six microwaves, or four stove top electric heating elements.

          Your estimate for energy consumption is quite high also. Even Greenpeace (who certainly overestimates consumption because of their agenda) estimates that the average household in Europe uses 4667 kWh of electricity per year, or 12.78 kWh per day (http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/take_action/your-energy/). Here in the US that number is much higher because of our heavy use of Air Conditioning amongst other things (we are gluttons).

          The maintenance would be similar to a boiler, which many people who currently burn fuel oil for heat already pay for. So, that is not an additional cost. The refueling would be very cheap and only occur every six months from the manufacturer. According to Rossi it would need very little nickel and a very inexpensive catalyst and very little hydrogen gas. I could not find the estimates of the refueling costs. Here is a link to some general FAQ’s http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi%27s_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_%28E-Cat%29:_Frequently_Asked_Questions

          That’s the long of it.

          The short of it:

          I agree with you about the best application being medium in size. Enough to support a community, or block of office buildings. The benefits of a system this size are numerous. Here are a few.

          The excess heat generate could easily be distributed to the community/office building through underground hot steam piping (safer than Natural gas piping). I work at a very large university in California that heats almost the entire campus in this way using the waste heat from it’s own natural gas electricity generation plant. The technology is mature and well tested. Simply swap out the Natural gas generators for Rossi generators.

          The peak electricity needed would be closer to the average needed by the community because not everyone hits their peak consumption at identical times.

          Economies of scale. Its cheaper to build a generator big enough for 100 homes than it is to build 100 small generators.

          I apologize for my snarky tone in my last comment, I was an A$$.

          The final caveat: If it truly does what it says it does.

          ~Chris

        • Maarten

          The initial cost of the first model would be around €15000 (30Kw). -That would be +/- the model tested past week (27Kw), an appliance the size of a microwave (!)-. That cost is a lot higher then what you pay for a condensing boiler. But it’s about the same as what you pay for a heat-pump, and less then what you pay for a solar power installation that would need to produce 30 Kw (continuously).

          The proposed price is for the initial home model. The first solar installations, heatpumps, condensing boilers (and pc’s, although a little besides the point) were a LOT more expensive than that – even the ones produced for the home market (I’m speaking relatively, of course). In other words, as soon as mass production starts, the prices will drop. Which is an application of easy economics.

          This 15000 is the buying price. The using cost is a LOT lower then any other energy source. So even the high initial price is earned back in virtually no-time. (Using a larger unit with your neighbors or neighborhood could potentially be even more price-efficiënt.)

          The used materials are plentiful and very efficient. That’s what makes it’s use so cheap.

          Don’t forget to think about the external costs. This appliance has virtually no external negative costs (no radiation, no dangerous waste, no dangerous gasses,…). This alone makes it a way better option than other methods of producing energy. However, the environmental impact of the production of the units is still unclear..

          • daniel maris

            Maarten –

            I don’t really disagree with you but I think the real price needs to be made clear since a lot of people have run away with the idea this is “free energy”.
            .

          • http://www.nickelpower.org Bruce Fast

            My understanding is that Rossi’s “home use” model is rated at 10kw, that it is different from the 35 kw units that make up the 1mw reactor. As such, it should cost about 5,000 euro, currently $6,700 usd.

            • daniel maris

              $6,700 USD is still a lot of money for most people. That would be their third biggest purchase after a car and house. I doubt many people could afford it and we don’t know what the ongoing fuel and maintenance costs will be.

              With bigger units, a lot of the inefficiencies of the Rossi system can be absorbed through economies of scale.

              It would be interesting to get a cost estimate for a 1 MW plant.

  • web4Y0U

    That was a very, very poorly planned and executed test.
    That was perhaps also the target of Mr. Rossi.

    Suppose that the working system produces excess heat, there is only one explanation for me behave for Rossi:

    1st He does not get patented.
    2nd He can only earn money once as long as his secret is secret
    3rd It is easy to replicate the thing. No special materials, manufacturing techniques, etc.

    I hope there will be a breakthrough. The world would have badly needed.

    web4Y0U

    • Francesco CH

      HO DOES HAVE A PATENT but it is valy only for Italy.

      Hence Rossi can produce and sell his E-Cat in Italy, and all the circulating information indicates that this is precisely what he is going to do

      • Francesco CH

        “valid only for Italy”