Interesting Crowd Funding E-Cat Test Proposal

Thanks to all who have made intelligent comments on yesterday’s thread about a crowd funding approach to E-Cat testing. It seems there is some interest in the idea, but also plenty of reticence. A recent post by Elias Freitas caught my attention and seemed worthy of featuring in a new post as it sums up the case for a crowd funding approach which I will call “The People’s E-Cat Test”.

It’ so simple:

– Create an “International Association of Cold Fusion Researchers”, based on the USA or UK.

– Allow people from every country of the world to be a member

– Members should donate 50 dollars to have membership. 100 thousand members would provide the association with 5 million dollars.

– If the association doesn’t reach the goal of buying and testing an E-Cat, return the money to the members.

I’m ready to give 50 dollars to this association. If the association buys the E-Cat, and the E-Cat doesn’t work as promissed by Rossi, that will be not a problem to me. At least, my money was well used to reveal a scam, and totally demoralize the scammer. I don’t mind if Rossi will be a few million dollars richer. If it’s a fraud, at least this subject will be “case closed”.

Can we reach 100 thousand members?

The interesting thing about this proposal is that it serves the purpose of the enthusiasts and the skeptics. It would either vindicate or condemn Rossi — and if done well — with the right publicity and online distribution (anyone remember the 24/7 webcam idea?), and of course credible testers, it could do so in a very public way.

The idea is indeed simple, but would not be easy to execute. You’d need a credible person or organization to champion the approach and get it organized. And the fundraising itself might be challenging. There would be legal and organizational hurdles to overcome to get the plan in motion.

As far as making Rossi richer if he is a scammer, my understanding is that he does not get any funds from customers unless the E-Cat plant is demonstrated to perform at the contracted rate (a COP of 6 is guaranteed).

One of the stronger arguments against this People’s Test idea of the E-Cat is that sooner or later we will find out one way or another from one of his customers — or another LENR company (perhaps DGT) — will allow public testing by qualified professional, and that we should therefore just be patient and wait for the natural course of events in the marketplace to give a thumbs up or thumbs down. I think it’s a good point.

On the other hand, however, we don’t know if or when such a customer will step forwards, and what kind of access they would give to testers. Rossi’s point about customers not wanting to have the press, bloggers, enthusiasts, skeptics, etc. inundate them with emails, calls and visits is a good one — although some might be happy for the publicity. And customers might not allow the amount of testing that might be warranted.

So an interesting proposal — we’ll see if it goes anywhere.

  • Dave

    Good idea, but Rossi will never go along with this. He’ll have some lame excuse like he’s backlogged with other orders and can’t get to it. The last thing Rossi wants is confirmation that his E-Cat system doesn’t really work.

  • Tony Lampet

    Maybe the guy who did the Rossi and Focardi t-shirts (see http://www.zazzle.com/energyrevolution) could donate a percentage of profits to the crowd funded E-Cat Test campaign.

  • Pingback: Community Watch: E-Cat Public Test | Ecatreport – follows the Rossi Energy Catalyzer known as E-cat()

  • http://avci.net searcher11

    Possibly one of the greatest inventions of our time,
    just as the electric car of tesla’s was…too bad it has been “buried” by big government and business for all these years.. I have been watching this technology develop for some time.. time to “GO or WHOA” imo best of luck against big government and all those who are connected with them!!

  • Ivan Mohorovicic
    • Ivan Mohorovicic

      Oops, it was already posted, sorry.

  • http://neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

    To put this idea in practice:

    There would have to be a bona-fide escrow fund
    with insurance with a reputable law firm.

    There would also need to be a standard rate
    for any person working on the project in an
    organizational capacity, they would need to be supervised and audited by one or more neutral third parties.

    I would suggest that an idea would be to
    purchase an e-cat and have it successfully
    tested by a few qualifed engineers and interested
    scientists who are not all the same as in the
    October test.

    If the test fails the money is returned without a purchase.

    If the test succeeds the put it up for sale and
    if it does not sell in 3 months put it to work
    somewhere.

  • arian
  • Bill Colias

    $50 is not a big deal for me either.
    Sign me up.

  • Bill Colias

    $50 is not a big deal for me either.

  • Bill Colias

    Me too.

  • Robert Horning

    Disclosure of how all of this works is the key. In order to get a patent, Rossi will need to disclose the key parts of the process including the “catalyst” being used to generate the fusion. Anything not disclosed is fair game to be copied by others, so it will be important for him to disclose everything.

    If you want “test” the reactor, there is no need to spend millions of dollars to buy one of the big boxes from Rossi. Just follow the “instructions” or re-create a reactor from the patent application. If that doesn’t work, Rossi’s patent application could be invalidated on that premise alone.

    BTW, you can certainly take a patented device and “recreate” that device for legitimate and bona fide scientific purposes as long as you are not competing commercially in some way that involves the claims of the patent. I would suspect that anybody doing such research could easily either prove this whole thing is bogus or validate it as a source of energy.

    My own money would be betting the whole thing is still a scam. If I was to pay any money, I sure wouldn’t want it to be going to Rossi, at least for testing purposes on the off chance this is a scam of some sort. What is being asked here is to prove the scientific credibility of the concept, not trying to completely reverse engineer the product in order to become a commercial competitor.

    • Victor

      The scientific credibility of the concept has already been proven. It is Rossi’s version that has not been tested by a third party. Whether the scientific community accepts it or not is totally irrelevant, for if it works, it works, and if it doesn’t, it doesn’t. Gaining a clearer understanding of it would provide a basis for further improvement and optimisation. But if Rossi can sell these and customers are happy, where is the scam? As yet he has not asked for money up front, he takes money only when the customer has tested it and is happy with it, he pays his own travel and incidental expenses, and to my knowledge no one has yet suffered damage. Where is the scam?

      I think calling something a scam without proof damage or intent to damage is a cheap shot and an intellectually lazy attempt at what should be constructive criticism instead. Where is your evidence?

      • Robert Horning

        The scientific credibility has not been proven yet. I don’t know how many times that needs to be said, but I’ll say it again.

        The whole reason for this “test”, the reason for people wanting to find out for themselves if this really works, is to further the “proof” that this thing is real. Or more to the point, the scientific theory and foundational physics to explain how this device works, if it works at all, still needs to be formed. I’m not talking “the scientific community”, I’m just saying that convincing evidence has not been presented to people who are legitimate skeptics with an open mind.

        The more I read about this proposal, particularly how substantial amounts of money are going to be offered, only makes this seem more and more like a scam of the worst kind. I don’t think that is a cheap shot, but I am asking for proper disclosure. There is no way I’m going to “invest” into something like this without some substantial and rigorous scientific investigation into whatever it is that Rossi thinks he has found.

  • Tom

    Patience. Out of the 13+ that have been sold, at least one buyer will want to boast it to the world and get it tested. And with Rossi at full steam production, what have we got to worry about? E-cats are on their way and if they don’t work, I won’t buy one.

  • Pingback: Interesting Crowd Funding E-Cat Test Proposal | ColdFusionBlog.net()

  • Sanjeev

    http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/12/roma-14-dicembre-coherence-2011-ii.html

    More good news in LENR. Celani got 200% yields. Expect more products in near future competing with Ecat.

    The slides from NASA and Defense Intelligence agency are also very interesting. I can safely say now that LENR is mainstream and we will see LENR based products of a garden variety very soon.

    Quote (Translation):
    [The power density is very high, and some of his reactions Celani has exceeded 1400 watts per gram of nickel, which is higher than that of uranium fission in the “cladding” Zirconium. Although Celani you hear talk about “technological reality”, as it has exceeded 200% yield for two weeks.]

  • Hampus

    I honestly don’t think this is a good idea. There are already new customers waiting to buy the ecat, Rossi have said that it will take a few months until these can get delivered. If we make this organization and collect the money we will also have to wait a few months.

    Let’s just wait the few months until a new customer comes out or maybe even the navy research lab will confirm that they bought the first device.

    Do not give away 50$ for this pointless idea.

  • Bob

    I think it would be much cheaper to work with another purchaser of Rossi’s machine. A researcher at some established institution could do the testing, based upon standards set by the organization. this could likely be done in conjunction with the actual purchaser, defraying their cost of testing or purchase. $100,000 would seem sufficient to complete what is needed under this model.

  • http://www.choicedowsing.com kwhilborn

    The White House petition was Free, and only 537 people signed it. Somehow the idea of 10 000 + people wanting to part with $50 seems less likely.

    Who is organizing. Sending money back means cashing the cheques and subtracting “postage/handling”.

    I would approach a reputable accounting firm or law office for this.

  • J Pelsor

    I’ve got $50 to contribute to this. Even at $5/hr I’ve wasted more time than that on following the e-cat controversy. I would even reinstate MainEnergyLLC to accomplish this here in Maine, US if people are serious.

  • Robert Mockan

    If the purpose were to provide Miley with funds needed to duplicate the fuel, and the contract included providing a copy of the laboratory journal documenting the precise synthesis procedure to members of the group, so that it could be duplicated by any person, I would join. But proving the the Rossi E-Cat is real, or that LENR is real? People who have researched the past 20 years of work in this field already know that.

    • http://www.replication-meyer.be.ma Stanislas Bauer

      I do not agree with you. None systems works so hard ! The simple fact to be sure that “it works” could give tonus and hope to research. ( And make interrest for industry and governments ).

  • John E

    Patience seems to promise being less expense, less trouble and, all things considered, faster results.

    For the purposes of this proposal, the window of feasibility has probably closed. We are more likely to find out about the E-cat’s workability from the news before the time it would take to organize and set up.

  • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

    > At least, my money was well used to reveal a scam
    > It would either vindicate or condemn Rossi

    Your $50 will not reveal anything. What part of “there are wish-to-remain-anonymous customers ahead of you in line” don’t you understand?

    If you want to condemn Rossi try to figure out a way for the attorney general to have a look at the money trail involving these manufacturing facilities he’s setting up in the US.

  • Victor

    Why must you fund for a 1MW device? Ity is the science that is being questioned. So why not the basic 15KW device? It runs on the same principle, and will run itself after reaching the appropriate temperature. Buy one of these for a few thousand, test over a 2-week period, having it run itself for at least a week, thus silencing all rational critics. The device would require much less space and could be controlled more easily.

    • http://www.replication-meyer.be.ma Stanislas Bauer

      Indeed !

  • JYD

    Pourquoi $50 ? Un 1Mw Ecat coute 2 Millions, il suffit que chaque membre donne $30 pour couvrir les frais d’achat + 1 million pour réaliser le test.
    L’idée parait bonne.

  • EK

    Likewise, sign me up.

  • Igina Tazzioli

    Yes I would do, they would be $ 50 well spent.

  • Johannes Hagel

    If it comes into operation I too will be ready to spend $50 on this idea. It might be the right way to finally find out if this is the true story.