Rossi Remarks on University of Bologna Situation

Questioned by a reader on his Journal of Nuclear Physics blog about the current situation regarding the University of Bologna’s involvement (or non-involvement) with E-Cat research and development, Andrea Rossi made the following remark.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND ALL THIS FUSS AROUND THE UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA STUFF: WE, THE E-CAT PEOPLE, MAKE R&D WITH CONSULTANTS , SUPPLIERS, PARTNERS AND UNIVERSITIES WE CHOOSE TIME BY TIME FOR SPECIFIC TASKS AND THIS DOES NOT BELONG TO PUBLIC INFORMATION. WHAT COUNTS FOR THE PUBLIC IS THAT OUR PRODUCTS WORK PROPERLY. AS USUAL THE PUPPET SNAKES ARE MAKING MUCH ADO FOR NOTHING, WITH THE HELP OF SOME PRIMADONNA (OR WANNABE SO).

In other words, Rossi is nor going to provide details about what is going on in this situation. He said recently that the work with the university will be done behind the closed doors of his factory, not in a theater for the world to see. This being the case we probably we won’t be hearing anything from the University either about what is, or is not happening on this front.

Rossi seems not to realize that many people are looking to find out whatever they can about his potentially world-changing invention, and E-Cat watchers always want to know more! Ultimately he is right — all that really matters in the final analysis is a working product in the marketplace — but details along the way are always very interesting (and great fuel for debaters). It looks, however, like we might not be getting much satisfaction in this situation.

  • Pingback: Andrea Rossi: mercato unico test per l'E-Cat - Energia - GreenStyle()

  • Sanjeev
    • Frank

      And this video captures Rossi with the ‘1/2 MW container’ together in one scene.
      This as an info for those guys which were suggesting in the comments to the previous two videos, that the container scene could have been taken and inserted from an old footage, and have doubted that the container is still in Bologna.

      And isn’t it funny that you can spot some ordinary portable gas-heaters in Rossi workshop, whereas Rossi wants us to replace our heating units by his e-cat heaters?

  • Francesco CH

    From 22passi (in Italian):

    @E-CAT PEOPLE
    Ho un annuncio… ehm. Non c’entra nulla con Bologna, dove tutto procede bene. Non c’entra nulla col fatto che sono più che convinto che un giorno gli scettici (onesti) che ci hanno dipinti come believers dovranno chiederci scusa. Ma ahimè, sono venuto a sapere oggi di una cosa per la quale, prima che la storia dell’E-Cat arrivi al suo LIETO FINE, verremo sfottuti per un pezzo!
    Ricordatevi di queste mie parole, e preparatevi a incassare i loro sfottò…

    • Francesco CH

      Human translation:

      @E-CAT PEOPLE
      I have an announcement… uhm. It has nothing to do with Bologna, where everything is going well. It has nothing to do with the fact that I’m more than convinced that one day the (honest) skeptics that have portrayed us as believers will have to apologize. But alas, today I came to know of something for which we will be made fun of for a while before the e-cat story comes to a HAPPY END.
      Remember these words and prepare yourself to be mocked.

      • daniel maris

        Oh dear…well, that’s a bit concerning! Wonder what it might be…What’s the date stamp on that?

      • Steve Robb

        Oh, please, please…tell us do what you know. Don’t keep us guessing. Let us know so we might prepare ourselves for the shock of the fun.

        Let me guess. Rossi is Gay and runs away with Silvio Berlusconi! No, wait, Rossi is heterosexual and runs away with Carla Bruni? No, wait, Rossi is mono-sexual and runs away with his right hand!?

  • s

    I recently read something interesting. One of the Fukushima reactors seemed to still be producing excess heat energy in “self sustain mode”, without moderation or input drive control, at least through part of November. This means at least 8 months of self sustain mode for that reactor.

    I’m making a speculative guess, and not a scientific fact based argument, that, perhaps, what is called “self sustain mode” for the ecat is really the reactors and reactants consuming, disordering, and extinguishing themselves similar to what might be happening in Fukushima. Looking at it this way, it is possible to do a calculation to estimate how much energy production loss, due to additional disorder and extinguishment of the reactor system, the ecat can withstand each “self sustain” mode cycle and still stay above a COP of 6.

    Making rough estimates based on the early October test, assume the ecat runs 4 hours of self sustain for every 2 hours of input drive. This means there are ~ 720 self sustain mode cycles in 6 months. Assume the Ecat starts with a COP of 7 and decays to a COP of 6 in 6 months. Performing calculations, each of the 720 “self sustain” cycles must produce at least ~ 99.9786% of the energy that the previous cycle produced. Put another way, the reactor and reactants can only extinguish and disorder
    themselves such that a maximum of only 2.14 parts per 10000 of the energy from the prior self sustain mode cycle is lost.

    I invite anyone to check the math and perform their own calculations. If the calculations are even ballpark accurate, this seems like a tight tolerance to make for such a new technology. Also keep in mind that, like Fukushima, the degradation during self sustain mode is not actively controlled. Water flow rate could serve as a passive control, though.

    In sum, this is a speculative guess and a speculative calculation on my part, and is not to be construed as fact. If my speculation is in the ballpark in terms of what is happening, then the energy loss per self sustain cycle would have to be very low to reach a COP of 6 over many cycles. That raises the question, at this early stage, of whether the designs can ensure such low losses of energy per cycle with very little control during self sustain mode.

    Also, it points to a potential reason why the tests might seem to contain only a single self sustain cycle: even if the second cycle showed 99.8% ( for example) of the energy of the first cycle, that energy loss is still ~ 10 times higher than what could possibly be tolerated for the ecat to be commercially viable using the speculative assumptions I’ve presented.

  • Joe

    If anyone really knew for sure Rossi had the goods then they would be taking out second mortgages on their houses to Short Exxon Mobil and the Gas companies.

    Such a device would be such a game changer. I’m sure like me, every is hoping this thing is real but deep down is quite sure its a pipe dream.

  • Jim

    I believe LENR is real, but Rossi is a horrible business man, and has no PR strategy.

    I think he did stumble upon something, hopefully NI or someone can bring him into the business world

    • Jimr

      You are 100% correct. My fear now is with Rossi,s inpatence, he will drop National Inst, which is his only hope in the near future.l

    • Tom

      How on earth are you or anyone supposed to know he is a horrible business man with no PR strategy. He hasn’t divulged anything for you to base that opinion on apart from the fact that he hasn’t divulged anything. You are only 50% correct because at the moment it is likely to go either way.

  • Alexvs

    Now, 01/27/2012 at 22:41 CET the percentage of Rossi supporters is less than 50%.

  • Roger Bird

    Neither Rossi nor Defkalion give a fig about journalists. You can tell because all of this hot air is getting boring, and boring is not good for news media. LENR is proven. Rossi and Defkalion are not.

  • http://www.neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

    If the skeptics put their money where their
    mouth is they will already be testing in the Defkalion hyperion lab.

  • Nina

    I have doubts as to the reality of Rossi’s claims and the performance of his device. I will not slink away in shame if he and his inventions turn out to be the real deal. I will be happy and I will still believe that waiting until there is sufficient evidence (and I don’t believe there is right now) to confirm a claim like this is the most responsible and intelligent course of action.

    • daniel maris

      I am not saying anyone should slink away in shame, whichever way it goes, but if it goes against I think you do need to rethink some of your assumptions:

      1. Is it good that a few people can decide what is scientific orthodoxy and you will accept that despite evidence of deliberate blocking of publication of experiment results.

      2. Whether your type of “scepticism” leads to a climate of fear among researchers that restrains their creativity.

      3. Whether peer-reviewed science is a better way of proceeding than a creative model approach.

      • Wes

        Cream rises to the top. Poop sinks. Should scientific development be given a free pass from this?

        • Tom

          I would insist otherwise after this mornings session in the privy. But no scientific development will happen until it has undeniable proof to work and can’t be subdued. For me, no matter how many papers and claims are made, LENR won’t be proven until I’ve experienced it first hand.

      • sparks

        You don’t seem to understand scientists. Peer-reviewed journals do not give a rip about what is “orthodox” versus what is not. Peer-reviewed journals care only about the careful and disciplined investigation of things according to proper scientific methodology. After that, “let the chips fall where they may.” Scientific journals welcome and relish new findings that survive the stringent crucible of the scientific method. This method is not given to speculation, NOR TO DISCRIMINATION. There is a world, inside this world, that is, the scientific world, that will (sorry about the cliche) “set you free” from your worries about LENR or e-cat being unfairly dismissed. The scientific world is robust and ever-open to new findings. You can relax about that.

        • GreenWin

          Get real sparks. Peer-review is a broken mess of old hat prejudice and funds-grubbing. For 60 years US taxpayers have “invested” in hot fusion, Tokamak, ITER etc. SIXTY years and $10 BILLION dollars for… nuttin’. Nada. Not one watt of fusion energy produced.

          But 60 years of pulling the wool over the eyes of Americans. Independent tests would show hot fusion to be a fool’s mission – a futile pipe dream. Yet fusion R&D, peer review, grant grubbing, keeps hyping hot fusion “coming real soon now.”

          You say, “The scientific world is robust and ever-open to new findings.” Just like they’ve been to Pons and Fleischmann.

  • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

    The problem here is Rossi is a skinny 70 year old man. He can call everyone a primadonna and get away with it because beating the daylights out of him to get the formula or an apology would make you a bad sport.

    What Rossi doesn’t seem to realize is that if it were about any other industry he’d be right. Since it’s about energy and power he’s off, way off, in his ways and means.

    That said I think the authors of this blog would work smarter not harder to try to get the truth out of NASA rather than this Italian manufacturing/investment Ponzi scheme operation. NASA answers to the people of the United States and as such one can get some sort of more concrete answers out of them.

    • Tom Krieg

      Good luck, getting anything out of NASA they are extremely censored internally.

      • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

        Still it’s better than dealing with Rossi’s opera. For starters I think you could hold NASA to the statement about excess energy produced. Specifically how much?

        • http://technologygateway.nasa.gov R. B.

          NASA has already given public comment on LENR theory, even though they don’t fully explain the physics of it either.

          http://technologygateway.nasa.gov/media/CC/lenr/lenr.html

          Now, whether or not Rossi will actually be selling *his* units anytime soon has yet to be seen, but the theory appears to be sound, if as yet unexplained to the Nth degree.

    • Steve Robb

      So, tell me please, where exactly is the pyramid in this “Ponzi scheme”?

      We would get deeper insight into events in the background by asking for clarification on the Presidents State of the Union concerning “energy innovation” and “the Department of Defense, the world’s largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history – with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year.” Why the Navy and not USAF, Army, Marine Corps. Surely those other entities have not exhausted their potential application points for the conventional renewable energy. Why mention the Navy? Notice he did not say that the application would indeed supply that power to houses but only used it as a measure of the amount produced.

      The Navy is the worlds largest consumer of energy because our carriers and task force surrounding those carriers use a prodigious amount of fuel oil. Let’s get on with it and find a substitute. LENR is it regardless of how much you Charles Ponzi might thrash about in protest. We have you hooked here and you cannot escape. And despite your hyper-kinetic posting you will never convert anyone… ever.

      • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

        If there are investors and there is a manufacturing operation present which is used to convince the investors that the device is for real then this would be a classic textbook Ponzi scheme.

        Check out http://www.ecat.com business tab first bullet item: Investments.

        As for proof of manufacturing operations listen to Rossi himself. All he talks about is his factory automation enterprise and how many millions of billions of units he’s going to produce.

        For all we know for every dollar Rossi gets from investors he might be packing 50 cents into purchasing fancy looking National Instruments and other brand machines and 50 cents into his Swiss bank account.

        • Roberto

          “For all we know for every dollar Rossi gets from investors he might be packing 50 cents into purchasing fancy looking National Instruments and other brand machines and 50 cents into his Swiss bank account”

          This is totally unfair.

        • Steve Robb

          “For all we know” but in fact you know nothing.

        • Steve Robb

          There are no investors in Rossi’s device and Defkalion is owned by private investors with deep pockets and I hope brains to match (sometimes doubt that). When Rossi starts taking money for a product from small people without a serious demonstration of the product then you will have room to complain.

      • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

        Dude I’m all for LENR. I just feel that the invention, if it exists, is too big and important to let one guy sit on it. If it means asking Rossi to name his price and writing the check so be it. If he’s the businessman he claims he is he wouldn’t refuse.

        In reply to your Navy/President Obama concern. You might wish to take a look at history and the manhattan project. What would have happened if the a-bomb did not work? Certain people in government would have been in big trouble for diverting resources from the war effort. What does this have to do with the Navy/President? If they know something and they don’t come clean and announce it right away, they could potentially be in big trouble. For starters lots and lots of government resources are being spent on green projects. They’re using government money to tear up the high desert. So there are environmental issues. The US is going into debt purchasing foreign oil. Continuing to do so constitutes dereliction of duty on the part of the US government.

    • Steve Robb

      “The problem here is Rossi is a skinny 70 year old man. He can call everyone a primadonna and get away with it because beating the daylights out of him to get the formula or an apology would make you a bad sport.”

      Ah, yes, that’s the way to put your thuggish fantasies on display. Such is the sign of a deep thinker. And by they way, acting on them would make you something other than a bad sport.

  • sparks

    A major impetus for probing and skepticism lies in the investment arena. Any investor worth his salt is looking at the global energy situation and wondering where to put his money. If e-cat or any LENR product is close to mass production in the near-term, it would threaten investment strategies involving long positions, especially in natural gas (oil, not so much). It would also be a green light for short positions in natural gas. So there are HUGE stakes riding on all of this, even for folks who don’t give a rip about the human condition (i.e., market traders) and its energy predicament. Hence, some folks on this site will be asking probing questions without much concern for coming off “nice.” It’s understandable.

    There is a lot to be skeptical about regarding e-cat, without bringing the validity of LENR into the mix. Clearly LENR effects have been noted and analyzed with strong scientific scrutiny, and LENR is certainly not the issue in my mind.

    The problem with e-cat is the outrageous claims to be just months away from establishing a mass production operation, while it appears doubtful that the prototype even works sustainably, as well as the possibility that the generated heat may not be due to LENR but possibly something like BlackLightPower corporation is doing (which requires frequent hydrogen recharges, thank you Mr. Mockam for that link).

  • the snake

    Rossi is a one man show, I doubt that there are e-cat people. Focardi admitted in one of the interviews that he doesn’t know about the catalyst. Apparently, there is no one else but Rossi involved with development of the e-cat. He may only have some plumber who’s weldering the tubes and plugging cables as assistent.

  • Pingback: Rossi Remarks on University of Bologna Situation | ColdFusionBlog.net()

  • Steve Robb

    I appreciate Mr. Rossi but I must say I giggle every time he uses “snakes” or “puppets” and I suspect there are those whom are intentionally mailing him with inflammatory comments in the hope he will respond thusly. Maybe we should start a drinking game.

  • Johannes Hagel

    Does Defkalion already accept applications for Hyperion testing? Do we know of anybody applied who is willing to publish his results after the test? Any dates known to anybody?

  • Tom Krieg

    Be patient.
    I have said this on several occasions. Rossi is to be congratulated. We have no evidence he is trying to deceive anyone, rather he is being protective of his discoveries.
    Maybe, some of his detractors are not familiar with the process of the introduction of new technology, and perhaps they are uncomfortable with properties and processes which can not be readily observed in nature.
    What experience have they distractor have with the vulgarity of “start-up” environments. I have 40 years experience.
    Graphene is not common in the world, yet it exists and its properties are wonderful. Dr. Nair is highly respected for this discovery. LENR may be considered a similar issue.
    Lastly, Apple would not be as successful today, if along the way they disclosed every nuance of their development. The competition would have copied it all.
    I commend Rossi for his position. If I had one bit of advise for him it would be not to debate his positions in an open forum such as this as there is always detractors with little or no knowledge of what it takes to bring a product to market.
    Time will soon tell the truth …. be patient.

  • Paolo Marconi

    I hope it is real but I have not seen any evidence to indicate it is.

  • Skeptic

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I have seen none.
    The university story does not interest me. A demo would be easy and could have been done by now.

    – All tests have been orchestrated by Rossi and very, very short.
    A credible test would be to run the device ran for a week.
    This has not been done.

    – Defkalion and Rossi’s stories give each other credibility. But:
    Defkalion did not exist before Rossi.
    Defkalion did not do or produce anything before Rossi.
    Defkalion did not have a website untill two months ago (in an age where my BAKER has a website).
    Defkalion today has NO OTHER products other that an e-cat.

    – NASA is frequently cited to give LENR credibility. However, Nasa has not stated ‘We have seen LENR and it works’. Ever.

    – Mass production: Claims by Rossi vary wildly. Numbers change, dates change. There has be no mention of the fact that an unproven lab-experiment which might work on yet undiscovered laws of physics is decades away from a reliable household appliance.
    Look at the radio, TV, computer, electricity, the car: they took decades from experiment to something you can actually buy.

    – LENR: LENR is as real as goblins are real. You can talk about goblins, describe their society and feeding habits, you can even claim you have seen one. That still does not make them real. LENR is real just like goblins are real.

    The e-cat can not be demonstrated or it would have been done.
    Defkalion is an invention by Rossi, to give Rossi credibilaty.
    Stories about production are strawman-arguments disigned to take your attention away from the real questions.
    Claims about the number of universities are also strawman-arguments for you to argue about while taking your attention away from the real questions.

    How does it work?
    Why no convincing demo?

    Facts:
    – Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.
    – Rossi uses magician-tricks to take your attention away from the real questions.
    – The e-cat is as real as goblins: You can talk about it, draw one on paper, but no-one has ever seen one.
    – Rossi is either a fraudster himself or he is an invention by someone who’s laughing right now. Does Rossi exist for real?

    • Stephen T.

      Enjoy your fantasy while you can. Time is running out for skeptics.

      • HanzJager

        No soon enough Stephen. I don’t understand why people like this don’t find something better to do with their time. Do they think they are posting something everyone hasn’t considered already?

    • Lévi

      exactly, it could be the next generation of reality show, so far he hasn’t done anything against the law, he can go on for ever like this. At the end he can reveal himself as a sceptic showing everyone how easy it was to mislead even respected scientists, and that it was a good thing for science. He always wins, even if his so called ‘Ecat’ is an ‘apparatus of imagination’. He would even get respect, he doesn’t have to care from which side he gets it.
      Since the last video in his ’empty’ factory I lost every faith, at a flash I went from a believer to a non-believer.This will be my last post here, I can imagine some of you will be relieved.

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

      Skeptic, “LENR is as real as goblins are real.”

      Skeptic, you are not an honest skeptic, just a naysayer. Naysayers are useless. Please check out the list of top scientists who have claimed that LENR is real. (This list only contains those who claim success with the Nickel + Hydrogen = heat reaction.) http://nickelpower.org/2011/12/30/replicators-as-if-december-30-2011/

      You are going against the likes of:
      Dr. Brian Ahern, Ames National Laboratory
      Dr. Joseph Zawodny, NASA
      Quintin Bowles, University of Missouri–Kansas City.
      George Miley, University of Illinois
      Piantelli, University of Siena
      Mike McKubre, SRI
      Francesco Celani, National Institute of Nuclear Physics
      M. Swartz, MIT

      Rossi hasn’t proved it. Defkalion hasn’t proved it. But to say “”LENR is as real as goblins are real” is to display your ignorance. Follow the link, quit being ignorant.

      • Tom Krieg

        I second the comment.

        • LEVI Strauss

          As I do! Trained in Nuclear power, I understand the possibilities of binding energy per nucleon or the BE/A curve and the possibility of fusion as a reality. I ask one question. If you found a common rock that when properly agitated by a resonant frequency, produced a brilliant light, but couldn’t explain it, would you attempt to exploit the product? Yes! And I’d be very secretive as well to prevent you from stealing my discovery. If cold fusion or LENR is real and NASA and many other agencies already accepts that it is, and Rossi hasn’t asked you for a penny for his product or to invest, why would be so ignorant as to call it a scam. Shut up and wait.

      • sapain

        u forgot the two most important,F and P

      • Roger Bird

        I 3rd the comment.

    • http://e-catsite.com Ben

      “Skeptic” sounds suspiciously like someone from the troll trap. Those people are really making the rounds these days, aren’t they. Wonder why all the frantic buzzing? Are they worried about something?

      • Robert Mockan

        Troll is the general term, but Skeptic posts more like a strawman sock puppet.
        Attempting to increase negative sentiment among newbies about Rossi and the E-Cat at this particular juncture indicates the forum is being monitored for the entry moment for posters like Skeptic.

    • morse

      You are not a skeptic. For me you are a naysayer, a debunker.
      Everybody on this forum surely knows LENR is real.

      • londo

        How do you “know”. Extraordinary claim require extraordinary proof, IMO.

        • daniel maris

          Did Einstein’s (then) extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof? No, everyone seemed happy with one isolated experiment during an eclipse in 1919 and the theory already enjoyed wide acceptance with no experimental back up whatsoever.

        • Robert Mockan

          Great sounding cliche, that has been over used ad nausaum, besides being an extraordinary incorrect concept. A claim can be supported, or not, by observations of fact. Any claim. Any verifiable fact that supports the claim is sufficient to convince any rational person of the validity of the claim. Nothing extraordinary need be conjured up.

    • Andrew Macleod

      NASA has not said “we have seen LENR, and it works.”. However they got a patent for a method of sustaining an lenr reaction. Can you get patents for things that don’t work?

      • John

        Yes, you can. It depends on where you are, though. It the european union, patents are reviewed more strictly than in the USA. In the USA, you can patent almost anything, as long as there is no prior art and you follow the proper procedures.

      • patents

        When you have thought up something new, you can patent it before you build it. So it doesn’t have to exist and you don’t have to prove that it works.

    • R. B.

      “- NASA is frequently cited to give LENR credibility. However, Nasa has not stated ‘We have seen LENR and it works’. Ever.”

      Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Foot in mouth disease?

      http://technologygateway.nasa.gov/media/CC/lenr/lenr.html

      Or, maybe (puts on tinfoil hat) someone HACKED into NASA’s web server, and faked this video! Yeah! That’s the ticket! I know, it was…..Morgan Fairchild! Yeah! And she wore a skimpy outfit while doing it!

      LENR is real, people. It’s real.

    • R. B.

      “- NASA is frequently cited to give LENR credibility. However, Nasa has not stated ‘We have seen LENR and it works’. Ever.”

      Wrong.

      http://technologygateway.nasa.gov/media/CC/lenr/lenr.html