New Poll: What Would it Take For You to Be Convinced About the E-Cat?

Now Andrea Rossi has given us a date on which he says a validation report will be published, I have been wondering what its impact might be. So I’ve decided to put the question to the readership here in a new poll. What would need to be included in a published report for it to convince you that the E-Cat is indeed the breakthrough source of energy that Rossi claims?

I realize the answers in the poll may not match your exact thoughts about this test, so please free to expand on your answer in the comments section below.

  • Anonymole

    E. Public demonstration of two or more e-cat units;
    • setup, tested and verified by three separate university teams and two state teams, each independently writing up and publishing their results;
    • exclusive of Rossi’s or a Rossi cohort’s involvement;
    • performed with public news-TV and webcam monitoring over the course of one week’s continuous operation;
    • fully isolated from any possible energy contamination;
    • with signed affidavits of the attending state officials presented post demonstration.

    Anything less would just be more “Rossi Says.”

  • skeptic

    Results of the poll so far:

    I am already convinced (25%, 155 Votes)
    >>>I don’t understand these 155 votes. Convinced by … what? There is nothing at the moment, nothing at all.

    No report can convince me of the reality of the E-Cat (5%, 31 Votes)
    >>>This is also wrong. You must always keep the option to change your mind when you are presented with evidence.

    Data showing clear useful energy production (9%, 54 Votes)
    >>>Data alone is not enough, as I could give you data right here, right now. Here look: Useful energy production: 10KWh. It doesn’t mean anything. The important part is to verify that I did not make up the data.

    Data showing clear useful energy production signed off by qualified academics (61%, 382 Votes).
    >>> This is the only way to be sure. Results checked by an independent party.

  • Melchior

    A certification from RD group at Siemens-Sweden before 10-9-2012

  • hammerskoj

    Cures is alive and well [see Cobras forum].

    • timycelyn

      link please?

  • http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/08/new-poll-what-would-it-take-for-you-to-be-convinced-about-the-e-cat/ captain

    Quote from http://www.rossilivecat.com/

    • Bob Saunders
    August 18th, 2012 at 1:48 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I am sorry that the portrait of the Hot-Cat has leaked, but I must admit that at the same time I find it very interesting. Wow, 1200C, that is really HOT! Does the picture show the Hot-Cat at full power, over 13 kilowatts?
    Kin regards, Bob Saunders

    • Andrea Rossi
    August 18th, 2012 at 3:00 AM
    Dear Bob Saunders:
    I do not know when the picture has been taken, but could be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Look at Rossi’s answer: he knows well how to do his Leonardo Co. CEO job 🙂

  • alexvs

    What Would it Take For You to Be Convinced About the E-Cat?
    A WORKING UNIT.

  • s

    Why doesn’t Celani simply load 4 or 5 wires with hydrogen and send them to NREL to test with instructions? Only 1 would need to work in case there are issues with the other 4. This would answer all questions.

    • dragonX

      Celani is taking his time. He has the right to do so. He promised very little and delivered very much. “Grazie” to him.

  • Kirit Yo

    What I like to see is a demonstration where they put the e-cat thing into an electric car. Then they would drive it non-stop from New York to Los Angeles and back. Of course allowing journalists and others to follow it so we could be sure no new fuel was added along the way.

  • Fisher

    Pardon my ignorance. I’m no physics major or anything but have been following Rossi for over a year now and love science.

    I hear about cars, boats, planes and homes powered by LENR but how would you convert the heat to energy if not by steam or other medium? Would a LENR reactor/sterling engine be powerful enough and also fit into a small car or boat?

    What about a single resident power system using steam, salts or sterling engine? Would it be compact enough and powerful enough? There could be other methods of conversion from heat to electricity that I’m not familiar with.

    Anyway, thanks for your patience and I hope that it all turns out to be 100% legit as I believe that humanity is the main source (if not the only source) of global warming. We simply must get off of fossil fuels asap.

    • Ged

      Such cars/boats/vehicles would probably not use steam; they’d covert heat to electricity through other means, such as those listed by LENR Cars.

      However, it -could- be possible to directly use steam to drive a car, and back in the early days of cars this was done. http://www.gavinshoebridge.com/news/steam-powered-cars-could-make-a-comeback/

    • Tony James

      A thought about cars.

      If electric cars were to become the dominate type on the road, the industrial e-cat being a significantly cheaper source of power would make them cheaper to recharge and make recharging areas more viable. For example, imagine having Parking Meters contain an electrical plug. You park your car, put in your money to pay for an hour, then plug the car in (along with some type of lock to prevent others from unplugging you), when you return to your car you’re all set. Likewise Parking Lots and Decks could install plugs in their parking spaces as additional “perks” to draw in patrons.

      • NJT

        I like your idea, but I believe you are proposing very simple things that are way above the grade level of our current city, county, state and federal leaders to comprehend. Your methodology would help fill the tax void that is coming (when oil is no longer need). As I said we need a thoughtful leadership capable of thinking out of the standard box – which will not happen for a long time I fear…

      • Karl

        I rather foresee the car loaded at the time of manufacturing and driven virtually during its life time possibly without any refilling requirement.

        • Fisher

          Well, how big would a power plant have to be to generate enough power for say, 25 homes using LENR? Would it have to be as big as a natural gas plant? Could you tuck one into a neighborhood or into a city block? Don’t just say “yes”. Think about it. I’m hearing an awful lot of ‘dreaming’, and dreaming is good, but I’m not hearing a lot of ‘how to’.

          The problem, as I understand it, is effectively (not necessarily efficiently) changing the heat into electricity.

          If you have the means of creating enough electricity with LENR to recharge cars all day and it’s footprint takes a quarter of an acre of space or less then it can be located anywhere off grid and far from major power plants…Now your talking. A charging station can be dropped onto any piece of real estate in the city or the middle of nowhere.

          So, how big would a plant be that could charge 1000 cars? How big would it have to be to power 100 homes?

          A LENR ‘engine’ that can power a car that fits into a 4’x4′ box…now your talking. But, if it is the size of a fire truck then that is just not going to happen.

      • http://www.choicedowsing.com kwhilborn

        The ecat can be the size of a flashlight. generating power on board is already feasible if we believe rossi.

  • ChemE

    Did you notice that cold fusion development is very UNCERTAIN across the board? Do you want to know why? It is a bigger deal than you think.

    http://wp.me/p26aeb-4

    • Ged

      We shall have to pit ELTB against this Singularity (it needs a better name I think 😛 ) theory for explaining LENR. A battlebots style rumble?

      • Ged

        Maybe Frank could make a poll about which theory people think best explains all the observations, or if they have their own, etc.

        • NJT

          YES!

        • GreenWin

          Like it Ged. But do enough people really KNOW what these theories propose??

  • hammerskoj

    New ICCF-17 paper preprint of Hora, Miley, Prelas, Kim and Yang:

    http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS&PROFESSORS/pdf/LENR%20Korea%20ProceedXX.pdf

    … “In this case the emission of many more 60 millions of neutrons during 5 minutes were measured fully reproducible in a sequence of experiments.”

    Interesting …

    • Ivan Mohorovicic

      Doesn’t the emission of “fast” neutrons invalidate Krivit’s beloved Widom-Larsen theory? No wonder this isn’t mentioned in his latest “ICCF-17 Update and news report”, together with Celani’s and Technova Ni-H LENR results which give credibility to Rossi.

      • Ged

        ELTB theory all the way, yo!

        Widom-Larsen never made sense or fit the data, to me; and fast neutrons definitely falsify it as it is.

      • hammerskoj

        No W-L, indeed. But …”their colliding energy of several 10 meV is sufficiently low that minor van-der-Waals forces or the increased Casimir forces [?] at the pm distance may lead to the state that the deuterons clinch together and form clusters.” is questionable, too.

      • hammerskoj

        Cures quotation from Cobras forum:

        http://www.cobraf.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=5747&reply_id=123479989#123479989

        [a few days ago] … I have lengthy talked with an outstanding theoretical physicist who has confirmed to me that they all are till groping in the fog [about LENR].

        • Ged

          It’s totally ELTB theory.

        • Omega Z

          In the beginning all the theories will be lacking & in the end we may have multiple theories depending on the specific approach.

          Some may involve fission, some fusion, some fission & fusion & maybe something totally new. A whole new world of research.

          • NJT

            Too bad the majority of our so-called modern physicists are unable to accept anything but old school dogma. They are now in a closed box which they are incapable of thinking out of.

            I refer specially to those who back stabbed P & F with their break through initial experiments in 1989 that are now being proved as correct…

  • georgehants

    Andrea Rossi
    August 17th, 2012 at 2:11 PM
    Dear Dennis Lynn:
    To convince the global community about the fact that we are manufacturing plants which work regularly, producing megawatthours in the industrial applications will be our plants, not our reports. The World demands facts, not papers in this field. Nevertheless, papers have their importance, when they are referred to facts: in our presentation at Zurich we will describe the validation tests which we made in July and in August with our High Temperature E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • dragonX

      Mr. Rossi.
      What we need is not more words (papers) but more important names (big names from industries or academia) supporting your claims.

      You are repeating about the plants going on sale soon and at the same time you are saying certification takes forever and ever. Which is it? Do you have a date for showing your product to the world (not only the selected people you like to invite based on their obedience to you)?
      And if the “magazines” that will publish your “signed” independent test turn out to be JONP and PESN and such, please don’t even bother.

      Please release ECAT or release names that we can trust.

      • Chris

        Rather presumptuous.

        Are you interested in buying his product?

        If you are, you shouldn’t be asking for other customers’ opinions as much as wanting to kick the tyres yourself. If not, then you have no business making such demands; follow the news about scientific research instead.

        • dragonX

          Excuse me? I should not ask questions but believe blindly like YOU? Go…

          • Jim Lahey

            “Excuse me?” – Made me lol, ty. Time for a drink.

          • agni

            It may interest you that the rumors are true about SIEMENS and ecat.
            http://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/register/1033362/DE?lang=en

            • Ged

              Only problem is that was registered back in 1982, it looks like.

              Although, I guess working with Siemens would prevent any sort of Ecat trademark battles.

            • timycelyn

              Actually, they acquired it in 2009

          • Chris

            Seriously, Dragon, where did I instruct you to believe blindly? BTW, I don’t either.

            You can ask him all the questions you like, but the presumtion of your post is a different thing. Rossi owes you nothing until you sign a contract with him.

            If you can’t understand a post then avoid replying to it.

      • GreenWin

        What utter, old school propaganda DDD drivel. Introduce doubt. Gee, someone took Debunkery 101…. wow.

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

        @DragonX “You are repeating about the plants going on sale soon and at the same time you are saying certification takes forever and ever.”

        My understanding is that the industrial (original type) e-cats are available now, but presumably only to customers not requiring safety certification (military). It seems likely that the next step is to get appropriate European industrial certification that would allow them to be acquired by non-military entities, but the ‘certification’ frequently referred to is UL testing for domestic units, which will almost certainly never happen due to a mixture of genuine and ‘introduced’ concerns.

        • Chris

          Over here, Aldo Proia of Prometeon srl seems confident they will have certification for industrial use by September. I hope it doesn’t fall through and that soon there will be enough of them around to dissipate doubts.

    • Joe

      georgehants,

      May I ask where in the JONP you read that reply from Rossi? I cannot seem to find it.

      • Francesco CH

        Here:

        http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=61#comment-303971

        Dennis Lynn
        August 17th, 2012 at 11:09 AM
        Dear Mr. Rossi,

        Do you feel that the the report you plan on filing in September 2012 and the additional testing in October 2012, will be sufficent to convince the global community that the technology that you have “unleashed” via your ecat designs is indeed real and capable of shifting the energy paradigm, in the very forseeable future, towards a new, lower carbon era?

        Dennis Lynn

        ———————

        Andrea Rossi
        August 17th, 2012 at 2:11 PM
        Dear Dennis Lynn:
        To convince the global community about the fact that we are manufacturing plants which work regularly, producing megawatthours in the industrial applications will be our plants, not our reports. The World demands facts, not papers in this field. Nevertheless, papers have their importance, when they are referred to facts: in our presentation at Zurich we will describe the validation tests which we made in July and in August with our High Temperature E-Cats.
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.

        • Joe

          Grazie, Francesco CH.

      • Don Witcher

        Rossi answers questions here regularly.
        http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510

        • Joe

          Thank you, Don Witcher.

  • georgehants

    Remember, Defkalion open their comment forum on the 20th. which is Monday.
    Should be interesting and fiery.

    • dragonX

      Fiery indeed.
      Last time me and others that requested Defkalion to keep their word and release the names of the 7 International testers, we were slapped with the blame of having the Forum closed. So asking them about their promises got the forum closed.
      Why do you think it will be different this time?

      First question for them should be: Where are the 7 international testers?
      Second question should be: What happened with the place under construction from the photos shown in the press release and with the promise of showing a Hyperion to the world on July 2012?

      • Ged

        I don’t think I’ll bother pressing on them this time, as they kinda closed up shop the moment I did during the last episode.

        • dragonX

          You might be right. No pressing but don’t bother asking any other related questions also… as this will lead to boring discussions regarding technology that is only in the mind of some LENR wishful thinking athletes.

          • Ged

            Do tell me what happens if you go back to the forums!

            • dragonX

              Before going back to Defkalion forum I will wait to see if they promise new things. If they do, I will wait again to see if what they promise is being fulfilled. If it is not, then I will ask all the questions necessary. Why would I hold back any pertinent question?

  • Ben

    I would like to see a “pride” of Hot Cats under stable conditions for 72 hours at 1,000+ C.

  • roseland67

    Energy out
    ———–
    Energy in

  • Kim

    Well at least National Instruments
    realizes that the Nickel-Hydrogen
    scenario can release the equivalent
    of 10 million gallons of gasoline
    per gram of nickel.

    At 800ev per atom of nickel
    https://decibel.ni.com/content/servlet/JiveServlet/download/23750-1-51320/TS
    Page 25 (last page)

    Respect
    Kim

    • makarov

      I’m not quite sure I understand the presentation (no surprise, I’m not a physicist). But it does not suggest nickel->copper transmutation, does it? It specifically says “metal fission.”

    • http://greenfuelbooster.com stmess

      Time to replicate LENR instead of waiting. They have their diagrams published already.

      Thnx

      Stmess

    • Chris

      “800ev per atom of nickel”

      Well although that is much more than chemical reactions, it doesn’t strike me much to make a song and dance about. Moreover, I don’t see how it could imply 1 g of Ni being equivalent to as much hydrocarbon as you say.

      • Ivan Mohorovicic

        In layman’s terms, with 800ev per atom how much energy would 1 g of Ni be able to generate? btw, Celani’s konstantan compound should be at least 40 times better than Technova’s.

        • Ged

          Nickel has an atomic mass of 58.6934 amu. So, one mole of nickel would be 58.6934 grams. We have one gram, so that means we have 0.017 moles. A mole is 6.02*10^23 atoms, so this means we have 1.025*10^22 atoms. At 800 eV per each, that is about 8.2*10^24 eV’s of energy.

          1 eV is roughly 1.6*10^−19 joules of energy, so that means we have 1.312 MJ of energy per gram of nickel, if I am doing this calculation right. A gallon of gasoline is 131.9 MJ.

          Now, a gallon of gasoline is 2,650 grams. So, a gallon equivalent of nickel would have 3476.8 MJ (3.48 GJ) of energy, by this method they describe.

          As Makarov points out, hydrogen is actually doing the fusing, so why is this in terms of eV per Ni atom? This is especially pertinent since not all of the nickel is going to be catalytically active (hydrogen can diffuse about 30 um into nickel).

          If my calculations are wrong, please correct me.

          • makarov

            Ged – that’s it, exactly. It would seem that the NI presentation, then, is at odds with most, if not all, of the LENR players who have variously claimed metal-metal fusion.

            I would think that NI’s presentation would revive much more thorough treatment and analysis given that it plainly does not agree with statements for current LENR players. To put it another way, I’m not aware of ANY current LENR proponent that claims their reaction involves hydrogen fusion.

            For example, given that Rossi has claimed metal-metal fusion (nickel-copper), what are his thoughts on the subject? Surely the hydrogen consumption in the E-Cat has been accounted for such that hydrogen-based fusion can and has been excluded from the reaction.

      • makarov

        Looking at page 25 of the NI slides, it appears that hydrogen, not Nickel, is reacting or fusing, so the energy per atom of Nickel is confusing.

  • dragonX

    If I see Siemens saying what Rossi is saying and showing time tables on when they will release the product, then I will believe them.

    Of course there is the ULTIMATE proof which is : RELEASE THE E-CAT to the masses through a small factory even if its not in USA or EUROPE. If certification is the blockage, then DO SOMETHING to release it without certification wherever you can.

    In other words, release the technology to the masses and fulfill your destiny as a hero of humankind.

  • Ivan Mohorovicic

    No mention of Celani’s Ni-H demo at all here. I wonder why?

    New energy times: ICCF-17 Update and News

    Perhaps because acknowledging it works makes denying that Rossi could have something, look stupid?

    • Sanjeev

      It was covered in detail here: Good pics.

      http://blog.***.com/2012/08/07/lenr-gets-major-boost-from-national-instruments/

      Insert newenergytimes in place of ***

      • Sanjeev

        It looks like links to newenergytimes are censored here. My posts are getting auto-deleted.

        • admin

          I’m not censoring NET links, Sanjeev — I have included links to there myself. Maybe my filter is catching something else. I’ll check

          • Sanjeev

            Thank you Frank. I was also wondering why its not appearing. NET is somewhat twisted but sometimes useful for new info.

      • Ivan Mohorovicic

        If one only read New Energy Times, he would think that Celani’s Ni-H demo only ran for 6 hours. But actually it kept generating excess heat for days!

        At ICCF17 the same demo (with same active wire, reactor, etc) kept running from tuesday to friday CONTINUOUSLY receiving much attention from attendees, acknowledgements by the US Naval Research Lab, receiving interviews by Korean TV, assistance by local National Instruments engineers, etc. Why no mention at all?!
        Recently disclosed Kobe-Technova results aren’t mentioned either (again, successful Ni-H LENR technology). Why?
        Why some of the most promising and interesting practical LENR results in YEARS don’t receive any coverage at all, or if they do, get dismissed as if nothing special happened??

        It almost looks as if news of successful, useful, working and open Ni-H LENR devices are starting to become inconvenient to some LENR reporters who called Rossi a scammer all along.

        • Sanjeev

          I guess, we can’t depend on Krivit alone. He does have most of the papers presented there on ICCF17 page.

          Any links to Korean TV coverage ?

  • MArc

    Well.. in order to convince me, it would certainly help that DARPA would come out and frankly state with which power source they are going to power this:

    http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/08/darpa-autonomous-robotic-surface-vessel.html

    😉

  • Andreiko

    The science and politics are in a fix how they go liberate themselves? (

  • Ged

    All I gotta say is, wow, Frank. This poll really brought out a mass of reader comments we haven’t seen before. Your site sure is getting popular!