Andrea Rossi on Business Plans, Philosophy

Many thanks to E-Cat World reader Renzo for this excellent translation of a part of Andrea Rossi’s discussion at the Pordenone meeting on October 12th. This is a very interesting explanation by Rossi of his business strategy and his guiding philosophy regarding commercialization of his invention. The original Italian transcript can be found here on the 22passi.blogspot.come site. Th

“So, yes… your speech is logical, the problem is complex… because first of all we can do the steps according to our legs, so the investments that we can do are the investments that we can do with our own money. I refused holdings until today because … because maybe all of you saw the movie about Mattei, the one with Volontè, it came out when I was twenty… and the famous phrase of Mattei is “when a dog joins forces with the hounds, he ends up being pushed aside and eventually the bowl is only in the hands of the hounds.”

“So – as you can see – it may be that our business strategy is not as naive as it may seem, because we must keep in mind that our financial development must be such as not to depend on entities that could not only put us aside, but even suppress the technology itself, because the problems in this area are much more complex than it seems. I have said it before, when I was asked the question about the possibility of applying this technology to large power stations etc., I said what I was told, I did not say what I think … [Applause of those present].

“And when I say that we have received ten thousand requests, but in the meantime we begin to provide only a few hundred, it is because we do not know who the rest are … meanwhile, we begin to do this with our own means. The projections of the business plan that we made are such that the profits from the sale of the first plants should have an exponential growth as to ensure that other requests can be safely met. If at this time we went to look for funding for the necessary funds to immediately build ten thousand plants, we would inevitably have a debt that could be toxic. You know, loans are like whiskey, a glass is good, two-liters kill the liver.

“So I want to have funding only if I am very sure that I can return that money anytime I can legally be required, because otherwise this could cause the consequences that we have said before. So the business model that we have chosen is a very aggressive model within the limits of safety to remain in control of the technology. We are keeping to this premise in all the world where we operate … in the United States we have made an extremely important deal… but we have to maintain this philosophy not only in our interest, I think, but also in the interest of the technology, because – look – to the point where we are, I say with absolute sincerity that I have had proposals such that I could say “ok , I will sell everything, take the money and with the money I make a life for me, my children, my children’s children and the children’s children of my children … and then for the others it’s their own business!” [laughs] We chose instead of attending the development of this creature [he points to the Hot-cat] in order to be quite sure that it will grow up and graduate. [applause of those present]”

Andrea Rossi with Hot Cat. (Source:
  • john29302

    so the delay is as long as pinochios nose…so now the investors are putting money on the table and the speeches are presedential in tone and rhetoric involves money now. no product has been revealed. notta. none. inuendo…talk..even mental midgets actually proccessing the energy in and out and calluding on blog sites about what the device does on a scientific level. but no device that can perform has been presented. but the reasons for no device are aplenty. if you think big oil will let this guy cut their profits down from a million an hour down to a couple hundred thousand…you should continue doing your bad science. it aint gonna happen. the money trail is king. all else is a bumsteer.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    Technical question (bit off topic):

    If we assume that the hot-ecat can be used for home use and we assume a COP of 20 and a total thermal capacity of 10KW, how much heat will then escape into the environment? My own calculation is as follows:
    – Industry waste heat not included, only home use
    – Assuming 30% heat to energy conversion
    – Assuming the 10KW is per hour
    – After conversion to energy we have 10000 / 100 * 30 = 3000 Watt electrical energy
    – After electrical conversion there is 10000 – 3000 = 7000 Watt of termal energy left
    – Earth population is
    – Waste heat would be calculated as follows: 7000 Watt * 12 (half a day of unused heat energy) * 182 (half a year) * 3.500.000.000 (half the earth population) = 53.508. Watt or 53508 TerraWatt/Year. That’s more than the US national debt 🙂
    – Earth square meters: 510.000.000 m2
    – Waste heat by global warming: 2.9 W/m2 (
    – Waste heat by eCat: 53.508. / 510.000.000 = 104.917.647 W/m2 per year

    My calculations must be waaaaaay of or we are heading for a really major disaster.
    I’d say it’s my calculation…
    (* The dot is the european notation and does not mean comma)

    • Note: all 10 kW produced eventually becomes waste heat, also the electric part.
      If 7 billion people would produce 10 kW each all the time, it’s 7e3*7e9/(4*pi*6371.2e3^2)=0.1 W/m2, still about 30 times smaller than the global warming effect (if the latter is assumed to be 2.9 W/m2). I.e., at this energy consumption level, the effect of the waste heat on global the temperature wouldn’t be noticeable.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        So it was my calculation. (No idea how your’s works, but trusting yours to beat mine :))

        Since I expect energy consumption to go way up once a hotcat with COP 20 or more is available for electic power generation, it still won’t matter much compared to global warming. Also considering that global warming is also created by CO2 and other emission gasses which are not produced with an ecat, it’s even conceivable that global warming is reduced.

        Thanks for the explanation!

        • Andrew Macleod

          One other thing is that CO2 creates a greenhouse effect, utilizing the power of the sun as a heater. I think that small localized heat will have a minimal effect on a global scale even if there are millions on units running as the earth and buildings will absorb much of the heat.

          • The only way direct local heating might disappear from earth is by radiating into space. It happens more easily if the heat is in “hot spots” rather than average warming everywhere. Which is more likely to be true with artificial heating than greenhouse warming. But in any case, as said, the heat problem doesn’t seem to exist unless energy consumption is scaled up by factor 30-100 or so.

    • phlatbeer


    • andreiko

      Aerth 510. and 510.000.000 KM2

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Thanks. That is one mistake fixed. Now the waste heat per m2 is 53.508. / 510. = 104,9W/m2

    • modernsteam

      10KW … per hour? Kw is a unit of power, and power is not expressed per unit time, such as an hour. Instead, one says something like KWhours per hour, MegaJoules/hour, BTUs per hour, that sort of thing – energy output per hour, per second, or whatever unit of time. But never power per hour, or any other unit of time.

  • georgehants

    Just interesting as this is our nearest system (nearly) and we can remember that Giordano Bruno was burnt by the church, for saying that there where other Worlds around other stars in 1600.
    Over 400 years and science is still “burning” anybody who speaks against the religious Dogma of the establishment.
    The astronomers at the European Southern Observatory have announced that they have discovered an Earth-sized planet around Alpha Centauri B.

  • Voodoo

    It looks like Defekalion have new spark plugs with survivability greater then 2 hours now:

    todays desperate “news”:

    “Our move is in progress as well as the rest of our scheduled tasks”

  • georgehants

    In amongst all the events going on these days, I like to keep in mind that science has in no way officially accepted the reality of Cold Fusion.
    Until establishment science comes out with a full apology for Pons and Fleischman and clearly admits that for 23 years it has displayed nothing but total incompetence and an amazing disregard for all scientific principles, then on these pages and rightly as the story is released in the main-line media, the justified attacks condemning the “conspiracy” of silence and denial will continue.
    Until this failure is independently investigated and those concerned brought into the light, then all of science and all scientists will suffer from the reflection of this crime against humanity.

    • Stephen

      I am sure nothing will be able to stop the acceptance of CF, once there is a reproducible evidence. Unfortunately, we are not really there… I perfectly understand people having doubts and of course there is no crime being perpetrated. Rather, I am curious about this “new fire” initiative.

      I have a question coming from genuine curiosity: what is the source of income of AR? This whole eCat campaign must be quite costy… is the money coming from the Leonardo corporation? And what can I buy from them (beyond the eCats, of course)? Beyond the usual bla bla, is there an email address I can write to in order to have a formal quotation for anything sellable? A product, some sort of service… Or even a credible website with a list of products and services (again, no eCats, please)? Just curious, maybe there is.

      • phlatbeer

        Stephan, from the very first time LENR, CF or whatever was visited, is it that that same flame like the Olympic torch that has been used in exhibiting this “novel lattice” phenomenon? Time and again we hear X, Y, Z group/person has produced an EROI of 1+, from different reports, scientists,and at different locations etc. Is that not evidence of reproducibility? Or do you mean Bruillion, NASA make another 1Mw e-cat? I cannot really see the sense building another similar 1Mw e-cat given the R&D purportedly under way at present that gives over 1:1000 My question then, is what is reproducible evidence to you.?

        • Stephen

          It’s very simple phlatbeer: just a well-defined recipe with a well-defined expected outcome, that anybody can reproduce if he/she wants. Even sth with a EROI of 1.1 and zero commercial value. But it should be clear, in terms of procedure as well as in terms of outcomes. Something real and solid to discuss about.

          I have not seen this happening yet. Many people saying “I got it, somehow” is not a reproducible evidence. It’s just a repeated, but unreproducible, evidence. I agree there are many reports out there, and I hope a reproducible recipe will come out. However, I have still not seen it.

          If there’s no reproducible recipe then it’s all just about words and trust. I could also claim I have a working LENR reactor in my garage with COP of… 100! It’s running, in this very moment: try to prove it’s not real. I could even arrange a couple of shows with some witnesses, probably. See? The fact is that you have to trust my word (and you should not need that) and indeed it’s me who should prove my claim is genuine, not you who should prove that I am telling BS (btw, no need for that: I don’t even have a garage ;)…).

          • HeS

            Hmm. Do you belive that Higgs boson exists? Scientists from CERN announce that. How “anybody can reproduce if he/she wants.”. And what do you think about 1000 other invention not reproduced by “anybody”?

            Everybody (and you:) can reproduce Celani reactor, but this takes time, work and money.

            • Ivan_Cev

              Not accurate, two teams did the experiments separated and both teams arrived to same conclusion, so was replicated, and can be replicated again by you, if you have the right degree, and have access to the accelerator.
              LENR has to be reproduced by separate teams the experiment should be reproducible and the report peer review.

            • Stephen

              HeS, I actually strongly hope that there will exist a “Celani kit” to reproduce CF anywhere by anybody. This is why I am glad about the new fire attempt. If they succeed they would make me very happy.

              Higgs. The recipe and expected results are there and open… the fact that it’s enormously expensive to redo the test is another problem. The key thing is that the theory/experiment *can* be verified and, in case, falsified. Anyway, I believe in the Higgs just as long I don’t see an evidence against it. So far, this is the only evidence available and indeed in this case mine is not even a particularly strong belief. This is not exactly the situation with these claimed reactors… we have seen mixed results and a lot of secrecy.

              About inventions. Not sure what you’re talking about here. If you mean something I can buy and it indeed works… yes, I will believe it works. Probably though I won’t fully believe *how* it works as long as the thing is secret and not reproducible openly. Anyway, no problem, the day I can buy a LENR reactor I will believe it works, somehow.

          • phlatbeer

            Sorry Stephen,I don’t buy your argument

  • georgehants

    From the BBC —-
    Energy policy talks due among senior cabinet members
    Senior members of the cabinet will meet later to formulate a policy for dealing with the UK’s future energy demands.
    David Cameron and Nick Clegg will be discussing ways to keep costs down with the chancellor, chief secretary to the Treasury and energy secretary.
    The decisions will help frame the new Energy Bill expected within weeks.