Self Sustain Profile of Hot Cat

Andrea Rossi has made some interesting comments lately in response to questions regarding the self-sustain activity in the Hot Cat. Here are the Q & As

1) Is it true? 218 consecutive hours in ssm?
2) If not true, how long are the ssm event durations?
3) Does the Hot-Cat still require one hour power, one hour ssm segments?

1- 218 hours of ssm is true
2- the duration is regulated by the control system, are not regular, dependon many factors: can be 1 hour, 2 hours, or minutes
3- no, the Hot cat works differently

a. I therefore understand the total amount of time the Hot eCat spent in self-sustaining mode (SSM) was 218 hours?
b. The 218 hours consisted of a number of separate SSM periods, ranging in duration from minutes to hours?
c. During those SSM periods, no electricity was used to heat the Hot eCat, the electricity only supplied power to the control system?
d. During the SSM period, the surface temperature stayed within some range. Can you specifiy the temperature range while in SSM?

a. yes
b. yes
c. yes
d. 1030/1070 °C

Just as a reminder, the total length of time of this test was 336 hours, so during this test the hot cat was running in self-sustain mode for 65 % of the time. From what Rossi says here, during that time the temperature never dropped below 1030 C.

We may be getting a bit blasé here, but 218 hours is 9 days! To have a device the size of a medium sized telescope that can put out over 1000 C of heat for that long with no energy input (except some contolling mechanism) is remarkable. Of course, that that was not a consecutive nine days; it is interesting that Leonardo has developed a way to regulate the self sustain mechanism, so that is cycles on and off as needed, and that the cycling is not regular. Somehow they have ways to detect the activities of these mysterious reactions and are able to respond to them automatically.

Self sustain appears to be the real achievement of this latest hot cat design. Without it, the hot cat would still be a remarkable technology, but with ssm it moves it to a new level. One would expect that refining and perfecting the ability to control this ssm would be a priority now for Leonardo, in order to lead to greater and greater efficiencies.

  • PROOF?

    I thought Rossi claimed a couple months ago that by the middle of October, he GUARANTEED the release of a report with the names of third party scientists who have tested the E-cat. I decided to look into this now to see the names of those scientists. And as it turns out, NOTHING WAS RELEASED WITH THIRD PARTY VERIFICATION!

    I actually believe there must be something to LENR simply because there are other credible scientists who have reported on the reaction.

    Is it possible that Rossi is a kind of dupe set up by the energy companies to try to kill off any true enthusiasm for Cold Fusion research if he is revealed as a fraud? Or will he ever provide even a shred of third party evidence? How long can he continue NOT to provide third party evidence of actual scientists the press can talk with? IS THERE ANY UNIVERSITIES TESTING THE E-CAT?

    I’ll check back again in a few months and see if anything has developed. But I have a feeling I’ll just get another report from Leonardo Corp saying how great the latest experiment has gone for them.

  • georgehants

    From ECN —-
    RonB Reply
    October 19, 2012 at 2:26 am
    Just in case some of you haven’t seen this
    The following is the final report on cold fusion back in ’89… the one that recommended no funding of cold fusion research.
    http://files.ncas.org/erab/contents.htm

    • Robert Mockan

      I recall when that report was issued. It created a lot of conspiracy theories that there were ulterior motives for the panel to deciding not to fund it at the federal level. But the report clearly stated why the panel members decided the way they did, and it was reasonable then to make that decision.

      I wonder if a government evaluation of cold fusion today might reach different conclusions.

  • georgehants

    Higher Education network banner
    Academic blogging: the power and the pitfalls – live chat
    How can academics best use blogging to research and rehearse their ideas, network with peers and boost their careers? Join our live chat on Friday, 19 October
    The higher education blogosphere is sometimes caught between a rock and hard place, accused of narcissism on the one hand and of being an institutional echo-chamber on the other. Enough of the mythology, says Priego, who argues that blogging is the ultimate form of collegiality – if we understand collegiality as the relationship of professional colleagues united in a common purpose and respecting each other’s abilities to work toward that purpose.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/2012/oct/19/academic-blogging-power-pitfalls-livechat

  • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

    Andrea Rossi
    October 18th, 2012 at 3:52 PM

    Dear “The Plumber”:
    Yes, the Hot cat is becomeng by the day more important. We will remain in the industrial applications, until the domestic ones will have been certificated. Sincerely, I think that the Hot Cats will never be approved for domestic utilization, not in the middle term for sure.
    Besides, to make electric power with the Hot Cats will make necessary the application of all the components of the Carnot cycle, which is possible only in applications with at least 1 MW of power.
    For domestic applications we are waiting the certification of the low temperature E-Cats
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    If taking this completely at face value, then the local grid would survive at least in urban areas, although the high voltage long distance transfer grid would become unnecessary as electricity could be made in suburb scale (if the smallest practical unit for electricity production is about 1 MWth/300 kWe as he says). That would change the economic landscape of electricity production quite strongly, even though true per-household production would still not be possible.

    • Voodoo

      Dear Pekka,

      fortunatelly there will distant competitors with different tech capable of mechanical output, so without need of Carnot cycle.

      Grid system will virtually dead within 8 years. Ask Sterling Allan who is No. 1 in his Top 5.

      Simply Rossi will be punished by market for his hundred old lies.

      • GreenWin

        Vood, IF there were any “punishing” to be handed out… It will be of those who destroyed P&F and suppressed this technology. These are the corrupt old orthodox “scientists” who karma will treat well.

      • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

        Voodoo: Number one seems to be at the moment something called “Confidential – cheap, easy, high energy density, might open source core principle while licensing the advanced designs.”

        How to say this diplomatically … I have the typical mainstream scientist view of the other exotic techs on Allan’s site, except cold fusion. With enough strong evidence I could be convinced to change my opinion about anything, but based on what I know now I have no reason to be interested in that stuff. Of course, I respect other people’s possibly different opinions, but I do not wish to enter into debate because I don’t have more to say and because it would be off-topic for this site.

        • Voodoo

          You are right.

          This No:1 position, according to Sterling is costing 100 thousands pounds, measure 1m cubic and in fundraising was advertised 1MW output.

          Unfortunately Sterling yesterday published their data:

          2 kW output “readings”. So 100 thousands pounds advertised as “cheap” get 2 kW “readings”.

          Slightly better performance then South African fiasco, where Sterling get money from folks for test purpose.
          Instead of test, Sterling run for 2 hours dinner and at end published test is O.K.

        • georgehants

          Pekka, If I may butt in.
          First I would like to sincerely thank Admin for allowing my “off topic” posts to remain on page.
          I have learnt a great deal from the exchanges.
          One must remember that the post the I put up, that caused most consternation was an official scientific report, confirming that very qualified scientists have interest in more than reductionist science despite “training” to try and remove any heretical thoughts.
          Nobody replied to that report, everybody attacked me (mostly) because I named what those subjects are.

          Pekka may I ask, what is your opinion as to regards Pons and Fleischmann.
          Do you think they should receive an official apology.
          Do you think there should be an independent inquiry into the handling of Cold Fusion by the establishment.

        • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

          George, Do you think F & P should receive an official apology? Generally speaking it seems rather obvious that some individuals have made big enough mistakes to warrant a personal apology. I’m not a big fan of collective apologies.
          Do you think there should be an independent inquiry into the handling of Cold Fusion by the establishment? In due course, yes, something like that is probably needed. Probably several: one about physics, another about history, third one about legal and moral issues if needed. Putting everything into one might be problematic.

          • georgehants

            Pekka, thank you, you have made your position very clear.
            While we all enjoy the Cold Fusion story and discuss and debate the current situation, a few of us are far more concerned to keep aware of the answer you have given above.
            Pons is still alive and a research organisation has been named for Fleischmann.
            The World has suffered untold possible damage from the 23 year delay in the possible utilisation of Cold Fusion.
            A few of us are not willing to forget that the same thing is happening Now, on other equally important subjects.
            Many scientists would it seems rather forget, or at least ignore this situation.
            I believe that every scientist has a Moral and Professional obligation to Demand that such a disaster can never happen again.

    • daniel maris

      I agree Pekka – that sounds like a plausible scenario.

    • Robert Mockan

      Hmm. My BS sensors just went active.

      There have been, and are today, many applications using all components of the Carnot cycle operating at much less than 1 MW of power. Even 40 years ago uniflow steam engines of less than a few kilowatts output were being used with solar reflectors making the steam, with the whole power system averaging about 10% net conversion. Today the conversion for a small system much less than 1 MW would be better than that. For example this link is an inexpensive simple steam engine thoroughly tested operating at over 20% efficiency with 450 C steam, and even at 300 C steam it is 18% efficient.
      http://www.rossen.ch/solar/wcengine.html

      Why Rossi said what he did about Hot Cats only for use commercially, makes sense only in the context of vested interests in the status quo wanting to continue profiting from centralized control of electric power generation. Since a COP=6 E-Cat hot water heater is no threat, that is what the peons can have, while the COP=12 or more at 1000 C Hot Cats are only for the Elite.

      The solution to the delay of the certification ploy to help them retain control of the technology is simple.

      WE NEED OPEN SOURCE CATALYST FOR EVERY PERSON IN THE WORLD!

      • Robert Mockan

        Since getting some serious data from the last Rossi demo, I’ve been looking more closely at the possibility of using a LENR radiant heat source with the power system components typical of a solar energy installation using concentrated sunlight, to convert the thermal power of the reactor to electric power with a Carnot cycle. The radiative surface of the sun is 5800 K, while the LENR reactor surface in the demo was 1323K, but the downshift of the peak photo-flux wavelength due to the lower temperature can be accommodated while retaining almost all the power system components already proven for solar energy conversion in sunlight concentrator systems. There are some interesting advantages to extracting LENR thermal energy by way of radiant energy from the reactor. For example, the solar constant at earth orbit from the sun is about 1000 watts of radiant power (sunlight) per square meter. The LENR reactor in the demo was radiating 14,300 watts from .086 square meter of surface. The concentration factor greatly reduces the size over that of a solar energy system. Also, heat exchange from the reactor to the working fluid using radiant energy transfer can be simple and self balancing, while enabling reactor temperature to be maintained at 1050 C over any desired range of the working fluid temperature, by simply controlling the exposed reactor surface area with insulating shields, and the mass flow rate of the heat exchange fluid receiving the radiant energy.

        • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

          It’s not a bad idea, I think. Its official name is thermophotovoltaics. One uses an emitter coating (interestingly, tungsten is one option) which has a peak at suitable infrared which is matched to the bandgap of the photovoltaic semiconductor. Alternatively one can use a broadband emitter with a bandpass filter in the vacuum gap.

          I remember seeing some solar power proposals where one heats up a fluid by concentrated sunlight and then makes electricity from the infrared radiation produced by the fluid using thermophotovoltaics. It’s curious that in some cases (according to proponents) such infrared conversion scheme would be better than using the concentrated sunlight for photovoltaics directly. I guess it’s the fact that the radiation can have a narrow spectrum which is matched to the bandgap, while the solar spectrum is wide.

          Cooling the HotCat surrounding semiconductors by water (e.g. 100 C) might keep them cool enough so that their efficiency doesn’t suffer. The device would then produce combined warm/hot water and electric power.

          • Robert Mockan

            I am not suggesting thermophotovoltaics (although it does sound promising).

            What I am referring to is solar energy concentration to make steam, and replacing the sun with a LENR reactor as the source of energy to be concentrated.

            Here is a convenient link that explains all the Carnot cycle components used. Clearly Rossi is in error to suggest that 1 MW is a lower limit to using the Hot Cat for electric power generation. The power system described in the link generates just a few kilowatts, but at over 30% efficiency. Do the same thing using a LENR reactor would have many advantages.

            http://esc.fsu.edu/documents/DascombJThesis.pdf

            • Robert Mockan

              Also, the storage of heat in molten salts as applied in solar power stations could be used to advantage with LENR reactors if the erratic nature of electric power input can not be overcome. The stored heat could be used to keep the boiler and steam generation going for the engine when needed. This would be suitable for stationary applications, but perhaps not for mobile applications where one wants to keep the power system mass down. But maybe possible for locomotives and boats, where the extra mass can be tolerated.

              (What is this with so many obstacles building to prevent LENR use in planes?)

              • Mario Marq

                Why the boiler and why the heat storage ?

                Why it has to be “water” ? … i mean the Ecat reactors are sealed, don’t breath air, and its not radioactive whatsoever.. so

                Isn’t there a gas or fluid that under a very good dose of pressure in a lets say hermetically sealed circuit, can absorve the majority of that heat(SF6 ?)for an highly efficient heat pump ?

                Meaning that way, your ecat clusters + turbine circuit will be on all the time for the duration of the fuel charges, meaning possible battery+capacitor bank can be relatively very small just enough to keep it running or max ~5Kwh (for comparison Tesla uses 90Kwh sets, or 18 times more -> if around 500Kg for Ecat means 27Kg-> and future better batteries means even less weight)

                On maintenance, the gas can be evacuated completely from the circuit before handling, with none escaping to the atmosphere.

              • Omega Z

                Robert

                I tend to agree with Rossi’s statements.
                There Most Probably based on what the Safety Certificate-rs & Regulators are telling him. Also on what technology is presently available for mass marketing.

                His statement applies to short & midterm. He left Long term open. No Agency is going to allow 1000`C & 200 Bar pressure products to the masses.

                The Flip side to this is if E-cats & the Technology/Info become publicly available, 1000’s of people like yourself, along with Big & small business will develop & advance other technology to change this over time.

                I’m aware that there is already a lot of tinkering going on to convert low temp waste heat to Electricity.

                The Progress is slow & at individual scale has little demand & based mostly on existing Fossil Fuel Systems. The E-cat will drastically change the dynamics of the situation.

                I also expect once E-cats are available, will see major improvements & a variety of operating temps Available. I also expect in time that Mid-temp systems will be available to individuals sometime during the Midterm. Only question is what is midterm. 5, 10 years?

                Note: E-cats wont be the only product.

    • Chris

      Forget what Rossi says about at least 1 MW of power, he’s never seen a portable electrogenerator. OK that’s an ICE but, if you don’t require portability, it can be done with steam too and certainly with the Seebeck effect.

      The real issue is that it needs high temperature to be worthwhile and the hot cat might not come available for any Tom, Dick or Harry to buy. Further, it is easier and more efficient to manage electric generation for a number of users if each one’s demand varies according to their whim, as it is especially in the domestic case.

      So I agree that utilities will need to change radically but can survive, as long as their management takes the right course of action, and starting sooner than right away. Lines might survive even at the distribution level (several kV, up to 30 or so) while those transmission ones (hundreds of kV) might become redundant along with the largest thermoelectric plants, as MW scale plants increase in number.

      There would be no need to hurry though, about dismantling existing lines even at the transmission level. With the whopping plants replaced by many smaller ones, the loadflow would change radically but the transmission lines, seeing they already exist, would still make for easier adjustment to demand.

      • Chris

        Didn’t make it on time to edit:

        The loadflow would change for the better too, with production located more according to demand. This would make for much less losses over the lines. Less transport, more evening up.

  • alien70

    Hey all,

    Found on Rossi blog, did not see it posted yet, a lot of info!

    Enjoy!

    Adolf Schneider
    October 17th, 2012 at 7:52 AM

    Mr. Rossi

    We like to inform you that we have stored two links (english/german) with the schedule of the last E-Cat-convention in Zurich from Sept. 08/09, 2012. All the presentations can be downloaded via hyperlinks (underscored texts).

    The link to the english texts is: http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Kongress080912N-e.pdf
    The link to the german texts is: http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Kongress080912N.pdf

    Best wishes
    Adolf Schneider

    • barty

      That’s only the time table from the Zurich conference.
      Old and nothing new.

      • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

        Well, the timetable-PDF contains links to the presentation slides. They haven’t been public before if I remember correctly.

  • http://www.cilectric.com.au Manuel Cilia

    For all you fellows that want to use the Ecat to fly a plane. If you connect the props directly to a small high RPM steam turbine such as the “Cyclone Power System’ which has about 28% efficiency you should be able to fly for ever with spare power left over.

    • Jarvis Cooper

      Manuel, Cyclone’s engine looks very interesting. All the Cyclone Engine needs is a heat source, the E-Cat would be a match made in heaven. Cyclone is going for the land speed record for steam car, I wonder what they are using for a heat source? I wonder if a Cyclone Engine powered car, with an E-Cat for it’s heat-source, and breaking the land speed record, would get the main stream media’s attention?

    • HHiram

      This is the specific engine you’re talking about:

      http://www.cyclonepower.com/whe.html

      WHE stands for Waste Heat Engine, and this particular model can run on heat as low as 500 degrees Fahrenheit.

    • Peter_Roe

      You would need to figure in the weight of a flash steam boiler and a condensing apparatus, but overall these items should be much lighter than any electrical drive system (which would probably need the same kit anyway, unless a 30% efficient TEG is invented). That’s certainly how it would need to be done for airship propulsion, with the waste heat from the condenser being used to heat the lift gas.

      Edit: Moderated! Try as I might, I can’t see anything at all that might trigger the filter.

  • GreenWin

    Good comments Frank. This does put the hot-cat SSM in a League of its own. Regardless of the total kWt, to have discovered an entirely new source of energy, have it run with zero input for extended time, and designed a control mechanism to seamlessly continue the reaction – is performance summa cum laude IMO.

    Increasing the total output is yet another challenge, as is direct conversion of thermal to electrical energy. In any event, provided third parties verify (academics please!) – there is a whole new world waiting to be unveiled. It is conscious, abundant, available to all… imagine.

    • Voodoo

      No, it is not available to all.

      It is not for common folks, even not for un-qualified companies.

      And this week not for even one.

      And within 2-3 months only for owners of jettisonable 1,3 mil. €

    • Anders Åberg

      If the power is taken out by radiation there will be temperature up to four dependens that can act as a selfregulating regulator.
      If the temperature goes up then the outpot power will increase rapidly and the Hot cat is cooled down until the will be a balance.

      Anders

  • ivan_cev

    How could you have an idea of when he e_cat will be ready for production?
    (supposing is real)
    You only have to see past production of any thing out of Rossi factories.
    Have any one bought or seen any other product developed by Rossi? Have it been successful or customer satisfaction high?
    Rossi is about 60 years old, so past products should be readily available.

    • Ivan_cev

      So one have seen any product out of Rossi factories.
      This will give you a real idea of what is happening.
      The emperor has no clothes.

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

        The emperor is still in the shower. I’m sure he’ll be properly attired by time he arrives at the party.

        • Ivan_cev

          So you have information about products producced by Rossi?

  • Moeter

    Herr Rossi, geben Sie es auf dem Markt, wir brauchen es – gestern. Hier in Deutschland zahlen wir 25 Cent pro KW / H für elektrische Energie, und es wird immer teurer. Viele Menschen können nicht mehr bezahlen und sind ohne Licht, warmes Wasser und Heizung .

    • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

      Current NordPool electric power stock market price: 3.4 cent/kWh (http://www.nordpoolspot.com/). But the retail price is higher also here and is complicated because besides the electricity there is a separate base charge for maintaining the lines. (Which encourages people to use more energy, by the way.)

  • Robert Mockan

    Peter Roe,

    your moderation problems are contagious. I just posted a comment, it appeared briefly, and then it disappeared. And I know there was nothing wrong with the comment.

    edit: hmm. It just reappeared. Is this my evil browser displaying the cache? Or is it real? Have to wait and see.

    • Peter_Roe

      Robert – I’ve has few comments disappear and not reappear. It seems that they went straight to the ‘spam bin’, and Admin reinstated them when I brought the problem up. Your temporary disappearing act seems to be something else entirely though. It could be some kind of cache problem as you suggest I suppose.

      BTW I’ve looked through both Firefox and Chrome browser settings but have not been able to find any setting that will ensure a fresh page load, so I suppose I’ll just have to keep wearing out the F5 key.

      • Jay

        Just lurking but ensuring a fresh load can be done by clearing your cache, ctrl+shift+delete works in both chrome and firefox. A reload (ie f5) of the page will then completely reload the page from the server.

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks – does it last for more than one session though?

          • artefact

            For just one page I think you can press strg + f5 to reload without cache.

      • Babble

        Try Maxthon 3 browser. Each tab has an auto refresh setting if you want to use it.

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks for the suggestion – I’m giving it a try.

    • Filip47

      It’s big brother:)

    • Thinksforself

      Try holding down the control key while clicking the refresh/reload icon at the top of the browser. This causes all Browsers to completely reload the page including the CSS, JavaScript and the image files.

  • Robert Mockan

    The picture does look better with the latest information from the demo.

    However …

    35% of the time the demo reactor needs 2.4 kW (average) of electric power input to operate. The reactor generates 14.3 kW of thermal power. With a 20% conversion of thermal power to electric power the reactor would produce
    14.3 kW * .2 = 2.86 kW of electric power.

    So, during the time interval when the reactor does need electric power, it barely produces enough to keep itself operating, with almost nothing leftover to power anything else.

    2.86 kW – 2.4 kW (average) = 0.46 kW.

    Since the 2.4 kW consumption is an average, and Rossi says there are about 5 kW peaks, we have a problem.

    There are going to be time intervals when the reactor does not even produce enough electric power to power itself.

    (My plane is flying along using 200 kW of shaft power to the prop. Suddenly, shaft power to the prop goes to zero, as the LENR power reactor is recharging. A minute later… CRASH!).

    Rossi, you still have some work to do!

    • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

      One just needs to add a battery. In a larger setup (1 MW) one can manage the units so that enough units are in their self-sustaining mode (SSM) at any given instant. If one intends to sell electricity to the grid, there is no problem because one can use the grid as an unlimited capacity battery (i.e. to have a separate cable in and out).

      Your plane would have 40 reactors (40x5kWe=200 kWe) which is probably enough to synchronise the SSMs properly. Slow startup time (4 hours) would be an issue, however.

      • Robert Mockan

        That still does not keep my plane flying. Unless the erratic nature of the electric power input can be fixed, too many of the reactors might go offline at the same time before the battery can reactivate them. It would be much better to find out why the LENR catalyst does this, and fix the problem at the source. Besides, the emergency battery would be a large massive device itself, and after using up the charge to get the offline reactors back online, the reactor power would need to recharge it before sending power to the plane engines.

        The result would be the same. CRASH!

        Another thing. Why need separate reactors? What does the catalyst do, infect itself? Just using a larger mass of catalyst in one larger should result in some of it always being active. And the active part should reactivate the offline part if heat is the issue.

        Rossi needs to explain more what is going on in his reactor.

        • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

          Get a bigger plane and more reactors, then they average out more nicely :-) Or, wait until he has developed his 200-300 W reactor cores.

      • Peter_Roe

        Rossi seems to be saying that the charge/ssm behaviour of hot cat cells is rather unpredictable, so both a degree of redundancy and a computer control system with the ability to anticipate likely needs would be needed to ensure a steady output. Airships would be a better platform for CF powered flight than fixed wing craft I think, especially if substantial batteries need to be part of the system. A large airship (Zeppelin size – 70-80m) would need about 800kW for fast propulsion, or half that for more leisurely cruising.

        • GreenWin

          I’m liking the airship concept especially since we will have eliminated annoying engine noise. Current diesel driven blimps, make a racket overhead. LENR-based electric drive props would be much quieter! I’ll book a cross the pond visit to Britain the Great, as my first voyage.

          • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

            Just that helium airships and blimps are not an option in a global scale because helium is a scarce resource. Hot air airships heated by E-cats would do. Maybe that was what you had in mind.

            • Peter_Roe

              I was thinking of a ‘hybrid’ rigid design where some permanent buoyancy is provided by helium gas cells, and the balance by hot air cells that are heated by waste hot water from the propulsion system (heat exchangers). This would also provide a computerised trim system that would cancel effects such as asymmetric solar heating of the outer skin.

              I don’t know if a ‘pure’ hot air system could provide enough lift, but if it could, and the heat was virtually free, then this could make a new generation of large airships even more attractive. I’d certainly book my Swan Hellenic aerial tour of the treasures of Greece in a shot!

              • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

                But anyway, helium is a no-go. It’s an unrenewable resource, byproduct of natural gas mining. Even if E-cat would produce it by transmutation, it produces too little. But with E-cat, why wouldn’t a purely hot air design be possible.

              • Peter_Roe

                In a rigid zeppelin-type airship with a volume of say 8,000m3, about 6,000m3 could be gas cells (leaving room for expansion). The waste heating system could probably maintain the air in the cells up to a maximum of about 50C above ambient temperature.

                With modern materials and frame design the total weight of the airship might be around 8,000kg.

                Maybe there is someone lurking who would know how to calculate whether enough lift could be generated with these parameters?

              • Peter_Roe

                Deleted by author

              • Peter_Roe

                I used the wrong figures – those above are for a small modern semi-rigid airship (NT Zeppelin). The ‘real thing’ was 240m long with a volume of 105,000m3, weight around 85,000kgs, maybe reducible to 70,000kgs with modern materials.

                Using the calculator at the link below, the lift with hot air would be a measly 18,000kgs, so hot air as the main lift gas seems to be out – it would only be good for trim.

                A lead balloon – I’ll have to cancel my reservation. Bummer.

                https://www.brisbanehotairballooning.com.au/faqs/education/123-hot-air-balloon-lift.html

                • georgehants

                  Peter, I cannot understand why your comment above did not go to moderation. Ha

                • Peter_Roe

                  The ‘b’ word you mean? (I’m not chancing it again!). I haven’t been able to figure out what is tripping the filter – all sorts of words you’d think might act as triggers, don’t, while apparently innocuous posts often do (at least for me). Its a mystery.

      • zvibenyosef

        Maybe a plane is not the best application for the hot cat at this time. there are still quite a lot of useful applications for this technology

      • Andrew Macleod

        This technology is in its infancy. I have a hard time believing that we are even close to an optimized version.

      • Mario Marq

        But the energy density is enormous, in a aircraft it could be “on” all the time for 6 months.. at least… i think Rossi can engineer that without augmenting the size of the reactors, so he can have about 1 year, meaning that battery can be full charged most of all that time.

        And its not 14.3KW, it might be that Rossi is too conservative and is ~18kw in reality (don’t know), and efficiency can go up to 60%, possible in Carnot cycle, more so because you have much much less moving parts eating away your efficiency, compared with a ICE setup, meaning it could be only 20 reactors for that 200Kw…

        And since each reactor weight 4.5KG and has (3.1414x(8,6/2)²)x33 or 1917cm³ so 20 of those very tight clustered together, weights 90 Kg and has the volume of around 40 liters… i mean its the volume of a small car fuel tank, for half the weight of a comparable 268HP engine (attending its possible to get 60% efficiency out of it, which i think it can, with ***pressurized closed loop working fluid*** and very efficient turbines)

        Comparing oranges to oranges
        ~40litres fuel tank on a plain can weight almost those ~30Kg, but a very efficient turbine can weight less than comparable power output engine… and upon stall you can still have a lot of power(heat) for many minutes (ICE is 1 or 2 minutes before nose dive)… only you don’t have 40 liter fuel tanks in any aircraft, and even considering a good battery+capacitor bank(which can be relatively very small), changes are Ecat + turbine + Battery + electric engine weights less than the an actual engine+ full fuel tank… only ecat can last at least 6 months of flight while the fuel tank only lasts ours of flight!..

        which is better ?

    • LCD

      where did you get 20% though Peter, at that temp it should be higher no?

      • Robert Mockan

        Just an example but taken from the net efficiency of the older electric power plants using coal fired boilers, that seldom had net conversion percentages measured above the low 20s. I try to keep my calculations conservative so as to not expect too much from new technology.

        30% or more is certainly possible at 1050 C, but in my example that would still not prevent reactor shutdown.

        14.7 kW * .3 = 4.41 kW. But the reactor needs 5 kW peak electric power input, even though 2.4 kW is the average.

        • Mario Marq

          30% you are being too conservative, and with good “heat pumping” tech you can have a multiplying COP factor above 2.

          And yes the rector can shut down, but when it does it doesn’t mean the temperature shuts down(->power availability dependent on temperature ) completely in an instant.

          That only happens with the obsolete ICE.

    • Tor

      it`s much more effective ways to
      converting heat to electrical power

      • Piero

        Don’t forget that the input energy dose not necessarily need. to be’ electrical. use a heather fueled by your airplane gasoline

        • Mario Marq

          Or another Ecat.. cluster several together, i think it can be properly engineered an efficient geometry, and chances are then when a reactor needs a push it his given in large extent by the others that is connected to.

          I suspect there must be a “pattern” to this erratic behavior, but its not a minus, matter of fact in a cluster of reactors in a proper geometry its possible that SSM lasts for most of the time, and not the contrary where all ecats in the cluster would be needing a push all at the same time

    • Ivan_cev

      You have not seen the device and already flying?

      • LilyLover

        He’s a visionary leader; not a follower ;)

        • Robert Mockan

          40 years ago I had a pilots license. But flying now is too expensive, what with regulatory compliance, fuel costs, and cost of airplane maintenance (especially the engine). But with a LENR power source I could have unlimited range, no fuel cost, little noise using steam power, low cost of steam engine maintenance, and so on. A 2 place bush plane with lots of storage space with STOL ,(short takeoff and landing), and big tires can land and take off almost anywhere (and there are pontoons for lake and ocean). Typically you need about a 200 brake horsepower engine for good STOL performance and 120 miles per hour airspeed, depending on the aircraft. Right now there are many excellent deals out there to buy used aircraft, and with a LENR power source the resale market would really take off (pun intended). So not a visionary leader, just looking for that next opportunity.

    • Miles

      “With a 20% conversion of thermal power to electric power the reactor would produce”

      Source:http://www.indianexpress.com/news/now-technology-to-convert-heat-waste-into-electricity/1005452/ Assuming Rossi is using this new technology…”With a very environmentally stable material that is expected to convert 15 to 20 per cent of waste heat to useful electricity”

    • Thinksforself

      You are being too steampunk in your thought process for achieving cheap flight with LENR or a HotCat.

      Instead of a prop think jet engine. Why waste efficiency by making thermal energy to then make electricity to then create mechanical motion. Use the thermal energy to flash boil water and vent it through a nozzle. Instant thrust! You likely would need to use a combination of a turbine like a turbojet and thermocouples to make the electricity to run the reactor. But, that would be a smaller electrical demand and the thermal to mechanical conversion of the jet thrust should be more efficient than the thermal to electrical to mechanical setup for an electric motor powered prop. You would need to carry water as reaction mass, but that would be far cheaper per tank than jet fuel. You wouldn’t get the unlimited range of an electric prop plane, but it just might suffice for commercial aviation.

    • Mario Marq

      Yes the same with any other heat source… even an ICE…

      You want more efficiency you have to augment the pressure of the working fluid. I think properly engineered is possible to get 60%, or more.

      Also Rossi said he took 30% to account for all possible errors so in reality he was getting ~18.6 Kwh…

      And since those reactors are very small, and the energy density is enormous, if wan more power is only give it more reactors … like more ICE pistons… so with 5 reactors it could be even smaller and lighter than your aircraft ICE… and better even… if the reactor shuts down you can still have plenty of power (heat) for a lot of minutes ( 4 hours to close to room temperature)-

      ((5x 18.6)x0.6)-(5×2.4))= 43.8Kw

      If your aircraft can have that means

      ICE turns off -> less than 2 minutes to dive and crash

      Ecat turns off-> 20 minutes for the same, or mostly likely more and can be very gradual permitting an emergency landing somewhere

      In a sense it could be employed in turbofan engines also, heating the airflow after the compressor to a good degree, permitting perhaps 3 to 4 x less fuel… and on failure the same, permitting to have so a gradual diminishing power before stall

      So i think it can have applicability

  • Mark

    A lot of talk suggests SSM is a good thing, I would think that SSM is a bad thing.

    If a commercial unit reaches SSM then any loss of cooling will lead to failure of the E-CAT (core full of molten Nickel). It may be that the reaction can be controlled by removal of the Hydrogen source but no information currently given suggests this is a viable option.

    I would think investigation of SSM in the lab is valid primarily to know how to avoid this situation although the closer you can get to SSM without achieving it the better you COP will be. The only time I would think SSM is usable would be when the E-CAT is idling (at temperature but not producing usable heat, Heat generated = heat lost, home heating system) although even then it could be dangerous for the reliability of the unit.

    • andreiko

      The H2 pressure is de sleutel voor stabiliteit en is volautomatisch regelbaar door eenvoudig mechanisch instrument zodat het smelten van de kern uitgesloten kan worden.Het lijkt ook mogelijk de temperatuur van de HOT-CAT willekeurig te kunnen regelen doormiddel van dit mechanisme.

      PS/Text Netherlands.

      • Filip47

        Andreiko uw engels is echt onmogelijk, je moet er iets aan doen, men neemt u anders niet ernstig. Vertaling voor nederlands(de taal) is ‘dutch’. Probeer eens keer met ‘google translate’, of lukt dat niet? Ik vind trouwens dat uw opmerkingen een bijdrage leveren, spijtig dat ze niet altijd begrepen worden.
        Groeten,
        Filip.

    • Filip47

      Andreiko is implying that the Hotcat is simply regulated by the volume of H2 pressure.

      • Robert Mockan

        An interesting suggestion. If the hydrogen storage compound absorbs and releases hydrogen dependent on temperature maybe the electric power is being using to heat it in a cyclic manner to create a pressure cycle in the reactor? Perhaps cycling the H2 pressure also serves to flush out LENR “waste” products from the nuclear active regions, thus allowing them to start up again?

        Rossi needs to reveal more about what is happening inside his reactor. All we can do is guess without more information.

        • Peter_Roe

          I wonder if there are any compounds that would reversibly absorb hydrogen at higher temps, to provide negative feedback by limiting H2 pressure? The amount of metal hydride providing the H2 would need to be limited so that all available hydrogen had been liberated at the normal operating temperature, for this to work (if there are such chemicals).

        • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

          One possible “thermostat” would be a mixture of two hydrogen compounds, A and B. Compound A releases its hydrogen if T>T1 and reabsorbs it if TT2 (where T2>T1) and releases it if T<T2. The end result is that hydrogen exists as gas only in the temperature range T1..T2. If TT2, it’s absorbed into compound B.

          While this is simple to write down, I’m not sure if there actually exists some compounds which absorbs hydrogen only above some characteristic (high) temperature, T2. Likely I’m not sure if the diffusion timescale of hydrogen in and out from the compounds and the nickel particles would be fast enough to make this kind of scheme feasible.

          Edit: Ah, Peter suggested the same.

          • andreiko

            NI powder + C powder I think.

            • Peter_Roe

              I think I remember reading somewhere that CO2 poisons the LENR reaction somehow – I may be wrong, its difficult to keep track.

              • andreiko

                No O2 in the reactor CO2 onpossible

                • Peter_Roe

                  Of course – ‘senior moment’!

          • Peter_Roe

            I think you are probably right about the timescale factor, Pekka – not only the rate of release/absorption by the H2 donor compounds, but also rate of diffusion out of the nickel (I think that must be a very slow process or Celani’s ‘pre-loaded’ wire would not have worked).

            • andreiko

              think on surface difference ni powder or wire Celani

        • Ivan_cev

          I believe the e-cat is regulated by a calculator, pen, eraser and some paper.

          • Peter_Roe

            Ivan – you seem to be drifting back towards tro11-type comments. If you believe that, why are you still bothering to post here?

        • http://extropolitca.blogspot.com Mirco

          Rossi need the patents, so he is able to tell without losing future earnings.

    • Mario Marq

      i think SSM is a function of the heat removal potential.

      At room temperature with a single reactor in a static situation you get already SSM for a god portion of time.

      Cluster several close together and probably you get thermal runaway and molten zinc

      Blow cooled air directly on top of it it, and it never gets SSM

      So the best for efficiency IMO is having several close clustered together, but on a closed loop circuit with an exchanger (heat pump), that has a working fluid capable of absorving most of the excess heat of the potential “runaway condition”… so it might end up your have SSM most of the time, yet a COP that would correspond to a single reactor with temperatures much above 1050… but without melting…

  • clovis

    Hi, everyone,
    The 3rd party replicators, are the pivot point, the whole world is setting on the edge of our seat, waiting,and waiting,and waiting,
    Come on guys who ever you are,– GET ER DONE,— SMILE.

    • Ged

      We academics are notoriously slow because we are so thorough. It’ll be there soon!

    • LilyLover

      Sadly my experience forces me to call 0.1% people as whole world?
      Us-true; rest- don’t care.

  • Peter Poulsen

    Soo…. how can we convince Rossi on putting up a webcam and videostream a running hotcat, on the net? I would love to see it in action.

    My patience is wearing thin with all this talking and waiting.

    • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

      At least the datastream would compress well :-)

      (I mean that it would be boring to watch since nothing moves in the picture.)

      • GreenWin

        Indeed. Perhaps Peter should resort to an episode of Dr. Who. Lots more action.

        • Peter_Roe

          Watching an e-cat doing very little would beat most of the TV available here – Dr Who excepted of course (unfortunately it is broadcast at a time when I’m usually still working, hobbyising or having a drink in the garden [not just now perhaps] – never mind, ‘YouView’ is coming!).

      • Ivan_cev

        Not true the meter will move, the steam in the turbine, do not dream, we will never see it.

      • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

        Which brings to mind that some posting here would also compress well :-) [But not as well as ECN]

  • Pierre Lelance

    What about old 10kW eCat that I am much more interested in ?
    What about the huge factory with hundreds of robots making million of cheap eCats ?

    40°C water almost for free would already fully satisfy me… pending better :-)

    • Gerrit

      good questions, but “home e-cats” are not the focus anymore it seems.

      I am really interested when the first 1MW container will be sold to and actually in operation by a satisfied customer, and then visited by independent and trustworthy parties who will not be under NDA.

      It will be strange if that doesn’t happen soon.

      In my worst nightmare Rossi will go on to invent the “ultra-hot-cat” which is even smaller and hotter with better COP and faster switch on/off. And the Hot Cat will be forgotten just like the 1MW plant currently is out of the picture. And after the “ultra-hot-cat” he will push forward and invent the “universal-hot-cat” which will run on other fuels as well, ad inf. We’ll find ourselves in 2015 with still nothing on the market.

      Anyone else has such uncomfortable dreams ?

      • Voodoo

        Rossi publicly wrote, that he is in core heart inventor.

        So you nightmares are very possibly to be realized.

        • telecommuter

          So, Rossi is the only person who can design a commercially working LENR generator?

    • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

      Home units are waiting for certification, and the certificators are waiting for (at least) the gathering of many hours of test data from industrial or other E-cats. By the way I think that there may be fewer than hundreds of robots in a million units per year factory. Million sounds a lot, but it’s only two units per minute in automatic 24/7 production.

      • Ged

        On the grand scheme of manufacturing (think of the tens to hundreds of millions of phones made a year, which are far more complex), 1 million units in a year is nothing.

      • Peter_Roe

        And that need only be the reactor cores and final assembly. The control systems would probably be manufactured elsewhere by a specialist electronics company, and the casings and pipework could be bought in pre-assembled from a Chinese ‘white goods’ manufacturer, many of whom would consider a million to be a starter order. They could make the control system as well, but this would probably have to be made locally under secure conditions to preserve IP.

    • evleer

      I’d rather see that Rossi would redesign the low-temp E-cat to incorporate the Hot Cat control and operation mechanism. An array of thin rods, maybe even a set of wires (à la Celani) that can be independently controlled to heat up to self sustain mode. Such a configuration would be a major improvement on the current E-cat design, since it would drastically lower the overall energy consumption and allow for modulated output power (a matter of switching individual rods or wires on/of). It would definitely make the heating E-cat a overwhelming success in countries with high energy prices, whereas the current implementation would actually increase heating costs instead of lowering them.

      • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

        Indeed, at the end of August he said that they are looking into small 200-300 W reactors (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=695&cpage=5#comment-310268). Probably he’s thinking the same as you.

        • Peter_Roe

          There is ‘daisy chaining’ to be explored sometime as well, where a small reactor heats a bigger one, which heats a bigger one, etc., each one being maybe ten times the output of the next smaller one.

        • Omega Z

          Pekka

          The Smaller Kw units is to allow modulation as they will be able to do with the 1Mw. Turning individual cores on/off.

          I think there’s 2 many possibilities at present.
          I’d prefer his team Focus on just 2 things.

          1. The marketing of the Low temp 1Mw so Safety Data can be obtained. The Sooner the Better. It will effect all E-cats.

          2. Building the 1Mw Hot Cat unit Prototype so they can get on with configuring & working out the Kinks for actual Electricity Generation.

          Everything else can be worked out latter.

          Accomplishing 1 & 2 & making it public will have a hugh psychological impact on the Public. Even if not available for a couple years. Light at the end of the tunnel does wonders.

          • Peter_Roe

            I agree. I worry that Rossi has simply lost interest in the old-type e-cats, large and small, and is wasting effort right now looking for the perfect electrical conversion system, before he has got the basic reactor working as well as possible. I hope he now has a team of less brilliant but more practical and determined engineers behind him, to see at least one of the various projects through.

            • Omega Z

              Peter

              I would speculate that IF Rossi’s 1st customer was of Military concern, That he is under a lot of pressure to conclude an Electrical Generating Hot Cat. Military+Siemens turbines. Deep Pockets both.

              This is actually a path suggested by Jed Rothwell of Vortex. Government Type projects. Up front quick cash to get things off the ground, Thus avoiding VC funds.

              Accepting VC Funds has inherent risks of losing control of your product & IP. Fine print gets you every time. I always remember Steve Jobs being forced out of Apple at 1 time among many other less known CEO’s in the past.

              This path would lead to less people involved that Rossi has to answer to. I think most people missed it but Rossi did state in 1 of the Videos that a 2nd 1Mw Low temp E-cat has been delivered to that same customer. 10 more to go.

              I would also speculate that if it is the Military pressuring Rossi for the Electric E-cat that the terms of sales would be open ended for a long time. Possibly a single operation/plant dedicated just to them.

      • telecommuter

        The fact that Rossi hasn’t put any thing into production doesn’t raise a flag for you? What’s he using for funds? If the funds are coming from investors, what do you think the investors are looking for? Another version of a product that isn’t making money?

  • Voodoo

    In simplicity is beauty.

    How way you will be testing longevity of SSM at new product ?

    First 5 minutes of SSM: O.K. ? Good so
    15 minutes, then half hour, then one hour ……
    and 14th day is maybe half or full day of SSM.

    Well End of test, publish some illogical numbers.
    Hurrah to Pordenone where are managers, directors
    of some big prospective customers. We must sell them
    some old low-temp devices for 1,3 mil $/€ because
    our new Hot Cats will for 250 thousands $/€ and after that nobody will want old tech.

  • leo

    As much as we know about Hot Cat, its control must be based on the limited emission of H2 from certain substances. Obviously, the H2 emitter must be heated electrically to temperature, higher than the said 1050 C. After certain amout of H2 is released, the power output of reaction increases, and the temperature arises. Then H2 is consumed, the power goes down, the temperature decreases, until the electrical heating is switched on again. The temperature must never get that high, that enough H2 is released to support the reaction without electric power input, because there does not exist any other means to shutdown than switching off the input power.

    • Peter_Roe

      That might theoretically be a viable control system, depending on the characteristics of the hydrogen donor (light metal hydrides tend to release most of the bound hydrogen at a few hundred degrees C). SSM would be an incredibly difficult balancing act though, because of the need to maintain just sufficient H2 pressure, but not enough to produce a thermal runaway. There is also the fact that once H2 has entered the nickel, it will take some time to ‘use it up’, so response time would be excessive. I think there must be some other factor involved.

      • Blanco69

        This is an interesting concept. There must be a limited number of ways to control/sustain a hot cat. We’ve touched on temp, H2 pressure etc. Not sure about RF as we tend not to see that kit around any more. We should be able to come up with a finite list of possibilties here. All I can think of are; shouting at it or hitting it with a large spanner so we must be getting close to the end of the list.

        • Peter_Roe

          That’s certainly how I fix recalcitrant machines – with limited success I would have to admit.

          Possibilities for control suggested so far fall into two categories based on two different assumptions – Category 1: that the SSM reaction may run away unless dampened down, or Category 2: that it will die back unless kicked back into action by some stimulus.

          Category 1 possible solutions:

          1) Additional heating may limit the reaction in some way.
          2) Increased rate of cooling to reduce operating temp. (not apparently used so far).
          3) Reduction of available hydrogen by chemical or mechanical means.
          4) Reduction in rate of hydrogen ionisation (speculative – no mechanism known in unstimulated systems).
          5) Electromagnetic or RF damping of the reaction (speculative – no mechanism known).
          6) Some chemical means (temperature-driven – automatic) of reversibly limiting availability of reaction sites or mopping up free electrons (speculative – no mechanisms known).

          Category 2 possible solutions:

          a) Additional heating may re-start the reaction.
          b) Increased ionisation may make more nascent H available (Defkalion spark plugs)
          c) RF or EM stimulation may kick-start the reaction through magnetostrictive effects.
          d) Current flow (possibly modulated) through the nickel may kick-start the reaction through electrostrictive effects (Piantelli and Brillouin – possibly the same mechanism as c).
          e) Reduction of cooling rate (not apparently used so far).
          f) Some chemical means (temperature-driven – automatic) of increasing the availability of reaction sites or providing more free electrons (speculative – no mechanisms known).

          These are as opposed to ‘kill’ mechanisms such as venting, gas flooding etc.). Have I missed any?

        • Peter_Roe

          These are mostly just generic possibilities. In the case of the hot cat, the fact that Rossi appears to be using an electronic control system limits the possibilities to heat modulation, current flow or EM/RF, or just possibly some kind of built-in chemical, electrochemical or physical ‘reaction thermostat’.

  • mattias

    I realy hope that AR have a “if they kill me plan”.
    This invention will change the global powers bigtime and if i was him i would have a secret entity that get all info and post it on the net in case of..
    What if they persuade him to “fail” thru his family…then a secret entity will not work…

    A idee Compile all necessary info to build a hotcat/E-cat and encrypt it with 128-bit.
    Send it out on the net…with info of what it is.
    In time it will be broken and the secret out of the bottle so to persuade AR after that encrypted file are on the net will be futile.
    I whant to se this thing be main stream….

    • QC-JYM

      >>I realy hope that AR have a “if they kill me plan”<<

      He does, it's called "Defkalion"

      ;-)

      jym

      • http://none chris

        Yes ,and what progress have they been making since the switch to Canada. It is certainly not in their best commercial intersts to let Rossi grab all the limelight

        Surely we must have a follower of this Forum in Canada ,who can give us some info.

        • jjaroslav

          At this point there are too many threads in the LENR platform for total loss of technology…If AR fails there are many just behind him (not just Defkalion) who are pushing to success…just a matter of time.
          But it would be great to get rid of my boiler and disconnect from the grid before too many heating seasons…

  • Carmania

    So what is the energy input vs. output when it’s not in SSM?

    • Voodoo

      when not in SSM it is officially CoP = 6

      unofficially it is slightly more

      most of trick is in forgotten 100 hours output in SSM
      so real whole CoP may be around 16 to 18, maybe even around 20.

  • Johannes Hagel

    Sounds great, really great!!! If this is true and if the speed of devellopment goes on according to all these sayings, we need to have no sorrows anymore about our futures. But it all depends on the big IF’s …….

    IF what Rossi says is true ….
    IF he is not mistaken by himself….
    IF the day will come when we all will finally SEE the machine…
    IF IF IF … to be continued.

    I have never been waiting so hard for truth!

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      I don’t think there are so many IF’s here.

      We know that LENR is true, but we don’t know for sure that what Rossi claims is true. However, why would Rossi make all this up? Occams Razor suggests that it is more likely that he speaks the truth than that his claims are false. Also, consider how many people are working with Rossi, either directly or indirectly. If his claims where false, there would probably be a lot of people coming out stating that his invention doesn’t work.

      • Jim

        That’s an interesting point. There are many people who say that based on the *absence* of exacting proof then by inference Rossi must be a fraud. But there is no-one that I’m aware of who has claimed based on the *presence* of concrete eye-witness evidence that Rossi is a fraud (although SK seems to try to make that case.) And the number of people involved and the amount of time and activity greatly increases the chances of such a claim, if someone were in position to make it. Not proof of ECat, of course, but more burden on the skeptics.

      • sparks

        But keep in mind, by and large, startup companies do one thing: Fail. Rare is the startup company that actually succeeds, even when they are using conventional, proven technology. So the fact remains, that LENR can be quite real, but the startup companies based on LENR can still fail for myriad business-related reasons. In fact, it is my opinion that the biggest hurdles Rossi faces are business-related, and that’s not to discount the still huge challenges of developing a rock-solid stabilization/control strategy to achieve proper sustained operation.

        • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

          True. Rossi can still fail. Others may outdevelop him or prevent him by having patents granted before him. He and his partners may make some big business mistakes. However, as far as I can see, Rossi seems quite far ahead of the competition.

          Personally, I can’t wait to see the ecat on the market but in reality, product development of a nuclear product that is not officially understood yet, will probably take way longer than everyone involved initially thought. It may take a couple of years even before we see actual products.

        • Omega Z

          sparks

          I agree. So does history. First to market does not guarantee success. Johnny come lately has a good chance of catching up shortly after.

          1- They have less out of pocket. Much of the research is already done. Investors easier to come by. Market has already been broken out.

          2- They don’t have the road blocks & their costs(IP patent hassle). Most of these have been overcome by the 1st product. Follow on products have it easier.

          Rossi does have 1 thing in his favor. Demand will exceed product for many years & even 2nd place will do well. All that is necessary is getting all his ducks in a row before showing proof positive. Thus even if overcome by a competitor, 2nd. place is more secureable.

          • Mario Marq

            That is the sad story, the only Rossi has is a “heating” source and some simple water heater machine/cube(1MWh)…

            Probably we wont see anything else from Rossi… and NONE electricity producing device or apparatus, unless some political power kicks in some other industry into the action, Rossi only does the “reactor” basically…

            Perhaps he should had tried China or Japan… because those that are claiming “i want to see it produce electricity or something” or else is a fake… have already won so far perspectives, but not because its a fake, and the smart ones knows it (human jealousy, cynicism and skepticism has such ugly characteristics)

        • Mario Marq

          Can fail, but most likely “for a myriad NON-business NON-finance related issues”…

          TPTB: “for that guy that none of our banks (means practically all by *cartel* implications) will be lend him a cent, and that none of our corporations (meaning almost all of the big ones by the same reasons) will be doing business with him… all tell all our media “men” to think of smear campaigns…capice !?… amen amok!…

          Sad predicaments the world felt into…

    • HeS

      @:” … to be continued”

      Is a better kind of soap opera?

  • http://www.fusionenergyfoundation.org fusionrudy

    RTG’s (Radioisotope thermoelectric generator) have been in use for a long time in satellites and remote stations (e.g. lighthouses). They have an infinite COP and can run smoothly for decades, depending on the material used. They frequently use the Seebeck effect for electricity production (efficiency 5-10%). But the conversion problem is the same as for the ECAT. Hence a cooperation with the RTG industries would seem beneficial. I have never seen RTG’s mentioned in all discussions of the ECAT.

    • daniel maris

      You haven’t been paying attention then! LOL RTGs have definitely been mentioned in relation to prospects for LENR on spacecraft – I think one of the researchers is specifically looking to develop LENR to replace the RTG function. It was George Whatisname…I think (sure someone else can clarify).

      • daniel maris

        - It was George Miley I think.

        • Warthog

          Also Rossi. A while back a “science blurb” came out about a new material for thermoelectric conversion, and Rossi was asked about it. His answer was to the effect that yes, he was following the science/technology of thermoelectric conversion closely, as he had himself done research in the area.

          • Omega Z

            Warthog

            I believe that is William(Bill) Donovan’s task to look for ways of direct conversion. Possibly something built internally using Beta or Gamma. A 2 year time frame was referenced minimum. But this was for the Low Temp E-cat.

        • Gerrit

          correct, he presented that at the NETS 2012 (Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space – 21-23 March 2012)

          http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/nets2012/pdf/3051.pdf

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      This where Rossi is headed. If he can continue increasing the COP thermoelectrics is a natural for the Hot Cat. He has stopped dealing with the Carnot cycle himself and says he will let the Carnot experts deal with that problem. He is inventing a thermoelectric machine.

    • Ged

      RTGs are very low power. The Curiosity rover with its 10.6 pounds (4.2 kilograms) of plutonium dioxide generates around 100 watts. It’ll also only last a few years before running down below usefulness. The power you get out of a RTG continuously decreases over time, hence why most of the instruments in the Voyager probes are powered down, since their RTGs are decayed too far past the point to generate enough power.

      RTGs are also potentially dangerous if the nuclear material is dispersed.

      LENR is quite a bit different, much more powerful, and much safer than RTGs.

      • GreenWin

        The premier RTG project is NASA’s Deep Space ASRG – A Stirling engine generator developed at Glenn Research Center.

        http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/TECB/RPS_ASRG_%20Handout.pdf

        Or plausibly replace the mechanics with thermoacoustic engine – if it can be made efficient enough.

      • Peter_Roe

        Rossi is dealing with one largely unknown tech with cold fusion – I think he would be rather unwise to take on another (TEGs) at this stage. If he can solve the remaining hot cat problems and couple it to any existing mechanical converter, that would be more than enough at the moment. Really all that’s needed is a great big HP boiler to sell to the powergen industry by the thousand.

    • Mario Marq

      ummm naaa! TEG is not proper for “heat pump” engineering, ECAT is.

      A closed circuit with “low lift” and high pressure can have a tremendous amount of “momemtum” in the fluid to turn turbines, and a multiplying COP factor above 2 in the heat pump circuit alone.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_heat

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    I agree that the longer SSM mode or that the control software is able to control the SSM better is the big breakthrough.

    To me the ecat SSM mode seems like a mode which is sort of on the brink of a runaway reaction. I suspect they can now run the hot cat longer on the “edge”. Previously they had to apply large amounts of electric power to the internal resistor to control the LENR reaction, which is a relatively costly operation in term of energy applied.

    Now it seems the control software is much more sophisticated and able to control the runaway reaction better so the applying of large amounts of energy to the resistor is much less needed. It does explain the better COP anyway. Maybe they tuned the frequencies that they use to control the LENR reaction to get this much better control?

    One has to wonder when 100% SSM will be reached? That would be the holy grail :)

    • Chris

      Yes, for quite a while that has been my understanding and all further evidence is pointing to it: the drive brings it toward the brink of disaster but with enough margin to avoid it, then it runs with no drive until it needs it again.

      100% SSM could be acheived with the hot cat to all practical purposes, but somebody is afraid it wouldn’t guarantee against reaching the brink of disaster. They want the drive to come from a source other than the thermal output, when the real essence is for it not to risk increasing with the output. IMHO it could be done fail safe but there are reserves, which could be due to pressure from interests in traditional energy sources.

      • telecommuter

        Why is self sustaining mode important? Isn’t it the net energy available that matters? Isn’t it more work to make it self sustaining instead of just using the energy output itself?

        • Chris

          If you have to pay for the drive, isn’t it a substantial difference? If in some situations the drive is hardly available, isn’t it an even more fundamental difference?

    • Mario Marq

      100% SSM ?

      ummm… perhaps put in a deliberately runaway condition only with an *active* heat removal apparatus that removes the heat as fast as the runaway condition produces it…

      hey! but that is what already happens!…

      This *HOT CAT* is puzzling!.. the idea of ending with molten zinc is puzzling!… if outside surface is 1050º, it only means that inside its not only quite above the melting point of zinc(419.53º), but also above the boiling point of zinc(907º), meaning what the HOT CAT has inside when functioning is already all gases, and perhaps under pressure!?…

      Maybe it can be pushed much further and have much higher COP with much better controls, but since its nuclear what will be the dangers !?… because the idea that the reaction stops when zinc melts cannot be applied for the HOT CAT only the eCAT.

      So the HOT CAT already functions with “metal gases” and hydrogen, meaning what ever is put in there is very inert related to each other, only the hydrogen produces reactions. Perhaps it can be pushed already quite higher being the limit the structural integrity of the reactor…

      Does it mean 100% SSM ? … perhaps its not advisable at all!?!..

      • Mario Marq

        Also the idea of a special zinc powder formula is “bogus”… it can be a powder… but not for long in functioning with the Hot Cat…

        So totally HOT CAT =/= eCAT

  • Ben

    When can we see a Hot Cat?

    • jedslater

      I don’t that is the right question!! the question is WHEN can we see this apparatus in working function? I already know the answer: When AR is ready! My personal opinion is that a lot is going on behind the scene, and this “battle” we will only know about when it is over. Until then we are passive watchers and can do nothing.

      • Barry

        Well put jedslater.

        • clovis

          hi, guys.
          I think the answer is when 3rd party data is reported,
          Come on–3rd party, replicators the world is waiting, to have our ppm party,-smile, I just hope the bad guys don’t get too them first.

      • telecommuter

        A lot going on behind the scenes?

        You mean Rossi can produce right now commercially viable units but something is keeping him from doing that?

        If so, what is all the presentations and data about? I.e., why bother with them?

    • Ged

      If we’d gone to that conference we would have :<