‘Strong and Very Well Organized’ Team Behind the E-Cat

Here’s an interesting comment by Andrea Rossi, giving an assessment of the strength of his team at the moment.

Dear Italo R.:

We are a very strong team and very well organized. Obviously we have learnt from Universities with which we made (and make) R&D. Between the E-Cat as it was 3 years ago and the E-Cat as it is today there are strong differences, and this evolution comes from the work not only of Leonardo’s employees, but also of all the University Professors we worked with and all the Consultants we ask the help of for specific issues. From November 2012 we also are teaming with the new Partners of the USA, and the evolution is growing exponentially, for many reasons.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

From what he says, there are a lot of people now involved, and the development of the technology seems to have benefited from the input of a number of people.

In the course of my research on this topic, and in communications with various people about it I come across pieces of information that I need to keep confidential — I will just say that I have strong reason to believe that Andrea Rossi is not inventing the information he presents in this statement. And no, I don’t know who the partner is.


  • Roger Bird

    Here is another thought that has occurred to me about Rossi. Assume only what we know for a fact about him. He is a very busy and creative guy. If we have not heard anything confirmed about him for more than a 13 months, what the heck is the guy doing? He MUST be deliberately keeping secret all of the busy and creative stuff that he cannot help himself from doing. He can’t be playing crossword puzzles and conning the world, because, well, that just isn’t him. And if the busy and creative things that he is doing is not important, then why keep it a secret.

    Was he a con artist 4 years ago? No. Yeah, he got into trouble with the government, but the government is corrupt, so this says nothing about the man’s character. He is a busy and creative guy. For 13 months we have gotten nothing but “Rossi says”. Why? Not because he stopped being a busy and creative guy, but because he has something terribly wonderful to keep secret, for now.

  • georgehants

    Google translate.
    —-
    Pietro F.
    December 28th, 2012 at 4:37 AM
    Ing good day. Rossi, its American partner has as main activity the production / distribution of energy? I know that the question is perhaps unfortunate but curiosity is so much! thanks anyway and good work.

    Andrea Rossi
    December 28th, 2012 at 5:31 AM
    Dear Pietro F.:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • HeS

      @:”production / distribution of energy”

      This probably explains Rossi strategy (this is brilliant move:). His partner will produce E-Cat for its own power plants. In this way, the mysterious catalyst will be kept secret long time (long enough to obtain a patent).

      • Peter_Roe

        That seems likely to be the probable strategy, most probably by producing a ‘drop in’ conversion package for an existing relatively low powered gas fired or coal fired generator module.

        • Peter_Roe

          I meant to say boiler module, not generator module – the likely intention being to make retro-fitting simple.

    • Peter_Roe

      OK, so the US partner is active in China, AND is primarily a producer/distributor of energy. This most probably means electricity, but (bearing in mind Rossi’s playfulness) could also mean heating equipment, including boilers.

      Not stated but implicit is that this particular producer is also a manufacturer of generator plant, and by extension of this logic, also manufactures plant for others (as a US energy producer there would be no need for a presence in China, so they must export their plant).

      Does this help us?

      • Peter_Roe

        From the General Electric website:

        “This is GE China. With every one of GE’s businesses present, China is GE’s second home.”

        http://www.ge.com/audio_video/ge/careers/china_this_is_ge_china.html

      • Peter_Roe

        UTC (inc Carrier Corp) have a research base in Shanghai, but the corporation has recently been caned for using US helicopter gunship technology in Chinese-made choppers, and would probably not be allowed to export any more novel technology for a while. In any case, manufacture power generation plant seems to be a secondary concern for UTC.

      • Peter_Roe

        Siemens also has a strong and established presence in China, where they are already involved in the energy field:

        “The Low and Medium Voltage Division, as a global leading supplier for power distribution, serves the entire product, system, and solution business for the power distribution infrastructure of public utilities, municipal utilities, industrial facilities, and buildings.

        The Division is responsible for providing reliable power supply equipment for conventional and regenerative power plants as well as intelligent, compact switching stations for distribution networks in metropolitan and rural areas. In addition, the Division supplies energy-efficient solutions for the integration of renewable energy and energy storage in the grid.

        It also ensures reliable power supply and grid stability. As a long-term reliable partner for China’s low- and medium voltage power distribution, the Division offers the entire range of vertical-specific low- and medium-voltage products, systems and solutions for electrical power distribution from a single source. Industries like oil and gas, metals, mining, marine, manufacturing can benefit from its customized power supply solutions.”

        Taken from http://w1.siemens.com.cn/pdf/Siemens-in-China_en.pdf

        On balance I think the ‘US partner’ is probably Siemens, as many have speculated.

  • georgehants

    julian_becker
    December 27th, 2012 at 8:01 PM
    Dear Mr. Rossi.
    I hope you had a good Christmas time and I wish you a fruitful year 2013.
    I would like to ask you 3 questions:
    1. Does Leonardo or your new partner also do research on a device one could call “Wet-Cat” (LENR reactions with ordinary tab water)
    2. In a previous comment you were asked if your research with other materials than Nickel.
    Iridium has a much higher melting point. Although it is much more scarce could this be a potential improvement in terms of heat production to Nickel.
    3. Do you do research on alloys with potentially even higher melting points?
    4. If question 2 is true, this means that any element could be transmuted to another via LENR reactions? (even if it is only a side product) If yes, maybe future geneneration will not only see you as the father of LENR technology, but also as the father of a very old dream come true: turning ordinary metals into gold.
    Kind regards from cold Jinan in China,
    Julian Becker
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    December 28th, 2012 at 3:01 AM
    Dear Julian Becker:
    1- no
    2- I do not know
    3- yes
    4- no
    Happy New Year to you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. Our US Partner has a strong presence in China, so I think a development of our technology there is likely.

    • Peter_Roe

      Unfortunately, as most of the candidates suggested so far have strong presences in China, this doesn’t really narrow the field.

      • georgehants

        Morning Peter.

        • Peter_Roe

          Morning George. It’s just as well that Rossi continues to drop us hints to play with or we’d be running on air by now!

  • georgehants

    PHYSICS NEWS
    Chinese scientists find evidence for speed of gravity
    by Staff Writers
    Beijing (XNA) Dec 28, 2012
    Chinese scientists revealed Wednesday that they have found evidence supporting the hypothesis that gravity travels at the speed of light based on data gleaned from observing Earth tides.
    http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Chinese_scientists_find_evidence_for_speed_of_gravity_999.html

  • Nixter

    Rossi has posted something new, he says, “We surely have already produced direct e.m.f., now we have to develop a real application.” (English corrected by me.),EMF is the abbreviation for Electromotive force.

    Noun 1. EMF – the rate at which energy is drawn from a source that produces a flow of electricity in a circuit.
    emf – the rate at which energy is drawn from a source that produces a flow of electricity in a circuit; expressed in volts.

    That is one amazing claim, if it is true, the present Rossi E-Cats will pale in comparison to the next generation of devices based on this new phenomenon. High temperature superconductivity and inverse resistance have been reported by LENR researchers, the scientific, technological ramifications of this development are truly off the scale. I hope this turns out to be true, it does indeed sound too good to be true, but if Rossi actually produces a positive test report, 1 Mw heat generator, or perhaps a demonstration of a closed loop Hot cat running a turbine Generator, this will validate that everything he has been saying is factual, lending credibility to todays EMF claim.

    This February we will see if Engineer Rossi can deliver on his amazing claims.

    • Jacob

      emf is a voltage source (equivelent to the battery) which pushes a current to flow in the circuit – the amount of the current flow depends on the emf value an circuit resistance.
      I= emf(volts)/ Resitance(Ohm).

    • wolfgang gaerber

      An LENR biased tunnel diode would be a good point to start with.
      I would assume that their setup involves a coil attached to a negative resistance with extra EMF seen.
      Otherwise the notation of “EMF” would make no sense.

      rgds.

      • Peter_Roe

        I’m not sure what a ‘negative resistance’ would be. I suspect that Rossi means that an electrical potential difference has been observed in some configuration, but that very little power can be drawn from it as yet.

        • wolfgang gaerber

          A negative resistance is somewhat power source.
          Normally we use voltage sources(with constant voltage) or current sources(with constant current).
          A negative resistance is somewhat more general source indicating that there is energy coming from – or the observed losses are lower than expected (which would indicate that they are compensated by a negative resistance).

  • Jacob

    Be patient every one – you will not see any practical reliable E-Cat reactor in the market before 2-3 years from now.
    And if you looking for better version then you have to wait another 2 years.

    • Zaghlool

      I have no problem with that, in this days time is passing is passing very fast (same as the lighting), 3 years of day pass fast as 3 months of the old days . Our time today is not blessed at all.

    • daniel maris

      So you are saying Rossi has been telling lies when he says that he has already been selling fully functioning E Cat reactors? Please clarify.

      • Jacob

        Daniel, I mean the home small E-Cat reactor – 10Kwatt ( not the industrial ones)

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          You’re probably right. These early models are likely a little crude and I doubt a major corporation will push for mass production until they’re convinced they have a polished, efficient, and fail-safe product. Then after a couple of successful experience in the industrial market, the company (and the certifier) will be confident enough to sell the domestic models. Hopefully 2013 will mark the debut of the eCat Model T.

          ~~~~~~~

          Young Henry Ford started his engineering career at Westinghouse and in 1891 was hired by the Edison Illuminating Company. In 1893 he was promoted to Chief Engineer. Thomas Edison was aware of Ford’s interest in building an automobile and encouraged him.
          http://www.todaysengineer.org/2011/Dec/history.asp

  • Richard Hill

    Slightly OT but a good read.
    Commercialisation of bench top hot fusion
    http://www.popsci.com.au/science/the-boy-who-played-with-fusion

  • georgehants
  • Martin

    63 people working at Leonardo, an unknown number of people working at the new partner. Not a single word about the E-Cat except from him who says. Not on twitter, not on facebook, no blog, no nothing. That’s what I call condidentiality. Maybe Apple should try to get some advice on how to stop new products leaks.

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

      But there is also “Cures” alias Domenico Fioravanti (cobraf.com).

    • Ged

      With thousands and thousands of employees, Apple, Microsoft, Intel, Samsung, and most other businesses do just fine in preventing leaks. So, not sure what you’re trying to say.

      Besides, we’ve had several informants leak us inside information (and even pictures!), such as “Cures” and Fransesco.

    • Roger Bird

      Remember that Apple is built by young people and for young people, and young people are generally not masters of morality and ethical behavior. Rossi is something like 61 and I am sure that he has all kinds of ages of people working for him.

  • Peter_Roe

    Sean – Discussions here often drift off topic for a bit when nothing much is happening. As for being a physicist or even being smart – if these were requirements, things would be very, very quiet on this blog, as there would only be two or three contributors at most!

    • Peter_Roe

      Whoops – that was supposed to be a reply to Sean, at the other end of this thread. Any chance of moving it Admin?

    • Gérard2012

      Einstein said: “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” If imagination is a form of intelligence, many people here are intelligent, myself included. It is best to have the knowledge to use it for the creativity and inventiveness, it pretty much set CAs.

      If knowledge is taken as an intelligence and that the goal is to simply repeat the dogmas and knowledge of schools … There is a danger be a dictionary or an encyclopedia in the best case …

      In french

      Einstein a dit: “l’imagination est plus importante que la connaissance”. Si l’imagination est une forme d’intelligence, beaucoup de personnes ici sont intelligente, moi compris. Le mieux est d’avoir la connaissance pour l’utiliser pour la créativité et l’inventivité, cela définie assez bien Andréa Rossi.

      Si la connaissance est prise comme une intelligence et que le but est de répéter simplement les dogmes et ses connaissances d’écoles… Il y a un danger a être un dictionnaire ou une encyclopédie dans le meilleur des cas…

    • NJT

      I agree, stay with us Sean your contribuions and comments are welcome and appreciated…

    • Sean

      Dear Peter, NJT & Gérard2012, thank you for your kind words. Sometimes I feel intimidated. But I am interested in the subject of LENR. In 1989 I was employed as an R&D designer for an electrical company. When I visited Power-Tech Labs in B.C. for the testing of one of my new inventions back in 1989, there was a great sense that Pons and Fleishman had discovered a massive electrical game changer. We knew that all these High voltage towers outside, would become obsolete. But then a bloke at MIT trashed it. I also agree that sometimes you do not need to be a university educated scientist to invent something. I have always believed in everyone’s ability to create. Imagination is key. (So is necessity.) I have learned this from both sides of my family. Mothers side all the way back to the automated loom. My father’s side, clocks to the development of the Turbo jet, power Jets, headed by Sir F.W., for whom he worked, (I met him, a really good man.) then RR nuclear in Raynesway. None of us ever became rich. But rewarded in the satisfaction of just doing the things we like to do. I have gone a bit technologically backwards, as I am now building a large 7 ¼” scale steam locomotive. I was hoping for a Hot Cat for the steam generation in Locomotive 4472. But am planning to make a Briggs style boiler for now.

  • georgehants

    Steven Karels
    December 27th, 2012 at 11:48 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    To the question “2. Have you or your new team already made trial runs of the E-Cat using chemical reactants other than nickel?”, you replied “yes”.
    1. Can you tell us which metals had positive (heat producing) results?
    2. For those metals with positive results, were the same or different catalysts required?
    3. Were any metals more effective than Nickel? Produced higher energy, higher temperature?
    4. Were all tests performed with natural Hydrogen?
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    December 27th, 2012 at 1:21 PM
    Dear Steven Karels:
    1- confidential
    2- confidential
    3- confidential
    4- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Peter_Roe

      There has been a lot of speculation in various places (including from myself) that the ‘hot cat’ uses a different technology and may be based on tungsten metal. If there is any truth in such speculation, the new reaction could conceivably have been discovered accidentally, when looking for a heat-resisting material for containing the original nickel reaction.

      • artefact

        A long time ago Rossi said on his blog something like
        “many metals work but nickel works best.”
        For higher temperatur that could be different or it is better to use a different metal due to the melting point problem.

        • Peter_Roe

          Unfortunately most of the ‘usual suspects’ copper, iron, zinc etc, have melting points lower than nickel. Cobalt is higher, but only marginally. There are other high MP metals such as osmium, rhenium, tantalum and so on, but it seems more likely that Rossi would restrict himself to reasonably inexpensive metals, which these are certainly not.

          There doesn’t seem to be any electrochemical reason to think that tungsten might be a cold fusion candidate – but it does have a very impressive melting point of 3400C if it was.

          • Warthog

            Actually, if you get into it deeply enough, there are indications that tungsten is indeed active. Only a very few experiments, and the data is somewhat inconclusive, and is considered even more “fringy science” than LENR, but strange things seem to happen when tungsten is in the presence of atomic hydrogen (i.e. bare protons). This goes back even to research by Irving Langmuir.

          • Paul

            The original reports for LENR activity from the late 1920′s (1929?) were in tungsten. The physics noble prize winning Ernest Rutherford (first to split the atom) was aware of the results but thought they must be an error. That’s pretty much where things sat for decades until Pons and Flischman – no one had any explanation for what was happening and the whole thing was put down to errors or other reasons. So tungsten instead of nickel? Who knows? But given its pedigree it must be a possibility.

  • georgehants

    Khashayar Shatti
    December 27th, 2012 at 11:31 AM
    A fuel cell generates direct electricity using fine platinium powder and hydrogen gas as you know. Are you planning to generate direct electricity from your e-cat or using separate electric generator?
    —-
    Andrea Rossi
    December 27th, 2012 at 1:19 PM
    Dear Khashayar Shatti:
    We are still making R&D on this issue. All the gates are still open. We surely have already produced direct e.m.f., now we have to develope a real application.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R

  • Renzo

    December 27th, 2012

    Joe

    Dr Rossi,
    1. Have your new partners in research already made important contributions to the stability of the E-Cat?
    2. Have you or your new team already made trial runs of the E-Cat using chemical reactants other than nickel?
    3. Do you continue to file new patents with each advance in the E-Cat?
    4. Has your business model been altered with the advent of your new partnership?
    5. Are you miniaturizing the E-Cats in order to maximize power density?

    Andrea Rossi

    Dear Joe:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    4- confidential
    5- yes

  • jjaroslav

    Rossi’s problem is that the secret ingregient is probably so patently obvious that he needs to hold onto this trade secret as tight as possible. Even if it were no so the ultimate issue for him is to protect his investment. For those not familiar with patents and trade secrets there are important differences. ie. Cocacola’s recipe has always been a trade secret. Without the protect of patent law and we know how weak can be the next best option is to maitain the technology as a trade secret. THe rules for this are rigorous.
    Aside from the fact that there are numerous paths being taken on LENR to market, Rossis critical challenges are to 1. Maintain ownership and control of his technolgy. 2. Enlist partners who will enable the technology to get to market and protect it once it is launched. 3. neutralize the obvious forces who have to fight this.
    It will be very interesting to watch how he accomplishes all these tasks.
    If in fact he has enlisted the ‘strong’ partner then he is or at least the technology is safe….

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      jjaroslov – “Rossi’s problem is that the secret ingregient is probably so patently obvious that he needs to hold onto this trade secret as tight as possible.”

      If the ingredient is so obvious, then why hasn’t Rossi’s competition succeeded in replicating his claimed performance? If the secret ingredient is so obvious, then that would seem to lessen the need for secrecy. Maybe the secret is more the technique, than the ingredient.

      • Jim

        “The obvious is not obvious until it is obvious”.

        • Pweet

          It seems the most obvious thing is, there is no secret catalyst.
          If there was then it would have been included in the patent application.
          What’s the point of filing a patent application for protection of a technology and then leaving out the one claim which actually makes it work?
          Without the “secret catalyst” he is trying to patent what is common knowledge, as proved by all the cold fusion projects now running.
          You would have to conclude there is no secret catalyst.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Dates of patents are all important.

        • jjaroslav

          So true Jim….but in the the reverse engineering world these things can often be quickly discovered. In writing patents you need to not disclose all the intricate specifics but still make it defensible. A fine line….and ultimately only really any good if you’ve got the muscle to fight infringments.

  • Zaghlool

    Well, unfortunately we live in bad age and time , it is hard to trust or believe any one – truth and honesty became a hard currency to find.
    To make me believe A.Rossi’s E-Cat device, let him make a working one to heat a 2000 sq feet house as a model and to report daily in this site about the the E-Cat status and house temperature.

    • Chris

      How would this differ from the usual “Rossi says” things?

      He has already told folks the results of tests, making available spreadsheets of measurement figures and the naysayers simply dismiss it and want to see something from an indepenfent third party. Then they challenge the independence of any third party, or even their very tertiarity. At this rate, they can dismiss it until they’ve seen it with their own eyes and perhaps even then say they themselves must be drunk.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        There are probably people on this earth today who will not believe human flight is possible until they see it in person.

        • Chris

          Or even after having flown London-Tokyo and back…

    • Ramsy

      Be patient, no harry, I beleive E-Cat is still in research and improvements stage.

      • Zaghlool

        Well,the research and improvements will continue every day as long as the Sun is still rising every morning.

    • Jacob

      I think the best E-Cat demonstration model is to run electric generator (by steam power ) and to connect the generator to electric load (such electric heater ).

  • georgehants

    TIME
    Science & Space
    2013: A Cloudy Forecast for Renewable Energy, With a Silver Lining
    Read more: http://science.time.com/2012/12/27/2013-a-cloudy-forecast-for-renewable-energy-with-a-silver-lining/#ixzz2GFnmVtA2

  • Gérard2012

    Crumbs ho hiss! the barrel of champagne is too hard to roll pfff … I’ll perhaps just take the case of champagne. but as they say in France, “When you love you do not count.” hic hic

    In french

    Ouf ho hiss! Les barriques de champagne c’est trop dure a rouler pff…J’aurai peut-être du juste prendre la caisse de Champagne. Mais comme on dit en France, “Quand on aime on ne compte pas”. Hic Hic

  • Renzo
    • freethinker

      He expose Hampus full name and occupation (if he got it right).

      It is so him, being the bully and self proclaimed chief of police he is.

      Presenting people a hundred times his own fibre as criminals with mugshots, how krivitesque.

      If nothing else he contributed with some entertaining(?) news in what is otherwise a slow period.

      • mikeS_50

        Krivit is a certified nut case who has lost all credibility.

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Time for him to return to his job day job as voice-over for “Kermit The Frog”.

        • Pedro

          Nut case or not… He is considered an expert in the field, quoted in articles, invited to do presentations (at NSA recently). His split personality-behaviour about LENR can be very damaging for the whole field.

    • AB

      Typical pseudoskeptic behavior of ignoring the strong tests made in response to criticism while focusing on the weakest tests.

      • Pweet

        Can you direct me to a test which you would consider one of the “strong tests.?
        I thought I had seen them all and I couldn’t find one which would fit this description.

    • Karl

      The self-appointed scientific journalist, the blogger Krivit kind of “KRIVITISM” seems to me be a perfect example of a fifth column behaviour, rather than promoter of Cold Fusion, he try to demolish it. Of one or another reason Krivit seems also to stubbornly refuse to admit anything in the development of Cold Fusion that is not in line with the Larsen theories.

      Those of us followed Cold Fusion evolvement the last years can remember when he failed to read a simple graph by the JET Energy demonstration. It is difficult to ignore the suspicion that he may just be a paid debunker to prevent and delay the evolvement of this new technology.

      • Ivan Mohorovicic

        He and his alternate ego Gary Wright are trying to make as much fuss and damage as possible to demonstrate their point that Rossi is harmful for the LENR field. So, if anybody even only loosely related with him gets damaged in the process, it’s not their fault, it’s Rossi’s so they should complain to him.

        If they really cared about the LENR field they would have simply opted to ignored Rossi completely and show the positive aspects, studies and applications. Instead, it looks as if they’re both (?) acting out in a personal vendetta in a very childish way.

        By the way, Krivit doesn’t promote Cold Fusion. In fact he strongly opposes it and supporters of this definition. The Widom-Larsen theory is the only one worth of being accepted and anybody who doesn’t agree (or thinks that LENR can be commercially exploited) is an enemy in the LENR field.

        A very similar way of thinking to that other (?) shutrossidown fellow.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          Krivit thinks he is back in the eighteenth century using pseudonyms like “Gary Wright”. His science IQ is also from the eighteenth century.

  • GreenWin

    At some point non-pathological doubt accepts the preponderance of evidence – even if it countermands orthodoxy. It is then that the human spirit emerges exclaiming, these are things you could have known for eons, if not for your myopic, small-minded solipsists crippled by their own fears.

    • daniel maris

      Hint to Greenwin:

      That spiel is really not boosting the case for believing Rossi’s latest version of what’s going on.

      And let’s remember Rossi has had teams and partners before now…what he hasn’t given us is 24/7 webcam evidence of his devices (so easy to arrange) or allowed fellow members of his technical (as opposed to his sales) team to talk to us about the E Cat (also, so easy to arrange).

      So any scepticism is ENTIRELY his own fault.

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

        -A webcam is easy to arrange, but what would it help or prove?
        -Your point about technical/sales I didn’t understand. Rossi and “Cures” blog, neither seems salesperson to me.

      • Peter_Roe

        ‘Skepticism’ comes in three main flavours – honest doubt, Pavlovian responses made in ignorance of the facts, or personality or agenda driven opposition. Only the first type is legitimate and deserving of any attention.

        People are obviously free to come to their own conclusions based on the evidence available to them, and if they have honestly considered this (all of it, not selectively) and still come to the conclusion that Rossi is involved in some strange pretense with an unknown purpose, then fair enough. The truth will be known soon enough.

        However, as has been stated many times in now-lost earlier comments, Rossi is not under any obligation whatsoever to provide ‘proof’ to genuinely wavering skepics, or for that matter in response to ignorant naysayers or to accusations and innuendo generated by pseudoskeptics in pursuit of their agendas. As Pekka says, what would it prove? Any determined skeptic would dismiss any such evidence as fake, and nothing would change.

        Besides which (as has also been said repeatedly) why should Rossi bother with such sideshows? He owes you and other skeptics nothing, has no reason whatsoever to ‘convince’ you, and would simply be confirming to his enemies in various camps that he must be stopped.

        All this has been pointed out on many occasions and I for one simply cannot understand why such futile ‘demands’ are endlessly repeated here. Lets just wait and see what transpires in the next few months shall we?

        • GreenWin

          Peter, futile demands recur as often as t-rolls receive payment. Just bidness. :)

    • Pweet

      @ greenwin
      who says,. “if not for your myopic, small-minded solipsists crippled by their own fears”
      I’m puzzled why comments like this can sail unhindered through moderation and yet mosts other posts, including many of mine, which cast doubt on a matter by simply stating facts can get permanently tied up in moderation or deleted. ??
      The comment clearly states that anyone who doesn’t have a blind belief in what someone else “says” is short sighted, small minded, self indulgent and metally crippled by their own fears.

      How derogatory does a post have to be before it is so derogatory that it cannot be saved by the posters apparent undying belief in what “Rossi says”?
      Just wondering? :)

      • Peter_Roe

        I think that whether or not a particular comment is allowed to survive depends on Admin’s judgement of its intent or purpose. If the intent of a comment seems to be destructive it will probably get deleted. If your comments that remain are any indication of the content of those that have been deleted, then I for one am not surprised at the high rate of deletion.

        • captain

          Overall, I think that Admin is doing a good enough job in keeping his blog running smooth: as deemed advisable, he deletes my comments too ;-)

          Keeping in mind that Rossi is pleased when he’s let to do his job in peace, he should appreciate this blog’s trend headlines.

          What does he think about certain comments relating his ‘creature’?

          At the end of this video

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LHXc7NNMiWo#!

          Rossi is saying:

          I respect the points of view of everybody, but I think that to go ahead with discussions about – this will work, this will not work – is a loss of time. If it works or not, we will see.

        • Pweet

          Just out of curiosity Pete, asnd if the question is not too “destructive”, how much longer can you hold your point of view in the face of the constant absence of any independent third party testing or sales of working products to known customers who can verify the products operate to the claimed specifications?
          3 months?
          6 months?
          12 months?
          2 years?
          5 years?

          I have a feeling there are some here who would wait forever.

          • Jim

            Well, let’s see, as far as my personal sense of timing goes, perhaps I could just check back periodically to see if you’re still posting, and then make up my mind.

            • Pweet

              :)

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

            To me it’s a question of understanding the data we have. Setting a time limit doesn’t make the task any easier. No one says, for example, “I give evolution theory 5 years to deliver convincing proof or else I believe in creationism”. Or if someone says that, he has already made up his mind, it sounds to me.

            The problem is the non-existence of a null hypothesis. That everything is as we thought it was before is not a good null hypothesis, because it doesn’t help us at all in understanding the data. By “data” I mean in this case all the Rossi and CF related direct and indirect information that we have.

          • Peter_Roe

            Pweet

            The balance of accumulating evidence has long since convinced me that Rossi has more or less what he says he has, so basically I am prepared to wait as long as it takes to see the public disclosure of a working device.

            Setting ‘deadlines’ would be arbitrary and therefore fairly meaningless in any real terms. However with that said, I do have some generalised expectations of a likely time frame, and the implications of a ‘no show’ within what I consider to be a reasonable period would have to be considered.

            As I believe that there is still a possibility that some attempt may be made by the US military or other vested interests to hijack the technology (or simply to try to suppress it) I would tend to consider a ‘no show’ to be possible evidence of successful intereference with the process.

            The continued deployment of shills on this blog and others dealing with the topic of cold fusion confirms the existence of such oppositional forces, and their willingness to continue funding such activities. The question is whether these parties have the power to go beyond such limited ‘harassment’ tactics, and if so how far they are prepared to go in opposing the emergence of cold fusion.

            • Pweet

              I would be amazed if there was even one shill replying to this web site.
              A shill would only be required if the technology was proven by verification of customers or by third party testing.
              In this case they might decide to cast doubts on the technology by saying it was dangerous or some other made up story.
              So far nobody needs to do that because I don’t think many people believe anyone can yet produce any meaningfull power.
              If and when that happens, then the shills might appear.

              • Peter_Roe

                Clever!

      • GreenWin

        Dear Mr. weet,
        you misunderstand my comment by refusing to acknowledge the principle set out in the first sentence: “At some point non-pathological doubt accepts the preponderance of evidence – even if it countermands orthodoxy.”

        “If you think that the excess heat effect is not real, you’re being oblivious to data.”

        Dr. Robert Duncan, Vice-Chancellor Research, University Missouri, SKINR

        Only those not accepting the preponderance of evidence do I couch in terms of myopia, etc. Happy New Year!

    • robyn wyrick

      Seasons Greetings, Greenwin!

      You know what would help?

      A clean, organized, referenced, and periodically updated list of that “preponderance of evidence”.

      For instance, it’s not precisely about the E-Cat, but a big tipping point for me was the Toyota announcement a few weeks ago.

      Unfortunately, the “Why I believe in the E-Cat” page is not updated, and also isn’t exactly chronicled very well (sorry Admin, no dig intended).

      And if I can make a plug, maybe something on this site, maybe during this lull in LENR news, this would be an opportunity to write something up. I think it could become a helpful information/news resource, beyond these daily posts and comments.

      Cheers

    • Roger Bird

      Greenwin, I loved it.

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

    Terry Blanton at Vortex had noticed that http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum now gives the following address info (note that http://www.defkalion-info.com by itself gives less):

    Main Corporate Office: 1140 Homer Street, Vancouver, BC, V6B 2X6, Canada – Tel: +1 604 683 5555
    European R&D Center: 5 via Bastia, Milano 20139, Italy – Tel: +39 0253 92829
    Greece Liaison Office: 3 Xanthou Street, Glyfada 16674, Greece – Tel: +30 210 7770602
    Cyprus Office: 3 Makarios III Ave., Loukaides Court 4th fl., Mesa Geitonia, Limassol 4000, Cyprus

    WE ARE CURRENTLY UPDATING OUR WEBSITE
    THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE

    In the meantime, please feel free to contact us
    [email protected]

    • daniel maris

      So what?

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

        DGT’s site has been down since December 6, with only an email contact address info. At least I didn’t know beforehand about a Milan office of DGT.

        I guess it’s not unfair to call their web management somewhat unprofessional because they didn’t seem to have a backup of their crashed website. (It’s an urban myth by the way that nothing can disappear from the web.) Also if this address info is meant for people to see, now almost no one sees it because it requires one to follow an old link instead of typing the main page address.

        Professional IT or not, it seems premature to count them out if they have presence in 4 countries and recently expanded to Italy.

      • freethinker

        Daniel,

        Defkalions doings ARE of interest. It shows that they are now formally in Canada but also claim R&D in Italy and also still maintaining a presence on Greece.

        Not every piece of information MUST be of earth shaking quality or content.

        Face it – we are in the middle of the christmas holliday, a classical period of news drought.

  • Jimr

    I hope all of this turns out well. But everything is based on “Rossi says”. Rossi says he has 63 employees, he has sold an interest in the company,independent company to report by the first of Feb. After following Rossi for two years I suggest some of you whom have only followed Rossi for six months or a year start preparing excuses such as , he has, no control over the timing of the report,etc,etc.

    • Peter_Roe

      The number of ‘likes’ tells me that you people are out in force today. It’s getting late in the day for pi$$ing in the pool, but it seems you can’t be stopped (entirely) – so have a ball while you can.

      • Jimr

        Peter, I hope more than anyone that this turns out well for Rossi and us. However his statements on working with Home Depot to sell home Ecats for $150, having robotics installed at a plant he operates ( it costs a lot to have a robotic factory sitting idle), all this said in late 2011 his promises go on and on. As I have said previously we must ignore most of what he says and go by what his constituents are saying, until they say he is a fraud I will hold out hope.

      • Gerrit

        For me both possible outcomes are equally supported by facts or circumstantial evidence, both positions are defendable.

        I think that Jimr voices an educated point of view.

        In one of his comments Rossi has already delayed the “1MW plant in operation at a european customer” from February to April. But that doesn’t really matter, because it will be “under NDA” anyhow. So the whole plant-in-operation will unfortunately be another “Rossi says” episode.

      • timycelyn

        Jimr, Take another look at Franks’ entry at the start of this blog item. Please read the last para again. Carefully.

        Of course, I suppose you can move on to ‘Frank says…’

  • Jacob

    It looks like a military organization regarding the secrecy.

    • Zaghlool

      Well, we need a spy satellite to know about this organization.

      • Stephen

        Yes, but pointing on Mars… I am not sure AR is talking about something belonging to this planet.

  • robyn wyrick

    Seasons Greetings, Everyone.

    My hope last spring was that Rossi would take a very maverick approach to releasing the E-Cat. I thought it would follow some trajectory like:

    1 – Demo
    2 – 3rd party demo
    3 – Peer reviewed report
    4 – Patent approval
    5 – International press fanfare
    6 – Mad rush to get products to market.

    And while a couple of these steps have obviously been taken/accomplished, as the time has progressed I have had to note that my imagined pathway to success was pretty ignorant. For one, I imagined that the USPTO would be less recalcitrant regarding LENR.

    But far more importantly, I hadn’t thought through the requirements for capital development. The need for massive capital inputs means that someone far richer than Rossi is going to need to drive this stage. The costs (and time and risks) of building just one public Cold Fusion power plant are astronomical, and yet I am hoping LENR would change the entire international (geo-political) energy landscape.

    I am very happy that Rossi has acted more thoughtfully than I would have. I think we have witnessed his ongoing education in the comments on JONP. But in the thick of it, I think it’s clear that (unless, of course, everything about him turns out to be a pointless, elaborate ruse) he has been positioning Cold Fusion for exactly the rearrangement of the international energy landscape that I had been hoping for.

    The news that he is no longer at the helm is very encouraging.

    • HeS

      @:”For one, I imagined that the USPTO would be less recalcitrant regarding LENR.”

      Not only LENR. What does it matter that someone wants to patent the device, which does not work (perpetum mobile:). If someone pay for the patent and its maintenance, it should not have any importance whether the device really works. Protects something that does not work so no one violates his rights.

    • Zaghlool

      “6 – Mad rush to get products to market.”
      Well, why that mad rush to the market ? and money love is the origin of every evil action in this word ?
      Let Rossi take his time to produce perfect product with no defects.

      • Paul

        “Let Rossi take his time to produce perfect product with no defects. ”
        -
        Obviously NOT an engineer. There is no such thing as a perfect product with no defects – never has been, never will.
        -
        Some engineers are willing to settle for good enough. Some are still running along side the plane with a screwdriver making one last adjustment.

        • Zaghlool

          Well Paul, you are dealing with atom issue (not a Christmas toy),every thing should be perfect and more than perfect.
          Sorry, that is my personal opinion.

    • Pweet

      ^^ @ robyn wyrick
      Regarding the statement above, “I imagined that the USPTO would be less recalcitrant regarding LENR”, their apparent “recalcitrance” in this case was well founded.
      The device was submitted with sketchy specifications at best, and worst of all , the magic secret ingredient which might have made the device work, if it existed at all, was not covered under the application.
      You simply cannot patent a process and say that the part which makes it work is secret. Otherwise anyone can patent anything which is still not invented and later claim it is covered under the awarded patent because it is covered under the undisclosed “secret”. The whole process would become ludicrous.
      The patent office objections and requests for clarification were clearly made and a date given for rectification by.
      So far it appears the rectifications have not been made.
      That is hardly a fault of the US patents office and is not due to recalcitrance on their part.

      • captain

        Have U already seen how USPTO is treating these subjects: Cold Fusion or LENR?
        Do U have a better knowledge on those matters after googlesearched for >help ending Heavywatergate< and the like,
        blog news?
        Do U think that Rossi has already given a brand new working prototype of his 'domestic e-cat' device for obtaining necessary certifications/validations from UL?

        Think awhile… Leonardo corp. is working hard and is making products ready for the market (the 1MW warm thermal plant): what are doing now said public institutions to protect, anyhow, Rossi's IP? Practically nothing, so far?

  • Marc Irvin

    I say we need to take the good with the bad. I appreciate that the master of this site is on top of the little things. That way I am confident that when something important really happens we won’t miss it. Also, I rely on this site to keep the vision and energy alive.

  • theBuckWheat

    The main issue for Rossi’s e-Cat is that the underlying physics of the reaction is not fully understood from a theoretical basis. The risk then is that the process he is exploiting could produce varying results. It is a smaller risk to the user that his e-Cat might suddenly stop working whereas the major risk is that for some unanticipated reason the process might start to work far too well and become dangerous in some way.

    The only solution is for Rossi to get as many e-Cat operating hours as possible under circumstances where any of these extremes can be logged and analyzed safely.

    I look forward to e-Cat as a successful product. It and other LENR devices will really change the world power and financial dynamics, for the better.

    • Warthog

      Actually, no we do NOT need the theory. It would probably make things better, but all forms of steam transport existed and were practiced LONG before the thermodynamics were understood (and in fact the science of thermodynamics was largely developed to understand steam power).

      We understand reliabililty and safety testing a lot better today, so can do a better job even in the absence of theory.

    • Mannstein

      The first operational jet was developed in Germany during WWII. No computers were availabel just slide rules to do the number crunching. It was a remarkable feat that the propulsion engineers pulled it of.

      • Sean

        Ooops.. I stand corrected. Just looked it up, I understand by Dr Hans Von Ohain. The inventor of the jet engine. Also Heron the mathematician for steam power as in Heron’s Aeolipile. Great inventions that changed the world. As I hope the ECAT will. Ecat Jet engine perhaps?

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Sean – “Ooops.. I stand corrected. Just looked it up, I understand by Dr Hans Von Ohain. The inventor of the jet engine. Also Heron the mathematician for steam power as in Heron’s Aeolipile. Great inventions that changed the world. As I hope the ECAT will. Ecat Jet engine perhaps?”

          Sean, how can you “stand corrected” if this was your only comment in this thread?

          • Iggy Dalrymple

            “The first patent for using a gas turbine to power an aircraft was filed in 1921 by Frenchman Maxime Guillaume.

            On 16 January 1930 in England, Whittle submitted his first patent (granted in 1932). The patent showed a two-stage axial compressor feeding a single-sided centrifugal compressor.

            In 1935 Hans von Ohain started work on a similar design in Germany, apparently unaware of Whittle’s work. His first design ran in March 1937, and it was one of his engines that powered the first all-jet aircraft, the prototype of the Heinkel He 178 in late August 1939.”
            http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm also wiki

          • Sean

            Sorry about that but I asked that my first comment be deleted. The follow up comment is still there. I have asked admin to remove this one also. The reason is that it is off subject of ECAT. I am not a Physicist or smart enough to be here.

  • Jason

    I would seem that the biggest problem with LENR is that once you start it up, it will run until the fuel in exhausted. The problem is turning it off safely.

    • Gerrit

      That is not entirely true. As far as I have understood it, the reaction(s) only takes place when the environment is tightly controlled. Once one of the parameters drifts of, the process stops.

      However, there have been reports of explosions and “over”heating LENR experiments. That anecdotal evidence is one of the reasons one should not rule out useable amounts of energy release for LENR.

    • captain

      Absolutely wrong! No issue at all.
      When U like, U may switch off an E-Cat, and without any problem. The device is so constructed that, as said by Rossi, for safety reasons only, a 4 hrs period is needed to have the system say fully’cooled down’.

      The same happens at startup, when a 4 hrs warmup period is needed to the reactor to reach its full operating power.

      And so, now as now, but in the future we’ll see.

      The Rossi’s system is built in such a way that it’s INTRINSICALLY SAFE anyway.

      More infos on what above can be easily found on Rossi’s answers of his journal…

      Is a sharp cutting knife safe for use? Yes, provided U use it with a sane brain.

      • Linda

        Hello Captain, nice to hear from you.

        Can you please explain why the eCat does not explode like some LENR experiments in the past have done?

        Thank you,
        Linda

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Linda – “Can you please explain why the eCat does not explode like some LENR experiments in the past have done?”

          I think I’ve read that there have been eCat explosions, but at night when unattended. The only LENR fatality was when a glass vessel exploded, I seem to recall at SRI. Since eCats use heavy metal reactors, they should be safer than glass research vessels.

        • captain

          In the past years, italian scientists mainly at UniBO have made several test just to know the possible limits of CF-LENR NI-H devices. Of course taking duly safety measures, as already explained by Stremmenos, Focardi and Celani.
          Rossi too made his own test on his e-cats: that’s why when he’s saying that his E-Cats having COPs ranging from 6 to approx. 11-12 are a Ferrari kept running like a turtle (tortoise), he’s right.

          Past experiments indicated that when COPs were approaching values of 150-200, possible explosions may occur (Rossi’s tests). Other sources talked also of limits up to 400.

          Even a common car engine ICE can ‘explode’ or breakedown if kept intentioinally running well beyond its limits! No surprise at all.

          But Rossi has made his reactors intrinsically safe, so that absolutely in no way they can explode: in the worst possible condition, a nickel meltdown occurs and that reactor automatically stops working.

          In the 1MW thermal power plants, as already recently said by Leonardo corp, should for any reason a reactor cease working, it can be be replaced by another unit kept dormant within the same plant. A certain amount of said dormants, say 10 percent of total, are fitted to ensure anyway to output power continuity. And this indicates that in those industrial plants, every aspect has been kept in due consideration.

          SAFE, CLEAN and CHEAP.

          • captain

            Franck, as already said, I can’t edit my typos :-(

            • admin

              Sorry, captain — I had to turn off the editing function because it has been causing problems for posting. Sorting it out is on my list of things to do

              • captain

                Thank you Admin!

          • Linda

            Thank you again Captain, that is an excellent answer. I especially like the way you speak with authority. Please don’t be overly concerned about your typos, what you are saying is very clear. :)

            Concerning the explosions, I understand the need to limit the power. I appreciate the self-limiting nature of the nickel reactor too. But that limitation, while insuring safety, also limits power and utility.

            Which brings me to the question, why don’t the Hot Cats explode? They run much hotter. They use tungsten, with a higher melting point, and that means much more power.

            Is it because they don’t need to run hot enough for steam? The picture I saw of one hot cat showed a bright light. Could it be using photon direct conversion?

            Thank you again for your responses.

            Linda

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

              Explosion means that something generates hot gas at high pressure very quickly – or that a massive hydrogen leak develops which makes an explosive mixture with air. In the prototype Hotcat there is no gas around except the small amount of hydrogen which is initially bound to a hydride. Perhaps he even has two hydride materials arranged so that hydrogen is gaseous only in a wanted temperature interval.

    • Warthog

      Two known mechanisms exist:

      “If” not running in “self-sustain mode” (i.e. with supplemental heating), turn off the supplemental heat. Temperature drops (due to continuation of heat removal for the higher temperature). Reaction stops.

      In “self-sustain mode”, vent the hydrogen pressure. Again, rx stops.

      An interesting tidbit here is that Rossi is no longer using “bottled gas”, but a metallic hydride supply system.

      There are such systems that have to be heated to maintain a given hydrogen gas pressure….if the heat is removed, the hydride strongly ab/adsorbs hydrogen, dropping the pressure.

      “If” the temperature of the hydride supply is maintained separately from the E-Cat by either electric heating or, for example, propane or natural gas, this boosts safety.

      One can, for instance, use a “fusible link” (basically a switch which is opened by melting a conducting metal alloy) inside the E-cat to cut the hydride heat if the E-cat itself overheats.

      This is a completely “fail-safe” approach.

      • clovis

        Hi,warthog,
        Some username you have there, smile, thanks for your thoughts on this very new power source, and as good a explanation as anything i have heard.
        I’s my belief that Dr. rossi, is being as safe as anyone can be in the production of his e-cat, he build’s his device as though it will be operating in his own living room, around his own family.
        You could not ask for more, thank you Dr. Rossi, for bringing, the world such a safe,and useful, and powerful, device.

      • Anonymous

        How do we know it’s safe? Because the inventor with a vested interest says so? Because GE says that their nuclear reactor will shutdown in containment is lost? What if the hydrogen supply stays on? What if someone wants to build a weapon out of it?

        Even if the ECAT works, we know NOTHING about it, and even Rossi himself may not have a complete model of the physics inside of it.

        This thing is not going to market any time soon if it is real.

        Finally, if it was real, it has been 18 months since Rossi and Defkalion revealed their cards, and we still have no confirmed test by anyone made public. If this was actually a true game changer, what it defies belief that Rossi and Defkalion would have remained silent or that information would not have spread.

        So, regardless though hopeful, I am doubtful of a successful commercial device coming from either of these two companies in the next 5 years, and I am doubtful that either of them can sustain their commercial venture beyond 5 years.

        If they are real, I would prefer that either or both step out with new PR releases on a regular basis that would at least let us know they have a credible device. It has simply been too long without an independent test and no one likes that and it serves no one other than the Oil and Gas cartels.

        • Peter_Roe

          You are right when you say that delay serves the interests of energy cartels, but I see no reason to believe that Rossi and his US partner are not proceeding as quickly as possible towards building a pilot plant of some kind. And if such a pilot plant is successful, why would this not constitute the basis of a ‘successful commercial device’? If, as seems likely, the intention is to build an electrical generator that uses ‘hot cat’ technology, then far from being unsustainable for more than 5 years, such a device is likely to be the single most successful invention ever put on the market.

          If it and its successors produce cheap, clean power with few drawbacks, how could it fail to be successful? I simply can’t follow your logic at all. And as for safety concerns, not only will every possible safeguard be built in, but an element of risk has never seemed to bother the nuclear industry, so why should it worry the specialists who will undoubtedly be running the first cold fusion generators, at least until any concerns have been eliminated by experience.

          • Anonymous

            “If it and its successors produce cheap, clean power with few drawbacks, how could it fail to be successful?”

            If it produces ionizing radiation, OR if it can “blow up” like an atom bomb, it needs to be made safe. GE spent 25 years developing the Fukishima reactor and it still ruined 500 Sq Miles of land around it with fallout. Half a test or the word of the investor isn’t good enough — sorry.

            So, without a verified physics model, how is any country going to know that a Rossi reactor (assuming it works, an untested if) is a safe item to operate.

            The answer is that will take a LONG time for real testing authorities, not UL, to determine. That prevents the device from becoming commercially viable in the next several years AFTER we have a demonstration that LENR is real and not chemical.

            At least that prevents installing a powerplant on the odd lot worth of funding that Rossi may have obtained. If LENR is real, we are probably several billion dollars of science and engineering away from the authorities letting Rossi operate a LENR “powerplant”. This is a project the size of GE or Siemens and the project would need their resources. Maybe Rossi has a contract with a GE or a Siemans, but if he does, why not disclose. More likely he has a small amount of external funding.

            • Peter_Roe

              I see you are preparing the ground for a long predicted phase 2 of the misinformation campaign: ‘OK, so it works – but it’s dangerous’.

              The fact is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the hot cat device produces ionising radiation, or that that there is any possibility of a nuclear-style explosion. You are simply inventing ‘safety issues’, presumably as part of a general brief aimed at providing a faked basis intended to justify licensing or otherwise controlling the technology. Unfortunately for this tactic, a theory of operation will probably emerge quickly as the technology develops, but in any case engineering methods of fully controlling and stopping the reaction will be quickly identified and implemented to provide safe operation.

              • GreenWin

                …that will take a LONG time for real testing authorities, not UL, to determine.

                Oh? Real testing authorities?? A vane attempt to grasp control.

                Nicely defined Peter. You are dead center. We might say, where anonymous goes, Yugos too.

                Happy New Year Peter!

  • http://www.coprinf.com.ar Pachu

    Does anyone else notes a tendence to meaningless posts in this blog in the lasts weeks ?

    Sorry Frank its just what i see, some months ago a new post on e-catworld was some interesting news happening.

    Happy holidays!

    • georgehants

      Pachu, very much look forward to you putting up some “interesting news” or failing that a comment containing an interesting view.

      • http://www.coprinf.com.ar Pachu

        Hi george, im a blog reader not writer, i use the comments section to comment.

        I have shared my view on the comment, if you or any find it interesting or not, doesnt make the subject of the main posts of the blog.

        • georgehants

          What would you suggest Admin writes to make in interesting for you.

          • daniel maris

            “Rossi is going to arrange a 24/7 webcam demonstration of the E cat which he has claimed, for the last year or more, is a working device that can heat a building and which has been sold (total of 13 units) to various buyers.”

            That would get my interest, George. Wouldn’t it get yours?

            • georgehants

              daniel, can I suggest then that you put that to Rossi on his page and give us his reply to you.
              If a negative reply you may wish to moan at Rossi and not Admin for apparently not doing things your way.

              • GreenWin

                Some just want it MYWAY, George… Forget community.

    • John-xyz

      Well, yes. I think that maybe Admin feels that he has to post nearly every day, which means a lot of contemplative posts as well as a few way out there posts about things that are highly unlikely (as an example, a youtube video a few weeks ago).

      That said, I enjoy coming to this website. It is a good summary of what is happening and also Admin is not a blind believer which would be annoying (you can tell he’s not by his use of the word “if” on a lot of the posts).

    • john E

      A few meaningless comments perhaps, but not posts.

    • Gerrit

      Sometimes the post itself does not bring much new information, but the ensuing conversation is worthwhile nevertheless.

  • Greg Leonard

    Great stuff Frank.
    Are you going to run a poll on who we think might be the partner?
    I would put Google in to list.
    Greg

    • clovis

      Hi, Greg.
      Good, to have you comment here,as i know you have a great incite into
      energy production, in many forms, we here invite you to please drop in anytime. and a poll is a great idea. my guess and only a guess is that it’s GE. who better to put this device, out there to the people,–clovis

  • Nicklas Rudfell

    I dont know if this pdf has been posted here at E-catworld.
    Its From september 2012 regarding Cold Fusion from NASA

    http://www.drboblog.com/lenr-presentation-from-nasa-new/

    • Adam Lepczak

      It seems like old stuff. I’ve seen it before actually.

    • Peter_Roe

      But thanks, anyway!

    • georgehants

      Nicklas, yes thanks for contributing.