I thought it might be a bit of fun to try and makes some educated guesses about who Andrea Rossi’s new and seemingly very important partner might be. There are not very many clues to go by, but a couple of recent comment by Andrea Rossi gives perhaps a bit more information that might help narrow down the candidate.
Rossi responded to some questions from a JONP reader in China, and at the end of his responses stated: “p.s. Our US Partner has a strong presence in China, so I think a development of our technology there is likely.”
He was also asked if the partner “has as main activity the production / distribution of energy?” Rossi answered yes.
In addition to the above, a few other things that Rossi has mentioned about the partner are:
- It is USA based
- It has the capability to develop E-Cat technology as much as required by market forces
- It shares Rossi’s philosophy (Desire to put technology to the service of mankind, low-cost manufacturing, philanthropic, creation of good jobs)
As I mentioned previously, I have come across some information that makes me feel very confident that Rossi is telling the truth about the existence of a partnership.
So who do you think might fit the bill?
Loading ...
Saving...
It is possible that this is more known companies? What are the companies that could successfully complete the LENR technology?
in french
Il est possible que cela soit plusieurs entreprises connu? Quelles sont les entreprises qui pourraient se compléter avec succès pour la technologie LENR?
Two month ago I asked admin to put this question in e-catworld poll
Who is partner ? I have few company’s for vote – GE, Westinghouse, Siemens.
My guess is Florida Power and Light (http://www.fpl.com/about/profile/company_profile.shtml), a subsidiary of NextEra Energy, Inc.
Rossi’s home in Miami Beach is probably consuming electricity provided by Florida Power and Light.
It’s too small for Rossi’s programs!
NextEra Energy starts with an “N”
It looks like this is all taking shape as I predicted it would months ago… come on a flight of speculative fancy with me;
Our story begins with Andrea Rossi, a good man, driven by passion and idealism who discovers a technology that will provide humanity with effectively free energy forever.
Except he has one little problem – Rossi needs money to develop it. He swears he will never compromise his dream, but cap in hand he courts the capitalists.
To the capitalists, Rossi is no hero, rather, he’s a dangerous man, as well as a potential cash cow. His dreams of electricity “too cheap to meter” are a familiar nightmare to these people. He is a threat to the entire industry, one that must be harnessed and used, then discarded, just like Westinghouse did with Tesla.
But the warping of Rossi must be done slowly – threaten him, frighten him, he will release it to the world. He must become convinced, gradualy, to see “reality”; that the eCat is too “risky” for home users, that it really does take 20 years to bring out a new car engine, and that the only way his invention will ever see the light of day is if it is “entrusted” to those “established players” with the knowledge, contacts and expertise to roll this technology out to the world. Sure, they’re billionaires, these electricity barons, but they own the existing power infrastructure. They’re really not bad guys, after all, they just want to feed their families, like anyone else.
On cue, the oligarchs come out with their lawyers, and welcome him with open arms, but not too close. They sniff, and smiling falsely, they motion their lawyers to ask, “What is the alternative? Do you want to die in obscurity, frustrated, like P&F, friendless, powerless, and labelled a crank?”
They push a fat stack of papers and agreements at him. If he signs, he will be rich. At length, he is convinced. Of course he forgets his original intention, that if he should ever lose his dream, if anything ever happens and the technology is stolen, he will publish everything he knows to the world. He is too relieved at having saved his house to worry about that now.
Besides, he does not think of his technology as having been “stolen”. He was paid, and he will keep on being paid, if he sticks to the deal.
Yet it is. He was the custodian of this inspiration, as sure as if it had been gifted to him by God. It was not stolen from him. It was stolen from humanity, to whom it rightly belonged. Future generations will not thank him, and that is putting it mildly. Because in years to come, despite Rossi’s incredible breakthrough, electricity prices will mysteriously continue to rise, just as they have done in spite of all the incredible advances in solar, wind and so on. Eventually, it will be obvious to even the rag pickers on Smokey Mountain, all Rossi has really done is multiply the profits of the oligarchs forever.
Rossi’s secret is safely locked away from the pleading hands of the starving billions living in poverty for whom it was intended. It is safe in the vaults of those who already have more than they will ever need, yet are never satisfied. The greedy ones have it now. Posterity will surely condemn this poor steward, Rossi, to whom much was given, and of whom much will be demanded.
I have said it before, and I will say it again, I have no doubt Rossi’s invention works. But we will never see free energy or LENR cars or home eCats in our lifetimes unless someone else discovers the trick and gifts it to humanity. If you need a clearer explanation of how this works, ask the heirs of George Westinghouse, or Nicola Tesla.
Linda – that is excellent. It’s not only the most well-written comment I’ve seen in a very long time, but it also lays out very eloquently exactly what I am also sure is the way in which the cartels have chosen to deal with Rossi (and probably any others who seem to be coming close to launching products).
Personally I don’t condemn Rossi for his decisions as you seem to – we can’t know the full extent of the pressures that were applied to bring about the ring-fencing of his technology, and it may be that he simply saw no alternative. However I have believed for a long time that this outcome was inevitable, and the exact mechanism hardly matters.
Admin, perhaps you would consider making Linda’s comment your ‘featured comment’ until such time as someone posts something even better (i.e., for a very long time!).
Admin, If you want this website to be taken even a little bit seriously I would advise you don’t take the above advice.
Linda says herself it is “a flight of speculative fancy”, and that is to put it mildly.
Posts like this do nothing but make a sane person shake their head in disbelief that anything like this could be posted on a site promoting something scientific.
There are a number of people here which are now weaving Rossi into the book of Revelations and various other biblical texts and prophecies. It diminishes the respectability of the whole web site and gives the impression that the site has become nothing more than a pooling of the intellectually impaired.
I know this post will be permanently tied up in moderation or deleted, but I’m writing it with the intention that it will at least be read by you. Please read it and consider.
regards,
Pweet
Your comment is completely unjustified – no-one is attempting to mythologise Rossi. It is in fact a classic ‘straw man’ attack typical of more intelligent shills (ref. items 2. and 5., ‘Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist’ http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html).
Linda’s post, although self-described as fanciful speculation, in fact seems to reflect unfolding reality rather closely. The fact is that the domestic e-cat is to all intents and purposes buried and there are no indications of any other small scale applications such as vehicle propulsion, the 1MW unit is available only to certain ‘qualified’ types of buyer – probably military entities, and the ‘hot cat’ technology is now exclusively in the hands of a US corporation.
These are exactly the patterns of development that this site is concerned with. The fact is that it cannot be “a site promoting something scientific” because it is not a marketing forum, and in any case few specific details of the engineering involved are available.
Your purported concern for what is or is not appropriate in comments on this blog strikes me as entirely insincere, especially considering the content of your earlier posts.
Perhaps you’re too pessimist, other competitors will develop commercial Lenr apparatus in the next years, even not so efficient: researches are starting all over the world with big companies involved, see e.g. a famous international company starting with “S”, which contacted the most notable scientists and experts in the field, made them to speak on their secret researches with the promise of a collaboration and then sent them at home at empty hands.
Yes. As soon as it is clear that Rossi’s device works, there will be a gold rush to uncover the secret by more or less legal means. Billions will flow until success is met. If some country or company tries to prevent it, there are many other “barbarians” who don’t think twice about it. So I don’t agree with Linda’s analysis except possibly the early part might be true (approximately until sentence “Yes it is”).
I don’t like it but I’m afraid this is a very good description of what’s really happening behind the scenes !
The only good thing which might come out of this in the end is that at least pollution is gone or reduced because we’re not burning oil anymore and that’s in the interest of the rich as well, they too need clean air and water to be able to continue their luxurious life on this planet.
Linda, this is an excellent analysis, and you are to be congratulated on it. However, I am afraid I will, in one major aspect, have to beg to differ.
I have no doubt that the history you sketch is quite close to the truth, and agree that this likely charts the slow ‘control’ of Rossi.
Furthermore, if the US & EU were the only significant players in the future of LENR both as markets and as sources of technology (eg imagine Rossi’s catalyst was a rare element that came from one mine in Arizona, say)then I would agree that a very possible future would be the triumph of the oligarchs in controlling this energy source.
However, otherwise, I would have to contest your view of the longer term future. Everything you suggest is quite believable in an EU/US context in the short & medium term. However, in the long term energy prices from LENR will either have to fall to a much lower level, and probably decentralised LENR based power will be allowed, or these economic areas will go totally bust.
This is due to the fact that the developing powerhouses of the world economy – India and China – will want to do their own thing, and from my limited knowledge of the two countries I find it unlikely that this would be some sort of parallel monopolisation of the technology. The needs for energy in these countries, which are developing rapidly yet have poor distribution infrastructure, point the other way, to many many decentralised plants.
It is also clear that though Rossi has a very useful form of LENR technology, others will rapidly create alternate versions that could be used there, no matter what kind of monopolies the ‘West’ ties to impose.
When one tries to predict the future one really generates branching, conditional, predictions, but for what it’s worth my predictions are:
1. Within 10 years, in the West, large scale electricity generation from LENR will be a fact, but local, decentralised energy sources (heat or electric) will, for the reasons you and Peter elegantly describe, be unfortunately delayed…and delayed….
2. On the same timescale, not so much will have yet happened in India/China. They will probably have one or two elec plants, but will be working hard on their own smaller kit.
3. Looking out 20 years, India and China will be powering ahead, as decentralised energy from LENR allows continued rapid development of their economies without massive imports of carbon fuels or large infrastructure investment.
Darn, pressed the wrong button! To continue (first part of text seems to be in moderation):
4. The ‘West’ will by then be in serious decline. Depending on branching futures we have possibilities of:
i)Bootlegging of Chinese LENR plant
ii) Massive voter unrest at being denied this plant on reasons that become harder to defend. Given tat politicians will sell their souls to get elected.
iii)Sooner or later (UK anyway) someone will promise (probably for the third time, the first promises won’t be honoured) to allow the import of such kit and relax restrictions.
iv) The longer the cheap energy is withheld in these countries, the more they will decline economically. To me, the real question is when the oligarchs will be forced to take the brakes off, before or after our counties are destroyed by imports with which we could never, ever, hope to compete…
Tim, I agree absolutely with your caveats and prognosis for the longer term. My own warnings (and possibly Linda’s) are for the short term, i.e. the 10 (or possibly 20) year window following initial introduction of CF (grid) generators, and are really just intended to provide a counterweight to the (I think) over-optimistic assumptions expressed by a few that some kind of utopia will immediately follow the public introduction of CF.
The fact is that the current triumvirate of banks, energy cartels and governments have the rest of us by the dangly bits, and are not going to let go in a hurry. The whole roll-out will be carefully orchestrated to minimise their losses and to squeeze every drop of profit from the new energy source, without any regard whatsoever for the wellbeing of the people of the planet. Politicians in turn will act to reinforce the monopoly, will cream off a huge slice of the profits in taxes and kickbacks, and will lie through their teeth as usual in order to depict black as white, by making heavy use of the AGW ‘save the planet’ fantasy.
The single factor that will determine how long it takes for the wheels to come off this cosy arrangement is the time it will takes other parties (possibly outside the US-dominated world) to replicate the ‘hot cat’ (by far the more significant tech) or to come up with another ‘free’ energy source of equal utility. (And also to survive long enough to get it into production, or better still, to release the details on the Internet.)
Future uncertain…..but very exciting nonetheless
Cheers
Tim
There is some hope. If Rossi partner is not as big as GE or Siemens but the medium-sized company, then production of the E-Cat may be an opportunity for this company for rapid growth. My favorite is the Bosch company.
Wikipedia about Bosch: “privately owned corporation that is almost entirely (92%) owned by a charitable foundation”!
I the ‘partner’ is not a part of the existing cartel, it will probably be very quickly bought out by a company that is (probably even before its shares have a chance to rocket, by forcing a moratorium on trading through some pretext).
@:”be very quickly bought out by a company that is”
Bosch can not be bought by unknown investors. Only 10% of the shares is on stock exchange. This is a “family” business.
You missed my addendum then?
Sorry – missed ‘privately owned’. I’m sure an alternative means of ‘absorbing’ a rival would be found though.
Peter
“I’m sure an alternative means of ‘absorbing’ a rival would be found though.”
Everyone has a price. You only need to figure out what that price is.
The flaw in this conspiracy theory is China. The Chinese government HATES having to import hundreds of billions of dollars per year of oil. They know that they have have a terrible air pollution problem with coal, but they don’y have a viable alternate energy source. The big vested interests, like Big Oil, Big Utilities etc… don’t hold sway over there. If LENR works, China will deploy it on a MASSIVE scale and there will be no hiding it or burying it. If LENR is for real, the only choice the West will have is to build LENR industries ourselves or import them from China, because one way or another, China will do it.
I posted something similar to this as a reply to a number of other posts in this thread. I probably should have just posted it as a general reply to all, so here it is.
Most replies name publicly listed companies which are listed on various stock exchanges in Europe and America or both, so it cannot be any of these without a public announcement on the relevant exchanges.
For all companies listed on the stock exchange, anything which can “reasonably be expected” to affect the share price MUST be declared to the public as soon as it becomes known.
If not, big penalties apply.
There have been no announcements therefore it is none of these. (GE, Siemens, Phillips, Mcdonalds, etc.
You will have to pick either a government department, or an unlisted company or a venture capitalist group, or a private individual.
( It could be Dick Smith. He fits the criteria. He is not a public company, he’s interested in this sort of stuff and I happen to know he still has a million dollars available because to this point it has still not been claimed.)
I`m not so sure about the stock exchange disclosure thing forcing these large entities to reveal their activities. It could be easily argued that disclosure should not be made until it’s prudent to do so in order to protect shareholder interests. To me, the only American based company with interests in power generation in China and with the sort of resources to make this happen decisively is GE.
While Pweet’s point about publicly traded companies seems valid, I’m sure that there are ways and means to introduce delay into the process.
So long as outright acquisition (of Leonardo) is avoided (by for example entering into a joint venture for the purpose of R&D) it could be argued that this does not materially affect shareholder interests because the outcome is unknown, and so need not be disclosed. Such arrangements could be further downgraded in importance if the whole things was conducted through a subsidiary such as Carrier Corp.
Obfuscations such as these would only need to hold for a few months in this case, i.e., up to a point where construction of a pilot plant has been successful – at which point a full declaration could be made in the knowledge that share prices would rise very rapidly.
That might have been possible except for the fact that one “partner” in the agreement (Rossi) has now been trumpeting “a partnership” deal with a very large and influential company. Once one party to the deal has spoken out it is impossible by any means whatsoever that the other party in the partnership could remain silent, if they are a listed company trading on the NYSE. And presumably it would be if it was a listed american company.
Whenever such deals occur, and they often do, a common text is drafted out and both companies post the same text on the same day with the relevant stock exchange.
Since Leonardo is not a publicly listed company they would not be obliged to post anything, but the listed company certainly would be.
Whether the technology is real or not, a partnership agreement with another entity would most certainly require full and fair notification to the stock exchange, and Rossi has publicly said a number of times he has a “partner”.
And the notification has to be given immediately the information becomes known. If it can’t be, and often it can’t, then the company has to request that the shares in that company are placed in a trading halt until such time as an announcement can be made. (also quite common and usually two working days but they mostly do it over a weekend which gives them four)
There is no way around this.
They are regulations which are strictly enforced.
WE don’t know really what the deal is. Rossi is always a little loose on these remarks he makes on JONP.
If the ‘partner’ isn’t a partner, but an owner, or an owner in future if certain things happen, then what…?
Under the regulations, even “rumors” (american regulation so american spelling) require an announcement.
If the “rumor” is false then it has to be reported and denied.
With Mr. Rossi publicly claiming a partnership, I think that would qualify as a rumour. It would need to be reported and then confirmed or denied.
Pweet
We actually have no Idea what their agreement is. Very Likely nothing to disclose at this time.
It could all be done under R&D at the Entities Expense with Rossi being the Chief Scientist in charge.
R&D Expense for new Turbine design research draws little attention. Business as Usual.
If Rossi delivers in February, then by June or July we should hear something IF it’s a Public company.
The (Provisional-if/when it works) Partner at that time could announce/disclose a formal exclusive licensing agreement with Leonardo at a shareholders meeting. To manufacture & sell/distribute H-cat Generators under license from Leonardo. Shareholders Eyes Glaze Over. See nothing but Green.
This could all stay well below the radar until then as no large sums of money has changed hands. It would all be dependent on a working system. Nothing formalized until then. Nothing to disclose. It’s R&D…
This is a new technology. This is a very likely/possibly terms for an agreement. Corporations do this occasionally(Corporate VC). Technically a Partnership.
They will use their venture capital companies.
Material disclosure in the US need only happen quarterly or even yearly so there is a delay built in to any disclosure. Furthermore the whole notion of materiality is very subjective and any company aligned with Rossi can claim things such as “evaluation”, “product development”, etc which means the partnership is not material to their bottom line. So I think your point is not applicable. Once a product is eminent for sale then it probably is material.
Rossi’s got nothing or he would announce the partner. He’s stretching out his “delivery” date in the hope he can find someone to finance whatever he is doing. The partner if it had half a brain would never let him speak on JONP with language like “snakes”.
Sigh. Can these guys read, or does the patho-skep tendency cause regression of reading age to somewhere around ‘The Fat Cat sat on the mat’ whenever they encounter something not in accord with their prejudices?
Again – take a look at the second to the last sentence in Frank’s piece at the top.
Regarding the comment about JONP, I’m sure that is causing a lot of gritted teeth in the partner company, and indeed since the date of the sale of Leonardo to that company Rossi has been much more circumspect on JONP. His continuing on there was no doubt ‘Grandfathered’ as a very minor part of the deal. He always maintained that he gets good ideas from the blog, otherwise he wouldn’t waste his time with it.
This is true as those of us that have followed this for a while will remember one blog contributor that gave him the idea of using shipping containers.
“Sigh. Can these guys read, or does the patho-skep tendency cause regression of reading age to somewhere around ‘The Fat Cat sat on the mat’ whenever they encounter something not in accord with their prejudices?
Again – take a look at the second to the last sentence in Frank’s piece at the top.”
Frank: “As I mentioned previously, I have come across some information that makes me feel very confident that Rossi is telling the truth about the existence of a partnership.”
Dear Timycleyn,
“Some information” does not mean a public announcement. A public announcement with a legitimate partner adds legitimacy. Thus it is rational from the point of view of Rossi and the partner to make a public announcement that “[GE or Siemens] and Leonardo Corporation are announcing today a [joint venture or minority investment] in the ECAT technology”. It improves the situation of both companies and promotes further cooperation with their parties. I state that if a legitimate partner has made an investment (and not a consortium of unknown private individuals hoping to make an extraordinary return on their investment), it should be announced.
Therefore, unless you have public information to the contrary, I state that it is highly unlikely (95% confidence) that at this time (December 30th, 2012) there is a joint venture or investment with a major counterparty like a GE or Siemens.
Finally, it serves no purpose using language like “Sigh. Can these guys read, or does the patho-skep tendency cause regression of reading age”. On the internet people have a tendency to use aggressive language when they don’t see people face to face, and that lowers the quality of the discussion. Instead, you can bring up the level of the discussion by saying something like “Perhaps you have over looked the fact that Frank stated in the second to last sentence that he has “come across some information” that confirms the partnership”. I highly suggest that you always avoid insulting or ad-homonym statements when blogging on people who’s viewpoint you disagree with. It makes your writing more effective and it makes the blog better for people who are interested in the subject. I am a scientist by training who makes probability based assessments. I know that I can be wrong. My stock in trade is in the accuracy of assessing the probabilities from the available information in the amount of time that I have to gather it. I have done more first hand research than I am willing to disclose on this subject of LENR/ECAT. I remain hopeful that Rossi himself is going to be successful, but I have my current assessment and I am waiting for information to help me change my assessment beyond non-public rumors.
Anyway, that said, thank you and the bloggers here in ECAT World. I appreciate your viewpoints.
Anonymous
Anonymous, thanks for your viewpoint. I try to remain civil, but occasionally the sheer repetitive nature of the discussion we seem to be involved in strains my good nature. I am duly chastened.
Having said that, I’m afraid that if I conclude someone is just trolling or behaving as a paid shill, I’m likely to react vigorously, and in that situation make no apology for my tone. Your posts have left me a little uncertain on this, and indeed previous ones had me suspecting one of these was the case. The more reasonable tone of your current reply therefore deserves a more reasonable reply from me.
Having dealt with that, I find your argument partly fallacious. As it happens, I too am a scientist and also have to carefully weight the pros and cons of a technical situation where only some of the facts are known, on a regular basis. I have followed this fascinating and confusing tale since the early days, and have formed the opinion that by far the most straightforward explanation of the observed facts, lies in a narrative that runs with the grain of what Rossi is telling us, with all due allowance for his frequent changes in direction due to technical and regulatory events; coupled with his very poor communicating of these changes.
Whilst the duty of disclosure of any share value affecting event on public companies is clear, there is, in fact, always a lot of greyness and fudging at the margins to determine when an event becomes value affecting. The duty to report steps that may lead up to a value affecting event, if at present there is no clear increase in value,and indeed no guarantee any will ever occur, is much less certain.
I can state this with some confidence as I’m involved, in my own industry, in something a little similar. At present, we have some evidence that is good enough to cause us to invest some money – in partnership with another company – in something that has an ~acceptable ~ chance of success. However, the effect on either company’s worth is, today, negligible. If our joint project works and we take the decision to move towards the market, then it might affect values and, certainly, would need to be reported.
I would suggest that the recent state of Rossi’s technology is exciting, promising BUT it has not yet:
i) Generated electricity
ii) Received approvals that would allow mass marketing of heating units
iii) The hot cat is still in development
The only thing that may have sufficient approvals to be sold is the ‘warm cat’ (the shipping container thing) and that is so horribly obsolete opposite the Hot Cat it is not going set the world on fire.
Of course, events are moving very quickly now, and it is undoubtedly true that soon, such a partner/owner will have to come forward if success leads to a situation where shareholder value will be affected.
Having followed this story for a long time, I believe that it, in common with much technical evolution and development, is riding an exponential curve. This apparent rate of development, so far invisible to us observers (other than by ‘Rossi says’ and a few other comments on specific issues, like Frank’s comments above), HAS to break cover properly in the next few months, the duty of disclosure by the partner company is one mechanism that will enforce it, there are many other routes as well.
I would say now, that if we reach the end of 2013 still in ‘Rossi says’ land, I’ll go and watch something else…..
Love and kisses
Tim
Tim,
First, you wrote a good well reasoned reply. Thank you.
I am of the opinion that Rossi himself believes he has something, but that he is not in a position yet to prove it. I believe that multiple investment partners have invested time and money with Rossi, but that they too have been unable to prove the ECATs work as expected.
I believe that Rossi has received some funding and continues to receive some funding, but this is not from a major industrial partner who is willing to go on the record because there remains insufficient proof of a “breakthrough”.
So Rossi is stuck in the in-between place between having something that is promising, but no proof, and no major industrial partner.
Hopefully Rossi will get the third party report that he needs to go to the next level. I do not believe it is ready yet, and I believe there is a good chance, at least 50/50, that the report when produced is unable to show that the energy produced is not exothermal chemical from a hydrogen metal hydride reaction.
So, it looks to me that Rossi may be on to something, but he cannot go public because what he has now is insufficient to sustain further investment funding which he needs to eventually prove the device.
Now for the bad part. There is also a chance that after extensive testing ECAT turns out to be false positive, and Rossi’s current investors will loose everything. If it was done properly this is all “fair and square” as an R&D investment.
So overall, my assessment that Rossi currently has a joint venture or investment from a major like GE or Siemens is 5%, and my assessment that he can produce a “breakthrough” public third party report from a reputable referee is 25%. The probabilities go down for each month that we do not have the proof, so I wait.
I would like for the sake of human civilization for Rossi to be successful. I would also like for Rossi and a credible third party to announce an investment and for Rossi to clean up his PR to something more professional so that I can increase my confidence in him. I think Mr. Rossi knows this. Honestly I don’t understand the JONP tactic. And I don’t think he has either a major industrial investor/partner or a third party report right now because it is in his self interest to announce that right now.
So I wait and hope.
Best regards to you Tim,
Anonymous
CNOOC !!!
I have no knowledge of who the partner is, however, a good partner would be NRG. NRG just completed an acquisition to become the largest private electric power producer in the US. Over 1TW in production. That would give them room to put in over 1000 1-MW E-Cats in production before going outside their company.
1000 1MW E-Cats very is conservative (could be >20,000). Here’s one qoute:
“With the merger completed, NRG is now dual headquartered, with financial and commercial headquarters in Princeton and operational headquarters in Houston. The combined fleet of conventional and renewable power generation facilities produced more than 104 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2011 and can supply nearly 40 million homes.” That is ~11.8GW continuous production for 2011 (should have read TWh (annual) in first post). With heat to electricity conversion losses, the number of E-Cats could easily double (~24K units).
NRG starts with an “N”
NRG Energy includes NRG Thermal, which is a subsidiary focused on CHP and renewables, but they do not appear to have their own manufacturing arm, which would be essential to Rossi’s plans. Also they don’t seem to have any direct presence in China, although they do have commercial associations with a couple of major Chinese solar and hydroelectric companies.
potrebbe essere la caterpillar..!! E-caterpillar.
. “Production and distribution of energy” sounds like a utility company…..unless “energy” = petroleum products. The SEC has no jurisdiction over Koch Industries, the 2nd largest private US company. The Koch brothers have advanced degrees in chemical engineering from MIT.
If this latest “Rossi’s says” is correct, I’m leaning toward a utility.
On 2nd thought, although Rossi’s statement points toward a utility company, it makes no sense. Utility companies have little or no experience in manufacturing. There must have been something lost in the translation between Rossi and Pietro.
Lets backtrack to Rossi’s collaboration with the US Navy. Which industrial companies work closely with the Navy in energy research:
Raytheon, Babcock & Wilcox, GE, and United Technologies Corp (UTC owns UTC Power: Manufacturer of distributed power generation systems and fuel cells for commercial, transportation, and space and defense applications).
My bet is Pfizer or Roche, this is my source of the info.
These are pharmaceutical companies, aren’t they. So I presume that you are being funny. That kind of steals my thunder: I was going to suggest maryyugo.
They will become the partner of the not so secret Puppeter, he will need quite soon their products and good lawyers, reading among the lines of Rossi’s words…
Carrier is part of UTC.
Have a look at their website http://www.utc.com
Seems a good fit.
I think that the partner is the well-known LENR entrepreneur Fakey von-Nonexistentburg. He received his Ph.D from one of the universities that is collaborating with Rossi.
He also has the 1MW Warm-Cat that was made publicly available in 2012 and has been manufacturing the commercial home-Ecats that Rossi announced last year.
Tosser.
hello everyone,
i say it’s Ge, as well.
Sorry if already posted. I thought krivits disclaimer on his last article was interesting .
“There is nothing wrong with Kullander and Essén’s admitting a mistake, even now. Rossi may someday deliver a device that produces energy as he claims. But that is independent from the fact that Kullander and Essén did not, and do not, have credible scientific support for their endorsement of Rossi’s device.”
Who cares what krivit thinks?
Yes, that Krivitty-krazy. Probably the most optimistic development in recent days.
Yes, ha ha, pure double talk.
That is why the delay in producing small E-Cat (10 Kwatt) for house use.
While we are waiting for third party verification…..here is a very interesting article on the economic effects of LENR….any comments?
http://coldfusion3.com/blog/why-lenr-will-lead-to-massive-inflation#comment-827
Yeah technology stimulates economic growth, and the distinction between growth and inflation is to some extent subjective. I have earlier said that world economy might grow by about 100 trillion due to LENR during the first ten years which is equivalent to tripling, or 12% annual growth. As I recall someone maybe LCD thought it was an underestimate.
Money is just a medium of exchange. The real determinant of relative price is labour value – how much you can produce with x no. of human beings working y hours. Both cheap energy input and technological improvements can reduce the amount of labour value in products and so reduce prices. The consequence of LENR should be deflation not inflation.
The point about LENR is it will reduce the amount of labour that has to be put into any manufacturing process, into agriculture (through fertilisers and machinery) and into services (as a consequence of more productive industrial and agricultural processes).
complete rubbish article, the author hasn’t the slightest clue about what she is writing about
Renzo…..why is it “rubbish”?
Bernie, it’s so full of errors that it almost painful to read.
“History teaches us that as technology advances inflation increases and money loses its value” -> False: in all of history as tech and productivity raise the cost of goods fall and so real money appreciates (or it would without interferences, see next points).
“the US dollar has lost more than 200% of its value in the past century. Why? One reason might be technology as goods and services get cheaper because of innovation money loses value” -> Unbelievable nonsense: the reason all money have lost value it’s because real “hard” money has been stolen by the governments through the imposition of “fiat” paper money and central banking.
“inflation has increased despite the efforts of government to control it” -> Again nonsense: a moderate annual inflation is a deliberate economic policy, has she never read an economy textbook? It is the very reason fiat paper money is forced upon us.
I could continue but the rest is based in the above errors. The facts are not controversial, both the economic schools who support these kind of policies and those who oppose it, do agree on that. Inflation is definitely not due to technological advancements!
It seems the author is trying to improvise about something that is completely unknown to her
To Renzo
Perfect comment! I’m still trying to understand how something can lose more than 100% (the article says 200%…) That author doesn’t even know layman mathematics!
To Bernie
Technology has always been the very main engine of growth and progress! and not only in its economic declination! It not only enables to produce more and better products and services with less (the opposite of inflation that is almost entirely generated by fiat government’s scam money) but also creates infinite new products and services and related markets.. so a lot of opportunities for all… The government’s interference and oppression toward technology creators and free market that drives technology development is a real crime with unthinkable costs mainly in terms of missed opportunities and this the reason why the people don’t understand it: they can’t assess MISSED/POTENTIAL THINGS!
Yes, the 200% reference alarmed me as well. Maybe a 100 dollar bill becomes a 100 dollar IOU.
Renzo:
I realize she is bucking current economic thought, but current economic thought is not doing worth a damn right now. I am willing to listen to new ideas. You seem to think that the Fed and “big government” is the cause of all our economic problems, that seems a bit simplistic to me. The Fed was created because without a central bank, reoccurring inflation and deflation were causing great economic instability and poor growth. What would you replace it with? Unregulated banks?
Productivity, the result of technology, has increased 80% since 1973, while the mean hourly wage has increased 10%. To that person buying goods at 2012 prices with 1973 wages he just might say technology has caused inflation.
Therefore, when jenifer writes, “ One reason MIGHT be technology as goods and services get cheaper because of innovation money loses value. As technological advances have increased over the past century inflation has increased despite the efforts of government to control it.” (My emphisis) I am willing to listen, because there is something wrong with our system when that “mean” person does not have money to invest into our economy.
To Bernie:
1) Look at the industrial revolution and the Victorian era: in that years the government interference in the economy was minimal, there was a gold stanard = no fiat money. In that period there was a boom in science and technology and prices went down so average people gained a lot (not only the same products at a lower price but thousands of new products possible due to technology…)
2) You don’t understand that so called by you “unregulated banks” are the insane other coin face of government! They are the same toxic thing (here in Italy banks board of directors are full of former politicians of 70 or 80 years old and their main shareholders are foundations controlled by other politicians… so it’s very clear to understand, in the US is more difficult)! For example the subprime crisis was not due to lack of regulation: the governmnent and the central bank wanted it and push the banks accordingly (low interest rates by the Fed and an endless sereies of laws by the gov… Obama himself was used to file lawsuits against because they didn’t lend money to subprime clients, mainly the “minorities”… ).
3) By the way you don’t get another important thing: banks are absolutely not necessary to finance the economy! They don’t want people understand this… because otherwise future bailout will be more difficult… Modern banks don’t lend to real economy and gain only with trading! The most important technologies that have been changing our lives weren’t founded by banks but by the free market: it’s not a cohincidence! Wake up please!
Bernie, yes I’d replaced it with free banking, I think it’s evident that the volatility of money in the last century under central banking has been much much worse than the previous alleged volatility.
Regarding the problem of greater inflation since 1973 it is another byproduct of such policy, we must thank the increase in productivity and the economic development of Asia for a counterweight to inflation, otherwise we would have suffered much more and the monetary ponzi scheme would have crashed long ago.
Renzo…..getting back to the question of the effects of LENR on the economy….I am simply saying we should keep an open mind, I think it is going to be a game changer, if the economists (The Fed, IMF) get it wrong, it could be very disruptive. As far as changing our central banking (FED) it is just not going to happen short of a revolution.
I agree with your last comment! LENR impacts will depend heavily on the governments and central ponzi banks response.. The more they stay away from the better! The best solution is do nothing!
I’m not going to lose any sleep over it. It is not inflation. It is adjustment. The inflation part is caused by government printing too much money.
Apple Computer has the cash, big energy user, China connection, etc’s…
I don’t think they operte exactly in the energy field! And don’t seem to share the same Rossi’s philosophy.. (see Foxxcon..)
My guess is General Electric! Or maybe the unthinkable: a big oil company (Exxcon) aiming to survive the next energy revolution embracing the e-cat!
read the intervew of Defkalion on Tovima.gr …
shell and exxon are interested, but exxon said later…
shell… hum…. follow them and their executives moving from greenergies… follow shellgamechanger.
follow SAIPEM/ENI.
Would it be logical to be a venture capital arm of a large corporation? There are also a lot of venture capital joint ventures between large corporation. GE and ConocoPhillips has a big one.
National Instruments for 3 reasons.
1. They have had a working relationship with Rossi and the CEO glows about the potential of LENR.
2. Yes, I know they are not an energy firm, but their instrumentation will likely be in every product produced. Not an obvious move, but who could have predicted that a battery maker like BYD would become an electric vehicle maker to make sure their batteries got a wider market share? BYD is opening new assembly/manufacturing plants in Europe and California.
3. By partnering with Rossi, NI could do what both Microsoft and Google failed to do.. become the leader in monitoring and managing smart energy systems in the home and for industry.
What about that remark from Rossi about Carrier? Was a strange remark to make… i still think it was a hint.
BTW. An other recent remark was about New Bedford, MA… Only 50 miles from Carrier’s HQ in Canton MA. Shurly they have R&D facilities spread around their HQ, maybe even near New Bedford?
I agree, Carrier should mean a relationship with US Navy, whose main contractor for turbines is GE.
If the partner is a public company, then at some point a stock market press release MUST be issued. If Rossi really has what he claims, the partner will obviously gain a huge competitive advantage in the business. Such changes must be informed via press releases in public companies, AFAIK.
Maybe belivers should buy shares in Siemens or GE? Which one?
Maybe patho-skeptics should learn how to spell.
If there is no money paid yet, they (GE?) don’t have to make an annoucement.
Probably they made a contract to pay for it AFTER they made enough progress in mass-replication, and are sure about the processes behind the AR-CF method.
@:”If there is no money paid yet, they (GE?) don’t have to make an annoucement.”
Paid to whom? I think Rossi partner does not have to announce the acquisition of Leonardo (small company:)
Announcements do have to be made, else the SEC will be all over them. Also, anybody who knows prior to an announcement will be open to allegations that they, their friends, etc. etc. used the information and profited from it. The risk for a public company of keeping everything completely quiet is huge.
Unless the company was acting under their military (classified) side. Then I believe they could get away without announcing. But that would likely mean that the government is really controlling everything
Or unless the partner was a private company, such as Koch Industries. What better way for Koch to hedge their fossil fuel biz.
^ barty
That’s not true.
If a publicly listed company has made any commitment to another company or organistation then it MUST make a public announcement to the stock market regarding the commitment, even if the arrangement is conditional and no money has been paid. There are huge penalties if they don’t.
You cannot over-ride this regulation by claiming NDA’s.
In the absence of any public announcement it rules out all publicly listed companies.
Pweet
This could all be done under R&D at this time.
Corporations Public or Private are not required to divulge such information.
The reason this would qualify as R&D is because it is.
To our knowledge there is no Turbine Generator powered by a Hot-cat for sale. Only a possible joint venture.
McDonalds for cooking the fries.
That would take “distribution of energy” to a new meaning.
Yes. That was my guess too because he said his new partner was also operating in China. That pretty much did it for me.
So that’s settled. McDonalds it is.
Vattenfall is of course, because cold fusion is nuclear, and the best partner is a company working in the nuclear industry. What do you think of this hypothesis?
In french
C’est Vattenfall bien sur, car la fusion froide est d’origine nucléaire, et le meilleur partenaire est une société qui travail dans le nucléaire. Que pensez vous de cette hypothèse?
Vattenfall is owned by the Swedish state, so it is not based in USA.
Maybe! This is just an idea …
Something disappointing?
If Rossi is so keen to keep this is a secret why does he keep dropping all these clues? It makes no sense.
Let’s just wait and see whether he finally comes up with something tangible at which point we can all rejoice. Until then, it is simply a matter of waiting, unless someone knows something we don’t…
The guy is an amazing tease.
GE furnish US Navy, so GE
I think that GE would be a good guess. GE has gotten very old and stuck in their ways. LENR would be a great way to revive the brand name and get the rigidity out of their system.
GE is a publily listed company. (NYSE code GE)
It simply CANNOT be a publicly listed company without an announcment on the NYSE from the listed company.
Thems are the rules.
You can reliably cross off ALL publicly listed companies.
(Gee that kills my top pick too. It’s not McDonalds. code MCD)
If it involves China I’m guessing it’s GE.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/ge.asp
Some considerations:
so far, IMO.
- The E-Cat I strongly believe is a tremendous source of clean and safe energy: imagine that very soon it should be possible having a COP OF 20, BUT IMO also 50 could be working properly. That’s the point, an unbelievable source of clean and safe energy! And real too.
- CHEAP? Yeah, but… for the powercos
- And for common domestic users? An domestic E-CAT of 10KW thermal/electric energy generator? Who knows, if … and when…
I’ve spent some time in reading and ‘decripting’ the hidden many interesting news coming directly from italian bloggers (cobraf). I prefer don’t make known what I think about the LENR/E-CAT, its inventors, the elements ‘supposed’ to be inside the reactor, a lot of other technologies and research matters involved for its practical realization.
I don’t know absolutely what’s in Rossi’s NDAs, but now as now, unless a clear statement is made public by interested parties, I have no great hope to see great benefits for common people/customers.
I hope that very soon we could see a real competition on the market with LENR products coming from other competitors, Defkalion i.e.
In the meantime, it could be a wise thing, if I see right, to have the brevets/patents on LENR made public, free, and available the world all over for really helping the mankind.
At some point, one must become realistic and considering every aspect of such an invention.
Could Rossi’s partner be GE,Siemens or …, it doesn’t matter: the situation remains the same.
And Rossi, as chief of scientists. sorry to say, is meaningless, unless NDA are clearly revealed. Sorry to say, but though I believe the E-CAT is a tremendous source of CLEAN and SAFE energy, about its ‘price’ and benefits for mostly of the mankind is still a hope, nothing more.
The real profits will go to the same power lobbies actually on the world’ scenario. Unless…
Unless….. what? You did’t finish your sentence at the end.
Siemens USA – http://www.usa.siemens.com/answers/en/
GE,Philips,SIEMENS.In cooperation.
All these companies are listd on various stock exchanges in Europe and America or both, so it cannot be any of these without a public announcement on the relevant exchanges.
Anything which can “reasonably be expected” to affect the stock price MUST be declared to the public as soon as it becomes known, otherwise big penalties apply.
There have been no announcements therefore it is none of these.
You will have to pick either a government department, or an unlisted company or a venture capitalist group, or a private individual.
(Maybe Dick Smith? He did say he had a million dollars available.)
Sunbeam
I presume that this is a joke.
It really is difficult to look beyond GE
GE is very likely!
http://www.ge.com/foundation/
http://www.ge.com/cn/
http://www.ge-energy.com/solutions/regions/china.jsp
GE
GE is very likely!
ExxonMobil fits the criteria of a US energy company, Philanthropy and china Presence. http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/energy.aspx, http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/community_foundation.aspx , http://www.exxonmobilchemical.com/IOGCEC/exxonmobil-in-china-en.pdf,