Rossi Stays Scientific in Predictions

Many people have been noticing that any time Rossi talks about the testing that is underway he mentions the long term testing that he says in ongoing, he mentions that the results of the reports will be reported whether “positive or negative.” A poster today brought attention to this point and challenged him on it:

“My question is how could them be negative ? There is already a rigorous scientific research stating that eCat works, even if COP is not well clear but certainly >1. So, what kind of negative results are you thinking ?
Finally, ok nobody knows future but … do you feel optimistic about the POSITIVITY of the results of that test ?”

Rossi’s response was, as usual, very disciplined:

Andrea Rossi
October 31st, 2013 at 9:11 AM
Marco Serra:
As I said, the results will be communicated after the end of the validation tests in course. The difference between the tests in course and the ones done in past are essentially based upon the duration, which means that the reactors are reliable in a long term. It is true that we already made long term tests, but not with a third party. I think it is not scientifically correct to say ” I am optimist”, I prefer to say ” We are measuring”. I sympathize with your anxiety to have good news, and I thank you for this, really. Bu I can say nothing until the end of this validation cycle.
Warm Regards,

I don’t think there is anything that can be read into his noncommital response. If you go back before the May report was published, Rossi was saying similar things. He’s playing well the part of Chief Scientist by not tipping his hat. It’s usually a much better policy to let events to speak for themselves, rather than setting up unrealistic expectations. And of course, there’s always something that could go wrong, and it would be embarrassing to declare victory and then have to backtrack.

  • twas brillig

    I would like to stay positive about this the E-Cat situation but Rossi made claims last year that his machine would be up and running by last years end and smaller models would be available to everyone. I think Rossi was exceedingly naive and his dream has now been replaced by (and/or he sold out to) the profit motive and has now been effectively silenced.

  • Doktor Bob

    “And of course, there’s always something that could go wrong, and it would be embarrassing to declare victory and then have to backtrack.”

    I think the people asking these questions would probably understand that way of reasoning if they try to put themselves In Andreas position.

    At least its a far more professional way of communicating science than what you normally would find within 98% of the “exotic” alternative energy technology community.

    Maybe he will act differently in the future bu for now it makes sense to communicate this way.

  • michael eisenbaum

    Since this site has had many (too many) threads about what will happen when finally Rossi is validated (vindicated?) and the world cannot deny LENR, maybe we should spend a little time discussing what would happen if the new tests are negative, or never appear. Will this be final proof that the global energy industrial complex has finally won over? Or just back to the future, as in:

    “Rossi sent 27 thermoelectric devices for evaluation to the Engineer Research and Development Center; 19 of these did not produce any electricity at all. The remaining units produced less than 1 watt each, instead of the expected 800–1000 watt.[14]” – Wikipedia


    • timycelyn

      if you believe wikipedia as an unbiased source of information on this matter, you are shockingly underinformed and extremely naive as well. The terminal – one might say manic – bias of the posters and editors of the E-cat article is famous, and stands as a damming example of some of the major inherent flaws in that otherwise noble project.

      I’ll pay you the compliment of assuming you have recently come to this area, and are still in the process of ‘coming up to speed.’ I’d suggest reading more thorughly into the background – there are a number of good primers on this subject – before you offer more of that type of opinion here.



    • GreenWin

      Eisenbaum is one of the several (they are dying out) LENR deniers who sew Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt under pretense to pragmatism. It is not pragmatic to deny 23 years of LENR proofs or the Levi-Elforsk E-CatHT validation by a team of 15 well qualified scientists, engineers and technicians. Flag this poster as “concern troll.”

    • bachcole

      Not necessarily, michael eisenbaum. My furnace has been going strong for almost 13 years and 6 months, and only 3 people and 2 dogs are dependent upon it. If a product needs longevity testing for 20 years, doing 20 one year tests just won’t cut it. It is entirely possible that if this test fails the cats will just have to go back to the drawing boards. That would be disappointing for my enthusiasm, but would not change 2013 Levi et. al.

      • Patrik

        Accelerated tests are not that difficult to design. Your furnace was not tested during a lifetime before it was released to the market. I have discussed it with a person from a European boiler manufacturer. He claims that they have a 6 month accelerated test. Approximately two years of normal operation is simulated during these months, and that should be enough to find any long-term effects.

        • bachcole

          All furnaces have been tested for roughly the past 200 years compared to the E-cat. So it would not surprise me if Rossi et. al. said hey we should give this a one year accelerated test; the six month accelerated test isn’t going to cut it.

    • Doktor Bob

      There is a saying, you can ignore the truth but the truth wont ignore you.
      As population and pollution increases while resources are decreasing we are finding ourselves in a position where we have to create sustainable energy technologies if we are to survive. Most species that every lived on this planet did not extinct themselves, their environment or other species achieved that. We are under pressure and our instinct is to survive, that is why we will “make it so”. I think that most people all around the world working related to energy would agree at least on that specific thing, we can not go on as we have if we want to survive on this planet.

      Thus, we have to adapt different ways of thinking…

      Please do not be offended that I argue against you Michael but I believe that the ideas that are strongest will echo through eternity. If we could travel 100 years into the future and ask people what they think about your arguments I think they would not agree that your approach of how to spend resources on solving important and complex problems is a good one.

      With Respect, your friend / DB

    • Omega Z

      “Rossi sent 27 thermoelectric devices for evaluation to the Engineer Research and Development Center”

      Note This Project was of an Investigative (Feasibility Study). They contracted LTI & Rossi. LTI & Rossi was only 1 of several concerns working on this project. There was also some University people involved who helped determine the most likely/best materials to use.

      1st.- It was to determine whether Thermal Electric devices could be built with upwards of 20% efficiencies.

      Rossi- Built Only One Thermal Electric Prototype Device. It reached efficiencies of up to 19%. It was able to maintain 17%. His Device worked. But hand built took a couple thousand hours.

      2nd. To determine whether they could be mass produced Cost effectively.

      The 26 additional devices were farmed out to (2) different manufactures to see if they could be mass produced cost effectively & functional by the Army research center. Part of them to a U.S. concern. Part to an Italian concern. The report didn’t say how many by who. But they were NOT built by Rossi.

      Some produced nothing. Bad contact junctions. Some damaged during shipping. Only a few reached up to 4% efficiency.

      According to the Military Report, The prototype was a success. Rossi had Succeeded.
      Production Versions were Not successful. This did not depend on Rossi. Problems involved Impurity of available materials. Material Costs. Manufacturing Quality, as maintaining precise contact at the junctions. To much or to little joining material had major impact on functional efficiency.

      It was recommended By the Army Research Center to their superiors that Research be halted/delayed until Material Science developed better, Cheaper more Pure materials. And Further more, to Allow Manufacturing time to develop better Manufacturing processes with better quality & precision control.

      Originally, They new Materials costs would likely be high, But it was thought that if high efficiencies could be reached & Mass production was feasible, Cost/Benefit “May” be attainable.
      The research was not a failure. It provided answers.
      Yes. Efficiency could be attained. No. Costs exceed any benefit.

      Rossi’s task was successful. That which did not depend on him were not.
      Yet a few people pick up unreliable bits of information and Slander Rossi with False facts. Do as I did. Read the Entire 150+ page Army Report. It’s kind of dry, but Accurate.

      This is Not something Rossi pushed on the Military. This is a Project they approached LTI & Rossi with.

      • AlainCo

        this explains why the military dod not moan agains Rossi, in fact agains LTI.

        LTI did not fire Rossi either.

        About previous crash of Omar refineray, what is strange if you compare how he was described by newspapers, and then how he was welcomed in Bedford.

        I don’t see another reason for them to keep Rossi in their team, else he was doing a good job.

  • US_Citizen71

    Positive write up about LENR mentioning both Rossi and DGT on Foreign Policy journal.

    • Omega Z


      Should have noted the author of this article.
      by Dr. Stoyan Sarg

      • US_Citizen71

        LOL should have looked him up! I didn’t realize how light flakey he is!

  • Jouni

    Seems that Rossi is under strict limits in communications. Compairing to those previous exaggerations, IMHO.

    • Omega Z

      He has been under Restraint since The partner came fully aboard after the Mar. 31 2013 test. He also cut certain people out of his friends, acquaintances & even a couple people involved with the E-cat development at the Partners request.

      Apparently, the Partner had issues of loose lips & possibly even trust issues with some of these people. This leads me to the belief that The Partner had done some background checks beforehand.

      • Simon

        1 MW industrial E-Cat units are available for a long time (according to the
        adds). If they exist and successfully work, it is the best proof for Rossi. But
        where they are?

        • US_Citizen71

          Compartmentalization of information is what the military does best. I am one of the many who saw the Navy training film showing footage of an officer getting his legs ripped off by synthetic line snap back of a mooring line during docking operations. 10’s of thousands of recruits saw it as part of training over the years before it was retired for being too gory. When the MythBusters tackled the “Myth” they couldn’t find any proof that the film ever existed or get confirmation from the Military that it had, only stories from ex-personnel. If they can do that to a training film, which I might add was more convincing than the plastic dummy movie that replaced it, they can keep a new power source secret.

          • GreenWin

            You mean to say the Navy disappeared a politically incorrect training film?

            • US_Citizen71

              I know right, I’m sure they don’t show the USS Forrestal firefighting movie anymore either. It started with a view of now Sen. John McCain’s fighter being hit by a folding fin rocket by a fighter in line ahead waiting to take off. Followed by a complete failure of the crew to us correct DC and fire fighting procedures. It was a lesson it what not to do.

              Edit: amazingly it is up on youtube

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    The E-cat reactor has already been proven to be an alternative to fossil fuel as a source of energy. If announcement about ongoing testing is not made by 3/31/14, I will assume the E-Cat has been purposefully delayed/buried for political/financial reasons.

    • roseland67

      Proven to who? Certainly not to me, I believe what my senses tell me,
      and up to now, my “Spider senses” are tingling.
      If it doesn’t work on 3-31-14, maybe it’s because it never did,
      not because some rich, evil, politically connected bankers buried it.

      • bachcole

        I don’t suppose you have bothered to read: Saying that it hasn’t been proven to you doesn’t count if you haven’t looked at all of the significant evidence. Otherwise you look like this: You might also look at: You don’t need to be able to read Swedish. Just look at the lower left corner and see the words “Andrea Rossi”. And there is plenty more evidence if you are interested in discovering the truth. If you are not interested in the truth, then why are you here?

        • roseland67

          Same reason you are, to learn.

          Do you believe everything you read, hear, see, etc?
          I do not, I refuse to believe what I am told to believe
          simply because I want it to be so.
          There are lots of professorial looking grey bearded gentlemen looking with furrowed brows upon many charts and graphs, and trend plots
          and spreadsheets showing lots of #’s.
          If they are to be believed, wonderful, but, I know no one who has there hands
          on an Ecat that can catagorically say Energy Out > Energy In.

          Search my posts amigo, I have been here since day 1.
          I am an engineer and work for a global energy company
          and am deeply interested in this technology for the same reasons everyone is,
          Who knows, maybe it’s even my company that is working w/Rossi.

          but as always, I’m from Missouri.
          In Chicago, I wait, (impatiently).

          And I find your picture in very poor taste.

          • bachcole

            I am not here to learn. I am here to teach. I spent 19 months before I decided that Rossi was for real.

            There are people who have seen the E-Cat working. You just haven’t decided to believe people who have nothing to lose except their reputations and careers. I gave you three good links. Here is another one:

            Please, if you are unwilling to look at these websites and think about them, please don’t respond to my posts. If I find that you have responded to my posts without looking at the sites I cited, then I will shun you, i.e. I will not read your posts and I will delete the email announcements of them. I don’t have time for people who don’t want to learn. You don’t have to believe; you do have to look at the evidence before you spout off.

            • roseland67

              Do you honestly truly believe that I have not seen every single one of these
              and many more?
              I am the dispenser of all things NIH fusion in an office clogged full of engineers
              debating all of the pros and cons. I can post all of my interpretations, drawings etc. if you are interested in reading them.
              But again, I am simply NOT wired to believe what I am told to believe
              why is that so hard to understand?

              • US_Citizen71

                Not hard to understand at all. We all were like you at one time many still are. Some of us get a little impatient and upset with skeptics like bachcole, from having dealt with many a skeptic over the years. With the handle changes due to the change to Discus it is hard to tell friend from foe again. If you are new to the site welcome. All opinions are welcome just use your brain and not talking points. There are some great people here.

                • bachcole

                  US_Citizen71, I did not change my handle. Frank the Admin changed to Disqus and my handle “bachcole” popped up, and since I was on eternal moderation as my real name, Roger Bird, I thought that I would stick with “bachcole”. But when people started wondering what happened to Roger Bird, I happily revealed bachcole to be Roger Bird.

                  And I am not a skeptic in the sense that I disbelieve Rossi. I believe Rossi 100%, along with Brillouin and Defkalion and probably several others. I don’t know where you get that. My only problem with roseland67 was that it did not seem like she had looked at any of the evidence yet she was disbelieving Rossi stridently. If she has looked at the evidence, then I have no problem with her disbelieving.

                  Except that she keeps saying that she feels like people are directing her to believe something or forcing her to believe something. I never felt that here at I am not. I just don’t want people saying this, that, or the other thing if they have not looked at the evidence. She says that she has looked at the evidence, so I have nothing to add or subtract.

                • Omega Z


                  I think you misinterpreted. Easy mistake. I did at 1st then reread it,

                  “Some of us get a little impatient and upset with skeptics like bachcole,”
                  Some of us like bachcole get a little impatient and upset with skeptics

                  The Pix. LOL

                • US_Citizen71

                  What can I say if I was great at writing I would have been a writer instead of a photographer!

                • Omega Z


                  We all do it. I’m becoming familiar with your posts.
                  I reread it because it didn’t sound like you.
                  If spoken instead of text the meaning would’ve been obvious.

                • bachcole

                  Oh. Sorry.

                • roseland67

                  I don;t see bachcole as a sceptic, he seems to be a supporter
                  of Rossi et al, unless I am mis reading him.

                • bachcole

                  roseland67, I was a right and proper skeptic for 19 months until the 2013 Levi report pushed me over the edge.

              • bachcole

                I do not see myself as being told to believe anything. I am not being told to believe anything. I don’t understand why you would believe that you are being told to believe anything. I just don’t get that. I see the social evidence (I haven’t burned my finger yet on an E-Cat), and I find it compelling. Did you see the McKubre videos? Don’t you find him compelling? Why would you think that someone is trying to force you to believe something. He is just a very convincing, sweet, adorable, dignified, and competent guy with great credentials telling us his experience. How is that you being forced to believe something?

              • Bernie Koppenhofer

                “I can post all of my interpretations, drawings etc. if you are interested in reading them.” Please post them I am interested in seeing them.

                • Bernie Koppenhofer

                  I have not received the above info yet, wonder why?

                • bachcole

                  I was wondering the very same thing.

                • roseland67

                  I am connected now,
                  please advise how I post an attachment and I will do so.

              • GreenWin

                ‘Cause I don’t believe you.

          • US_Citizen71

            OK Missouri I’m visual as well. I looked for every loophole Rossi could be pulling ran every idea I had past my father who is an EE in power systems and never found any concrete way of him cheating. What finally convinced me is the photos below or actually hi-res versions of them. I am a commercial photographer by trade. After examining them in Photoshop at high magnification I determined they were real. Clearly a ton of energy is coming from inside the core and there is not a way to flow enough amps to do that through that gauge of wire without melting it.



            • bachcole

              US_Citizen71, we are on the same wavelength. These are the exact the pictures that sent me over the edge, dancing all over my house, getting excited in my family’s faces. I even got a “wow” out of my son and wife. I am no expert in photography, but the test with these photographs, all of the other theories (scam, incompetence, etc) just melted in fire of this evidence.

      • GreenWin

        roseland67 aka JNewman from the ecatnews FUD site. JN, you are in the wrong place as LENR and E-Cat supporters, like the execs at Elforsk, exhibit the open mind needed to accept the independent Levi-Elforsk results and expand the proofs. Those results confirm E-CatHT works as claimed by its inventors. Do you have any LENR-experienced scientists who have published papers establishing reason why LENR/cold fusion is mass hallucination??

        My “spider senses” tell me LENR is gaining significant positive mindshare and that drives skeps crazy. Literally crazy. 🙂

        • roseland67

          No, I do not,
          but when you get your Ecat, please asdvise as
          I would very much like to see it operate.

          • GreenWin

            I have not ordered an E-Cat. That however is irrelevant to the evidence of its performance.

            • bachcole

              roseland67 is just one of those people for whom theory is stronger than the evidence of other people.

      • Paul Smith

        I trust in Rossi’s LENR because I have asked to “Cures” and I trust him. He has been one engineer that has witnessed the test on the 1MW plant. Yes, he has positively tested the plant for a Customer, and says that the Rossi Effect is real!!

    • Omega Z


      Considering the approximate start time of the testing & allowing a year of tests or 2 recharges, I don’t expect anything public until July, maybe August at the earliest. At least nothing Major.

      A years testing would likely give them a huge amount of data to determine nearly all unknown issues that could arise.
      Dependability, Stability, Longevity of the Fuel/charge & the devices it operates in & the stresses it can handle plus a good handle on the Energy density.
      Rossi would already have a reasonable answer to much of this, But Partners & Others will want additional verification.
      No one wants to start selling Million dollar Systems only to find out 6 months down the road you half to chuck the system & completely replace it. Not Very cost effective. Answers are needed.

      With Rossi’s data released, Then the Partner independently replicating it, & a 3rd independent party testing data, Walls will start coming down, but alas, there will still be those detractors who will hang on.

      • bachcole

        With seven billion people on Earth, the detractors, whose right brains are completely atrophied, won’t matter.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        My point is if this is an open race (not in any way controlled by “the powers that be”) to produce an LENR reactor, the person or company who wins the public relations, marketing battle wins the race. To me this means announcing as early as possible. (Re: Beta/VCR recorders)

  • Pekka Janhunen

    No news in them, but I admire the way he formulated the answers (also to Hans Persson: “nothing is under question, all is under long term third party validation”).

  • Barry

    It makes sense that they are doing a long term test. If the Ecat is going to replace heating systems they have to be more than a Cold Fusion phenomenon. They have to be engineered to become stable workhorses for long durations.

  • bitplayer

    In contrast to Rick Allen’s wishful post yesterday-ish, I was wondering if Rossi and partner are putting a lot of time and energy hardening the initial product against reverse-engineering, as well as testing and optimizing efficiencies, durability, etc.

    If they’re going to sell energy as opposed to devices, they’re going to need to know very closely what the initial product will reliably deliver over the lease period. And the longer they leave it at the customer site the greater the chance of snoops or commandos learning too much.

    (Perhaps this is a little like sensory deprivation, where we start hallucinating from lack of input 🙂

  • bkrharold

    I can understand the necessity for caution, with all the naysayers like Krivit, just waiting to pounce on any perceived misrepresentation, so they can exaggerate it out of all proportion. The original test was just a few hours, and while the result was very positive, it did not conclusively prove the viability of this technology. A positive result from the long term test will be conclusive proof.

    They will be releasing the results of the long term test quite soon now. Unfortunately the main stream media is studiously ignoring the ecat and its third party testing, so I don’t expect to see any big headlines.

    However more people are taking note, and inevitably it will eventually become part of popular culture. When that day comes, everyone will be demanding one, and it will be game on.