Andrea Rossi Gives Year-End Update Reporting Important E-Cat Progress

It’s been a while since we have had much of an update from Andrea Rossi that provides any level of detail. He has usually said that ‘now is not the time for talking’, or something similar — but today, for whatever reason, he has provided the following update on the Journal of Nuclear Physics to Steven Karels:


1- within March 2014 I think will be completed the first part of the long term validation and the results will be published positive or negative as they might be.
2- we are aiming to obtain at least 3/4 of the time of operation in self sustained mode and the remaining 1/4 with a COP>1, so that the energy produced will be more than the energy consumed also during the periods with the drive on.
3- we are working now permanently at temperature (on the surface of the heat exchanging surface) that will allow an efficiency of 40% with the Carnot cycle. In these very days ( also during Christmas) the Hot Cat is working in our USA factory with a temperature upon the external surface, before cooling, around 1 000 °C. Enormous progress has been made in these months working with the Team of our US Partner. Here I found materials, expertise, professonality and, mainly, a moving trust in me that makes me feel extremely indebted. These factors are generating a strong force, with interesting results.
4- the publication of the theory behind the so called Rossi Effect I think will be published in 2014, but this is not a guarantee, because many are the factors this decision will depend from
5- the industrial plants are already for sale, because they have already obtained the safety certification, being operated by certified operators, while the domestic appliances, which will be operated by anybody, will need time to obtain the necessary safety certifications.
Please say hello to my beloved New Hampshire, where my US work has been started in 1996….
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Some comments:

#1 March is not too far away! I would be wary of holding him to that date, however, as far as getting a report published. I remember last year after the testing was completed by Levi’s team it took two months before we saw the report.

#2 This sounds like a major improvement in the efficiency of the hot cat. In the second Levi test the hot cat had an overall COP of just under 3, and self-sustain periods were very short. From what Rossi says here, I would expect the COP to be much higher than 3.

#3 The kinds of sustained temperatures of 1000 C he is talking about here should allow for efficient generation of electricity on a large scale. It sounds like the people Rossi is surrounding himself with now have contributed greatly to the advancement of his technology — and Rossi apparently couldn’t be happier with their contributions.

#4 I wouldn’t hold my breath for the publication of the theory this year. I remember Rossi made a similar statement about publishing the theory at the October 2011 test. Probably competitive issues are what is holding back the publication of the theory. I’m reminded of a quote I read from Elon Musk this week who talked about the publication of patents: “We have essentially no patents in SpaceX. Our primary long-term competition is in China. If we published patents, it would be farcical, because the Chinese would just use them as a recipe book.”

#5 Even though these plants are “already for sale”, it seems like there are limitations on who can buy them. Rossi spoke recently about performing due diligence on potential customers. Not just anyone can order them and use them.

The comment about New Hampshire suggests that he is not working there — which may eliminate DEKA as being the partner. I have to say that I find that Rossi’s use of English has improved significantly.


  • LENR G

    It is frustrating.

    I think our collective hope is that the partner reveals itself as soon as it can and that an unassailable validation is released in March by truly independent parties and covers the full operational period of a reactor before recharge (6 months).

    I think of Rossi’s 1 MW plant pre-sale as being like an invitation only beta test phase where buyers must agree to an NDA and not be in a position to compete or sabotage. I’d have preferred if he just kept that on the down low and selectively contacted potentially interested parties. Saying it the way he does just leads to a lot of confusion IMO.

    For the sake of everyone, this technology needs to come out of hiding soonest. I think there’s a chance of accelerating revelations starting in January with Defkalion. I think Spring 2014 is a good bet for the big reveal.

  • catbauer24

    It is becoming more apparent each day that “the so called Rossi Effect” is no different than the “John Rohner Effect”. Granted we all hold on to the positive ‘indications’… unfortunately there are many negative indications that are similar to many other ‘efforts’ that proved unsubstantiated.

    The devices are stated to be for sale. There are a hundred reasons being made why no one has discussed witnessing first-hand the virtues of these devices for sale, it is all hearsay.

    • LENR G

      There was an ironclad independent (well almost) validation of the E-cat reactor. There are many other indications this is the real deal. Know anything about Defkalion, Lenuco, Nichenergy, Defkalion, ELFORSK and so on? It’s not vaporware, it’s preindustrial… between R&D and commercialization.

      Visit lenrftw.net to get a more nuanced understanding of what’s going on here.

    • Buck

      Your definition of ‘hearsay’ includes the 3rd Party Test, suggesting that your grip on a definition for what is a real phenomena is questionable.

      • bachcole

        The entire issue of “hearsay” is a matter of opinion. For some people, non-hearsay is getting their finger burned and watching their utility bills plummet. Even if the Levi report was 100% ironclad perfect science, it would still be hearsay. It would still be what someone else said. At some point you have to trust other people or else you are going to find yourself back in the stone age trying to decide for yourself whether it is better to hunt with a bow-and-arrow or a lance, and you won’t be able to trust Oogg’s word for it.

        • Buck

          Roger, I agree. That is why CB’s point falls apart . . . he apparently ignores too much LENR history. And, I don’t think he trusts Oogg. ;-)

    • bachcole

      I get a lot of hearsay evidence from my 14 year old son and his cell phone network. Just recently he attended a candle light vigil for a girl who had been killed, supposedly accidentally. Each and every time that my son has given me evidence that is just hearsay, he has been correct and he has been faster than the local news media. This does not mean that hearsay evidence is always true. It does mean that it is not always false. His latest hearsay evidence is that the girl was murdered because she discovered that her step-father was getting it on with another woman. We’ll see.

      Since Rossi came through for me with the 2013 Levi, Essen, et. al. report, I am going to trust him this time. Although I confess that 2000 C is really high.

    • Quiet Wine Guy

      You show a troll like outlook when you compare Rossi to John Rohner.

      • US_Citizen71

        That is because catbauer24 is likely a troll at least regarding Rossi. If you click on his handle and read his previous comments two things become clear he hates Rossi and has no love for Sterling Allen. My guess is either he is one of Krivit’s acolyte’s or is Krivit himself.

        • Quiet Wine Guy

          Nice find . . . Maybe it is Krivit seeing himself as Jack Bauer of ’24′ fighting against the terror that is LENR.

  • Buck

    Here is Q&A with Rossi about the nature of one ‘destructive test’.

    ==========================================

    James Bowery

    December 28th, 2013 at 7:54 PM

    Dr. Rossi,

    When you say that reactors “explode” when out of control, do you mean they actually produce a loud noise? Or do they merely destructively over-heat? (As apparently happened to a HotCat in this photograph during the prior validation test:)

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XuKgtxpqL9U/UYQSyPJP-OI/AAAAAAAAJYI/96mRUBJjs1w/s1600/hot-cat.JPG

    ———–

    Andrea Rossi

    December 28th, 2013 at 8:32 PM

    James Bowery:

    Very sorry, I cannot answer to this question exhaustively, but I can say something. Obviously, the experiments are made with total respect of the safety of my team and myself. During the destructive tests we arrived to reach temperatures in the range of 2,000 Celsius degrees, when the “mouse” excited too much the E-Cat, and it is gone out of control, in the sense that we have not been able to stop the raise of the temperature ( we arrived on purpose to that level, because we wanted to study this kind of situation). A nuclear Physicist, analysing the registration of the data, has calculated that the increase of temperature (from 1,000 Celsius to 2,000 Celsius in about 10 seconds), considering the surface that has increased of such temperature, has implied a power of 1 MW, while the Mouse had a mean power of 1.3 kW. Look at the photo you have given the link of, and imagine that the cylinder was cherry red, then in 10 seconds all the cylinder became white-blue, starting from the white dot you see in the photo ( after 1 second) becoming totally white-blue in the following 9 seconds, and then an explosion and the ceramic inside ( which is a ceramic that melts at 2,000 Celsius) turned into a red, brilliant stone, like a ruby. When we opened the reactor, part of the AISI 310 ss steel was not molten, but sublimated and recondensed in form of microscopic drops of steel.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • LENR G

      While I see where you get your COP=768 (1 MW / 1.3 kW) those power measurements that Rossi gave don’t really provide enough information to accurately calculate COP. The total energy in is unknown because the operational time of the mouse is unknown. If it required 1.3 kW for 1000 seconds and then output a MW of power for 10 seconds then the COP would only be ~7 (10 MJ / 1.3 MJ).

      To do it right we would actually need both the power input and output curves as a function of time (and they likely weren’t constant over the period — especially the dead cat), integrate both and then find the ratio of the integrals. COP is energy out divided by energy in.

      • Buck

        I agree with the essence of your point. But Rossi shared the information because the Team recognized the importance of knowing the COP from second to second. This is probably for the purpose of defining the boundary to a ‘stable LENR’ system given the settings of specific controlled parameters.

        • LENR G

          I am glad he shared the information but I don’t pretend to know why. Instantaneous COP is somewhat meaningless with the current setup of activation followed by self-sustained mode. Maybe the mouse was still on when it went up to 1 MW, which would give an instantaneous energy ratio of 768 like you mentioned. But that’s distinct from characterizing a LENR device as having an overall COP of 768. We just need to be careful is all I’m saying. We can expect an increasing number of uninitiated to start coming across sites and posts like this and we need to try and give them accurate info.

          • Buck

            I suggest we have a little trust in those who chose to learn about LENR and have faith that they will develop an understanding of the whole picture after reading 100′s of blog entries rather than just one.

            For example, Rossi’s single quoted Blog entry about the described destructive test holds only a little meaning when isolated from then entire history over the last two years. But, it implies something very different when placed in context. At the least, they will become familiar with his style of written English that can easily lead to a misunderstanding if taken out of context.

            • LENR G

              I think we’re on the same side, Buck, of promoting the truth. I’ve got your back… and I share your excitement about Rossi’s latest nuggets of info.

              • Buck

                I believe we are on the same side. :-)

    • bachcole

      Wow!!! All that I can add to that WOW!!!!!!

      I know. I know. This is still all “Rossi says”, but right now, I believe him. It is difficult to believe, but I still believe him.

  • LENR G

    Rossi is suddenly a fountain of encouraging information…

    - stable operation at 1100 deg C with ~75% running in self-sustain mode
    - independent long-duration validation test results expected in (or around) March 2014 again from the ELFORSK folks but with an expanded stable of Professors
    - destructive tests underway… white hot explosions at 2000 deg C triggered by a ~1 kW mouse activator (yeah, it’s nuclear)

    Unless this is all BS 2050 will look nothing like 2013.

    • Buck

      This points towards a very Happy New Year.

  • BroKeeper

    The last comment from Andrea Rossi is ‘blowing’ my mind. One runaway explosion preceded with 1000C increase in ten seconds to 2000C. That opens up a whole new can of questions and concerns.

    • Buck

      In this destructive test, the COP was ~768, if my math skills haven’t been blown away . . . . WOW!

      If Rossi can achieve a stable COP of 500, that would be one heck of an efficient LENR retrofitted power plant.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Rossi mentions witnessing numerous “explosions”. Does he mean violent explosions or mere meltdowns? If violent explosions, I would think domestic units are far, far away.

    • Buck

      From Vortex mailing list. The thread does not answer your question completely, but it fleshes out a constructive understanding.
      ==========================================

      Hank Mills
      December 27th, 2013 at 7:34 PM

      Dear Andrea,

      What happens if you do not apply power again once you put the reactor in to self sustained mode? Do the reactions try to run away or will they fade over time? With at least some of your previous reactors, if you did not apply power every so often the reactors would run away. However, in one test the data showed when the input power was cut off the reactions gradually faded over time.

      - – -
      Andrea Rossi
      December 27th, 2013 at 7:56 PM

      Hank Mills:
      If we give too much energy to the reactor the temperature raises above the controllability limits and the reactor explodes. We must maintain the drive below this limit, and it is what we are learning to do, trying to reach a controllability level at the highest temperature possible, because the COP raises exponentially with the operation temperature. The apparatus is made by two well separated components, the activator ( “mouse”) and the energy catalyzar ( “Cat”). Now we have a mouse with a COP above 1 and a Cat with a COP with zero energy consumption. If the Mouse excites the cat too much, the cat gets wild and explodes. We must not risk to reach this level. We have seen explode hunderds of reactors now, this way.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.
      - – -
      Herb Gillis
      December 27th, 2013 at 8:52 PM

      Dr. Rossi:
      Can you elaborate on how serious an explosion you are talking about? When you say you have seen hundreds of reactors explode I am sure you must appreciate that word (“explode”) does not sound very good out of appropriate context. Do these explosions involve release of radiation outside the reactor housing?
      Kind Regards; HRG.
      - – - -

      Andrea Rossi
      December 27th, 2013 at 9:13 PM

      Herb Gillis:
      Useful comment.
      The explosions, or destructive tests, are made in controlled modes, in proper lab, with due control of the radiations made by proper instrumentation. I cannot give further information about these data, but we need destructive tests to find the safety limits within which the E-Cats can work in a stabilized operation. Obviously,no ionizing radiations are released outside the safety box in which the reactor is destructed: by the way, just behind the walls of the box there are my Team and ME.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

      • bachcole

        I can just now see the skeptopaths filling their shorts in trepidation. And the skeptical physicists are looking over their resumes, trying to glamorize what is there. (:->)

        • Buck

          Roger,

          IMO, Rossi has given a huge Christmas gift to the LENR community with his recent blogs. Rossi and his Partner apparently are very focused and determined to get it right . . . they will be ready to retrofit an abandoned power plant and pass muster with the government regulators/investigators with a controlled LENR industrial device.

          His message, IMO, is very clear: “have hope, we see a bright future!”

          • BroKeeper

            Buck. You got that straight. The world is beginning to wake up to that fact and even the power utilities are frustrated with the poisonous byproduct and its cost it would be to clean. LENR is the only near mass solution before it’s too late. To me, IMO, it all appears as a providential intervention.

            • Buck

              Bro,
              what I enjoy about your message is that the lesson appears to me as “God helps those who help themselves” . . . a mysteriously morally neutral statement that places the moral responsibility back in the lap of Man as it should be.

              To be dramatic: we will be saved not by those who selfishly wield immense power with a verbal cloak of good intent, but by those who make solutions driven by a moral imperative.

              • GreenWin

                Very well stated by both Buck & Bro… (fun with alliteration.) I share your thought that it is providence found in the hands that create to benefit. Perhaps an interpretation of “The product will appear when the students are ready.”

                Yet, with the hundreds of “explosions” meme, we see focus on the retrofit approach – which is necessary to gather data for future domestic implementation. A insightful team Dr. Rossi has!

                • bachcole

                  I am either unsure or disappointed when Rossi uses the word “explosion”. I am glad that he is getting 1000 C regularly, but “explosion” does not sound good.

                • Buck

                  Roger,

                  it sounds good when they are doing it purposefully. They are defining the controlled limits of their LENR device. They bring that forward to establish the safe parameters of an industrial LENR device. They write the software that keeps the LENR device 10-20% on the safe side of these limits. With this extensive line of ‘destructive testing’ they can say with conviction that their commercial LENR device will be safe.

                  Think of all the auto manufacturers doing 10′s of 1000′s of controlled accidents working towards stronger protections for the passengers. You’ve seen the TV ads.

                • BroKeeper

                  They are probably testing alternate fail-safe systems as well. Many of which did not work => BOOM!

                • Buck

                  I really like the apparent discipline which Rossi’s Partner brings to the R&D and industrial design effort.

                • BroKeeper

                  I think they are having a lot of fun – a real blast. HeHe

                • Buck

                  Just like wild-eyed Slim Pickens waving his best cowboy hat, riding his favorite like a bucking bronco down to his destiny in ‘Dr. Strangelove’.

                  However, in this LENR movie, Slim Pickens’s ride ends in a very very different positive result and message.

                • Fortyniner

                  With the temperatures that Rossi is talking about it seems likely that his reactors are largely constructed from ceramics. Ceramics are brittle and tend to suddenly disintegrate under excessive stress, but with rather less force than metals. The ‘explosions’ probably result from thermal shock and/or excessive pressurisation and may be relatively mild.

                  Almost any device or system can be made to ‘explode’ under certain conditions – that’s what destructive testing is all about. A friend of mine was present at a test to destruction of a jet engine manufactured by a well-known UK company, in which a turbine blade was deliberately released from the rotor with the engine running at full power. Going by his account, THAT was an explosion!

                  In any case, remember that your car is driven by a series of quite powerful explosions taking place a couple of feet from some of your more precious possessions!

    • Alain Samoun

      To quote Rossi:
      “We have seen explode hundreds of reactors now”
      So hopefully these explosions are not too violent. Note also that he seems to have made many reactors…

    • Sanjeev

      Looks like they are doing stress tests to determine the safe operating limits.

      So its not a question of whether it works or not, but of how to stop it working too well.
      Its in the stage of determining design parameters so that it passes certifications easily. These tests will actually make getting certificate for a home unit easy, since they know the safe ranges already.

    • US_Citizen71

      Any explosion is violent it really is a question of how energetic they are. I have a feeling the energy level is in the ballpark of a closed container heated until it ruptures. Along with a small fire danger from hydrogen gas at fire point. The cooling from the expansion of everything during the explosion should shutdown the LENR process.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Any explosion is violent it really is a question of how energetic they are.

        Yes, but does the word “explosion” have the same meaning to Rossi, as it does to us?

      • bachcole

        An E-Cat submerged in water would have to be hermetically sealed. Heat would raise the pressure inside of the outer container, and if anything in the outer container vaporized, then the pressure inside the outer container might go so high as to cause the outer container to blow, just like a pipe bomb.

  • V.p.S.

    Just some additional thoughts as for the point #5 based on what we now definitely know. Rossi has been telling us repeatedly that the 1MW factory is on sale. However German and Swiss licensees both gave up on trying to sell them despite having many really interested, potential customers from the industry. If you are now seriously interested in buying an E-Cat factory, you will be put on hold and later informed of many restrictions and policies you will not be able to fulfill. Eventually you would not want buy one. So de facto, those factories are not on sale and nobody knows when they will be. Rossi should be very much aware about it and still he keeps on writing his answers in a way that should make us believe that the 1MW factory is already available on the market and in case of serious interest you would get one. This is not necessary lying, but this makes me think again that many of those things Rossi is chattering around are in reality not what you would normally expect just from reading his comments. May be this is still just old Rossi’s exaggeration style, may be this is already part of the new corporate communication strategy – nobody knows. But surely the expectations should be put too high. Rossi himself always repeats: the results may be negative. Good way to leave an exit door for yourself…

    • malkom700

      E-Cat factory are probably really on sale, maybe could benefit the multinationals big corporations and the military.

  • malkom700

    This is good news. Any progress on the topic is very welcome to us, let us mind the fact that probably only LENR can save the world in respect of environmental pollution and related matters.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Technically there might also be other ways (such as ground and space based solar power combined with the use of ammonia as energy storage and energy transfer agent), but they would require a substantially higher level of societal organisation and international collaboration than what we are presently capable of doing.

      • malkom700

        This is one of the options but the situation requires inexpensive and above all quick answer. LENR advantage is that this solution does not require a special activity policy….

        • Pekka Janhunen

          Agreed: given LENR, nothing beats it.

  • georgehants

    Andrea Rossi
    December 28th, 2013 at 8:48 AM
    Giuliano Bettini:
    Yes, the work is promising, but let’s wait the publication to read the
    consolidated results. So far I must repeat that the output could be
    negative, the validation work is not completed: never assume you won
    until the whistle of end game has not been blown. Anyway: now we will
    estabilish the limits of the allowable excitation with series of
    destructive tests, then the control engineers will design the final
    version of the control system for the new limits of the temperature of
    the high temperature E-Cats ( Hot Cats).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Daniel Maris

      Hmmm…well he is certainly handing out some seasonal presents for his eager “family” gathered round the LENR tree. :)

    • BroKeeper

      As it always has been this is not a man of deceptive speak but a man of high moral integrity speak. It’s ‘in’ Andrea Rossi not to be otherwise.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I get a feeling that Rossi is now more or less back into his normal mode of commenting, after a period of relative silence which started on July 1 and ended Dec 26.

    • Daniel Maris

      Could be a sign he has been incredibly busy up till now and the work is probably on hold over the Christmas period. That would be good!

  • Ecat

    Per Rossie Third independent party report will be “around March”.

    Andrea Rossi

    December 27th, 2013 at 6:54 PM

    Jed Rothwell:

    I am sure of the fact that the long term test is made by the
    third indipendent party and the publication will be made on a peer
    reviewed magazine hopefully around March.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • Daniel Maris

      Yes, we’ve grown used to Rossi’s predictions of this nature being way out in terms of timing but ultimately coming to some sort of fruition.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Thanks!

    “I have heard that he really is working with a major U.S. corporation. It
    sounds like it is going well. This is excellent news.”

    - Jed

    I think “major U.S. corporation” precludes DEKA, so maybe G.E., Raytheon, UTX, B&W, GOOG, or Lockheed-Martin. As someone as already suggested, maybe DEKA is an intermediate partner.

    • kdk

      Oh, good grief I really hope its not Raytheon. That would be almost as bad as Cold Fusion not happening at all.

  • US_Citizen71

    I guess this was Rossi’s post for our prediction discussion. Sounds like we will have some great news by summer.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    For several days I haven’t been able to view the vortex site.

    • Omega Z

      Iggy

      I take a peek at Vortex everyday.
      I’ve had no problems accessing it.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        The old url that I had been using, no longer worked. Veblin’s (72.52.77.8/[email protected]/index.html) works fine. Thanks, Veblin.

  • Andre Blum

    March of course is the month of the 25th anniversary of the Fleishmann and Pons announcement on March 23, 1989.

    • Buck

      It is my own wishful thinking, but I expect Rossi and Partner see the PR opportunity of that date.

  • Marc Ellenbroek

    I think we should thank Andrea Rossi for this update. It is a nice Christmas present after such a long period of relative silence. I would be quite interested in some of the following issues:
    1. Is Andrea working on the theory himself or in co-operation with others?
    2. Can the COP be influenced by the control parameters? In other words, if the e-cat is hotter, is the COP than different?
    I hope Andrea also reads this and he can answer these questions. I wish him and all of you a very happy New (LENR) year!

  • artefact

    If we have the 4 e-cats in a bundle like fortyniner said,

    with the one driven reactor having a COP of 1 we get:
    (3 parts infinity; one part driven) 3 * COP 1 = COP 3; COP 3 * 40 % (Carnot) -> COP 1.2 with electricity generation.

    with the one driven reactor having a COP of 6 we get:
    3 * COP 6 = COP 18; COP 18 * 40% -> COP 7.2 with electricity generation.

    Its all about the reactor not in self sustain mode.

  • georgehants

    Riccardo
    December 27th, 2013 at 8:18 AM
    Dear Mr. Andrea, I’m very happy to read your last answer to Mr.
    Karels, a plenty of very good news and detailed information. It Look
    like you are now very well on the road to complete your “homework” and
    that you are close to be ready to present in the next future (within
    2014 I guess) the results, that, i’m sure will not be less that
    astoundish. I’m eager to read all the world’s newspaper about. Carry On,
    Best Regards and Happy (working) New year Holidays
    Riccardo
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    December 27th, 2013 at 10:04 AM
    Riccardo:
    Remember that until the results are published I do not know if the final
    results will be positive or negative. All I can say is that we are
    working hard and that if I work, it is not to sharpen the tops of the
    skyscrapers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Interpreting AR’s numbers by the worst case (denoting energy produced over one cycle by 1.0): Input electric energy 0.25, output energy 0.75 of which 0.4*0.75=0.3 is electric, if one also makes a worst-case assumption that during the 1/4 driver phase, electricity production is not possible. Because 0.3>0.25, the device should be able to self-sustain in a time-average sense. In other words, the device (if also equipped with a battery for temporary storage of electric energy) should be able to produce heat indefinitely without requiring external electric or other input. On top of that it might also be able to produce a modest amount of electricity, perhaps 5-15% of the heat output, depending on the details.

    If the cool side is at 200 °C, 1000°C gives 63% theoretical Carnot efficiency. A good turbine design might realise some 70-75% of the theoretical one which would give 44-47% in this case. So the 40% estimate doesn’t look too optimistic. On the other hand, AR didn’t say that they would run at 1000°C ultimately, he only said that one particular unit is at the moment running at that temperature. Perhaps 40% is an internal design goal which guarantees breakeven for heat production, and exactly what internal temperature is sufficient to achieve it is not yet accurately known.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Admin said about New Hampshire comment “which may eliminate DEKA as being the partner” DEKA has several facilities in US.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      DEKA also has an office in Huntsville, Alabama…..NASA territory.

  • Sanjeev

    All good news, except may be #5, I doubt anything is for sale currently.
    These things would sell like hot cakes, but nobody has bought one (openly at least). The distributors are silent or have no clue. The demo unit in Sweden is still missing. Leonardo corp is abandoned and no one knows where these 1MW plants are being manufactured. The only one existing plant (the big blue box) was swallowed by the “partner”.
    I do hope someone will buy one and show it to the world in the new year, but we don’t really know.

  • georgehants

    Showing once again how science, capitalism and the establishment are corrupt and incompetent.
    Maybe a new year resolution should be for science to take the radical step of starting to search for the Truth and laugh at the pathetic antics of those who try to cover up every scientific disaster such as the inability to Research Cold Fusion, the Placebo Effect, UFO’s Water Memory, Telepathy, NDE and a thousand other serious areas of science that the reductionist Dogma sheep are frightened out of their minds to approach in a scientific manner.
    ——-

    FAA safety data kept hidden from inspectors
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/26/safety-data-kept-hidden-from-faa-inspectors/

    • kdk

      Yes, the alien disclosure is the next on my list. It will lead to all the others anyway. Of course, having good evidence or digging too deeply is the sort of thing that tends to lower one’s life expectancy with accidents and suicides.

      Bentwaters and the Phoenix Lights are the most obvious for the uninitiated. Corso, Bob Dean, Clifford Stone. The Sirius Disclosure project (witness testimony) has the best accumulation of evidence but probably only gets the tip of the iceberg. Then there are a whole slew of other military, air force, gov./Lockheed/Boeing scientists.

      The self appointed keepers of scientific (un)truth are going to have the hardest time with the ET stuff. Truly, take a care in that area. Finding out how the placebo effect works is probably the most significant thing to understand as far as helping people. Clearly, it never works though.

  • Fortyniner

    I’m not sure where any industrial plants might be purchased, unless this is a reference to HydroFusion’s offer of an old-style container unit. There is no indication that these devices are genuinely available or that any facility exists for building them. In any case who is going to buy a steam engine when Diesels are supposedly coming soon? If this is what AR is referring to then he is being more than a bit disingenuous IMO (as he clearly is in the case of home devices) – something I’d hoped we had seen the last of.

    The second round of ‘long term’ tests will provide further verification when published (May?), but only of what must now be an obsolete prototype relative to what is being researched at present. It is only if before/after ‘fuel/ash’ analyses are included in the published results (very doubtful) that there is likely to be much of interest to anyone already convinced that the devices work.

    “we are aiming to obtain at least 3/4 of the time of operation in self sustained mode” – so if successful, it’s likely that the basic production unit might be a bundle of 4 reactors, with 3 ‘on’ at any given time. The target temperature of 1000 °C might give a theoretical efficiency of 40% Carnot, but the real question is – how much power can be extracted from a reactor in self-sustaining mode before the reaction is damped or killed.

    • georgehants

      Peter. since Mr Rossi’s supposed entanglement with his new “partner” his anoncements seem to be much more restrained and sober with less of the natural exuberance that he used to display.
      This taken at face value would imply that the new partner has vetted and allowed this latest time frame notice of publication.
      We are now I think judging them as to their ability’s to honour annoncements.
      If so, March is almost tomorrow and could this be the end of a seemingly very long wait for exceptable general confirmation.

      • Fortyniner

        Morning George. Yes, Rossi is apparently on a short leash these days, and that probably means that most of his pronouncements are fairly reliable, although as I indicated I am rather less happy about his claim that “the industrial plants are already for sale”. At least we have only a few months to wait for the 2nd independent report, although it’ll probably not make significantly more impact than the 1st in the ‘scientific world’.

        • georgehants

          Ha, Peter, I know what you mean but a new year coming, lets be very positive and take note of the spiritualist doctoring completely backed up by Quantum theory that our thinking determines an outcome.
          Hope your old tub has survived the winds in good shape.

          • Fortyniner

            George, I think I’m probably having a ‘glass half empty’ day after a certain amount of Christmas over-indulgence!

            The ‘old tub’ is mostly made of 6 and 10mm steel with four small portholes, so I’m guessing its probably OK. I can’t help fretting about whether I remembered to drain down the engine cooling system though…

            • timycelyn

              No dodgy embankments on the pound you are on, I trust, Peter? Cheers Tim

              • Fortyniner

                Hi Tim. Naah – safely up a short piled ‘engine arm’ – not even wash from speeding passers-by to worry about. I’ll start sweating if there’s a sustained freeze around Napton though!

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          The impact on scientific world will depend on who the partner is.

    • Warthog

      “Whatever the answer, a fairly complex valve-controlled cooling system will be required.”

      Effectiveness of control of cooling has always been (at least IMO) “THE” key engineering variable needed to get overall control and an increased percentage of time in “self-sustaining” mode. But I think this has more to do with the external design of the outer surface of the Hot-cat and the internal design of the chamber it fits into than the complexity of valving. Again IMO, the use of electric heating was a temporary “crutch” to get control of a system with very crude cooling capabilities, and, of course, on startup.

      I also call attention to reports from some LENR researchers (I think Miley) that with proper fuel design, heating on startup is NOT necessary…..the reaction starts spontaneously on introduction of “fuel”.

      No matter what Rossi and his partner come up with, it will still be the technological equivalent of Daimler’s first diesel

  • Reboot

    Finally. We can see the light.

  • Jonnyb

    Let’s hope 2014 will be the year that LENR is finally recognised as real.