Please, MFMP, Stay Focused on the E-Cat (Hank Mills)

In their Project Dogbone, the Martin Fleichman Memorial Project has been towards the goal of making tests on fueled reactors to try to achieve a reaction similiar to that of Industrial Heat’s Hot Cat. Not only have they been acquiring the hardware needed – alumina tubes, alumina cement, heating elements, and power supplies – they have also been working out deals to obtain the thermal cameras and pyrometers needed to measure the output of their reactors.

In January, if their schedule stays on track, there should be tests of Lugano style E-Cats. They should be commended for their efforts on project Dog Bone. However, they have also announced plans to work with other researchers such as Francesco Piantelli on other cold fusion or LENR projects. I sincerely hope they will stay focused on their goal of replicating the E-Cat rather than be distracted by other systems that have not proven to be capable of self sustaining while producing kilowatts of power at high temperatures.

Hot cat reactors in a very high powered mode can produce up to a megawatt of power for seconds before self destructing. In self sustain mode, they can operate at 1,400 degrees Celsius or higher for up to two hours with zero input power. This is the holy grail of cold fusion. Once you reach such temperatures, anything more is overkill for producing electrical power. The only reason for higher temperatures would be for using the technology in certain refining or heat treating applications.

What still excites me is that we have more or less a formula for the hot cat. We have the Lugano report which tells us the composition of the powder, the isotopic ratios, and some information on the percentages of different elements. Also, we have scanning electron microscope images of the fuel grains. This tells us the size and shape of the nickel and other particles. With all this information, I think replicating the ultimate cold fusion device is within our grasp. Of course there will probably need to be a series of tests; it is unlikely for the first combination of fuel powder to produce a self sustain reactor at high temperatures. But even if hundreds of tests are required (varying the sizes of particles, composition of fuel, processing of the fuel) we are far closer to building a working E-Cat than we were months ago.

I have said this all before, but I think it bares repeating. We have basically been given most of the recipe for the best LENR device that could be hoped for: one that doesn’t use expensive palladium, one that doesn’t produce penetrating radiation, one that can self sustain without input, and one that can reach extremely high temperatures.

So I hope that the MFMP will focus as exclusively on the Dog Bone project as possible. Performing dozens or hundreds of tests will take time, money, and resources – all of which are limited for the MFMP. But their best bang for their buck will be investing in replicating the E-Cat. Although it’s possible other researchers and companies have impressive devices that they have been keeping secret, I don’t think any of them have a technology that compares to what Rossi has produced.

Many people claim that it is good for the MFMP to attempt replication of low powered, low COP devices. They say that if teams around the world could replicate a device with even a COP of 3 or less with a couple watts of output it would validate LENR. However, I’ve learned a few things over the past several years about how difficult it is for the skeptics to accept cold fusion as real.

First, if there is any possible chance of error whatsoever the hard core skeptics and naysayers will claim a test is invalid. With low powered devices producing a low COP, this will almost always be the case. Although we have the ability to accurately measure small amounts of input and output, skeptics will always say that the excess power was measurement error. This means when the excess power is not obvious and large, the test is totally meaningless towards validating LENR in the eyes of the skeptics.

Secondly, even if a test produces a high COP and fairly high temperatures, if only one party is testing, the skeptics and naysayers will still deny the test proves that LENR is real. They will try to come up with every hole they can to attack the equipment and the methodology. They will also attack the character of those conducting the test.

Third, even if a test is conducted very well and shows large amounts of excess power with little input power, skeptics and cynics will say, “Why didn’t they show it running with no input power whatsoever?”

Fourth, the mainstream media will avoid positively reporting on LENR like the plague because they are terrified of a skeptic or cynic criticizing them for covering “pseudoscience”. If they feel there is even a chance of their reputation being harmed, they will not positively report on cold fusion. They would rather miss the story of the century than have a chance of being mocked.

Fifth, most mainstream scientists will not speak up in support of LENR until the media is speaking positively about it. They are more concerned with their reputation and career than helping cold fusion emerge.

This all means that until we prove to the majority of skeptics that LENR is absolutely real, the mainstream media will not report on LENR and the scientific community will ignore it. The good news is that with some trial and error testing we have the ability to build a high temperature E-Cat that will be capable of convincing the skeptics and cynics the technology works. No one can deny the excess power of a device that operates for even an hour at fourteen hundred degrees Celsius with no input. Once the final recipe is posted online and hundreds of teams are posting pictures and videos of their E-Cat’s staying at 1,400 degrees, the skeptics will be forced to relent. At that moment the mainstream media will jump on the story.

Please MFMP, stay focused on the E-Cat.

Hank Mills

  • doug marker

    Hank,
    You have provided an excellent perspective on this story. In regard to Piantelli’s experiments, I agree 100% that he was (as he has stated) only producing very low power experimental devices as his primary interest all along was to understand the process not commercialize his experiments. Those who assume Piantelli had high power LENR+ devices are running the serious risk of letting wishful thinking cloud their judgement. Piantelli has *never* claimed he had high power LENR. He has published papers showing low power results that run for long periods. The evidence has to be taken at face value.

    The reason Piantelli has an approved patent is because he was very rigorous in writing the technical detail describing his process. His most recent patent was granted by the EPO in late 2012. See here …
    https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09806118&lng=en&tab=doclist

    If one reads the detail, you will see that the approval of the patent is being challenged and has been since early 2013 by Andrea Rossi. Thus far, the challenges have not been accepted (i.e. the patent grant still holds)..

    The EPO letter to Piantelli granting approval in Dec 2012 is at this link … https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=ET07O2OB0772FI4&number=EP09806118&lng=en&npl=false

    Andrea Rossi has a difficulty in that his 1st EPO patent application was not well worded and was eventually rejected, however Andrea has challenge the rejection.

    Andrea really needs that IP protection as no serious institutional investor will risk such a massive investment if they find the IP is owned by someone else or the device can’t be protected. That is simply how business works. The risk is that cheap copies will emerge from Asia and no one can stop them.

    Andrea Rossi’s 2010 patent to EPO is listed here … https://register.epo.org/application?lng=en&number=EP08873805&tab=doclist

    The letter advising pending rejection is detailed here …
    https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=ETSUZDTZ9625FI4&number=EP08873805&lng=en&npl=false

    It may well be that Andrea Rossi created the hot cat to be able to get around his inability to patent the ‘cold cat’. In essence it appears different enough to perhaps qualify as a different process. It was really very unfortunate that his original patent had so many issues in the way it was written. Not the least was the wording of a mystery catalyst (such claims are not allowed).

    Unfortunately there has been considerable ‘bad blood’ between the Rossi and Piantelli projects (for many reasons) and sadly this ongoing animosity is affecting the actions of both parties to this day. Some have argued that Piantelli’s offer to help the MFMP project is intended to harm the ability of Andrea Rossi to patent the hot cat. This may or may not be the heart of the matter but the question is a vaild one. If the hot cat can be publicly reproduced then the process is not patentable. A patent can only be for a ‘novel’ invention. The hot cat is different from the original ‘cold cat’. An alternate possibility is that Andrea Rossi has yet a different process that he hopes to patent but thinking this is being optimistically speculative.

    In the background to the Rossi/Piantelli activity we have Brillouin working with McKubre at SRI to build a ‘large boiler’ version of the Brillouin process. SRI only entered into this arrangement after reviewing the Brillouin small reactor process (the experimental unit).

    Then there are the ‘other’ not publicized projects.

    Either way, 2015 looks to be an interesting year.

    DSM

  • Mike Ivanov

    I think the real trick is commercialization of the lenr. I doubt what any experiments with any level of accuracy will satisfy the “official” science establishment. Just because they will loose their faces, heavily. But last Phokhorov experiment shows what there is no magic secret behind a hot cat, it could be done in any lab. And next step is to reach self-sustained mode. After that the lab can run internal heating system based on this and start to sell the devices to countries of “emerging market” these who do not have solid regulations regarding commercial heating systems. It may work similar as cell-phone revolution, when in some countries like Cambodia who never had wired lines, cell phone networks are cheaper and better than in Canada for example.

  • drjohngalan

    No one who has followed cold fusion, and is aware of the vast amount of laboratory work that has been done over the past 25 years by many different people, can conclude that it is not real. Pathological scepticism rests on a non-scientific belief that cold fusion is too good to be true. No amount of laboratory testing will disabuse these people of their belief.

    Those of us who frequent blogs like this should never lose sight of the fact that we are a tiny, tiny minority. The vast majority of the population is either unaware of cold fusion or has dismissed it after its initial, very effective denouncement. At the end of October, Melvyn Bragg ran a radio discussion on nuclear fusion with Philippa Browning, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of Manchester, Steve Cowley, Chief Executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority and Justin Wark, Professor of Physics and Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. All three of them were completely uninformed and dismissed the whole thing out of hand: they had a little joke: involving a “Fleischmann-Ponzi Scheme” with much merriment: three eminent people whom the majority of the population would believe.

    In my view, a full scale industrial test that results in an undeniable financial return, combined with a high profile journalist who is brave enough to report on it, is the only way pathological (or uninformed) scepticism will be overcome.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Even if it appears unlikely, the same setup could produce the same systematic error. That’s why I think that multiple experiments with different setups and measurement methods are the optimal solution.

  • Omega Z

    Hank,
    I believe the skeptics are a lost cause. If Rossi concludes 1 working plant in a business setting within the next year, It’s game-over for them anyway.

    As to the MSM’s concern of harming their reputation, Well at least then they would have one. 🙂
    Right now, most consider their reputation to be Dirt.

    As to-
    “Once you reach such temperatures, anything more is overkill for producing electrical power.”

    I fully agree, You’ve reached a point where Turbines aren’t capable of handling temps any higher then that. They begin to Fail or become to expensive to be of economic benefit.

  • Omega Z

    “IP security” is of concern because Investments of this nature are high risk to start with. Increasing those risks makes investors shy away from such ventures.

  • Pipmon

    The notion that resources are being ‘diluted’ by having more and different approaches being investigated assumes that said resources are fixed in size ie not subject to increase.

    To the contraty, IMO, if Piantelli (or whomever) who was not involved previously joins the fray in trying to get an open source replication going, then all the better because we have an increase in total resources being expended on proving/disproving the viability of LENR energy generation. Further I don’t think anyone can object to some diversity in the methods employed in trying to achieve this goal. Quite a lot of ‘discovery’ comes from serendipity as history as shown and that factor can only increase by having more and different people investigating an apparent anomaly.

    Depending strictly on Rossi is somewhat worrisome to my mind, especially in view of his latest pronouncement,

    “Within about 1 year we will have consolidated data. I deem meaningless to give transitory data.”

    This implies that not till 2016 will we have any significant update re Hot E-Cats.
    Maybe some people accept the notion that only Rossi can succeed, but I don’t and as in all such scientific races to be the first, very often an unknown or overlooked dark horse steals the march. Caveat Emptor.

  • ivanidso

    Hank, I am not being argumentive, because I respect all you do for LENR. But I happen to think Piantelli has something to offer and as I understand it, the goal of the MFMP is just to prove that it works, not to produce a commercial unit. I think the world of Rossi, and I don’t know how this will affect IP’s and patents, I just want proof so we can know there is a non-carbon solution to climate change and get appropriate funding for LENR. So I do think it is worth a try.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Barring possible pleasant surprise, I agree that Piantelli’s device is probably not as well developed and/or powerful as Rossi’s. But unlike Rossi, he seems willing to share his knowledge. Therefore it’s not self-evident which one is the better bet for MFMP.

    I do share a concern that by distributing resources too thin, there is a danger of not getting anything done properly. But as an outsider, my best bet is just to trust MFMP’s own judgement about the manpower issue.

    • psi2u2

      After reading through the last several blogs and comments on this topic, I feel Pekka summarizes my own opinion perfectly. As long as MFMP has the manpower, and can raise the needed funds, I see no reason not to continue on both tracks simultaneously.

      Since those directly involved are in a better position to evaluate these issues than I am, I am gladly willing to trust their judgment. I do appreciate Hank Mills raising this issue and hope that MFMP will consider his objections. But, having done so, if they chose to proceed on the dual track, they have my full support. Since they know I am one of their biggest contributors (;) this should mean a lot.

  • Mr. Moho

    I seem to remember that Piantelli and his team control their IP through Nichenergy. Have a read at this blogpost from 2012, it’s packed of related information:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/06/14/piantelli-seeking-investments/

  • guest2

    How about Piantelli helping MFMP replicating the Ecat. The professor has experience, credibility and patent protection. If they are successful, I.H and Rossi will lose market share in the E.U immediately.
    Where would you get a partner like Piantelli?

    • Omega Z

      “I.H and Rossi will lose market share in the E.U immediately.”

      Not realistic at all.
      Once a working product is available, It will be what ever the market will bear. Period. This reality will continue for quite a while, because Demand will far outstrip supply in the foreseeable future.

      It will take years & 10’s of billion$ to build/modify manufacturing facilities & equipment for mass production. The only issue will be how much of a savings margin they will need to provide to conclude a sale. Market share wont come into play until much latter. After scaled up production is completed. Besides, The China market is more important followed by India.

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    good idea, maybe mixing the two design could work…

  • Sanjeev

    Hank Mills, how did you miss the info that Piantelli’s system will be tested by MFMP Europe team in his own lab and the hot cat mock up test will continue as usual in US ?

    Secondly, please stop giving too much importance to these skeptics, as if LENR is on mercy of a few faceless, nameless internet trolls. The aim of the replications should not be to satisfy skeptics, but it should be to grab the attention of a few smart and capable people around the world, who will then jump in the LENR bandwagon and contribute to its progress with their scientific knowledge or wealth or both.

    Fact: you can’t satisfy skeptics, because they are pathologically closed
    minded and are simply stroking their egos here by telling all how many
    text books they have memorized. They actually survive on the attention you give to them. You seem to be terrified of them.

    Again, I would not care a bit about mainstream media, they have a business to run and families to feed. Its ok that they do not report often on risky news. Actually I was surprised that the news of last 3rd party report was so well received by all mainstream. Once there are widespread replications, media will pick up, without your asking.

    Thirdly, you seem to assume that Nichenergy reactors have a low energy output or low COP. How do you know that ? Any inside info you’d like to share?

    He himself has described a meltdown event that happened to him, very similar to hot cat melt down. How do you explain that ?

    I totally support the Piantelli program. This is a once in the life time opportunity. The hot cat mockup will shed some light on the Lugano report, but its far away from the main objective of MFMP, which is to demo a WORKING LENR DEVICE.

    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      Another point for the Piantelli program is that Piantelli already has the important patents.

      He can give MFMP more detailed information for their research and replication efforts. If anytime someone will commercialize his technolgy based on the findings and published data of MFMP, that one has to buy a licence from Piantelli.

      Rossi and IH don’t have this IP security, and that’s why the are so cautious and incommunicative.

      • Hank Mills

        Detailed instructions to build what? Has he shown them that he had anything other than low power systems?

        • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

          He worked together with Focardi and Focardi delivered Rossi’s base design.

          Why do you think Piantelli don’t have anything interesting? Even if they just see a few watts of excess this would be huge news and even more experiences for the MFMP guys!

          And as Piantelli is talking it seems he’s sure to get more than just a few watts!

          • Omega Z

            Rossi already had the E-cat working. Rossi invited Focardi to prove his results were wrong or in error. Focardi could find no errors. I do believe he was instrumental in Rossi better understanding the effect & hence, Rossi’s ability to improve it at a faster pace.

            Note, Piantelli & Focardi had hit an impasse & Piantelli had ceased his work. There was a time lapse between Piantelli & Focardi’s work & Focardi advising Rossi. Piantelli restarted his research likely because of Rossi’s results & probably, Piantelli’s faith in Focardi’s abilties gave it credibility in his eyes.

            • doug marker

              Omega Z, just want to clarify your comment that Andrea already had a working eCat in June 2007 when he approached Prof Focardi. Is there *any* documented information to support this belief ?. Reason I ask is that both Andrea and Prof Focardi state in multiple interviews that they did not start building the 1st eCat until after June 2007 because Prof Focardi’s role was to ensure no radiation harmed them. That was his speciality.

              The design Andrea took to Prof Focardi in mid 2007 was a theoretical one. They began building eCats at the Bondino factory of the Rossi family, after June 2007. The 1st success was (as written in detail in the 2008 Rossi Italian patent) was Oct 2007.

              Cheers

              LENRPLUS

    • Hank Mills

      First, I did not miss that. I personally think that all of the resources and personel of the MFMP should be utilized in the Dog Bone project – regardless of their location. To hit the optimal combination of elements in the fuel and replicate the E-Cat will take multiple attempts and the team in Europe should focus on setting up a lab for E-Cat testing.

      Second, we are at the mercy – for the most part – of skeptics, cynics, and the naysayers. We have been ever since 1989. There have been countless low powered successful tests of cold fusion devices and there are countless papers about them. But due to the continual ridicule, mocking, and attacks the media will not touch it. Also know that some of the biggest skeptics, regardless of the names they use online, are academics trying to protect the status quo and the funding of hot fusion. Until we convince the mass majority of skeptics, almost nothing will do more than get a couple more people off the fence. The only way to end the suppression quickly and forever is to shove hundreds of self sustaining reactors built by dozens of parties around the world into the faces of the cynics. Then they will claim they thought LENR was real all along.

      Third, all indications are that Piantelli has nothing that compares to the E-Cat. He has interesting patents, but has not even attempted to show anything of significance. I’m not a gambler, but if I was I would bet he has only low powered systems that achieve no where close to 1000C while self sustaining. We have zero evidence he has anything better than any of the other many systems that have produced tens of watts. I hope I’m wrong and he has a system that can produce kilowatts at a COP of 1000, but I doubt it.

      Finally, a working lenr device will accomplish little if it is not at the level of the E-Cat.

      We have the Holy Grail. We need to focus on that.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        “There have been countless low powered successful tests of cold fusion devices and..” Yes, but there is not yet an opensource version which is easy to reproduce. Also, I’m sceptical that one needs to convince the sceptics, or that such deed would even be possible.

        • Omega Z

          I agree, the skeptics are a lost cause. If Rossi concludes 1 working plant in a business setting within the next year, It’s game-over for them.

      • Billy Jackson

        I have to agree with frank. when your receiving public support for one project the mistake would be to start to spread yourself to thin and leave the impression that you have turned your focus away from what was publicly supported. No one wants to feel they wasted their time and money or effort on a project that lacks focus. we have enough jumping around with IH and Rossi.. please stay focused on whats promised and post an outline on what you would like to do as a follow up.

    • Hank Mills

      And every single E Cat naturally wants to run away to melt down according to Cures who worked with Rossi testing hundreds of reactors. Can Piantelli produce a meltdown on demand?

      • Mr. Moho

        Probably yes:

        http://news.newenergytimes.net/2011/01/19/rossi-and-focardi-lenr-device-probably-real-with-credit-to-piantelli/

        Piantelli has an exciting story to tell of another experiment that, for few hours, was out of control. It was sometime around September 1993, before Piantelli-Focardi group’s first published paper on the subject. Around 7 in the evening, he looked at the monitor for the experiment. Something didn’t look right. The temperature was increasing rapidly. He wasn’t sure what to do. Should he kill the experiment, and if so, how would he stop it?

        A rapidly increasing temperature in an enclosed steel container couldbe a big, big problem. He was afraid. He wondered whether he should leave the building. Instead he called Focardi in Milano—at 2 in the morning—and asked, “What should I do?” This was before Piantelli knew about the poisoning effect of deuterium. But Focardi came up with a workable idea: introduce nitrogen. And it worked. It stopped the uncontrolled temperature rise and killed the experiment.

        Piantelli didn’t know how hot the experiment had gotten before he killed it because the monitor eventually blacked out. However, the metalthermocouples inside the cell melted. This told him that the temperature exceeded 1450 C. Understandably, he was angry because these experiments take a long time to run and he had to abandon it prematurely.
        “It’s not good when they run too hot,” Piantelli said. “400 C is a much better range.”

  • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

    As I understood, the MFMP will keep on working on the E-Cat replication in the HUG Labs in USA.
    The european branch of MFMP (Mathieu Valat) is simultaneously following Piantellis offer.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      yes US and EU team are quite independent.
      good for us!

      we will have two replication underway…

      for e-cat even if replication don’t work, at least it will give calibration data to confirm or reject claims of errors in lugano test.