Rossi: Outsourcing for Production Arranged With Chain of Industries in US, Europe and Asia [Update: Confidential Parts to be Outsourced]

There’s an interesting response from Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics that indicates that he and Industrial Heat are well prepared for the industrialization of E-Cat plants.

A reader asked Rossi about how long it would take for the industrialization of the E-Cat to take place, assuming the current test is successful.

Rossi responded:

Andrea Rossi
July 8th, 2015 at 7:56 AM
Jan:
To answer to you I’d need the well discussed about crystal ball. I can say, though, that we have already all the plans ready, as well as agreements with a chain of industries in America, Europe and Asia ready to start their parcel of outsourcing activity. Assuming that the results of the tests on course will end up to be positive ( which is still not sure) , I can suppose, but it is only a supposition, that in one year the massive production could be in line. I underline: this is a supposition, not a forecast.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Rossi is typically optimistic here when it comes to his projections of when mass production might start begin, but he also admits this is just a guess. More interestingly to me here is that he says that plans and agreements are already in place with industries across the world to get started with outsourcing. It makes a lot of sense to outsource production of non-confidential parts for the E-Cat plants, since it will be much cheaper than doing everything in-house. I expect that many of the required parts needed are already available off-the-shelf, but perhaps some custom parts will be needed as well.

I would guess, however, that IH will need quite a bit of factory space for production of confidential parts, as well as for assembly of the plants.

UPDATE: I sent some follow-up questions on the outsourcing topic:

Q. When you talk about outsourcing, does this mean that companies around the world will be making parts for the E-Cat plants, and shipping them to your own factory for assembly into plants?

A: The final manufacturing, after the outsourced parts will have been collected, will be made in due places, under due supervision to help to control that the IP conservation procedures are respected. At least until the massive production will devoid of importance the reverse engineering.

Q. Will you be the sole manufacturer of the reactors and fuel because of the industrial secrets involved?

A: No, the manufacturing will also be made by the manufacturing Licencees: obviously the confidentiality of the secret parts will be maintained. We have studied together a procedure for this.

I find these responses quite interesting, and I think what Rossi says, could bode well for the fast dissemination of the E-Cat. He talks about final manufacturing taking place in “due places” (plural), which indicates that there will not be one central factory in the US where everything is shipped to and from. He also mentions “manufacturing licensees” — suggesting that Industrial Heat will not have to set up their own manufacturing facilities to put together the E-Cats. It could be a situation similar to how Apple contracts out the manufacturing of its products to a large manufacturing partner.

The big surprise here for me is in the response to the second question, where Rossi states that even the confidential parts will be outsourced. On May 2 2015, Rossi had posted that “We will manufacture only the confidential parts, outsourcing all the rest.” So there seems to have been a change in thinking here. If even the secret reactors are being outsourced it should eliminate a potential bottleneck. It seems like they feel they have a sufficient plan to be able to supervise the manufacturing process so that secrets don’t leak out.

In the end, Rossi concedes that reverse engineering will take place, but he hopes that with a mass production plan, and cheap enough products, it won’t make sense for competitors to try and build E-Cat clones to sell.

  • Agaricus

    New readers please note that a well-worn ploy of the detractors known as ‘shills’ or ‘trolls’ is to wait until a thread is a few days old before planting their content-free but disparaging posts using a throwaway ‘handle’. As this seems to be the case here, the comment should be assessed in this light.

  • Mytakeis

    Rossi, a kuwell dude!

  • Omega Z

    This is pretty much what I’ve posted before, except I thought Rossi/IH would manufacture the reactors & fuel themselves for a period of time. Eventually resulting in Rossi/IH just be a licensing & R&D firm. Somewhat like Apple.

    By licensing to competitive industries, you have multiple product variations & competitive prices. How many competing manufactures use the same Intel or AMD chips in their products. And as to a competitor to the E-cat technology, It’s not if, but when.

  • Roland

    What strikes me about the commentary, aside from the ones that are obviously not up to speed on what’s happened to date, is that it’s been largely overlooked that this project is still in the R&D phase where rapid progress on the fundamentals are making yesterdays concepts redundant on a monthly basis.

    The core units have been scaled up by a factor of 25, and more may be achieved before production decisions have to be made. What was an acceptable COP at 6 is now a dot in the rearview mirror, which speaks to tremendous progress in the control systems.

    This year long trial has already led to a complete rethink of the manufactured product and we’re only a third of the way through yet.

    A great deal of flexibility about precisely what the product will look like is inescapable with so many fundamentals still in flux.

    The issue becomes one of preparation to manufacture a product in the absence of a detailed beta prototype that won’t be obsolete before the paint dries.

  • Sanjeev

    Some more reveals by Rossi:
    2- No, the manufacturing will also be made by the manufacturing
    Licencees: obviously the confidentiality of the secret parts will be
    maintained. We have studied together a procedure for this.

  • Alain Samoun

    I must say that I’m starting to be discouraged by Rossi saying:
    ” Assuming that the results of the tests on course will end up to be positive ( which is still not sure)”

    To me to be “positive” the COP should be over 3 – And he is not sure of that yet?
    I hope other LENR researchers will take up the relay or we should look for other technologies?

    • Observer

      Such statements become boiler plate once the corporate lawyers get involved.

    • fritz194

      I think we have to distinguish the context of “positive or negative”.
      The actual runtime of the 1MW e-cat of 136days is somewhat below expected.
      The question here is if the technology already in place has the potential to be applied in a scalable manner with the neccessary maturity and reliability.
      I don´t doubt that there are almost infinite COPs in SSM possible – the only question is if this technology “as-is” can fullfill the requirements of a “industrial heat” customer.
      Taking into account the amount of parts needed to assemble this container – this probably gives problematic FMEA figures and reduces the reliability.
      I am quite sure that there will be another iteration to reduce number of e-cats needed and to reduce the system complexity – once the key requirements for stable operation can be defined.
      So the question I see is if its possible to operate almost similar setups after the test – or will be the need for a substantial re-design of some parts.
      Anyway – the answer if this technology exists- or not can be given after the test and it will be definitely positive.

      • Daniel Maris

        I agree with a lot of that. A technology can be real and achievable – like Stirling Engines, which have been around for 150 years – but not widely adopted. The reasons for non-adoption can be varied but will likely relate to such matters as reliability, safety, average down time, cost of materials, cost of manufacturing process and labour costs (in terms of supervision of the process).

        Even if we assume proof positive that this LENR technology is real and achievable, we still have no idea how those other factors are going to play out.

        • fritz194

          The timeline of Solar cells is a different but good example.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_solar_cells

          Traditional centralized power generation pays-off within decades.
          A disruptive technology has to pay off within few years – to minimize risks,.. and so on.

  • Charlie tapp

    Does anyone actually think that once the test is over he is going to actually release info about it? Seriously people if this thing is real he is going to fall off the radar take a pay check and never be heard from again, or misterious heart attack. If he keeps talking he will only say (the test is positive now we are going over all the data for the next year and cannot release info per the customer request) time to start following someone else I think ! Maybe parkhomov tell him to start a website. Journal of low energy nucular physics

  • Bob

    As I have followed this saga over the years, it seems that the majority of what Rossi alludes to comes to pass. Not always as many initially understand it however. Often much embellishment is placed on the subject by the audience of this play. I have found that most of what Rossi states seem to come to pass, in some form or another.
    However, this topic statement does have be proverbially scratching my head. One puzzle I think I have some insight on. The other, I do not. Note that I have been and still am a supporter of Rossi and hope him the best as his success will benefit us all.
    Rossi said in the past, that he had a “robotized” factory that was a “magnificent”. His words and pertaining to being ready to mass produce eCats. What happened to this? This is one area where I am at a loss as to how accurate Rossi was in the statement. While not too big a deal with me, it is a bit of a puzzle.
    More importantly is the question about why the wait for the “customer’s imposed 360 day test” as some have stated here and before. A customer could not bound Rossi to release information about his eCat. He might constrict releasing information pertaining to the customer, but not the product. Rossi, could very well make another 10 plants and have one of them running publicly by now if he wanted. Why is he so “handcuffed” by this particular trial run? It certainly cannot be the “customer’s” fault as some would imply.
    I believe the reason is : Tom Darden
    Tom Darden seems to be an intelligent, successful businessman. One who does not delve into the public limelight to gain notoriety. I believe he is a serious, philosophical man that values both his investments and reputation. He understands the controversy of Cold Fusion and what it did to F & P. He does not want to travel that road.
    So, he is maintaining a fairly strict cloak of secrecy on this until he has absolute, undeniable proof that “his plant is real and works”. He is making the demand of the 360 day test, for his own peace of mind. He probably does not care about theory, he knows if it works, it will sell.
    I propose this is the reason for the long test and seemingly delay on proceeding with the eCat production. Some will say why 360 days when 180 days would have been sufficient. Possibly, but Darden is a logical, systematic and patient person. He probably deems the longer trial to be a minimum of insurance against the huge investment and the huge “risk” of reputation at stake.
    This test and delay is likely to be for Tom Darden and not the customer at all. He wants to have absolute proof of it working. He is not a physicist nor cares about theory. He cares if it will work and help solve the pollution problem. He is fronting the money and calling the shots so to speak. Just my thoughts. 🙂

    • GreenWin

      Bob, Rossi’s “robotized factory” was introduced while pursuing a plan to market home-cats – PRIOR to the Industrial Heat joint venture. Plans change all the time in business and it is pointless to see change in nefarious light.

      The present prototype burn-in is therefor exceedingly pragmatic and logical – especially for Industrial Heat who want to sell industrial heating products. This is in no way a “delay” as some skeptics wish to spin it. Had Rossi not established a public dialog during early tests (circa 2011) – he would not likely be revealing much about the current prototype. This speaks to consistency.

      And while Tom Darden is certainly a pragmatic businessman, the prototype customer must have a demanding contract – if they are to lease or buy the product on final delivery. While it may be hard for some on this forum to wait for a complete burn-in, it makes perfect business sense. For both customer and Rossi/IH. The MTBF data alone will prove to be greatly valuable when scaled manufacturing and assembly begins.

      • Mats002

        Yes, Mean Time Between Failure is an important factor for economy but is of no importance for science or tech POC.

    • Warthog

      “Outsourcing” and a “robotized factory” are not exclusive, but complementary. The robot factory assembles the final product from modules provided by the outsourcing chain. Rossi has already said that the “fuel assemblies” will be manufactured by a company under his (or IH’s) direct control, but that other assemblies will be provided by other sources.

      • Daniel Maris

        I agree that is most likely. Get all the parts and control modules built in places like China and then assemble them in the USA.

    • AdrianAshfield

      At the very least, Industrial Heat need to know how long the charge lasts.
      But that would only have a marginal effect on the price and I don’t see why IH couldn’t start making them before the official end of the test. Probably more to the point, look for some sales..

      • Daniel Maris

        The real influence on the price will be how many operatives are required to supervise the E Cat in operation, whether it breaks down often, or whether it requires significant periods of down time.

    • oceans

      Bob your comments are precisely why most ventures are not discussed with the uniformed bystanders of the complexities of new tech ventures, plans are constantly changing as new developments warrant, Elon Musk flew under the radar till just before announcing construction of its $5 billion battery plant.

      Stand by kid and watch the Dr Rossi and his team at work, we are thankful he is sharing what information he has to this point as a new paradigm shift develops.

    • Observer

      When interpreting Rossi’s statements (such as the robotized factory) one must leave oneself open to all realities which are consistent with his statements. Since outsourcing final assembly was always his intention, it stands to reason that the “robotized factory” was a pre-existing facility Rossi was planning to out source to.

      It is not uncommon for people to describe the factories that produce i-phones as “Apple’s factories”, even though, technically they belong to a sub-contractor.

    • Agaricus

      It has never made much sense to me that the e-cat project is of such low urgency that IH is happy to wait a year for pilot plant development and testing to be completed, before the next step can be taken.

      We have some asides from Rossi about HT e-cat development running alongside the LT pilot on the customer’s premises (which incidentally raises the question of the relationship of the ‘customer’ to IH) but its difficult to accept that this is all that’s happening in the process of industrialising what seems to be the greatest invention of our time..

      I am hoping that we are being encouraged to watch what the right hand is doing in the light, while the left hand does much more in the shadows. In other words, Rossi may be providing distraction (including the irritating ‘positive or negative’ mantra) while Darden conducts a larger operation behind the scenes. If that is not the case though, then we can only hope that others have ‘the secrets’ and are moving more efficiently towards the point of industrial production

      • radvar

        The shoe string aspect is disturbing. It’s a tough problem.
        > The deliverable has to be completely reliable; and new designs would have to go through another extended testing period.
        > The lead engineer has to hand-hold the “beta” so much that:
        —> He can’t train others (but do we know that? Who knows who cycles through the containers, and what they talk about)
        —> He can’t develop new technology (but he’s working on the hot cat, apparently)
        > Few if any other people understand the core-technology enough to design frameworks around it (but do we know that? again, who visits Rossi in the container)

    • fritz194

      ==== Robotized Factory ====
      Some people might call a small workshop with new and shiny CNC milling machine a robotized factory – if they handcrafted their stuff for 30 years.
      I am very shure that Elon Musk and Andrea Rossi have different expectations on that issue.
      Maybe he had at some point an agreement / LOT with a medium size state-of-the-art CAM workshop to manufacture his proprietary stuff.

    • Private Citizen

      Most of what we know of Darden is from a half hour speech where he barely mentioned LENR and chose not to demo the technology publicly. It is perhaps a bit hyperbolic to elevate the fellow to the level of unrevealed, omni-competent, systematic and patient messiah just yet.

  • mcloki

    I would think that the container components would be easy to replicate. The computer controllers and wiring of sensors would be a bit more difficult but once established. Sensors, wiring, housings are almost all commodity pieces. The fuel mixture is proprietary, the fuel container would be proprietary. Once they establish Ver1.0 E-cat “engine” reactor for the lack of a better word. They could really explode the E-cat market by letting everyone into the party.

  • mcloki

    Depends which model they go for. They could go the Ford model and have to build the entire car or they could just build the e-cat engine and sell if to other OEM’s that attach the e-cat to products that use the heat created for multiple uses. I don’t think Rossi cares about a radiant floor heating system for homes and cottages. But there would be a huge business in retrofitting houses with a radiant floor heating system especially if it was as inexpensive to run as seems possible. All IH would do is supply replacement fuel cartridges.

    • Steven Irizarry

      i want no electricity bills when this gets out

      • Omega Z

        You can go off grid right now if you choose.
        The reason you don’t is it costs more then being on the grid.
        I think you and many others will find the situation will not change with the E-cat. It will cost more then grid energy. Volume & scale will still be cheaper.

  • GordonDocherty

    “Assuming that the results of the tests on course will end up to be positive ( which is still not sure)”

    Now it makes sense – the agreements only activate if the results are positive. Conversely, until the results are announced and are positive, production will have to wait.

    That way, the producers don’t “jump the gun” to produce components before lessons have been learned and incorporated, so minimizing the risks of rework, scrappage and/or reputational damage.

    • blanco69

      In my experience, overlaying any production agreement with the proviso that this may or may not go ahead, means that suppliers will do nothing in terms of preparation. In that respect then there is no well oiled machine piosed to swing into action when the gun is fired. I wouldn’t expect any third party preparation until Rossi places a firm order.

    • Omega Z

      Agreed, Who wants to build a couple 100K components only to learn they need scraped, redesigned & manufactured a new.

  • AdrianAshfield

    If the test continues to work well there is no reason for Industrial Heat/Cherokee to wait right up to the end in order to prepare for production.

    • Bob Matulis

      That is a good point – would make no sense to me to wait if a SSM plant is working for over a half a year. And why scuttle everything if it works for “only” 340ish days? That would not make sense either.