‘No Time to be Lost’ in Bringing E-Cats to Market if Test is a Success

You will notice that there’s now a countdown clock on the bottom right of this page. That is measuring the time left until Feb 5th, which is the date the 350 day test will end, providing there is no downtime during the remainder of the test.

I have often wondered how long it might take for E-Cats to be available in the marketplace, providing this test is successful. Will industrialization start up right away, or will Leonardo and its licensees only start to gear up for commercial activity after the test has been successful? Will we be waiting for an extended period of time before we can see E-Cats being deployed in industrial settings? I asked Andrea Rossi about this today, and this was his response:

Andrea Rossi
August 15th, 2015 at 8:38 PM
Frank Acland:
Believe me: we are working very strong to prepare the manufacturing in massive quantities of the E-Cats, even if we still have brakes pulled due to the fact that we still do not know if the final results of the tests on course wil be positive or negative. How much time will be necessary, assumed F9>0 ? Not easy to say, but we will not lose time. Somebody will be very surprised about the speed of our action.
F9.
By the way: now it is 09.40 p.m. of Sat Aug 15, I am in the plant, the 1 MW E-Cat is stable, the E-Cat X is still very promising. This shortens of 1 day the distance from the OTS day ( OTS = Off The Shelf).
Warm Regards,
A.R.

So for now, the brakes are on, but from this response it does sound like they are raring to go. It won’t be soon enough for some, but if the tests are successful there will be plenty of work to be done before they can make the plants, ship them, install them, and put them to work. Rossi has said previously said that investment funds have not yet been released to fund mass production, but they will need lots of money if they are going to manufacture ‘massive quantities’ of the E-Cats.

  • Jarea1

    Ok ok i agree with you XD

  • Jarea1

    you always sound so sure. Do you have inside information?
    Why should we relax if MFMP doesn´t have any reproducible experiment yet?. if MFMP would have a reproducible experiment then i would be confident that the product would come for sure. Please, MFMP you are my hope to relax! XD

  • Jarea1

    That is true and also scary. There is no real prove of Rossi COP other than third person promises. We have to believe in the good progress of Rossi and also in the COP he has announced. On the other hand, MFMP has not been sucessfull yet. :(.
    Is Rossi selling smoke to everyone?

  • psi2u2

    Right.

  • psi2u2

    The second point is just boilerplate caution about “forward looking statements.” He is obliged by good legal and business practice to say it.

  • Paul

    Because he’s sure that the results are positive but according to the agreement with the customer he has signed he cannot officially release information about the test.

  • ecatworld

    I think they are getting everything in place in the hope that the E-Cat plant will pass the 350 day test. He says right now the brakes are on, because they are not certain that it will pass. But they want to be ready release those brakes as soon as they have a green light.

    I think they have some level of optimism that the test will be positive, but have to accept that something could still go wrong.

  • Hador_NYC

    I don’t follow your meaning. I was responding to Phillip Power.

    I would not bet on that date, though. I hope Rossi has it, and I suspect he has something, but me, I wont knight him nor ignore him, just yet. I’ll wait until he shows his cards. In the meantime, I am rooting for him, and all others working on this area of research.

  • Paul

    In the Internet slang F9 means “fine”. Rossi is not a guy, but please consider that some times his colleague, the engineer Fulvio Fabiani, a former top level hacker, writes on the Jonp instead of Rossi in reply to more technical inquires… He knows what F9 means, but probably Rossi doesn’t use it properly.

    • timycelyn

      He defined it a while ago on his blog – the mantra “…. final result can still be positive or negative.” became a bit wearing for him to type, and someone joked he ought to find a way of assigning it to a function key like F9 to save himself some time. He said something like “Don’t know how to do that in the software on my keyboard, but from now on when I type F9 that’s what I mean.” He only uses it with his regular correspondents (like Frank) who understand the meaning.

  • Rene

    Years go Rossi had a lot of problems with controlling the reaction. It is why self-sustain back then was short – long sustains led to runaway meltdowns. By his own words, he has said that he and his team spent considerable time increasing the efficacy and reliability of SSM. This is what has led to his success in making high output e-cats.

  • oceans

    do not discount deals being made with established heat and air companies like this example:
    Solar Air Conditioner – http://www.lennox.com/products/solar-ready/

  • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

    I hope that LENR makes big news long before the presidential election, which will be held on November 8, 2016.

    • Steven Irizarry

      What would that do?

      • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

        It will force a dialogue about energy policy. We will see which candidate will support LENR, and which candidates stick with the renewable energy hoax. BIG ETHANOL. BIG WIND,and BIG SOLAR want to keep raking in taxpayer money while forcing us at gunpoint to buy their inefficient products. That is the way the Mafia does business, not the way the US is supposed to operate. We are supposed to be a free market economy, which means no government mandates and no product subsidies. Let the marketplace decide. Which candidates will stick with an energy policy that has been nothing but destructive.

  • Alain Samoun

    No questions that if the 1MW plant works,it will be a big success for industries using heat. What I’m more interested in, is the possibility to make direct electricity as Rossi has announced. That will be the paradigm that we all expect and I wonder if Rossi realizes that – If he is right in his announcement – then his success will be bigger that we can imagine: To solve our current problems – Climate,food,water and decent life for 7-10 billions of us – That is threatening our own survival as a human race. We then will need a bigger Manhattan project, this time worldwide, to save humanity. Does Rossi realizes this Frank?

    • Frechette

      I hope you are not implying that the first Manhattan Project saved humanity.

      • Alain Samoun

        No of course,what I mean is that, knowing the urgency, it should be necessary to get the maximum of scientists, worldwide, to work on LENR projects to solve the energy problems once it will be obvious, for all, that LENR is the solution.

    • ecatworld

      I think Rossi understands that his invention could make a huge impact, but I doubt that he has plans to launch any kind of political plan to save the planet. I think he sees his job as to make the technology and get it out into the world.

    • Jarea1

      Again, why no question that the 1MW plant works? Rossi is always saying F9. We all hope that he will deliver but i fear that he will not focus on that and he will start with the new ecat X procrastinating the delivery of the previous one. That would be a disaster and for me a bad indication on the predictability and maybe in the honesty of Rossi.

  • ecatworld

    Not many details have been provided so far, Bob. Rossi has said that the 250 kW reactors are single reactors, but we don’t know how they are constructed internally. Rossi has said that there is some kind of synergy taking place between e-cats which increases the COP, but again, not sure what that means.

  • US_Citizen71

    My money would be on the 250 kW low temperature reactors being produced first. With his partner being named Industrial Heat I would assume that their goal is to either produce heat for industrial purposes or to sell devices that do. The 250 kW reactors would do this and fulfill the KISS principle better than the 10 kW reactors would. The 250 kW reactors are likely just larger scale versions of the 10 kW units so if they are not already covered by the safety certification due to their similarity getting a new certification would not be that difficult.

    • ecatworld

      Yes, Rossi has said recently that they will probably be making their low temperature plants out of 250 kW reactors, rather than the small ones.

  • oceans

    Dr Rossi is Very confident these days and he will be vindicated, imagine this new power source and its implications to humanity, These are exciting times.

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

    Airbus has not done any experiments as far as I know. So no replications except the very doubtable ones you mentioned.

  • Uncle Bob

    In the lead article, this line looks significant:-

    ” Somebody will be very surprised about the speed of our action. F9.”

    And we know the F9 is shorthand for either positive or negative.
    I wont be at all surprised if he’s proven right on that point.

    • http://www.thinktankreport.com/ Phillip Power

      Could someone please tell me what F9 is???

      • Leonard Weinstein

        F9 means the results can be either positive or negative. Thus F9>0 means the results are positive.

        • http://www.thinktankreport.com/ Phillip Power

          But what, in its most general sense, does F9 mean or stand for? I’ve seen it appear in a range of blogs.

          • hempenearth

            F9 means that we should remember that the results of the test currently under way, may be positive or negative

            • http://www.thinktankreport.com/ Phillip Power

              So are you saying that F9 is a term invented uniquely by Rossi and only to apply to his current test and it has no other meaning in any other context? So, if it appeared in any other blog, essay, book or report about any other subject in any other branch of human understanding, it would be automatically regarded as just a typo?

              • Hador_NYC

                Why are you taking this to an extreme? Its not necessary. Lets keep it simple. Rossi has used F9 as a short hand for his disclaimer on multiple occasions. Any comments or text around or related to Rossi’s work that contain F9 relate to that diclaimer. Any other use of F9 must be considered in its context. For instance many computer programs use the F9 key.

                So I ask again, what is your point in taking it to extreme?

                • http://www.thinktankreport.com/ Phillip Power

                  – because only by persisting with the question have I been able to elucidate the more fleshed-out answer that you have just provided! Thank you – although first prize should go to US_Citizen71 for providing more of the “historical background” (see above). And, as I indicated in that reply, I wonder if F9 could evolve into shorthand for context-dependent disclaimers. For example, in the context of this post, F9 could mean “IMHO and with all due respect”. In which case, F9.

                • Hador_NYC

                  there are better ways to do that.

          • Andre Blum

            In text message or whatsapp context, F9 can be shorthand for fine.

      • US_Citizen71

        Rossi has added the disclaimer that the results could be positive or negative for quite some time. Early this year a commenter on the JONP posted that he should program a function key like F9 to type that automatically to save keystrokes. Rossi thought it was funny and begin using F9 to replace the disclaimer in his posts.

        • http://www.thinktankreport.com/ Phillip Power

          Ah – thank you! That’s the “historical” background I didn’t know. I did know that F9 is shorthand for fine, as Andre Blum said and that many computer programs use F9 as Hador_NYC said.

          But I was also wondering whether F9 is starting to be used in the wider blogging community as shorthand for “subject to all the usual disclaimers”.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Uncle Bob: I don’t know why you waste your time trolling on this site if you believe this:

      Uncle Bob (Guest):

      Sorry Bernie,.. I should have been more specific, but the post gets longer and longer. A detailed explanation will be necessarily long but here it is.

      What I am saying is I don’t believe any of the ecats worked to the claimed specifications, that is,.. a guaranteed COP of 6.

      I believe the plant Rossi has been describing certainly exists, but again, I don’t believe it has a COP of 6, or even 3. My belief at this point is it has a COP of 1.

      His constant reports that it is operating in ssm or in driven mode indicates to me that the running reports are all just made up.
      The idea of multiple reactors in a 1MW plant was to provide a continuous flow of steady power in and heat energy out. From the many reports that is obviously not happening. All reactors are either in ssm (mostly apparently) or in driven mode.
      This would be like running a multiple cylinder engine in all cylinders firing at once mode”.
      This is so bizarre that I find it impossible to believe.
      I appreciate that others might have no problem believing it but I don’t.

      Regarding “the Lugano testing” ;
      it was not faked, but it was conducted in a manner to specifically direct the attention of the testers away from the area of testing which would have made apparent the peculiarity which enabled the later testing at a higher temperature to show an apparent COP greater than 1, You may recall that in later testing, the COP at the lower temperatures was minimal. That’s because the parameters obtained during the lower temperature calibrations were more relevant. There were no calibrations done at the higher temperatures which the supposed high COP’s were produced. I believe that anomaly was known by someone but not those writing the report.

      You might remember the photographs of the first hot cat test which showed a glowing red hot ecat with a supposed small input power, and then it suffered an internal meltdown. The parameters of this test were stated as not being closely recorded so they couldn’t state the COP.
      I strongly believe this meltdown was solely for the purpose of keeping further calibration tests in the low temperature region so that when these figures were transposed into the high temperature tests, they would produce an apparently higher COP.
      A Thomas Clarke has previously posted a very detailed description of why this is so.

      I believe the test was planned that way.

      Also, the second Lugano test has little or no veracity due to the fact that Mr. Rossi was present at the test and had ‘hands on’ involvement even though he many times reported he had nothing to do with the testing and didn’t even have any knowledge of how the testing was progressing. There has to be a reason for this deception and I don’t think it was modesty.
      The fact that it was not taken up and published by anyone of any reputation suggests I’m not alone in that assessment.

      Regarding “Industrial Heat, Industrial Heat’s attorneys and attorneys of all licencees,”.

      Tom Darden readily admitted that the decision to become involved was on the basis of a weighted probability. That is, the likelihood of anything coming from it was small but if it came good, the payoff would be huge.
      Venture capitalists work that way. Risk and reward.

      They have little technical expertise and rely totally on the advice of others. As Tom Darden said, they decided primarily on the results of the two Lugano reports, which means if the conclusions in the reports were wrong then the decision to invest is also wrong. And as I have said, I think the conclusions are provably wrong.

      Regarding ” Mats Lewan, everyone witnessing the multiple e-cat tests have all been duped.” ;
      I think they were all duped, but understandably so. They witnessed a demonstration which was purposely set up to do just that.

      I was also initially duped until some days later in a video of the ecat test, someone asked Mr. Rossi where the thermocouple was placed. He pointed to the exact spot (he stated) on the heat exchanger where the thermocouple was placed and it was immediately obvious where the supposed excess energy was coming from, and why the water flow rate was made so ridiculo usly high when it need not be.

      I emailed Mats to point out the anomaly but it was his opinion that the high flow rate would make the positioning error insignificant.

      From my short exchange I think he’s a nice guy but I also think he is wrong. It was in fact the high water flow rate combined with the obviously incorrect placement of the thermocouple which enabled the whole trick to work.

      It would have been a simple matter to run the exact same test again but with the positioning corrected and the flow rate slowed. It was a simple, easy and quick modification to a test which had already been set up and run. If that was too difficult then just poke a simple laboratory thermometer in the rubber output hose for verification of the thermocouple reading.
      Was it ever done?
      Of course not. Too busy,.. and no time for that sort of clownery.

      That same test with those two errors corrected would have proven the case for LENR to the point where this argument would have been settled back in 2011, and yet here we are in 2015 with the point still no closer to being proven.

      Regarding ” unless you have seen the contract between IH and Leodardo you cannot say IH has manufacturing rights. Have you seen the contract?” ;
      Of course I have not seen it,

      All I and everyone else can go on is what Mr. Rossi reports and the language used to report it. And from that it appears something has changed in the relationship.
      That is not an infallible declaration on my part. It’s just as it appears to me. I could be wrong, but at this point I don’t think so.
      But the fact that he astutely avoids any question on the matter indicates there may be some confirmation to the observation.

      1:53 a.m., Saturday Aug. 8 | Other comments by Uncle Bob

  • Gerard McEk

    If Andrea wants to blow the E-cats into the market as soon as the counter hits 8 zero’s than now aleady huge investments are needed in big plants, automation etc. Contracts for materials must be in place, staff people need to be prepared and ready when the go signal comes. I do not believe you can start mass production in one day to full production. That takes time and I guess more than a year, maybe even more if you have to build production halls first.
    The E-cat is probably not a complex thing to produce and most things can be out-sourced. Maybe they have contracts ready for this. I can only say: Let’s see and wait.

  • http://bobmapp.com.uk twobob

    Well….. Having the orders for an initial 10,00 plus, E-cat, since 20011.
    I think that might help investors to invest.
    If he said there is a robotised assembly plant,
    then I have a tendency to accept his word.
    He has a good “track record” for doing what he sets out to do.
    10,000 plus orders is just a small hand basin compered to the ocean,
    He can bath in.

  • Gerrit

    no wonder, Rossi has fully robotized factories since early 2012 just waiting for the ecats to get ready.

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

      That’s what I thought too.
      He’s ready for mass production since years…

    • Jarea1

      Is that ironic? XD

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

        I guess yes, it is ironic because Rossi said years ago that his mass production line is ready. Now he prepares a second one. What happened to the first?