Andrea Rossi Granted E-Cat Patent by US Patent Office

Thanks to Mcloki for sharing this very important news as far as the E-Cat is concerned (and all who emailed me).

Mats Lewan has posted on his Impossible Invention blog that Andrea Rossi has been granted a US Patent http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/08/25/rossi-has-been-granted-us-patent-on-the-e-cat/

The patent was granted today, August 25 2015. A link to the full text his here:

https://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/us9115913b1.pdf

More to follow.

This should be a very significant event in terms of replication of the “Rossi Effect”. There have been a number of efforts already by people who have studied Rossi’s statements, E-Cat test reports, and the work of other replciators like Alexander Parkhomov. Now we have some important new details that should help replicators — and I am sure new replicators will get in the game now.

One interesting excerpt from the patent that should be helpful:

“Variations in the ratio of reactants and catalyst tend to govern reaction rate, and are not critical. However, it has been found that a suitable mixture would include a starting mixture of 50% nickel, 20% lithium, and 30% LAH [lithium aluminum hydride]. Within this mixture, nickel acts as a catalyst for the reaction, and is not itself a reagent. While nickel is particularly useful because of its relative abundance, its function can also be carried out by other elements in column 10 of the periodic table, such as platinum or palladium.”

I asked Rossi on the JONP how they were able to turn things around after the patent had previously received a final rejection by the USPTO. He replied:

Andrea Rossi
August 25th, 2015 at 11:11 AM
Frank Acland:
Working, studying, discussing.
Thank you for your important congratulations. This is an achievement of all of us of the LENR family.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

 

There’s a brief Q&A with Andrea Rossi on the Ecat.com website here: http://ecat.com/news/e-cat-patent-granted-by-uspto

  • psi2u2

    Its true that I did say that he joined the board because he was convinced by the science. I stand corrected, and so should you.

  • psi2u2

    I didn’t address his motivations in my comments, and these are not relevant to your personal attack on him. Please refrain from aggressive and irrelevant questions of other posters. It’s that kind of behavior that raises questions about YOUR motivations.

  • Omega Z

    When I researched it, based on a world GDP of 60 Trillion, about 6 trillion was (All)energy expenditures. 10%.

    Some products are energy intensive and some not.
    One has to separate a trucker burning 40 cents a mile & 70 cents to the driver. You still pay the 70 cents even if they use zero fuel. There are also other costs in the calculation that will remain. Also, the burned 40 cents includes some substantial taxes. Anyway once you separate all the gobbledygook, it will average 10% of costs.

    Also, percentage of income wise, these energy costs are a bigger chunk of those with lower income. So the lower your income, the more you’ll personally benefit. Health care costs only know one direction and it defies gravity. 🙁

  • Omega Z

    Yes, Most here are aware.
    SRI is a spinoff from Stanford University.
    It does a lot of research for the Government among other things.
    DARPA provided some funding for McKubre to do some tests on the Brillouin’s reactor on SRI’s premises.

  • Kevmo

    I have been saying all along that cold fusioneers should simply be claiming chemical levels of activity in their patents, and delight their customers with excess heat beyond chemical. It’s like claiming your race car goes from zero to 60 in 5 seconds when really, it does it in half that time or less.

  • Hhiram

    Very encouraging news. And surprising – last I heard, the E-Cat patent application had been rejected.

    I’ve been posting here for several years that Rossi’s strategy, even before Industrial Heat, has been to acquire patent protection. The idea that first-mover advantage in the market will make a difference is, I think, a bit naive. It won’t hurt, but Rossi’s company won’t be able to fend off competition from low-cost manufacturing countries like China without strong patent protection. His approach, which is frustrating to outside observers, has been to only allow enough independent testing to support a successful patent application.

    Very encouraging to see that this strategy has actual been successful! I was under the impression he had failed on those lines, and was focused only on leveraging first-mover advantage. It is possible that we will now see an accelerated schedule of public demonstrations and replications.

  • Jimmy Hoffa

    McKubre sits on the advisory board of Brillioun. That’s business speak which suggests that he is getting a slice of those funding rounds. Put less subtly it indicates that he is being paid to promote the company in order to bring in other investors i.e. a paid shill. Bachole how old are you if you don’t mind my asking?

    • psi2u2

      He’s old enough to know that this kind of name-calling doesn’t deserve a response from him. McKubre is a first class scientist who was *asked* to join the Brilloun board. He would not have done so if he was not convinced that the science was real. Kindly refrain from slander. Thank you.

    • GreenWin

      Suggesting Dr. McKubre is any more a “paid shill” than anyone sitting on any board is trollwerk. Kindly amend your name calling or be properly banned from this site, Jimmy.

      • bachcole

        I second the motion. McKubre IS a soft evidence data point, and as such, if Jimmy does not look at the 8 videos in question, then he (Jimmy Hoffa) is behaving like a skeptopath.

  • Timar

    Sadly, a cleaner environment will have very little effect on health care costs. Sedentary lifestyle, convenience food, soft drinks and smokings kill and debilitate more poeple than pollution ever has, by orders of magnitude. In fact, the problems the US health care system faces provide a good example of the problems a capitalist society has to deal with. People are constantly bombarded with food marketing. Food companies need to produce and advertise ever more highly addictive junk food because they need to grow in order to meet the shareholders’ demand. The lower classes have no access to proper education and fall prey for this kind of marketing. Hence the economic growth of Big Food directly translates into the growing waistlines seen among the lower classes. This is a striking observation for anyone visiting the US from abroad. Of course, obesity is a growing problem in all Western countries but it is nowhere as blatant as in the US. In fact, more “socialist” states have not only lower rates of obesity and related chronic diseases but also better functioning and much less expensive health care systems – although they provide health insurance for everyone.

  • Timar

    Agreed!

  • Timar

    I got a bad case of pneumonia as a child, which might have killed me without antibiotics. Same for a sepsis caused by a snake bite some years ago. Although it wouldn’t have killed my, I got debilitating symptoms from lyme disease until diagnosed and treated with antibiotics.

    Of course I can’t know which serious diseases I may have avoided because I am vaccinated against them. Given the amount of ticks I seem to attract, ESME is a hot candidate.

    I’m the first to admit that Western medicine has its limitations and shortcomings. I’m a big fan af Andrew Weil and his approach to integrative medicine. Yet it is utterly foolish to undiscriminatingly describe it as “evil shackles”. Antibiotics and vaccinations have saved millions, if not billions of lifes since they were invented.

  • Jarea1

    understood. However, this is like catch22 if you cannot put in the patent that it is cold fusion and you need to show them that is fusion. Besides, Rossi has already tried before with previous similar patents including nuclear wording.
    I cannot understand why this patent is still accepted when as you said the patent is open to misinterpretations in the utility. If you interpreted in that way (verly slow chemical in 180days), then the utility is not clear enough and must be specified. I thought that the utility must to be clear so that they replicators can point to the correct way.
    In my opinion, the patent office should enforce to put clearly that the energy density as you suggest delivered by he boiler is chemical or nuclear. It must be specified to clarify the utility of the invention. The patent doesn’t specify, it could be as you say (only once or two times the 6KWh) or it could be as Rossi has showed us before in previous patents, the 24hours 7 days week on providing that power. Currently, i think that the patent office must be informed about what Rossi is trying to patent so i think they are not so stupid.
    Why was not rejected if that was not clear?. What should the people try to replicate a very slow chemical device or what Rossi has always showed us before?
    In other words, what is the patent office protecting with this IP? Is protecting a way to create a cold fusion reaction or a strange way to deliver energy in a very slow way.
    Suppose it is cold fusion, will still this protect the IP?
    Suppose that the patent office didn’t see a hot nuclear device but a chemical reactor. Did they do a good job by approving this patent without enforcing clarity after so many other patents coming from him?

  • GordonDocherty

    While on the subject of patents, looking at recently published patents applied for, the following two look very interesting:

    Applicant: Etiam Oy

    https://www.google.com/patents/US20150162104?cl=en

    https://www.google.com/patents/WO2013076378A2?cl=en

    http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20150162104&IDKey=E23EE985EA94&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fappft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526d%3DPG01%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526s1%3D20150162104.PGNR.%2526OS%3D%2526RS%3D

    http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20150611&DB=&&CC=US&NR=2015162104A1&KC=A1&ND=1&locale=en_EP

    Referenced by:

    Applicant: Airbus Defence and Space GmbH, Airbus Operations Gmbh, Astrium Gmbh

    https://www.google.com/patents/DE102013110249A1?cl=en

    https://www.google.com/patents/WO2015040077A1?cl=en

    https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/pat/PatSchrifteneinsicht?docId=DE102013110249A1

    http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20150326&DB=&&CC=WO&NR=2015040077A1&KC=A1&ND=1&locale=en_EP
    http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=WO&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=2015040077&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.1&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en

    Perhaps some reference to the Airbus patent will be made at:

    http://www.iscmns.org/work11/

    ?

    Now, this is just a personal opinion, but I believe the patent from Pekka Soininen / Etiam Oy in particular (the first patent above) provides a very comprehensive description of what factors are involved in LENR.

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

      Etiam oy patent is quite different from E-cat, more similar to the (unproven) claims of defkalion, and to the (proven) technology of Brillouin.

      If someone with resource can try to replicate this patent, maybe even Etiam could help…

      • Jimmy Hoffa

        Is Brillouin’s technology proven?

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

          at ICCF17 SRI(tanzella) report WET results.
          Brillouin reported at ICCF19 COP>4 with HHT.

          • Jimmy Hoffa

            You know another thing that concerns me about Brillouin is they seem to be almost exclusively promoted by PESN. Sterling Allan will promote anything as fact no matter how odious the claims might be. As a rule, if it’s on PESN, well that isn’t necessairly a good thing.

            • Obvious

              Stirling has been a bit better grounded these past few months. His BS detector is improving (or his patience is waning). See his latest SHT story (almost, but not quite, as fantastic as the company claims, however) and his recent Keshan report.

    • John Littlemist

      It seems that Etiam’s application is strongly betting on Leif Holmlid’s UDD (ultra dense deuterium) theory. They claim that inverted Rydberg matter consists of UDD.

      • Obvious
        • John Littlemist

          Thanks, interesting indeed. Ultra dense deuterium, atomic metallic hydrogen, hydrino. A beloved child has many names?? 😉

          • Bob Greenyer

            Not quite the same thing, Hydrino theory is saying energy can be captured from “shrinking” hydrogen.

            Rydberg matter does not create the big energy yield itself – it is claimed to be a pre-cursor to fusion. Stoyan Sarg says that the electron stops going through te structure of the proton and starts orbiting it, allowing the magnetic sensitivity to increase 630 times and thus allowing them to densely cluster and be driven by EM. These clusters could be considered a metal – for that is what Hydrogen is (though normally in a gaseous state) we all know that copper gas is less conductive than copper solid.

  • Jarea1

    so you mean the patent office understood that this boiler from Rossi will work with a chemical reaction through 180 days active… That is a very slow chemical reaction i think, and if you put 1KWh of energy during the 180 days you will have at least 6KWh at the end of the 180days.
    Where is the utility and the new invention for the patent?
    What kind of chemical reaction with the fuel mentioned can last 180days once it is started?, because the key here is that the reaction START and last 180 days and it is controlled during these 180days. Besides, the fuel for that “chemical reaction” is defined and as far as i know the chemical reaction of hydrogen once started is very fast.

  • Timar

    I can only recommend to actually read Marx’ writings.His analysis’ are still shokingly valid. I just don’t think that a socialist system introduced by the means of a revolution will ever work – it will always be corrupt from the very beginning. I think a new type of socialism will emerge more or less “naturally” when the capitalist system goes through periodic, aggrevating crisis, which are unavoidably build into the system – regardless of LENR. The tragic error in Marx’ concept of historic materialism is that a synthesis must always come as a violent, revolutionary act – even if that may have been the case in all past history. For Marx, technology is always an instrument of class dominance, so he doesn’t see its internal dynamics which can bring about dramatic changes unforeseen and unintented by the ruling powers – the free flow if information on the internet is an historcially unprecedented phenomenon, as the free availability of energy from LENR will be. Interestingly, this leads us back to Hegel’s original, idealistic concept of synthesis, which Marx merely adopted to his historic materialsm.

    One day, poeple will look back at the age of capitalism and regard it as fascinating, but also as a dark and violent age – just as we do with the Middle Ages. They will also regard it as the age that caused the massive ecological devastation they will still have do deal with.

    • bachcole

      Marx makes perfect sense from a particular perspective, the objective perspective, and I don’t mean that as a complement. His ideas completely ignore subjective things, like incentive and risk taking Communism kills incentive and risk taking, and so it tends to languish.

      • Timar

        I don’t think Marx theory makes perfect sense from any perspective (discerning between an “objective” versus “subjective” perspective is highly problematic anyway, from a philosophical point of view ) – I was refering to his analysis, as opposed to his theory of a socialist society.

        Anyway, I see what you mean. In a way you are right, but you are critizising an oversimplified idea of socialism (i.e. one that implies planned economy), like that drawn by capitalist/right-wing propaganda.

  • Omega Z

    Sorry Charlie
    Many would never see 90 cents a gallon again even if the Oil was free.
    I do recall 30 cents a gallon when I was a teenager. However, our State tax today is around 55 cents plus 18 cents Federal & an additional sales tax included. Not to mention, some Major Metro areas have their own gas tax.

    Everyone knows that Multiple Government entities tax our gas. But most are oblivious to just how much that amounts to when combined. AND Government want’s it that way. For every $1 big oil makes in “profits”, Government make about $10. And this doesn’t all make it to the road funds. Much ends up in general revenue to be spent where ever they choose.

    Additional Government Oil revenues overlooked by the masses. Multimillion dollar leases on Government/public lands whether oil is found or not, Plus 15% of all oil extracted. There have been proposals to raise that to 25%. This goes to general revenue. They would also like to raise the 18 cent Federal tax to at least 30 cents. States will follow suit. We need some transparency. Two digital readouts when filling up. 1 for the cost of gas. 1 displaying all the tax hidden & otherwise. People would be shocked.

    And Sorry again Charlie. LENR wont effect the cost of gas for years to come. But your Utility bill may decline.