“E-Cat X: Go, Go, GO !!!”

Yesterday I asked Andrea Rossi for an update on the current testing going on in his shipping container, and got the following response:

Frank Acland:
1 MW E-Cat: stable, long periods of ssm.
E-Cat X: go,go, GO !!! ( Promising. Could make a revolution, even if totally covered by the US Patent we got, which makes all simpler; I designed it to fit perfectly in the US Patent).
Warm Regards,
A.R.

While the 1 MW plant sounds like it is behaving, Andrea Rossi seems especially excited here about the E-Cat X, not only because of what he has been able to do with the E-Cat X, but how he has been able to fit it into the constraints of the recently approved US patent — which will make things a lot easier when it comes to commercialization. Normally these days Rossi is quite sober in his assessments of his technology, invoking ‘could be positive or negative’ statements, but here he doesn’t even mention F9.

Still, one answer from Rossi to a question I asked recently has me wondering how soon we might be able to see the ‘revolutionary’ potential of the E-Cat X in our homes. I asked him how big of a challenge he thought it would be to get safety certification for domestic E-Cats, and he responded that it would be “very much” of a challenge, because of “the liabilities that the certifier has to take on his shoulders without a history of the product.”

In other words, a someone certifying a product for safety wants to see the track record of a product before making a determination if it is safe. The operation of the current industrial plant may help in that regard, but that is in an industrial setting where the liabilities are reduced. The E-Cat X will probably be used in industrial plants before they are released as domestic ones.

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • Omega Z

    Jim Anderson

    It’s possible the book you refer to has been mentioned on JONP in the last several months. Possibly by Rossi himself.

  • clovis ray

    hi, guys.
    If i recall correctly, Dr. Rossi, said that he would not sale any product of his, to anyone if it were thought to be unsafe for any reason, and that it would be certified by normal channels, and that they U/L i believe it was, would clear his commercial plant as long as it had an operator on duty, and home units, would be certified if they were safe, and when, it was submitted, and with a clean track record, it could be coming soon to a home depot near you. smile.

  • US_Citizen71

    I wasn’t saying that UL is doing the certification, I merely used them as an example as they are one of the more well known testing and certification companies in the English speaking world.

  • Omega Z

    The UL has a large network of industries etc that are contracted to do much of the certifying of products. It is also done under NDA, thus nothing would be published or made known until the process is finished. NDA’s also cover talking in house.

  • Steve Savage

    “the liabilities that the certifier has to take on his shoulders without a history of the product.”
    Seems to me one of the main reasons for the current test is to gain data on failures of cores, adequacy of controls, extreme events etc. so as to help verify the safety of the devices in long term continuous operation. I think maybe the main reason from IH’s point of veiw.

    • LookMoo

      In USA lawyers design machines. Why they are the safest but seldom the best.

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • nietsnie

    Rossi has indicated that in experimental models at higher COP when it got out of control it released measurable, high-energy, neutrons. That was a new one for me. Up till recently, I had understood that there was no radiation associated with Rossi’s effect. The potential that an e-cat having an especially bad day might become a neutron bomb is sobering. Putting that potential into the hands of consumers is dangerous. I have rented houses whose central heating hasn’t been serviced in waaaaayyy too long. People tend not to think about their furnace unless they’re feeling cold.

  • GreenWin

    There are other NRTLs for workplace – e.g. ETL established by Edison 120 years ago. ETL Service Mark meets the required OSHA standards for any electrically operated product.

  • EEStorFanFibb

    as if UL would spill… or are you saying their NDAs are regularly violated/worthless?

  • Ged

    SGS already certified the 1MW plant; but I doubt this e-cat x is ready for certification. Let us know if you hear anything though, as that will be one of the last steps before consumer marketing, I would think.

  • https://pissedthefuckoff.wordpress.com/ Mark

    Here’s a wild thought: what if The E-Cat X is capable of producing some kinds of elements? I heard that some other experimenters are talking about other elements showing up in their cold fusion experiments. Just a guess.

    Also, did I read it wrong, or did Rossi recently say something on his blog that gives the impression that it is unlikely that the results will be negative, at this point?

    • Omega Z

      At about the 6 month mark, Rossi indicated to someone that he wouldn’t be spending 16 hours a day in the container if the results at that point were a resounding negative.

      And as I’ve said, each day he is there is a positive note…

  • Axil Axil

    Does the E-Cat-X use the Cat and Mouse method as the 1 Mw reactor does?

    • Mats002

      No, it use the mouse – Cat – foX method ^^

  • hempenearth

    Sorry I’ve missed it. What does the E-Cat X do that is different from the Hot Cat?

    • US_Citizen71

      Unfortunately Rossi has been cagey about that.

      • hempenearth

        Last I heard about it was that it was named after Marie Curie which led to speculation about X-Rays. Not sure that calling it E-Cat X will end that.

        • US_Citizen71

          If I remember his post right, it was inspired by her choice to study the less strong ‘Uranium Rays’ (Gamma Rays) that inspired Rossi along his line of thinking to come up with the E-Cat X. So maybe single phase instead of three phase or something else that is weaker when compared with the industrial E-Cats.

          • ecatworld

            The last thing Rossi said about the name was that X stands for a number which will be added once they go to market.

            • hempenearth

              Thanks

            • US_Citizen71

              After rereading my comment I see how it might be interpreted as why it was named what it is.

        • Manuel Cruz

          No, he said that it was a Marie Curie, Marie Curie are prizes for excellence in science.

    • ecatworld

      It is supposed to be smaller (higher power density), hotter, and better COP than the Lugano Hot Cat model. He has also said it does something else, and has hinted it produces electricity directly.

      • hempenearth

        Wow

        • Agaricus

          A total guess, but while it seems very likely that the LT (original type) e-cats need to be driven and probably also limited by some kind of oscillating EM field, the hot cat and the derived(?) x-cat may have dispensed with this requirement. Certainly there was no sign of any separate driver windings in the Lugano reactor.

          Instead it seems possible that the physical configuration may give rise to a self-generated oscillating EM field arising from quantum effects such as generation of ‘surface plasmon polaritons’ or similar. If that’s the case, then it might be possible to tap this field for power by placing simple field windings around the reactor, to produce electrical current flow through induction. Maybe the effect was first noticed in LT reactors through some sort of measurable feedback into the driver windings.

          • US_Citizen71

            If they were measuring the resistance of the coil in order to attempt to use it as a thermocouple then they might have encountered some bizarre readings that led them down this path.

  • Miles

    “someone certifying a product for safety wants to see the track record of a product before making a determination if it is safe”.

    It seems your biggest thing holding you back is fear.

    • US_Citizen71

      You can’t sell an uncertified consumer electrical product in a great big chunk of the world. The certifying company or organization can be held liable in many countries as well if the product they certified as safe turns out not to be. Fear of bankruptcy due to someone else’s product not being safe is just shrewd business for a company like UL.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        How about China?

        • Omega Z

          You created a faulty product that hurt many people.
          Come, Walk with me to the village square.

          Yes, We know how this ends. Akin to the Big Bang Theory. 🙁

        • US_Citizen71

          I think you can sell stuff without a certification there, but if your product is unsafe and ends up killing people they just might sentence you to death instead of a fine and jail time.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Not if you get a free pass for cleaning up their pollution. My point is China’s government is in desperate need for a solution to their pollution problem. They have large demonstrations criticizing their government because of pollution.

            • US_Citizen71

              More likely than give you a free pass they would sentence you to death take control of any Chinese patents you have and then exploit them via government control in a safer manner. China can definitely use a solution for their pollution problems but they are not likely to use a solution that is deadly in other ways.