E-Cat X Makes Gas-Powered E-Cat ‘Obsolete’

At one time Andrea Rossi was working hard on developing a natural gas-driven E-Cat because he said in many cases it would be cheaper to use the energy input from cheap natural gas compared to electricity. It has apparently been a struggle to get the ‘Gas-Cat’ to work, and Rossi has never declared success with this approach.

Well, according to Andrea Rossi, there seems to be now no need to pursue this effort any longer. Here’s an exchange on the Journal of Nuclear Physics yesterday:

Alessandro Coppi

Hi Andrea,
what news about the gas fueled E-CAt that some time ago seemed the most promising technology?

Andrea Rossi

Alessandro Coppi:
I am afraid it has been made obsolete from the E-Cat X.
But the aituation is still fluid.
Warm Regards
A.R.

We still don’t really know what the E-Cat X is, but if it makes the Gas Cat obsolete, one would think that Rossi has made some kind of breakthrough where much less input power is needed than before– and even if electricity is much more expensive than natural gas it might still be cost-effective to use it.

Looking over the clues from Fabio Fulviani he said something in reference to the Hot Cat:

“I have really seen . . . Did you see Blade Runner? The quote at the end, ‘I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe’. It’s true. I assure you that I have seen things that only I, Rossi and a few other people saw. We really saw things… I really saw the new frontier of energy. There is nothing in comparison. You cannot imagine. I speak of the E-CatX* and many others of Rossi’s experiments.”

It seems that Fabiani here is in awe of the X-Cat, and it seems that it represents a major evolution in the development of the E-Cat. We have seen that Rossi has taken outside input in connection with the jet engine, and it makes one wonder what could happen with this technology over the next few years, especially when more scientists and engineers get involved.

  • Omega Z

    Any COP>20 is good as long as you keep in mind that you obtain ever dwindling returns for the effort.

  • Zephir

    Free energy device becomes selfsustaining with COP > 1, with electricity powered with COP > 3 .

    • Omega Z

      Above COP=3 is sustainable, but much higher COP is need to make it economically viable or even usable. At COP=3, you just power devices that power devices with no usable consumable energy.

  • Axil Axil

    I have been trying to make sence of the heavey elements found on the surface of the fuel particle in the Lugano fuel analisys.

    Eric Walkers contribution and analisys is here

    https://goo.gl/NiGa7u

    This is my take on the purpose of those heavy elements as follows:

    The elements that cover the surface of the Lugano fuel particle look to span the Rare Earth elements range in the periodic table. These rare earth elements have potential optoelectronic applications due to their performance of photoluminescence and electroluminescence. These rare earth elements may increase the optical pumping process during the formation of Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP).

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

    Photoluminescence (abbreviated as PL) is light emission from any form of matter after the absorption of photons(electromagnetic radiation). It is one of many forms of luminescence (light emission) and is initiated by photoexcitation(excitation by photons), hence the prefix photo-. Following excitation various relaxation processes typically occur in which other photons are re-radiated. Time periods between absorption and emission may vary: ranging from short femtosecond-regime for emission involving free-carrier plasma in inorganic semiconductors up to milliseconds for phosphorescent processes in molecular systems; and under special circumstances delay of emission may even span to minutes or hours.

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

    Electroluminescence (EL) is an optical phenomenon and electrical phenomenonin which a material emits light in response to the passage of an electric current or to a strong electric field.

    The roles of these elements may be to stimulate optical gain in the SPP radiation process as a way to compensate for the losses incurred in the formation of SPPs encounter due to dispersion.

  • fritz194

    If its possible to maintain a tight controlled (for example using rf excitation) stable reaction well below the runaway point – the thermal capacity and the thermal bias power needed, can be reduced by a high degree. Yes, I think they had some breakthru on controlling the reaction – and thats a game-changer on its own.

  • GordonDocherty

    I think there may well be a clue in:

    “But the situation is still fluid.”

    • Omega Z

      That occurred to me at 1st, but then decided it was not a clue.
      Possibly this is a statement that Rossi has heard in business discussions with Darden & others. We tend to pick up such terms from our surroundings & use them in other conversations.

      I can easily imagine a business discussion where Darden or someone in a meeting stating that the situation is still fluid. Until the test is concluded, this term could come up often.

  • Jarea

    Today i saw in the news:
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/6742052/Mathieu-Flaminis-no-fuel.html
    It seems that plastics and oil can also be made from Levulinic Acid according to a recent patent.

    It seems fosil fuels as energy vector and plastic source has also an alternative…

  • MasterBlaster7

    “some kind of breakthrough where much less input power is needed than before”

    So, maybe a COP of 20-80 goes to a COP of 200-infinity?

    I’m really just dying to what the E-Cat X is. He invented the flux capacitor didn’t he?

    • Ophelia Rump

      After about COP 20, and the ability to produce electricity, all that is required is enough time to realize that no other fuel source is needed once you boot a few of these up on the same grid.

      The only thing which has changed is the level of confidence and a clear demonstration of the capacity to generate electricity.

      • Zephir

        COP plays no role but the amount of energy which can be drawn from one kilogram of fuel. The COP can be increased simply by chaining of E-Cat devices.

  • Mattias Andersson

    Hi Frank,

    Did you see the following opinion piece by Peter Thiel:
    http://nyti.ms/1TctowB

    I think what he is asking is relevant also to the E-Cat, i.e. regulatory approval of new reactor designs must not become a roadblock for innovation. It’s also important that the government acts in such a way so as to accelerate this rather than to delay technologies that have a great potential to outperform many existing energy sources. Maybe this is even something that would deserve a petition?

    • ecatworld

      Thanks Mattias,

      An interesting read. There is strong political opposition to nuclear fission in principle, even though there might be very safe designs in some of these newer reactors.

      I don’t know that opposition would carry over to the E-Cat, since it is a very different technology, but I suppose there might be fear of an unknown nuclear process that could stir up opposition.

      i hope that Rossi/IH will be proactive in educating the public on how different this new fire is from traditional nuclear.

      • Manuel Cruz

        I am pretty much afraid that those environmentalist groups are quackery funded by corporations and lobbies with the sole intention of sabotaging competitors. They all seem to have selective blindness towards the actions of certain companies, and put an exaggerate focus on certain other companies and competing technologies, up to the point of spreading FUD and lies every single day.
        I am all for protecting the environment and replace coal with cleaner sources of energy, yet the more I read about the “green movement”, the clearer it becomes that those groups do not represent me, but the interests of Rockefeller and other corporations to stifle rival companies.

    • Alain Samoun

      Except that this is to support old nuclear fission, forgetting the problems of this kind of energy. It is not to support new clean energy like LENR. It is normal that government protects the public from dangers of any kind of new energy and also from old ones.

  • Zephir

    In my info the gas heating of E-Cat actually doesn’t work – the LENR requires high frequency electric field, which the gas heater cannot provide. Also, the gas heating is more difficult to control.

    • Omega Z

      The Gas cat would still need electricity for stimulating the effect. Rossi has stated this. The Idea I believe is it would not require electricity to provide the heat(provided by natural gas), but only the stimulation.

      What benefit would a little gas heat be. With a 10kW reactor, probably not much. However, if you were to build multi-megawatt reactor systems, a little gas becomes a lot$$$.

      Perhaps, Rossi’s E-cat X now only requires heat only at the initial start up. As long as it maintains operation, electricity is only needed for the stimulation. Thus, there is little if any benefit of using natural gas for heat.

    • nietsnie

      That is the conclusion I have come to as well.

  • nietsnie

    <<>>

    More evidence that LENR is not just getting the fuel right and then heating it up.

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

    If I were president, I would try to buy Rossi’s technology and distribute it to NASA, DARPA, GM, Ford, Chrysler, GE. Boeing, etc. This is too big and too important for one small company and a few engineers to deal with. A group effort of thousands of scientists and engineers is needed. I would even give it to Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Air Bus, LG, Samsung, etc., and only require modest royalty payments back to the US Treasury. Would Rossi sell out for a billion dollars? A billion is nothing compared to all the destructive phony energy crap we spend money on. Rossi could still do his research work and taxpayers would get their money back plus a high return of profit. No mandates or subsidies for production, just a one shot technology purchase distributed for research purposes. We currently spend many billions of dollars just hiring “scientists” to tell us how evil CO2 is. This would be a better use of those funds because we already have enough scare stories from junk scientists.

    • Tom59

      The president had recently invited a schoolboy to the White House who had build an electronic clock…
      Fabiani expressed that this thing is getting too big to be handled by Rossi and him. It seems, it already is. I hope the 10 top managers Fabiani mentioned who are following this with Darden are guys with a horizon wide enough to handle this opportunity of the century for America and for the world.

    • SG

      In an ideal world, this would be the way to do it. But there are forces at play, turf to protect, multi-trillion dollar interests to protect, and so forth. I’m afraid the success of LENR will primarily depend on a grass-roots effort. We must keep LENR in the forefront of the news, of the discussion boards, of the people, and eventually governments will follow.

      • Winebuff67

        There is no competition to push the release of the ecat.it will be quite a while before we see one in public.

        • Omega Z

          There are at least a half-dozen others in the running. The race has already begun.

      • MasterBlaster7

        yup

    • Alan DeAngelis

      The assumption is that large corporations would make more progress than Rossi working alone. I don’t think so. I think it would be better for Rossi to just hire the people he thinks he needs to do the job.

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

        Are you kidding? Not only large corporations, but lots of them. Look at the progress in televisions sets and all the companies that competed to get where we are today. Target store had 55″ 1080P LED TVs on sale for $250 on Black Friday. Give the base technology to dozens of corporations and see how fast the technology progresses. They will come up with ideas Rossi never even thought of. Competition works, and that is why socialism fails. The profit motive, multiple sources of ingenuity and production, and many nations competing get the job done. Investing moderate amounts of money in basic research is not socialism. Mandates and subsidies are the heavy hand of a socialist government, and that is part of the reason America is becoming a Third World class nation. Freedom and freedom of choice in the marketplace works better than government thuggery.

        • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

          There has to be a point where capitalism, for the monetary profit of too few, stops causing damage to air, water, species in the entire environment.
          We socially foot the bills for the costs of capitalistic profit.

          • Omega Z

            I wonder how long it would take Elon Musk to obtain $5 Billion in investments for his Mega-Battery plant if he told them there would be no Profit.

            Of course, that damage is actually caused by the consumer. Thus, calculate the cost of the damage & add it to the cost of the product. The only real way to eliminate damage by the species is to eliminate the species.

            • Zack Iszard

              Correct, sinister as it is. The next best way is to rapidly innovate our damage away.

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

            You have to have customers to make money. If you don’t have Big Thug government telling people what they must buy like the Mafia, then customers will make purchasing decisions based on their own self interest and their interest in protecting the environment. Billions of brains are involved in making the marketplace of supply and demand, and all that brain power adds up to better judgement, on average, than that possessed by a few politicians who have the selfish motive of personal political gain. As you may have noticed, politicians often lie and often do not understand economics, science, or how to tie their own shoes, walk and chew gum at the same time, etc.

            • Zack Iszard

              Good point Chris. Though it is usually slower a force than progressives and extremist liberals want, market forces are shaping our economy towards environmental sustainability, alongside the long-standing market drives to innovate and improve product quality.

          • Zack Iszard

            …yes, by way of mandates and subsidies. The gaping loopholes in the tax code, and special interest subsidies, are the primary reasons for the increasing division in personal income. This acts to artificially increase competition to an unhealthy level – if you don’t buy a politician as a large corporation, you have to go MUCH farther to compete.

            I agree that ecological regulations are needed when a technology works very well but has a high environmental cost, but these are exceptions, not the rule. Take the Montreal Protocol, or the banning of lead in gasoline or PCBs in capacitors or DDT and related pesticides. These modest constraints resulted in improved products which work better AND have less environmental impact.

            The populist (frankly communist) narrative of capitalism = evil is old and tired and has been shown to be wrong by history. If the government is in the business of owning whole market enterprises, it will do so inefficiently, and those in power will have more reinforcement to stay there and squander public money at unprecedented rates. U.S.S.R. anyone?

            • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

              Capitalism is not necessarily bad, socialism is not necessarily good.
              They are both the expression of a collective, occasionally competitive, environment. They should be compatible, we have no time left.
              Human organizations tend towards corruption in proportion to their size, regardless of which ‘side’ they bugle to represent.

              • Manuel Cruz

                Socialism is pretty obvious BAD when you realize that all it does is to turn the state (read: the politicians) into the biggest megacorp ever, with a monopoly in all resources and industries of the country, plus the power to dictate the laws without having to bribe anyone.

                The government should be an arbiter that makes sure everyone is playing fair and for the best interest of the population, it shouldn’t be one of the players that tries to game the system to maximize profits, and definitely shouldn’t be the only one allowed to do that.

                The problem with socialist countries is that the only one allowed to judge if something is legal or ethic is the same corporation that has a monopoly over everything, including the army and the power to write “ad hoc” laws.

                So, there is not a single case in which socialism is good for anyone other than the politicians. And because the socialist politicians happen to be amongst the dumbest people on Earth, their megacorp usually ends bankrupt in record time.

          • Warthog

            Capitalism actually prevents damage to the environment better than other alternatives. See the “tragedy of the commons” for why that is the case. The WORST environmental track records have been racked up by those societies that are the most socialist. Compare the record of the Soviet Union, Red China, North Korea to any capitalist government.

            • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

              You are quite right.
              If I own my home on its plot, I am a capitalist.
              I also believe in hard work, achievement and meritocracy, but I breathe the same air as everyone else. I am not convinced I am worth more than anyone else, though I would certainly try to save myself and my clan from a catastrophe.
              Kibbutzim, in Israel, are socio-economic systems within a capitalistic society. The sharing economy is not a purely capitalistic reality.

              What I am trying to say is that both concepts do not necessarily clash, it is their human interpretations which prove to be so far from perfect.

        • Omega Z

          You don’t want subsidies & Government interference, but then propose the Government intervene. All you will accomplish is delaying this technology & cause it to cost much more.

          Follow your own advice. Let things take their own course. The fastest way to get this to market is to leave it in the hands of IH/Rossi. Once they get 1 to market, Things will progress on their own.

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

            Research money is not the same thing as mandates and subsidies. No one is forced to buy anything. The research will be done mainly by private companies with a profit motive, but DARPA and NASA etc could join in. Mandates and subsidies are very costly. Research is very cheap by comparison.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          “They will come up with ideas Rossi never even thought of.”
          So they don’t need Rossi’s IP.

    • HS61AF91

      I think M T Keshe tried to give away his “Magrav-Power systems” to governments, without much success or follow-on action. Do believe that private industry, independent of any government control, will lead directly to widespread near free energy use, the clarion call of all E-Cat iterations.

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

        That is because Keshe’s product does not work. My idea is that the US Government would test the E-Cat X and confirm that it works, then buy the patent rights; then distribute the technology to companies that agree to a very modest fee paid to the US Government for every product sold using the technology so that taxpayers would get their money back plus a profit.

        • HS61AF91

          The gov. buying, testing, blessing, and distributing E-Cat X, while giving back to us (taxpayers) would surely be nice. Unfortunately, many such expectations have disappeared into a morass of suppression, sometimes by government, sometimes by economic interests anathema to their introduction. That’s kind of why I see private industries introducing, distributing and getting E-Cat devices into individual and commercial hands as more likely to work. Either way though when the products start benefiting human beings, I’m all for it.

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

            The factory test will be finished in three months. At some point in time the Rossi Effect will be considered proven. Then it may become the hip new technology that the public wants. Imagine if even for one week you see as many news stories about the Rossi Effect as you do about Climate Change. All the false crap about Climate Change will now become a positive pushing force behind LENR and the Rossi Effect. So, in a sense, what is now a negative force pushing windmills, solar schemes, and biofuels, which cause far more harm than good, will become a positive force pushing LENR, which is an authentic energy solution, not just endless counterproductive hype. Therefore, I am a little more optimistic than you.

            • HS61AF91

              May I join you in your optimism. Can’t have enough of that.

            • Manuel Cruz

              I would love for that to be true, but that is not going to happen for two reasons:
              1. The fake press is the last one interested in a workable solution for a non-existent problem. They just want to make a quick buck, so they invest in something that is cheap because it is useless, and then the corrupt politicians behind this scheme divert a whole lot of money onto those quackery companies that would not be viable without political interference. As they only want to give themselves an excuse to legally divert money to themselves, they coin a stupid and unsustainable theory and then selectively ignore all workable solutions that are already better than the “green energy” in which they have heavily invested. They do not care if “global warming” is revealed to be a hoax in a few years, because it has already fulfilled its purpose.

              2. LERN does not require government subsidies. As it is better than current options, all rational companies will naturally move towards adoption of this technology, and irrational companies will lose the race to the market. Because this technology does not require government support, it does not give those thieves any excuse to steal huge amounts of money from the taxpayer, and as it will also make obsolete their useless invests on “green generators” they will rabidly oppose it, and because those people are the same corrupt politicians that are now in power, expect LERN to be given the same treatment as nuclear energy.

              In fact, if you look at fake media sites such as wikipedia, the E-cat is already the worst scam in history. Soon, it will also become an invention that, apart of being useless and not really producing energy, will also be called nuclear, cause cancer and global warming.

        • Jarea

          What is the government already have it? What if the best approach for the government is to delay the deployment of something unstoppable now?.
          I mean if you have a technology and you want to have superiority to the rest of the world, you don’t make it public you just use it secretly until you improve it. Only in case of superior necessity it will be showed.
          That has been the strategy of the US and although it is not a bad strategy to ensure privilege for a few and keep military superiority it has been a disaster for the world.
          Greed, wish of control and power is a bad combination that probably doesn’t benefit the base of the population.

  • AdrianAshfield

    I get the nasty feeling that the E-Cat X also replaces the regular E-Cat. This might give Andrea Rossi a dilemma of whether to gear up for mass production of that or wait until the E-Cat X has been put through a long trial.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      At the latest when the E-Cats enter the market Rossi should be careful with statements about technological improvements, since otherwise the “Osborne effect” might keep customers from ordering the current models.

      • HS61AF91

        Perhaps robot factories can rapidly change over from E-Cats to ones with X-es, or produce both, for different purposes.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          That would even enforce the problem. Customers would say “Why should I buy COP=6 when I can get COP=60 within a few months?” – so it appears to be better not to talk too much about technological progress. Companies like Apple impose strict information bans on new product features, certainly not only because they want to protect their IP.

          • HS61AF91

            Lot to speculate on.. maybe one Cat is less expensive and more for household use, the other more expensive and more meant for industry, and both so economical, that no hesitation on customers’ parts ensue? The folks who are spearheading introduction of Andrea Rossi’s Cats may already have a good strategy developed. It would seem so, since they know what they have to present, and are experts? at salesmanship.

          • Manuel Cruz

            That’s why IH and Rossi have stated they will use a model in which companies rent the energy from them rather than buying the E-cats. In this case, they do not have to worry about getting stuck with obsolete technology.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      True. In the best case, the E-cat X will be ready almost at the same time as its certification. It might be possible because he works with certifiers continuously. In that case, E-cat X enters market at the earliest technically possible time and people can buy the latest model directly. So if one wants to see things in positive light, the delay in certification might (i.e., might) turn out to be good.

      • Bob

        We need to be clear here to really evaluate what is going on. Companies that “certify” do not establish the certification requirements. They may establish a protocol to follow to confirm that a product meets requirements, but those requirements are established either by government or by economic controlling bodies such as ASTME, ISO, etc. To date, we know of no governing body, public or private that is developing the standards a for this new nuclear energy source. It will be difficult to keep completely secret once they get involved.
        .
        It is unlikely that any certification will be granted without this standard being developed and approved. For it to be approved, it must be publicly published and vented through the industry that it will govern. One cannot hire a company to establish certification standards that will govern a complete industry. Those standards will be set in agreement by that industry. Much politics and competition for sure, but agreement none the less. We have not seen any public activity on this yet. When we do, then we will know for certain that something is getting closer to being released for public purchase. It is highly doubtful that we will see the eCat go on sale and then some certification standard be published afterward. It will be the reverse before wide spread sales will commence. Certification standards first then sales.
        .
        I do not see a certification for a nuclear device being kept secret. There will most certainly be significant government oversight on any certification. Unless it somehow gets completely swallowed by national security / military, the technology will have to break public long before anything is offered for sale on a large basis. I do not see the US government allowing a a completely new nuclear device being installed, even in industrial settings, until there are standards set and a better understanding of the new energy source..
        .
        As much as we would like to think that LENR is completely harmless, we simply do not know yet. M. Curie did not realize what she was experimenting with and it cost her life. We do not know if an LENR reactor hits a “COP” of 500 say, it might actually reach some type of critical mass and explode. I hope not, but we do not know. Even Rossi stated radiation was seen at high COP at one time. I doubt the US government is going to let “some 12 unknown engineers” and a secret testing company decide what is safe when dealing with this new, exotic energy! Let’s be realistic here! What is even more troubling, is that Mr. Fabiani stated that even now, Rossi will not let anyone handle the fuel except himself. That no one is allowed or knows what the secret sauce is.
        WIth only one man knowing the secret, how can a standards and certainty be established about safety?
        .

        I want LENR as bad as anyone. I would like it now. However reason would state that mankind be reasonably sure that we know enough about it to make it safe before distributing by the millions around the globe. It was not too long ago that workers painting watch dials with radium paint and thought nothing of it. Cigarettes were a fashionable indulgence. Some insecticides were commonly used in mass sprayings and now are known carcinogens. Refrigerants that were so highly touted blew holes in our ozone layer. History is ripe with technology that was introduced with little understanding and have caused great suffering and damage. LENR does not have to be one.
        .
        I want Rossi to make his fortune. I want more for him to allow involvement of more than 12 engineers and a secret customer to handle the most potentially world changing discovery since the atom bomb. As alluded by another… “It has gotten too big for just one man”

        • Omega Z

          As I’ve pointed out to you before. Rossi had already received a safety certification of the Lt-cat for Industrial use before. The SGS Certification was publicly published & confirmed by SGS.(An International certification company) The LT-cat still uses the same technology & the hot-cat & E-cat X are much the same.

          Residential will take longer until safety data is obtained from the Industrial products.

          • Bob

            I am afraid that I do not see the SGS certification in the same light. It was not performed on a working reactor. The production process was not approved by SGS. It was not performed to any standards that would govern a nuclear reactor nor did it give the SGS “seal of approval”, I.E. Dr. Rossi nor IH is certified to place the SGS seal on it. For that to happen, one has to have the manufacturing process certified as well. I have personally overseen UL certifications of products. One does not simply do one test and then you receive a cart blanc stamp to put on all produced product. For you to have a UL stamp on a product, both the product AND manufacturing process has to be certified. This included multiple product samplings and manufacturing process control data. There is no manufacturing process yet, thus there is no certification..
            .
            SGS gave a certification that a piece of machinery did not exhibit any dangerous attributes as presented. Again it was a non-working reactor. They simply stated that the one prototype, as presented, did not conflict with electrical or plumbing standard practice. I certainly could be incorrect, and please provide the information if I am, but I saw no statements, declarations or certification in the SGS document that stated the eCat was approved to place the SGS seal on a production product, that it was certified to even existing hot water heater standards, nor to any standard. It seems the document just stated compliance to electrical and plumbing practice and did not exhibit any dangerous attributes. Again, I may be incorrect and providing the standards SGS certified the eCat to would correct me if those standards are applicable to the intended purpose of the eCat.
            .
            I also disagree that the current eCat is the same as what went through the SGS appraisal. It is completely different. From 100+ reactors to 4. The controllers have been modified, the fuel has been modified. I only state this from the tid bits that Dr. Rossi has provided via JONP, butthe information was from him himself. A certification is invalidated when any modification to the product or production process is altered by other than cosmetic appearance. Certainly the changes to the eCat will have invalidated SGS’s appraisal. It has been substantially modified.
            .
            So to receive a “stamp of approval” seal by UL or other certification agencies to mark a product as “UL Listed” etc. one must have both the production process and product certified. The production process must then be periodically reviewed to maintain that certification.
            .
            No, the eCat does not have a current certification that would allow Dr. Rossi / IH to sell reactor plants with a UL or SGS marked seal on them. It is doubtful that they will have one until the standard to which the eCat is certified to becomes public and recorded with governing agencies. If the eCat gets classified as nuclear, that time period could well be 5 years from now.
            .
            Again, one does not have to have any certifications to sell a product at all. As I stated before, many local ordinances (laws) require product to be certified before they can be installed and often only by certified installers. For example, in the county I live in, I cannot install a hot water heater in our production plant myself, even though I am an engineer. The county requires a licensed plumber to install it. The unit installed must be UL listed for it to be installed in a facility that is occupied by employees. I could purchase a non-UL water heater. I could install it in a facility that had no employees working at that facility. But not if there was occupational presence of employees.
            .
            If the above is not correct, I certainly would welcome the information indicating it not.
            .
            Thank you.

            • Omega Z

              “It was not performed on a working reactor.”

              Yes, It was performed on a working reactor(In Operation) & even checked for various types of radiation. If any were detected it would have been in the report. It was certified safe for industrial use which have trained personnel present. Rossi was authorized to place the SGS seal on it for Industrial use. It would be kind of silly to go to the expense of certifying a product destined to the R&D lab. Note: (COP wasn’t within the scope of the test)

              A manufacturing process may or may not be certified dependent on where the manufacturing takes place(SGS is also has the authority to do this). In some countries it’s an option, but nearly everyone does have their manufacturing process certified regardless due to liabilities & insurance costs. In fact, Most insurers wont provide a policy without it. When IH/Rossi start manufacturing in earnest, I have no doubt they will be certified.

              Installation is a different process again according to where it is done. The Manufacturer has much to say about how a product should be installed as well as do Federal, state & local agencies.

              Obviously, standards for residential use are much higher as there is no trained technicians present 24/7. UL can also create standards where there are none. They are authorized to bring in expertise from where ever necessary. The cost/expense along with all certifications fall to the client.

              Considering Dardens background in brown field remediation, I’m quite sure he is very aware of the regulations & certifications necessary. If not, I’m sure there staff of lawyers are. It’s what they do every day.

    • Ophelia Rump

      It is a new technology in background of other advanced technologies, expect the generations to fly by rapidly. Waiting would approximate giving up.

      They must proceed with a worthy product. When the next product is worthy they must transition that into production with a careful eye on whether one replaces the other.

      Should Edison have waited for the LED?

    • http://www.animpossibleinvention.com/ Mats Lewan

      Check the first pages in chapter 11 of An Impossible Invention and you will find that Rossi already did this once. At this point however I think Ophelia Rump is right. To many inventors have been struggling for years to develop the perfect product, only to find that when it reaches the market it is too late, alternatively that the customers wanted something quite different. Or both. The great opportunity in our age is the possibility to get stuff out fast, get the markets reaction at once, and to continue develop in an iterative process where the customers are on the track.

      • Agaricus

        As I’ve suggested before, the obvious course would seem to be to lease the next generation of plants on a ‘per MWh’ basis, with upgrades at IH’s expense as and when available, carried out by their specialist personnel. If the plant to be replicated is specifically designed as a ‘test bed’ then most upgrades would consist of replacement reactor cores and software changes only.

        This way market penetration and awareness will have begun, IP can be protected, customers will not be taking a risk with unknown technology and will always have the latest version of the reactors, and they won’t need to find a large amount of up-front capital for outright purchase.

        IH would inevitably take a loss during this phase, but would be able to field-test an assortment of variants, clock up safe hours of operation and establish themselves as the ‘go to’ pioneers of the technology before others make an entry.

        • Omega Z

          It will take decades just to fill the needs. When those needs are finally filled, it will be time to start replacing the old worn out technology.

          If you start replacing product in the field before the current demand is met, society as a whole will never be transitioned. This is a dilemma that hasn’t been reckoned with for wind/solar. In 20 years, it will be time to replace nearly every system installed and in use today.

    • PappyYokum

      It would depend on the useful life of a E-Cat install. If they have to be replaced rather frequently – like lots of products do – then selling the E-Cat which runs for a year or two before needing core replacement would not be a big dilemma if consumers are expected to get a replacement anyway. If the E-Cat is a buy one and it lasts a lifetime type of product, then there will have to be an incentive to migrate to the E-Cat X once it is ready for the market. It will be like upgrading from Windows 7 to Windows 10. Why do it?
      My cynical side is beginning to wonder if this X will simply turn out to be a way to keep stalling.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi has said if the E-cat X becomes fruitful, the original Hot-cat is obsolete. The low temp is a go should the test be positive. There is room & need for both.

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

    Fabiani was talking about starships and stuff. I wonder if there is a connection between The E-Cat-X and The NASA EM Drive. There could also be a connection to the work of David Pares, who is trying to build a real warp engine in his garage. Didn’t one of the commenters on Rossi’s blog recently ask if gravity was a factor in The E-Cat-X?

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Yes, someone asked, and Rossi answered that the connection is that if he hurts his toe because he drops an E-cat on it, its market entry may get delayed. By the way, thanks for the cool expression “starships and stuff”.

  • Gerard McEk

    I guess that AR has found a simple way to control Ecat-X with little power. Possibly is still power needed to start it, but once in operation it runs nearly in SSM ( like 100 W max. input 10 kW output). Maybe he uses a laser to start? That would make the vulnerabele heating coil obsolete! Good developement, I hope to hear more details soon!

    • Ged

      Considering the clues Fulviani gave us, it could be they found a low power stimulation method that vastly increased the reaction yield per input power in. Something small, something simple… A laser is a possibility, if a heat resistant emitter (sapphire lens?) could be used, and if there was some sort of proper frequency. A maser may be even more useful as it should interact strongly with the fuel.

    • Omega Z

      It will still require coils of some type for the stimuli. Also will require initial heat up phase every time it’s started up from cold..