Rossi: E-Cat X ‘Very Interesting’ After One Month

While we are still largely in the dark about exactly what the E-Cat X is, Andrea Rossi seems to be getting more excited about it.

A reader asked him on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today how the E-Cat X was performing and Rossi responded:

Andrea Rossi

Anthony:
Is operating and still very promising. Now is going well since close to one month, so we are beginning to be very interested.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Joseph Fine followed up with a question about the power output of the E-Cat X and the power density in comparison to the 1MW plant, which is made up of four 250 kW low temperature E-Cat reactors.

Rossi responded: “The modules will be of 1 kW. The density of power should be doubled at the least”

Recently Rossi announced that future plans for E-Cat development would include building plants comprised of multiple E-Cat X modules, so it seems that for now at least, each of those modules will be 1 kW units. It’s sounding more and more like Rossi and Co. are putting their future development plans into the E-Cat X. But still we really don’t know what it is, or how it differs from the other E-Cats they have worked on.

  • Omega Z

    It averages better then you may think.
    We live in a 24/7 world. Also, power plants can ramp up & down and they have a history of data to help schedule power production. They have some power plants that completely shut down for months during off peek seasons. The fossil fuel itself is the storage facility.

    All the power plants need to control is the amount fed to the lines with a 10% plus minus range. If it’s on the low side they ramp up a generator & if it’s edging to high the ramp down a generator.

  • bachcole

    Yes

  • Brent Buckner

    I think you’re underestimating the importance of the Darden and Woodford investments in that they imply a high degree of third party due diligence with tens of millions of dollars on the line.

  • Brokeeper

    Andrea Rossi is a master visionary. He not only understands the minute details of things but being a physics philosopher can also synergistically assemble the many into a greater working purpose.

    In this respect for domestic uses, why develop costly manufacturing processes with differing module sizes when all you have to do is couple one-size-fits-all 1KW E-Cats together; perhaps with easy snap-together heat/electrical port design. Remember his response to why smaller modules:

    “It is because to control many small units orchestrated in ‘parallel’ is easier than to control a big one. Besides, under the manufacturing point of view makes higher the economy scale.”

    This could make it very cost affective and competitive in its manufacturing, assembly, installation, and maintenance for any domestic (and perhaps industrial) energy requirements.
    Rossi thinks big and simplistic at the same time.

    • Agaricus

      Agreed – modular design makes a lot of sense. Not only that but when the time comes to attempt introduction of private/domestic units, it will be simpler to gain safety certification if assemblies of such modules already have tens of thousands of logged safe operating hours. This will make the task of the inevitable opposition much more difficult.

  • Gerrit

    We all hope we’ll hear something, but that remains to be seen.

    • Agaricus

      At risk of sounding like a ‘skep’ myself (there seem to be quite a few around just now) I predict that all we’ll hear come Feb/March is that the test result is ‘positive’ and the customer is very pleased, but much work remains to be done – or some such anodyne form of words.

      Rossi does what he can to keep the peanut gallery informed, but will be under severe constraints at this critical time in the development program, and won’t be able to say anything of significance in public.

      While this may result in some foot stamping among his followers, and much glee amongst his enemies, it won’t affect progress towards commercialisation of cold fusion one iota.

  • pg

    No

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      How many Rossi’s are there out there we have not heard of, how many plans have they scraped, how many new products and means of production have they developed and abandoned? The only reason you know what Rossi is doing, is his blog, he has decided to be as transparent as possible, within the bounds of keeping his IP under his control. I for one thank him for his transparency.

      • Warthog

        Which is exactly why the idea of “patent” was developed in the first place…to prevent the ideas of the “obscure innovatives” from being lost to posterity. In the area of LENR, the “Patterson Cell” springs to mind. It was a liquid electrolyte/electrolysis LENR cell with demonstrated and tested high output. But Patterson didn’t trust patents and/or couldn’t get one due to the malfeasance of the US Patent Office in declaring LENR the equivalent of “perpetual motion”. With his death, that technology WAS lost.

  • jousterusa

    “if” the E-CAT X is the long-anticipated home unit designed to get us all off the grid, how useful would a 1kW device be? That’s enough to light 10 hundred-watt bulbs.

    • tlp

      The average power usage of a private house is about 1 kW. Nobody is using hundred-watt bulbs any more, but of course cheap energy increases usage in the future.
      I think those 1 kW units are designed like building blocks, so it is easy to make different size power units easily, even 1MW size.

      • Agaricus

        Not quite nobody I’m afraid. I have a good stock of tungsten bulbs (and know where to buy more) that I still use in the main living rooms and my office, as I don’t like the quality of light from LEDs. I have never used ‘compact fluorescents’ because of the slow start-up and the danger (certainty, really) of mercury contamination of my house in the event of breakage.

        That’s the rationalisation, anyway. Another factor may be that I simply don’t like being told by a bunch of technologically retarded politicians how I am permitted to light my home.

      • Omega Z

        tlp
        The average in the U.S. is about 1.5KWh, but this fluctuates a lot so it’s hard to put a fixed number to it.

        These average numbers work well for the centralized grid today. While 1 home is drawing 10KWh of energy because the family is all at home, another is drawing 10’s of watts because the family members are at work, school or doing something else. The power companies simple need far less generating capacity as it works according to averages.

        In addition, the cost of the power generating facility & it’s maintenance are paid by the consumer that is also correlated according to your use. He who uses it the most pays his share.

        However, These averages are totally meaningless if you’re off grid. You need & pay for a system that has to meet your peak demand. If your peak demand is 10KW, that is what you pay for 24/7. Even if the vast majority of the time, your average is only 1KW or so. Also with conversion efficiencies at small scale, you’ll need about 40KW of E-cat capacity.

        This isn’t an argument for the current large centralized grid of today, but if people want cheap energy, they will want a localized/distributed grid. There is a large savings in this arrangement. You also don’t have the loss of long distance electrical transport or the billion$ in steel towers across the countryside. Not to mention the weather related costs. With such a local grid, the gross cost to the consumer should be around 5 cents or less per kilowatt hour. A standalone off grid system would cost much more.

        • Warthog

          “If your peak demand is 10KW, that is what you pay for 24/7. Even if the
          vast majority of the time, your average is only 1KW or so. “

          Uh, no. You have a 1KW LENR which runs continuously and a battery array/inverter to meet peak requirements. Small-scale hydro, photovoltaics, and windmills all work the same way. The tech is well developed ,highly reliable, and getting less expensive all the time.

          • Omega Z

            The Tesla battery storage capacity times life cycles divided into to cost equates to about 18 cents per kilowatt hour. That is not cheap. It also doesn’t include the cost of the electricity which you need to create to store in that battery.

            • Warthog

              Who’s talking about “Tesla”?? There are plenty of off-grid installations up and running using standard battery tech. The point is that you do NOT need a generator sized for peak demand. Peak demand is pretty much universally met by having “some” storage available.

      • jousterusa

        I use 100-watt bulbs. I get them at Walmart. Thanks for your interesting reply!

        • tlp

          In EU those have been banned already many years.

          • Agaricus

            Except for ‘rough duty’ such as site lights and handheld inspection lamps where CFs (the only alternative when the laws were draughted) would fail quickly and dump mercury everywhere. These still fit standard light fittings though…

        • Bob Greenyer

          If I have every main light on in my house, 3 bedrooms, bathroom, toilet, kitchen, lounge, hall – my total is 102W.

          All LED or CF

          • Bob

            I must say that I tried the CF bulbs and did not like them. Mine in particular did not last very long, I did not like the light produced, they were dim, some would not fit in the lamp / light holder, were not dimmable and most importantly, when cool / cold took forever to turn on.
            .
            That being said, I have recently replaced several bulbs with LED ones that I purchased at Walmart. Paid $3.95 each. The packaging states they will last 15 years. I really like the light they produce. Very clear and sharp but not glaring or harsh. The package states they use like 4 watts and produce 960 lumens. Very bright and they are dimmable. They are the same size as the old “standard bulb” so they fit every where. If they last even 10 years, I will be really, really happy! I plan to eventually replace all my incandescent bulbs with these. Not only do I like the quality of light, they are supposedly eco-friendly and cost effective!
            .
            This seems like a win – win situation which is what we need more of in this world!. I recommend them.
            .
            Today… I do NOT have to wait for a practical LED bulb!

      • Bob

        My wife takes a shower and dries her hair everyday with a electric hair dryer. (I do too as far as that goes!) The hair drier is labeled as 1100 watts. So to dry hair with this drier, my AC plug needs 1100 watts of available power. Now add that I have well water and the pump is a 220v submersible at 1 -1/2 HP. My understanding is that 1 hp = 746 watts. So when the water pump kicks on, I need 1119 watts available. (More actually, due to spike at startup) Our electric clothes dryer uses about 2000 watts. Our refrigerator uses watts, our swimming pool pump uses watts, and on and on.
        .
        I have a 5000 watt gas generator for emergency backup when the grid power goes out. It has a peak of 7500 watts. When the power goes out, I can run my lights, the water pump, refrigerator, and little else with my 5000 watt generator without fear of overloading it.
        .
        So if the eCatX produces 1000 watts and let’s be optimistic and say it produces electricity at 75% efficiency (an unheard of number), I will only have 750 watts available. One will certainly need at least 10 eCatX reactors and then you will have to monitor what you run all at one time. In real use, one needs at least 15K of peak load available to avoid brown outs if many appliances happen to turn on all at once. (Swimming pool, water pump, clothes dryer, air conditioner, refrigerator, hair dryer, TV, garage door opener, electric cooking range, microwave, etc. etc.)
        .
        The eCatX at 1000 watts could not even power my wife’s hair drier. Either one will have to incorporate several reactors (15 and much more complex and expensive), use a large capacity battery backup/load capacitor (somewhat complex and very expensive) or stay on the grid (defeats the purpose).
        .
        Something “being very interesting” does not make it “very economical or practical”. While I do not have any issues with Rossi trying out new ideas etc., if this venture delays or supersedes the Hot Cat or standard eCat, then I will be greatly disappointed.
        .
        I find it somewhat interesting….. Leonardo Da Vinci had a “problem” of staying focused and finishing projects. Several paintings were never finished (such as the Mona Lisa), he dabbled with many concepts but never saw them realized. Perhaps some because of technology was not mature but many due to his lack of focus. What is Andrea Rossi’s company named? “Leonardo Corp.” !
        hhhhmmmm…… 🙂
        .
        Today….. we continue to wait.

        • tlp

          Fortunately there is competition. Randell Mills just changed his companys name to Brilliant Light Power in preparation of the big announcement: 100 or 250 kW SunCell, and that is electric power, not heat.

          • Bob

            Well, I know of BLP. I have not followed them as closely as Rossi, but from what I have read and seen (some of their demos), I am not holding my breath.
            .
            If BLP comes through, great! Hopefully we all will benefit. I wish them well. However, I trust them probably less than Rossi. While Rossi posts regularly and often times is frustrating most of his projections come to light. Maybe not always exactly has we anticipated or expected, but in some form. Not always without controversy, but he usually does deliver in some manner. Mills has made several very pointed promises over the years and spent millions of other peoples money. He has not delivered anything in my opinion, but some very silly demos.
            .
            I am very uncomfortable when Rossi goes from eCat to Gas Cat to Hot Cat back to eCat then onto eCatX. At least these are all very related and basically variations on one design. BLP on the other hand, has made several promised dates of working or commercial product, only to not deliver at all. These then completely disappear without comment and some completely new and different product being presented as “the next big deal”.
            .
            So again…. I wish BLP the best. I do not disparage them. I speak only of what their track record has spoken….. and it is not very good, Rossi’s track record has also been “up and down” some. I am afraid we are currently on a bit of a downward slope. But who knows!?!
            .
            This afternoon…. we continue to wait…

          • bachcole

            Randell is very good at big announcements. He is at least as good as Rossi at big announcements. He may even surpass Rossi at big announcements. Brillouin is not so great at big announcements. But I think that Brillouin is Rossi’s competition at having an actual product.

  • Gerrit

    ooh and aah !

    Honestly, I can’t give a damn about his newest Ecat-XYZ, I am only interested in finally seeing some hard facts of his “working” 1MW plant. After 5.5 years of waiting we have nothing but vague promises.

    No breakthroughs on the horizon from SKINR, CEES, Tohoku. They haven’t delivered anything meaningful, we can only wait 11 months for ICCF20 to get more of the same.

    Brillouin have a working reactor and they showed it to capitol hill, ooh and aah !

    Still nothing.

    Still nothing.

    Is this real ?

    • Jarea

      I totally agree with you. We are not getting the point if we start looking at future projects when we still have to proof LENR to the rest of the world.
      My view is that we should not accept anything else as success after 5.5 years. Besides, the fact that MFMP has not repreduced the paper of Rossi and the ECAT, gives me a bad feeling.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I agree, Rossi needs to use established companies
    to help him get products to market. He can do that without jeopardizing his IP.

    • Omega Z

      We can’t be sure what Darden & Rossi have going on behind closed doors.
      We also can’t expect them to tell us without tipping their hand to competitors.
      The only reason we’re aware of the China arrangement is that someone in the LENR community picked up on it. There was no public announcement in the western mainstream media. You can be sure Darden didn’t mean for this to be disclosed yet. How much more is happening we aren’t aware of?

  • Omega Z

    The larger refrigerators will hit 700 watts at start up. In the U.S, you’ll find the indoor temp in the 22 to 25 deg C. You’ll also find the average size is larger. 510 litre fridge is a small. A side by side can be around 800 litre. The average is probably around 600 litre and they will draw 300 plus watts.

    Refrigerators are less efficient in the U.S.. Thinner walls/less insulation. This was because of consumer push back. They have a 21 cubic foot refrigerator that’s built between cabinets & they want it replaced with a 21 cubic foot refrigerator. The thicker walls wouldn’t fit the space. They also didn’t like the thick doors.

    All that aside, you have to cover peak draw. Any less & your contributing to a much shorter compressor life. Or, if to little, it wont run at all.

    If you really want a more efficient Refrigeration system, You need a split system. Place the compressor & condenser coils away from the box preferably in a cooler environment. This gets the heat away from the box & you have room for a larger set of condenser coils. It’s all about getting rid of the heat.

  • Omega Z

    Rossi’s presence at the Pilot plant under test is likely due to it’s extreme importance. Should problems arise, 1st hand knowledge far out ways 2nd hand info from others. He’s also Chief of R&D. Where else should he be at this time.

    The Lugano test. How many replicators have blown the reactor cores. Initial start up of a new reactor is critical. Even tho Rossi was there, they had 2 or 3 spare reactors on hand. That says much in itself.

    Rossi also needed to deliver the Fuel & insert it into the reactor. He also needed to be present during extraction. It’s called Intellectual property & he would want to limit who had access to this fuel. But seriously, what could he do to a single gram of Nickel & Lithium that could possibly skew the test. Those doing the test used their equipment and their cables & did all their own measurements during the 30 days.

  • blanco69

    Ageed. Maybe the Ecat Y will supercede the ecat X before release. If we are not talking about the EZcat by Dec 16 I’ll be surprised.:)

  • AdrianAshfield

    Bob,
    Rossi backed off the thought it was Ni -> Cu some time ago.

    I remember from the very early days Rossi said he used a material other than Tungsten for the (internal) heater and it didn’t work as well. I had assumed this was because the Tungsten disassociated the H2 from the gas used in those days.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes, I am aware of that. My analysis in the first part of the year agreed that it would be an unlikely outcome and there was no Cu in the Lugano ash. This much is clear.

      In a previous comment, I noted that the 6:1 output of early claims is consistent with the currently awarded US patent that relies on the reversible reaction involving lithium.

      He has been quoted as saying more recently that that Lithium was in there from the beginning to some degree (perhaps the additional free lithium was added after a visit to Upsalla and considering the work of Ikegami) – so, as we understand it, that is where the main part of the heat is coming from. This would imply that there was not full disclosure in the original Italian patent – i.e., no mention of Lithium. BUT it did say that 62Ni was “Indispensable” meaning “absolutely necessary” for the “above mentioned exothermal reactions”. Now natural nickel ALWAYS has some 62Ni… how indispensable did he mean – Like, if you had 0% 62Ni – would it be 6:1?

      I have already detailed very succinct direct questions that, if answered clearly and correctly, would resolve this without any further need for speculation.

  • Omega Z

    Roger,
    No typo and your math is right.

    • Gerrit

      let me be pedantically note that kilo is written small -> kW

      • Omega Z

        If I were a Scientist, I would take note of KW & kW.
        On a blog, I don’t see it as important as long as I know what they mean.
        I don’t always enter it right myself. If I were to become a stickler about such things, I’d have to call out my utility service. The bill shows KW & Sometimes Kw. I have yet to see kW.

  • Bob

    I have to state that much of what you state is hard to argue with, but I also cannot state the arguments are completely realized..
    .
    For instance, the issue of Rossi always “handling” the fuel, both at Lugano and now. …. Everything he says could still be true. The Lugano test could be valid. (Technical measurement questions aside). It could simply be that Dr. Rossi is simply quite paranoid that someone will steal his secret sauce and he trusts no one to have access to it! I am not saying this is the case, but it certainly could fit the story line. Some say he is a master magician and is pulling the rug out from under everyone’s feet. I find that unlikely. Too many have been involved for there to be a complete fraud implemented. Could he have withheld certain information? Certainly. Could some of his posts be intentionally misleading?…… I think almost certain some have been, but probably for a reason.
    .
    I do not think someone of Darden’s savvy would be so easily mislead. Especially over one year’s time. If Darden disappears with no further statements (much like National Instruments, Seimens and the Navy) then I feel it will be conclusive that Rossi does not have a working LENR device. If Darden stays on board, it is a huge thumbs up for Rossi in my book.
    .
    I do not think the 1MW test will carry any weight. It will be at a Darden facility, totally ran by Rossi. I doubt we will see any real data from it. I do not know what to think about the supposed “referee” or the certification agency Fabiani mentioned. However, I do not think this test is for anyone but Darden. I think Darden will have enough checks in place to rule out any “funny business”. Once he is satisfied, then the ball will really start to roll. If he is not satisfied, we will hear no more from Mr. Darden.
    .
    I think it will be very difficult if not near impossible for anyone to replicate the eCat from the patent. It was simply an initial document to establish prior history. I personally feel Rossi is paranoid (or possibly just very business savvy) that he will never include the secret sauce until the patent lawyers convince him that the “last submitted patent” will lock up the process and that he has to include the sauce so it can be replicated. Until then, something will be withheld. Something critical.
    .
    I hope to Darden gives us a Christmas gift…..
    .
    As always….. we wait.

    • Agaricus

      “I do not think the 1MW test will carry any weight. It will be at a Darden facility, totally ran by Rossi.”

      That depends. The press, academia etc. will of course ignore the results, even assuming that they are published (like you I doubt they will be). However if the test has been set up for the benefit of a large investor or other potential business partner, then the methods and location of testing will have been agreed in advance, and the results will be decisive.

      Of course, the peanut gallery will be left disappointed and uncertain, despite the fact that Rossi has made no promises about information release, while the ECN pseudoskeps go into paroxysms of sticky excitement after their long exile in the wilderness.

      • Bob

        Yes, I should clarify a couple of my previous statements. “will not carry any weight”, I did mean relating to the general media or scientific arena. I do believe it will be a deciding factor as to whether Darden stays involved or not. As I mentioned, I believe the test is strictly for him (or other investors included). So this test will have tremendous impact, but internally only. It will have little to no impact outside IH and that we will see little to no data from it, in my opinion.
        .
        I also agree that the F9 thing is quite silly. That the plant operates over unity must be known by now with certainty. The fact that the test is still running (as far as we know anyway) must indicate that it is of enough interest to merit continuation. So Darden will not drop out of this project because a pipe started leaking on day 339 and the plant had to be shut down. I believe that once this test is finished and Darden has his “F9”, he will start putting the clamps on Rossi (via the financial funding muscle) to hand much of the project management over to someone who can stay focused and push it through to commercial success. There always is the possibility however, that Rossi is stubborn enough to not hand the secret sauce over and Darden may not be able to legally obtain it. We would then see Darden vanish from Rossi’s circle (as National Instruments, Seimens, etc) and he would concentrate on other LENR sources such as Brillouin or others. If Darden has seen LENR work as the Hot Cat or 1 MW plant has been presented, even for shorter periods of time, he will not walk away from LENR. He may have to pursue other avenues if Rossi refuses to release some control, but he will not totally walk away if he has seen significant LENR in this 1 year test., in my opinion.
        .
        I also did not state correctly “does not have a working LENR device”. I should have said “commercially viable LENR device”. I think there has been enough witness and involvement by others that it is reasonably true that Rossi has a LENR device that can run over unity. I do not know if he has one that he can control at will. for long periods of time, what the continuous COP is, or if anyone can keep it running other than him.
        .
        As normal…. we wait.

      • Omega Z

        “Possibly Darden will simply continue funding Rossi from Cherokee resources.”
        (minor correction)
        Possibly Darden will simply continue funding Rossi through Industrial Heat. The Only connection to Cherokee is by Tom Darden. Cherokee proper has nothing to do with Rossi & the E-cat. Likely there would be major legal issues if Darden were to use Cherokee investors equity funds as Venture Capital.

        “the peanut gallery will be left disappointed”

        I agree, but we the peanut gallery should actually appreciate Rossi’s openness & willingness to provide any information he does. If he didn’t there would be no ECW. Notice there is no blogs for all the others in play. Just near total silence for months or years at a time and people say, whatever happened with so and so…

        • Agaricus

          Cherokee vs. IH – while technically they are separate, in fact IH is just a paper company based at Cherokee’s premises at 111 East Hargett Street, Suite 300, Raleigh. ‘Industrial Heat’ probably consists of desk in a corner of Darden’s office, a computer and a telephone line, with the incorporation papers framed on the wall above.

          Its purpose will be to isolate Cherokee from any liabilities arising from IH’s activities (smoking craters, etc) and to act as recipient and controller of funds from Cherokee, which may come from working capital or from specific, informed investors.

          If/when Rossi’s experiments pan out, IH will assume a larger and more independent role (and perhaps acquire their own offices), but for the moment I think it’s probably more realistic to see Rossi’s project as a speculative investment by Cherokee.

  • purplepartyguy

    The e-cat must be geared for the home market with a 1kw output. Slap a few into a forced hot air system and you have cheap heating for cold weather locations or perhaps a low pressure boiler replacement for oil systems. A domestic hot water version for electric and gas hot water heater replacement?

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hypothesis 1:

    If it required 62Ni at $11,600 a gram, then the results could be negative if the sum of the costs (hardware, control power, maintenance, fuel, manpower) is not exceeded by the value of the net energy gain. BUT, if the 62Ni was recoverable, OR it was just a salting of 62Ni that then bred all the Nickel to 62Ni in the ash – the results may be HUGELY positive after re-processing.

    Hypothesis 2:

    Remember there are a bunch of employees monitoring this 24/7 – how much monitoring do you need on a gas pipe / burner or an electric heater element. A normal boiler only needs periodic safety checks and a resistive heater normally works until it doesn’t. The cost of the labour alone could outweigh the extra cost of the previous energy supply in the short term.

    Hypothesis 3:

    If we take the Lugano results at face value, the reactor starts with normal Nickel and ends with near pure 62Ni which is worth $11,600 / gram (for comparison, gold is less than $35 per gram). This alone could make the results positive even if the COP was 0.9!

    I think some hard straight questions need to be asked.

    1. Is the cost of the actual fuel used a significant factor in determining if the results are positive?

    2. Is the cost of labour to run the 1MW plant a significant factor in determining if the results are positive?

    3. Do you expect the ash to have any residual value?

    4. is the COP the only metric determining success of the 1MW test?

    • AdrianAshfield

      Bob,
      The price of 62Ni wouldn’t stay that high if more were available.

      The interesting thing about the E-Cat X is its small size and very high temperature. This makes it much more suitable for heating a gas for a gas turbine. Either for electricity or thrust.

      I wonder if 1400C makes the E-Cat self limiting….

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Maybe that’s where the tungsten comes in with a melting point of 3,422 degrees C.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I have believed there was tungsten in the first e-cats as an evaporation boat / H2 dissociator / heater.

          Since it is FAR cheaper to get High concentration of 183W from natural pure Tungsten than to get either 57Fe or 61Ni – I have acquired some W powder (which I will forward to me356) and Mathieu will have some on Monday.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            I just had a crazy thought about the “superatom” tungsten carbide. “…the molecules of titanium monoxide, zirconium monoxide, and tungsten carbide are actually superatoms of nickel, palladium, and platinum, respectively.”
            http://www.materialstoday.com/characterization/news/super-atoms-mimic-elements-with-a-little-help-from/
            Rossi mentioned using palladium and platinum in his patent. So,
            tungsten carbide (with a melting point of 2,785–2,830 °C https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungsten_carbide ) mimics platinum (therefore it might adsorb hydrogen). It might be a good replacement for nickel in the fuel.
            PS
            And obviously titanium monoxide and zirconium monoxide (if they aren’t reduced back to elemental titanium and zirconium) would be worth looking at as replacements for nickel.

          • Warthog

            You might want to also check back in history to the work of Irving Langmuir at GE when he was searching for fill gases to use to increase the oplife ot tungsten filaments. He was of the opinion that he had seen “over unity” for tungsten and a hydrogen fill gas, but did not follow up after corresponding with Niels Bohr, who told him that “over unity” was “impossible”. Langmuir was an incredibly thorough experimentalist.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Adrian, yes. Unless the fuel cycle is controlled.

        What is the real price of a diamond?

        • http://magicmusicandmore.com/ Barry

          Manmade diamonds are cheap.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      There nothing (so far) that suggests that Ni62 is required.

      The Lugano results certainly suggest that the isotopes of Ni “tend” or migrate
      towards Ni62, and that migration does not seem to effect performance of the reactor.

      So the “need” for such refined Ni does not seem to be an issue. If the Lugano
      test had ultra-pure Nickel, then I think this issue would be of concern, but so
      far nothing suggests as such).

      As for employees “monitoring” the reactor – it is a test
      reactor in a commercial setting. I have little doubt this issue is and can be
      solved by automation and control systems. And there really no place better for a group
      of people testing a new air plane or new reactor to be then where the device in question
      is running and being “pushed” to see how it performs. Time and time again in Formula One they spend a YEAR and milionns testing the race car engine in the lab. When it hits the actual race conditions – that supposed perfect engine blows up and fails repeatedly! The same goes for aircraft or anything else – you have to do real world testing.

      I think most of Rossi’s reactor issues center around reliability, and
      how much additional engineering is required to build a 24/7 plant that runs say
      like your refrigerator.

      However, I MUST admit that Rossi continues to always add
      some caveat as to better or worse. This position by Rossi is somewhat
      perplexing. And to be fair, we don’t know the COP.

      Between SRI tests, the Lugano test, recent papers from
      China and Russia, and many others, LENR is NOT in question.

      The only real issue is what issues remain before LENR is commercialized,
      and are COP’s high enough.

      So I accept some speculation is warranted as to reasons
      why the yearlong test would not be a success, but this test certainly has moved
      LENR much farther along the path to commercialization.

      Recent replications of LENR shows that LENR is a
      challenge, but the REAL issue is commercialized grade power output is elusive!

      The wright brothers spent about 7 years “playing” and “tweaking”
      their designs, and their airplane was a good number of years ahead of everyone
      else during that time frame.

      Cost and maintains of the reactor likely is one of the
      main challenges for Rossi. However, if the COP is high enough, then what
      remains are engineering solutions, not that Rossi has commercial grade power
      output.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • Bob Greenyer

        It is only a hypothesis principally based on the Lugano report ash. However,

        In the original patent, Rossi said about 62Ni

        “Accordingly, it is indispensable to use, for the above mentioned exothermal reactions, a nickel isotope having a mass number of 62, to allow it to transform into a stable copper isotope 62”

        Of course, I have felt for a long time that the last part of that sentence is a typo and it is amazing it has stood this long!

        Lugano ash did not show lots of 63Cu. Rossi has since claimed that he always used Lithium (perhaps as a compound and his catalyst), implying that that this was where the main heat yield came from.

        In enquiring about the cost of getting 62Ni and explaining why we were buying it, we were told that Rossi had about 3 years ago bought some 62Ni of nearly the same purity as that in the Lugano ash. The vendor said he did not know why he wanted the isotope until we had explained why we were interested in it.

        I already pointed out that Rossi has twice distanced himself from the 62Ni finding. Within two days of my raising the issue, there was a lot of talk for the first time about 61Ni, 57Fe and 183W after a release from Cook.

        This can all be cleared up by asking 2 straight questions.

        1. Do you still consider that the use of (or some) highly refined 62Ni is still “indispensable” in your Nickel based reactor fuel mixes.

        2. Will the E-Cat perform just as well without any 62Ni.

        “Indispensable” means “absolutely necessary” – In his latest patent, references to Nickel would include 62Ni. Yes it was supposedly for making 63Cu without radiation in the original patent, but we now understand that was never the main reaction or any reaction at all.

        One further note, 62Ni by the supplier that supplied Rossi was refined centrifugally, the nearest isotope to 62Ni is 61Ni – so it might have been that Rossi ended up with much of the rest in his 62Ni as 61Ni, which would fit Cook’s latest theoretical postulation.

        I am in no way saying LENR is not real – I do however agree that it is difficult to replicate Parkhomov/Lugano – and one does wonder why. We are told that Lithium was always there – which means that the first patents were not full disclosure. Do we have full disclosure now?

        • Omega Z

          Bob,
          Using the Lugano 3.5KW reactor 1 gram charge(Calculated for 30 days operation) as reference, the 1MW plant would require about 4 pounds of Nickel.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Great points here.

          I 100% realize nothing being stated here is suggests that
          LENR is not real.

          And you also noted Rossi has retracted that the Ni is being trans
          mutated into Cu. He stated the Cu likely was due to contamination. And in the 3 rd party reports, we did not really see anything significant in regards to copper (again as you noted).

          However it certainly possible that EVEN without
          transmutation occurring, that Ni62 could still be important.

          And you well note “early” theories did suggest that Ni was trans
          mutated into Cu, later results don’t support this view, and most (including Rossi) have recanted on this view (again, as you pointed out).

          And 3 recent replications from China, Russia, and Parkhomov never
          noted that Ni62 was critical for the reaction to take place (these results don’t disprove that Ni62 may, or may not be important here – but Ni62 so far not been mentioned).

          I think based on given information (so far), the requirement
          of Ni62 being required or even preferable cannot be determined nor assumed. Even Rossi seemed surprised by the isotope changes – this suggests that Ni62 being a key ingredient is diminished since the sample tested did not have un-ordinary amount of Ni62.

          To be fair, such highly refined N62i could still be VERY important
          or preferable.

          We likely need more info to determine if Ni62 is
          significant for Ross’s machine.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Bob Greenyer

            The simple questions I have proposed would in theory clear up doubt to some degree.

            • Albert D. Kallal

              Yes those questions and answers would clear up a lot. And to be fair? I VERY much hope that such a high quality of nickel is not required!

              Regards,
              Albert D. Kallal
              Edmonton, Alberta Canada

              • Bob Greenyer

                If it breeds it and reactors only need a little to start with, it is not a long term issue.

      • http://magicmusicandmore.com/ Barry

        Well put Albert. The Ecat technical specs claim a minimum COP of 6.

        http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-1-mw/ecat-1mw-technical-data

    • http://magicmusicandmore.com/ Barry

      Bob, the tech specs http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-1-mw/ecat-1mw-technical-data
      states the cost is low and the COP is 6 or greater.

      • Bob Greenyer

        for natural nickel, guaranteed?

        What about for pure salted fuel, or pure 62Ni.

        We KNOW that 62Ni works, since that is what is found at the end of the Lugano run in its ash and it was still apparently outputting the same order of excess when there was massively depleted 7Li.

        • Omega Z

          If I recall? wasn’t the 62Ni in the unused nickel sample of the Lugano test in the normal range.

          Of course if Rossi did obtain 62Ni, it could have been for R&D to determine just how important it is to the reaction and not used in the Lugano reactor. Like everyone else, he is still learning how this all works.

          • Bob Greenyer

            A point I make before is that the Cook/Rossi paper on page 9 says that the

            ‘Nickel was found to be encrusted on the internal surface of the reactor, from which a 2mg sample of the “ash” was obtained near to the centre of the charge.’

            In every Rossi/Parkhomov replication attempt so far that I am aware of, there was never Nickel encrusted on the internal surface of reactors – there was Lithium+Aluminium+(Nickel in solution)… this is interesting since if the 62Ni was found on the inside of the reactor (rather than in a sintered rod like we have found) – could it have been there from the beginning.

            In Rossi’s original Italian patent it says

            “Nickel is COATED in a copper tube”

            [my emphasis]

            The word coated is very specific. It would be very sensible to coat the inside of the heat extraction surface with the principal source or collector of the generated heat.

            The Nickel in the ash sample is almost entirely 62Ni (see attached image). The variance of the fuel 62Ni content against a standard natural sample is

            Natural nickel 62Ni proportion : 0.036
            Lugano fuel nickel 62Ni proportion : 0.039

            Difference/possible test error 0.003

            Lugano ash nickel 62Ni proportion : 0.987
            Purity of 62Ni Rossi was said to have bought : 0.984

            Difference/possible test error 0.003

            Was the more complicated internal structure of the DogBone 62Ni deposited on the inside? Perhaps this is why the control run temperature was limited.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e24a6933ebe2484c729385e89d6d24835362fc1f60a7f8a1a282be22f3c9c278.png

            • Eyedoc

              Nice analysis…..Can this be tested in some of the next MFMP trials ? How could this precoating be easiest done ? Would natural Ni work ?

              • Bob Greenyer

                We are first trying to arrange a morphology analysis of the 62Ni on a sample from the isotopic supply company that supplied Rossi. We have been told that it is produced through the Mond process and then fractionatied using a centrifuge so could be mostly 62Ni and 61Ni.

                The simplest next test is to add a small amount of 62Ni into a fuel mix to double or triple the normal amount – however, remember, these clusters will be around 95% 62Ni – so (if there is some truth in 62Ni being essential) they may work very well to allow SSM or good COP early on. The aim would be to have 1H interacting with 7Li – not with other xNi.

                In the interim period, we need to all put our thinking caps on and find the cheapest way we can Physical Vapour Deposit nickel on the inside of a tube or maybe onto some alumina granules. Some Plansee tungsten evaporation boats or helical wires would work – but need the right power drive and control.

    • Omega Z

      Bob,
      The cost of 62Ni pretty much rules out Rossi adding this to the fuel.
      Rossi had stated early on that the fuel charge would be around $10(about 5/6 grams) for a 10KW E-cat.

      No one would invest a large sum of money into a 1MW pilot plant for a 1 year test without knowing they had a reasonable COP to begin with. However, regardless of COP even infinite, Reliability would be crucial.

      Example- You produce a 1 Million$ a day in product at 10% profit, each day your are broke down costs you $100K. After a certain number of days being broke down, all the savings gained from LENR & more are lost. This would be a failed test as it isn’t ready for market.

      Likely they have a list of issues to be tested that will determine it’s ultimate positive/negative outcome. There is also a need for data for marketing purposes. Besides dependability will be how long between fuel change & routine maintenance schedules. Is it stand alone or requires full time technician present.

      As to the used Nickel, Rossi said it can be recycled, But I think he meant recycled for other purposes. Similar to plastics used for food containers can’t be recycled for food containers, but can recycled for lawn furniture & such. Of course if it’s converted to 62Ni, then for a period of time there’s a ready market for that.

      The Lugano reactor is rated at 3.5Kw with 1 gram fuel for 1 month.
      10Kw would be 3 grams * 100-10KW reactors * 12 months or 3600 grams fuel at 50% Nickel is 1800 grams. All converted to 62Ni($11,600 a gram) equal $20,880,000.

      Even if it fails, I’d take 1 of these. However, I think the price of 62Ni would quickly become practically worthless.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I am not saying that he is exclusively using 62Ni. I obviously don’t know. I have been told he bought some from one supplier and was told that on a separate occasion that he acquired some from another source.

        The reactor has always claimed COP of 6 with on/off cycle which fits well with the current awarded patent that refers to the reversible Li + Al + H2 reaction. The 62Ni content in my mind could be the key driver for excess as it does not want protons – it just expels them into the 7Li driving the main yield reaction. 6X may be the possible yield with natural Nickel.

        Imagine then that the results of the Lugano report are correct. That 62Ni is bred. if the protons were not transmuting other Nickel isotopes with small net gain, but predominantly interacting with 7Li to make 2X4He – then the yield / COP would go up … from 6 – to claims / rumours of 20-80… there is approximately 27 X less 62Ni in natural nickel than in the lugano ash/62Ni that rossi has been said to have bought. There is room for a yield of 100X+ unless reaction surface or heat extraction limits or amount of captured H- come into play (or however it works).

        It stands to reason then that either natural or marginally salted fuel is used to begin with, and the yield increases as the reaction progresses. As I said before, 64 Nickel ends up as 62Ni and there is no copper in the ash. As the 7Li is burned in Lugano, the rising 62Ni would improve efficiency offsetting the drop due to less 7Li.

        • Da Phys

          Bob, You mention that Ni62 may be key because Ni62 does not want protons and may expel them following Piantelli’s theory. I agree with you that this aspect is critical. Not only to answer the questions you asked in this thread but for LENR in general.
          How much evidence do we have that protons are expelled? Piantelli’s patent mentions the detection of 6.7Mev protons using a cloud chamber. Is this something that he confirmed in the discussions you personally had with him? Can this detection be reproduced with your dogbone? Finally do you know if any other group observed protons?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Firstly, I must thank both the people that made that trip possible and for Piantelli to share so much time with us.

            He confirmed many times. Showed pictures, let us handle the specific sample that yielded that result and emphasised the point that this was based on empirical evidence. He also glossed over the standard model calculations that he used to verify this theoretically but that was above my pay grade and ability to memorise, sorry.

            A note though on this. Piantelli has always said that ALL transition metals work and STRONGLY hinted that Nickel is not the best. Nickel however is cheap and has very few outcomes from the reaction which makes it perfect for safe scientific study – which is his intention.

            I personally suspect that the higher energy came from an impurity that was another transition metal or because the reaction was driven far to hard resulting in some transmuted virtual impurities.

            Unified Gravity Corporation claims to have shown that you only need less than 225eV to interact with 7Li. Indeed, having more energy could be counter productive.

            Bob Higgins GS type {GarbageCan} experiment is designed to look for a range of energies. Bob is very methodical and wants to get things automated and right. This is in progress. His experiment will look for secondary emissions that may give indications that Protons were emitted amongst other emissions.

            Protons decay to Hydrogen and can be stopped relatively easily. This is why Piantelli needs 300 pascal H2 environment to allow the emitted protons to survive up to 8.5cm. In high press ion Lithium H2 environment with molten Lithium+Aluminium+Ni on the surface of the Nickel, I would not expect them to travel any further than the first Lithium atom which in theory is adjacent to the Nickel.

            To give you an example, in proton beam cancer therapy, the energy of the accelerated protons are 70 to 250 MeV!

            The fact that 62Ni was the Nickel in the ash – also supports the 1H + 7Li > 2 X 4He reaction over the Gullstrom bound neutron theory – why… well, simply because there was no 64Ni in the ash… and if the end point is 62Ni – the reactor should have stopped producing energy when all the Ni was happy. All the reactor needs if it is the 1H + 7Li reaction is a few atoms of 7Li left on the surface and 62Ni, and we know that there was 7.9% left at the end of the run.

            As I understand it, Rossi gave a charge to last about a month (I think it was clarified that it would last for 35 but don’t quote me on that). It ran for 32.

            Assuming all days the same (though we know the reactor was driven harder in the latter stage of the experiment) and excluding inaccuracies in measuring Lithium isotopes which we have discovered is quite hard.

            burn rate =
            (start 7Li – end 7Li)/32 = (0.914-0.079)/32 = 0.0261 7Li / day

            Remaining days of fuel at average burn rate =
            (end 7Li)/burn rate = 0.079/0.261 = 3 days

            32 days + 3 days = 35days.

            • Da Phys

              Thank you Bob for having taken the time to answer thoroughly. There is however something here that does not fit the idea that protons are expelled from 62Ni: a single energy level of 6.7MeV. A single energy level suggests more that what was detected/measured in the cloud chamber was the result of a nuclear reaction. To have protons expelled because coming closer to the Ni nucleus should lead to a wide energy spectrum, and not a single energy level of 6.7MeV, unless I’m missing something important. Also, the interpretation of cloud chamber traces is something that can rapidly become challenging. In overall, the presence of (1) protons, and (2) at a given energy level of 6.7MeV, should be confirmed in the first place. I see this more important than any isotopic shift or transmutation that can only be achieved over a long period using a stable and stable reactor.

              • Bob Greenyer

                Firstly, he says that the energy is UP TO 6.7MeV it is a broad spectrum of energy – this is in his patent and published research AFAIK (without looking) – basically he has never had empirical evidence of higher energies. Moreover, in Piantelli’s case, he has never said that only 62Ni ejects protons, he would say any isotope of a transition metal may, as one of the two outcomes when the all 13 parameter bounds are met, eject a proton.

                He says that this determines the maximum potential distance of the Nickel from the secondary target. In the case of Rossi’s fuel configuration – the distance is at the atomic scale since the primary Nickel acting as a catalyst is adjacent to the 7Li – this is one of the great parts of the Rossi configuration.

  • Jouni Tuomela

    Interesting ?:

    Andrea Rossi

    December 12th, 2015 at 4:54 PM

    Frank Acland:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

    Frank Acland

    December 12th, 2015 at 4:12 PM

    Dear Andrea,

    Did you say at one time that the output power of the E-Cat X unit under test was 3.5 kW — is that because it is made up of 3 separate units each around 1 kW?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland”

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Things seem well and development over the last year has again been incredible. The 1 MW test is some 80% complete, E-cat X has been invented and its testing goes optimally, turbine engine development (presumably for electricity production, possibly also for aviation) is also again ongoing, and robotic production line for E-cat X has been preliminarily designed.

    In retrospect it seems that Rossi has usually managed to work efficiently, but for some months in 2014 he was temporarily slowed down because he was waiting for the results of the Lugano report before deciding how to continue.

  • Bob

    A few somewhat random thoughts…
    .
    Leonardo Da Vinci evidently had a problem “staying on track” as the saying goes. Some of his paintings, he lost interest and moved on without finishing them. THe Mona Lisa being one of them to my understanding. Sometimes those with creative minds find the early road of discovery more compelling than the “applying the finishing touches”. A recent interview with Rossi’s right hand man stated that this was a common scenario with Rossi. That new ideas would pop up and be the “subject of the day” (my wording) while subjects in process would be pushed back.
    .
    This is problematic in bringing something to commercial maturity. Especially complex and new technology. It may be a significant problem with the eCat.
    .
    With that in mind, I ask if any know the status or direction of the following. I am not on JONP and do not follow everything in close detail.
    .
    Status of :
    “Gas Cat” – At one time this was the subject of the day.
    .
    “Hot Cat” – At one time this was the hot subject. (Pun intended!) The Hot Cat was what the Lugano tests where conducted on. Is it even a pursuit now? It was a very different technology than the cold cat, at least from photos shown.
    .
    “Cat and Mouse” – My understanding this subject of pursuit (again pun intended) is that the Cat and Mouse was applicable only to the Hot Cat. That this was not involved in the 1MW plant design. I may be mistaken, but I was fairly sure it was the break through for the Hot Cat.
    .
    The secret customer is almost certain to be a Darden owned facility. Not too long ago, Darden announced a new lab at the industrial park. We know that Rossi is in Florida and if he spends 14 hours per day (or more) inside the shipping container, then it must be in Florida as well. Making assumptions, all the R&D before the new lab was built, must have been done at the secret customer. Even Fabiani stated that no one was allowed to handle the fuel but Rossi. So again, any R&D must be done with Rossi available, thus in Florida. It is almost implausible that nuclear R&D would be conducted at a “unrelated customer’s site” so it must be a Darden owned location. Any indication of a Cherokee/Darden/IH owned entity in Florida? If a person should find one, chances are it is the secret customer.
    ..
    It would be nice to have a Christmas present from Darden. While the rare post from Fabiani is interesting, I really place significant value to those from Darden. Rossi’s blog subjects too often fade into nothing, sometimes are contradictory and I find sometimes even nonsensical. (Not all but some) His posts are teases and through the years, I have grown somewhat “ho hum” about them. Often they cause more doubts that encouragement. Information from Darden, the Lugano group or even the “major certification company” would indeed be a nice Christmas present.
    .
    As always…. we wait.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Bob, some answers, according to my following of JONP.
      Gas-cat: not pursued at the moment, because it seems that E-cat X has high enough COP to make gas unnecessary. Rossi said this recently.

      HotCat: ready, but is not developed at the moment because is superseded by E-cat X which runs even hotter (1400 C) and presumably offers higher COP and possibly some other benefits(?).
      Cat and mouse: I don’t know, but I think is probably a technical detail that is not important for the user.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        We have to remember that not too long ago you couldn’t get a LENR patent. So, in the prepatent days the goal was to make a MW plant to demonstrate to the world that the E-Cat was real. Now that LENR patents are being issued it’s more important for Rossi to increase his IP by working on a variety of things than just working on the MW plant (which is still important) so that he doesn’t get scooped.

      • Bob

        Thanks Pekka,
        I am unsure about the eCat-X. It may be hotter than the Hot Cat and possibly have a higher COP (we really are totally in the dark about this, we do not know), but the one thing noted above from Rossi himself is that the eCat-X is only a 1kW device. This is the output of a hair dryer.
        .
        Regardless of higher temps or greater COP, if it is limited to 1kW it will be similar to the recent Orbo….. a novelty but of little use. Needing 1000 reactors to make a 1MW plant will be a very big hill to climb. Rossi is having issues with the current 4 reactors at low temps and pressures. Imagine 1000 at high temp and thus high pressure!. Even for a home unit, 15 reactors would be needed. Still a long ways to go!
        .
        I do not see the eCat-X being a displacement for the Hot-Cat, unless there is much we do not know yet, which is always a possibility.
        .
        I still hope my Christmas stocking has a message from Darden. At present, announcements from him about the eCat are about the only ones that will get me excited. I wish Rossi the best. I have been supportive of him in the past, I have tried to be open minded lately, but it is starting to take a lot of blind faith to keep positive, regarding his statements. One issue that I find quite troublesome is Fabiani stating that Rossi will not allow anyone else to handle the fuel. Regardless how you look at that, it is not good. If the process is so sensitive that only Rossi can make it work then the system is no where close to manufacture. Otherwise, it is the mark of a paranoid mind.
        .
        As always…. we wait.

        • Omega Z

          A Gas furnace uses multiple burners. You can build them to any Btu output by adding additional burners. Rossi has also stated that it is far easier to control many small reactors then a single large reactor. He’s also indicated multiple reactor system is cheaper to manufacture. Maybe this is due to increased complexity of the reactors to scale.

          As to news from Rossi or Darden, the test wont be completed until late February or March & likely there will be a period involved in analysis of the Data by the 3rd party Referee. They are not concerned with Our impatience. They will do it by their schedule. Not ours, And I don’t expect Rossi to give details until the refereeing entity is done doing their thing.

          As to Rossi’s presence at the Pilot plant, It’s a pilot plant under test of likely extreme importance. And should problems arise, 1st hand knowledge far out ways 2nd hand info from others.

          The fuel matter does not concern me. It’s part of the Intellectual property & beyond that, From Fabiani’s statements, this is still a matter of refinement that changes with each test.

          • TomR

            Thanks Omega Z for your thoughts. I just wonder whether Rossi and Darden will be able to wait too long after the test is done. Competitors might force them to start mass producing a product as soon as the test is done.. A lot of things can happen in 3 months. I just hope the domestic unit is one of the early products. I am pretty sure that the domestic heater is ready to go now if it would get safety certification. Rossi realizes the importance to the world that the domestic heater would have.

            • Omega Z

              Hey TomR
              I don’t think Rossi and Darden can say much until the Referee is done doing their thing. And, I think to many people greatly underestimate the importance of this pilot test.

              For instance- TomR, I want you to help finance a 200 Million dollar manufacturing facility so we can start manufacturing heating plants. Here’s OUR test data. Are you going to take OUR word for the data of a technology that is unaccepted by Science? This test is critical to moving forward.

              Probably you’re going to want an independent, likely certified entities opinion on this. And I would imagine this entity wants IH/Rossi not to give their opinions until they provide theirs. I could be wrong, but a request of silent in these situations is normal.

              Some food for thought. Darden had business meetings in China a year ago. I believe it was October of this year that Darden made another trip to China to sign agreements. At about the same time, he announced plans for a new research lab. He confirmed it would involve LENR R&D among other research.

              This leads me to believe that Darden inc has a high confidence in this technology. You don’t make such futuristic financial commitments if you don’t. This doesn’t mean manufacturing will happen right away. There could still be issues to resolve, but he apparently believes the time is getting close. It’s my opinion that the pilot test has much to do with this. It must be very promising even with the (F9).

              Now, As to the home units, they wont be certified until enough operational hours are concluded in the industrial setting. The safety & operational data are necessary to get a new technology certified for the consumer.

              It’s also my opinion that the home units will only be beneficial to certain regions unless COP is at least 10. Given it needs to run 24/7, a COP=6 isn’t competitive with Natural gas which is only consumed when needed for most people. This still makes it beneficial for millions of people in some places & for others as a base load heat. It’s just not for everyone unless COP>10.

    • Omega Z

      “Gas Cat” – If the E-cat X performs as hoped, the Gas Cat is history.

      “Hot Cat” – Rossi hasn’t said anything, But I think the E-cat X supersedes it.

      “Cat and Mouse” It is used in the L-temp E-cat pilot plant. It was to be incorporated into all E-cats, However, we can’t be certain of that for the E-cat X & Rossi wouldn’t elaborate when asked.

      As to Rossi jumping ahead, Fabiani has stated that Rossi is non-linear in his thinking. The E-cat X R&D is being down at a separate location. About the Customer, Not a Darden owned facility, but likely someone associated or known previously to Darden or Rossi. Given Dardens brown field remediation, He would be connected with many businesses whom he would contract out work to that may require low grade heat in their work.

      The only connection of Cherokee to Rossi is by way of Tom Darden. Industrial Heat LLC(VC Funds) was created to invest in Rossi/Leonardo.

      “Darden announced a new lab at the industrial park.” that will include a LENR Research lab. Also at about the same time,(Oct. I believe) he signed a business agreement in China that is also based on LENR. Both of these commitments bodes well for Dardens confidence in Rossi & his E-cat technology.
      So the test whether positive or negative, Darden believes it’s not if, but when the E-cat is ready to move forward.

  • LarryJ

    So much angst. Don’t worry so much. It will all work out. You’ll see.

  • http://bobmapp.com.uk twobob

    The “basic E-Cat gave off infra-red radiation.
    Is that not high enough up the frequency scale for you?
    Of course guaranteeing a COP of 6 was being conservative I believe.

  • Jarea

    For me is important, execute correctly the current test. Afterwards, we can be interested or even be curious about future of ecatx. I think focus here has priority. It would be different if ecatx would be reproduced apart of Parkhomov and Chinesse by MFMP. The reality is that LENR and even Rossi says he is not sure. For me that is incredible after so many years of research.

  • Owen Geiger

    Maybe somebody could ask Rossi if the E-CatX has potential use in transportation. Also, would love to know the approximate size.

    • ecatworld

      Rossi has said that the 1MW plant takes up 4 cubic meters. That should work for the starting point to do the math, which I won’t attempt!

    • Gerard McEk

      Rossi has said that it is too early to speculate on that. The 1 MW plant includes also the conversion of water to low temp. steam. Direct conversion into mechanical (jet) power requires a totally different approach. I guess it is indeed far to early to say something about that. It would be nice if AR would sell the Ecat (X)’s and leave product development to other speciallized companies. That would speed-up the development of new products in a tremendous way.

  • Ophelia Rump

    1 kilowatt sounds like it is for the home market and integration into other products. If the output is heat, that seems the incorrect scale to me. You would probably go with a five or ten for heat production. Water heaters run about 8 to 30 kilowatts. That is a more appropriate value for home electricity production.

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

      The grid is not going to pay much for electricity produced at 3AM. We need an off entirely grid system that produces home heating and cooling, plus hot water plus electricity. We need power for multiple big screen televisions, multiple computers, lights, ovens, etc. If you can use heat directly for air conditioning, you could probably get by with 5 kilowatts of electricity. If you have to use electricity for the air conditioner, you would need lots more juice.

      • Ophelia Rump
        • Thomas Kaminski

          A modern equivalent of that is a zeoplite absorbtion chiller that can provide 7.5 kw of chilling at 15C with about 15 kw of heat in at about 40C. Commercial lithium-bromide chillers can provide huge cooling power as well. See this link for a modern thermally driven chiller:

          http://www.solarcombiplus.eu/docs/D44_Sortech_v02_English.pdf

          By the way, some systems also be used as a thermally driven heat pump with a COP of 1.5 or so for heating.

          • Omega Z

            An ammonia system is more efficient, but not available for residential use because of the risks should the spring a leak. Also for residential AC, the systems are very expensive just for the system & more so with the extras & installation.

    • Omega Z

      It requires about 0.7kWe to power your refrigerator that cycles on/off between 1/3rd & 1/2 of every hour.

      Probably, if the X-cat can produce direct electricity, it will be made up of multiple reactors that can be ramped up & down with peak/valley demand.

      There is also the possibility that 1kW reactors are easier to control then 10kW reactors. I base this on Rossi’s response to those who ask if much larger E-cats can be built. He always says larger reactors are much harder & complex to control then having many smaller reactors.

      10KW is about 34,000 Btu’s. This would handle about an 800 square foot home depending where 1 lives & the regional climate. That requires 10-1kW X-cats

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

    What is the size of the 1 kilowatt E-CatX? Will each E-CatX require it own computer control? If the size is no larger than a lipstick, and it does not need individual computer control, then I can see it being used in multiples to generate electricity. If not, I have a hard time imagining such a small unit being of use for anything other than home heaters. I wish Rossi would sell his technology to a big corporation so that they could help him scale up to a one megawatt (heat) module at least. I think you need at least that size to make affordable electricity.

    • Omega Z

      If I recall correctly, Rossi indicated it is similar to those in the Lugano test. The H-cat in the Lugano test was 3.5Kw

  • Gerard McEk

    Interesting. So if AR says that the power density doubles in case of the Ecat X, on what does the power density depend on to enable doubling of power? (Previously AR mentioned that the energy density would be the same). The power density is linear with the temperature I guess, so the temperature of the existing Ecats inthe 1 MW plant is 700 C? (half of the Ecat X).

  • K. Som

    it was 3.5 KW until now, 1KW today, what will it be tomorrow?