New Q&A With Andrea Rossi on ERV, IH and E-Cat Test (Update: Rossi Dissmisses “2nd ERV Report” Rumor)

UPDATE (April 13, 2016)

This is a Q&A on the JONP today on the same topic.

Patrick Ellul
April 13, 2016 at 7:13 AM
Dear Andrea,

Jed Rothwell alleges that there is a second ERV of the 1 year 1MW plat test and that his report draws an opposite conclusion to the the one from the ERV that you described.

Does this second ERV exist?

Best regards,

Andrea Rossi
April 13, 2016 at 7:52 AM
Patrick Ellul:
Jed Rothwell is an intelligent person and has a remarkable sense of humour. Obviously he is joking.
The only ERV has been the one accepted by contract from both the counterparts with a signed agreement.
It is true that IH had their men constantly in the plant all the 352 days of the tests, and never said anything was wrong. It is true that for one year of the test they were free to bring with them anybody they wanted to control everything, but they never raised any doubt or critique. As well as it is true that Tom Darden, JT Vaughn and their investors from Woodford and from China have been in the plant many times, bringing with them their consultants, have talked with the director of JM in his office of the factory, have made their investors talk with the director of JM, who said good things giving good references, based on which Woodford has given to Tom Darden 50-60 millions of dollars and the Chinese started with him a 200 million concern in China.
Tom Darden , IT Vaughn also in this case danced like opera ballet etoiles around their investors, the director of JM, myself chanting ” Stellar, stellar”. No remarks of any sort have been communicated from IH, Cherokee Fund or Woodford, let alone the Chinese, who have been there with their engineers, about the plant, the ERV, the Customer. Until our bill loomed. Witnesses available. In due time and place.
Warm Regards,

I’ve tried to find a reference to Jed Rothwell posting about this alternative and contradictory ERV report, and so far I can only find this quote on the vortex-l from him:

Jed Rothwell has said that he is in contact with personnel at Industrial Heat.

He wrote (thanks artefact) in this message: “1. There is more than one ERV.”

He then wrote:

“I do not know if there is another complete report, but I do know that the I.H. observer disagrees with the Penon report, for good reasons.” (on this thread: https:[email protected]/msg109049.html) so maybe the question itself is faulty.


April 12, 2016

Here is an extended Q&A from the Journal of Nuclear Physics today regarding the issues surrounding the lawsuit the Andrea Rossi/Leonardo Corp. has filed against Industrial Heat et. al. Rossi’s responses to the questions are below each question in bold. His original comment can be accessed here.

April 11, 2016 at 10:30 PM
Dr Andrea Rossi

Can we have the following information about the ERV that made the report:
1- education
– doctorate in nuclear engineering, obtained with 110/110 csumma cum laude in the Alma Mater of Bologna (Italy). Note : the University of Bologna is one of the main Italian universities and in particular the Faculty of nuclear engineering is considered very selective

2- has he been chosen and agreed upon by both Industrial Heat and Leonardo Corporation ?

3- has IH been able to talk with him for any complint for all the 1 year long test ?

4- has the ERV experience in plants that produce steam ?

5- has the ERV experience of nuclear reactions ?

6- who paid the ERV ?
50% IH, 50% Leonardo Corporation

7- has he experience of validations ?

8- how old is he ?
I think around 55

9- whose were the instruments he used to make the measurements ?
the ERV used only his instruments, and retrieved them at the end of the test to control their status

10- who installed the measurement instruments ?
The ERV, helped by personnel of Industrial Heat

11- did IH participate to the choice where to install the instruments ?

12- did IH maintain his personnel in the plant during all the days of the test ?
always, every single day

13- did IH have the right and the possibility to contact the ERV for delucidations along all the test period ?

14- is it true that IH visited multiple times the plant in operation with their investors ?

15- is it true that they collected 50 million dollars from Woodford funds and initiated a 200 million business in China after theyr delegations visited the plant in operation ?

16- is it true that during the visit IH made also their investors talk with the director of the factory of the Customer during their visits, after which the investors gave them the money to be invested ?

Thank you very much if you can answer: your answer will clear a situation after Mr Darden has diffused information based on which IH was totally unaware of the fact that there was a test on course based on the agreement.


So Andrea Rossi continues to be quite public about his position in connection with issues surrounding the suit against IH et al — IH meanwhile are still remaining quiet in public, but surely they will be making preparations in private. I would expect that every statement that Rossi makes on the Journal of Nuclear Physics will be scrutinized as possible evidence in the case, so he would be wise to be very careful what he posts publicly. No new documents have been posted in the court docket for the case here:

  • LarryJ

    It would not matter who was hired as the ERV, you can be sure the discussion would be lively. That is why no report or demo, no matter how long or credible the tester will ever be accepted as proof of the technology. This is a paradigm shifting technology so there will always be highly credible skeptics who will dismiss the findings which in turn will discourage the mainstream press from reporting on it. The only acceptable proof is products in the market.

    I think that for legal reasons IH will probably tell a different story, while at the same time selling working reactors because it will serve their purpose to do so.

  • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

    Not 25 years. For me, the Arabia Saudi Fund is the key. They decided to create it just after the test ended.

    So just wait until they sell all their oil reserves and then the cloud of smoke would dissapear. And we all would suddenly know that they bought Cherokee.

    I dont think it was a coincidence.

  • Barbierir
    • Rossi has been saying publicly that his lawyer doesn’t want him to release the report. Why is this news or damaging in any way? Industrial Heat is also not releasing the report.

      • Barbierir

        From the way it’s now stated it seems the report won’t be published at all, not just delayed. I hope I’m wrong. The report is at a central point in the lawsuit, it’s already strange that it wasn’t included from the start. Certainly it must be at a later point or how can Rossi prove he’s right? Also the reason that he can’t publish the report because it would become invalid evidence is an obvious nonsense. Maybe there are other reasons but certainly not that bogus one.

        • Well it’ll certainly be a part of the lawsuit though we may never see it.

          Maybe they both looked at the ravenous pack of wolves out here on the Internet and decided not to have a trial by flame war.

          I mean look at us… we’ve been picking apart every little nuance we can so far and have a million theories none of which we can prove because the info is so thin and contradictory. Imagine if we actually had a report. It’d be the steam quality wars of 2011 revisited only with nuclear exchanges.

    • Buck

      so now you are a lawyer in the room with Rossi refuting legal advice.

      Why doesn’t IH publish the ERV Report?

      • Michael W Wolf

        Because it is damaging to them.

    • Ged

      Rossi has been saying that on his website, publicly, ever since the legal issues kicked off very soon after the report was released to him. This isn’t some special info given to Mats and then given to Jed.

      It turned from “I’ll get it to you all as soon as everyone agrees”, as was a condition in the license agreement with IH (which we can all read), to “I’ll release it when my lawyer says I can after forensics is done” immediately following the lawsuit being filed.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        I had noticed some months ago that Jed doesn’t seem to follow JONP regularly any more (he didn’t say it, but his questions clearly revealed it). Maybe he thinks he’s too much an insider to have to do that, or is irritated by the noise (although he does tolerate the noise in Vortex), or is tired of Rossi’s personality, or maybe he intentionally wants to avoid falling under Rossi’s “spell”. In any case, JONP is a primary source and if one doesn’t follow it, it’s hard to maintain a coherent picture. Mats and other friends of Jed cannot have enough time to repeat everything in their private emails to him,.

        • SG

          I do follow Mr. Rossi’s blog as I agree it is important to have the finger on the pulse so to speak. But I would invite Jed to simply frequent ECW, because most of the important statements by Mr. Rossi are extracted and copied here, usually into its own post, with quite insightful commentary always to follow by a (usually) friendly and welcoming community.

    • Omega Z

      Did a court Announce that the contract is breached? NO

      Rossi has claimed and may believe IH has breached the contract, but until a court rules on it, it is still legally intact. Thus Rossi can’t release the report as that would breach the contract on his part. NDA’s are still in effect. You can only see what has been made public by the courts.

      • Frank Acland

        However the License Agreement itself was covered by strict confidentiality clauses, and that is now public knowledge after being added to the court docket.

        • Omega Z

          What is disclosed by the court is only what was necessary to file the claim.

          At present, there is no breach of contract. Only a claim. Other then what’s been displayed in court, Until the court makes a ruling whether a breach was committed or not, everything else is still under their original agreements and NDA’s

          Should Rossi or Industrial heat disclose anything else and the court determines there was no breach, then you’ve opened another can of worms, or possibly another claim of breach.

          I note that some say all will now come out in court. That is not a given. Judges have the discretion to sequester certain information at the request of 1 or both parties if they choose.

  • Bob Tivnan

    IH has been so reluctant to make public comments about the lawsuit, and now they talk to Jed, one of the most connected people in the LENR community? This doesn’t fit IH’s profile. Either IH has made an abrupt change of strategy in their public relations, or Jed is being used to spread disinformation in an attempt to discredit Rossi. Am I missing something?

    • SG

      It is a way to get out their message in a plausibly deniable manner. It would be hearsay and so not admissible in court. But they picked someone with good street cred among the LENR community and started feeding him. Brilliant, though underhanded. IH will not go down without a big fight.

      • Bob Tivnan

        We may be seeing the APCO machine at work here.

        • MasterBlaster7


  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Koen Vandewalle April 13, 2016 at 2:51 PM
    Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi,
    Can you give an idea what % of the symphony is produced directly in Electricity?
    A: 0.01-1
    B: 1.0-10
    C: F8, but I’ve seen mostly A and sometimes B for some time, while
    experimenting. It works very intermittent, and it is hard to predict.
    D: We have to make a test in a container for at least one year.
    Are there still ongoing experiments in order to generate thrust? Does
    this seem a fruitful branch for the future, or is it more a side
    Kind Regards, Koen

    Andrea Rossi April 13, 2016 at 3:00 PM
    Koen Vandewalle:
    None of them.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

    So > 10 ?

    • SG

      Either that, or < .01. 😉 F8

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Earlier he hinted at ~50%, although didn’t give exact figure. This answer of his is consistent with that.

  • Curbina

    Looking at the Vortex Thread, it seems to me that Jed Rothwell affirms there was another ERV, and another report that is antagonist to the one of Penon. Rothwell also clearly thinks Penon is completely uncapable of performing the task and says that he would not pay 89 cents based on a report made by Penon, so he is clearly and unambiguosly dismissing the COP 50 figure. This is all hearsay, anyway, even if one has a great respect for Jed Rothwell.

    I am really getting
    tired of the circular arguments of the
    last days and I think that we will have no meaningfull information for
    the time being, other than rumours and hearsay that will be always biased by the one stating it. I don’t think Rossi is lying, I think IH would never
    have invested US$11,5 millions without being convinced of the E cat
    validity, I think they wanted to replicate the 50 COP and could not
    therefore feel scammed by Rossi, but they at least have replicated on
    their own a COP 11 technology (that’s what one can see in their patent
    applications), that should be enough, but off course, a COP 50, once
    being proven, makes anything else obsolete.

    • radvar

      “Jed Rothwell affirms there was another ERV”…no, he says that the IH people wrote an internal report.

      “Rothwell also clearly thinks Penon is completely uncapable of performing the task…” — I don’t see any evidence of that in Jed’s comments.

      Please be cautious in attributing views to respected figures. It might be mistaken for leveraging those people’s reputations to promote one’s own views.

      • Curbina not logged in

        Radvar, in Jed Rothwell’s posts you can see he calls Penon a “certified nitwit” and also that he would not pay 89 cents based on a report by Penon. Read all his posts on this topic and see for yourself.

  • artefact
  • I was thinking about the public relations aspects of it.

    But damn man, that’s some serious Bill Nye hate you got going on there. He piss on one of your treasured beliefs or something?

  • ggummm

    The precariat has plenty of time. With cheap energy, creativity will flourish. Decetralisation promotes networking. I believe we are good to go. Besides, bookchin is way more inspiring than shumpeter.

  • radvar

    This was in the Jed Rothwell link. It’s from April 8. I had not seen it before.

    It starts off:

    “Rossi 1 Megawatt Energy Catalyzer is a failure after 3 years of testing by Industrial Heat”

    It contains theses words:

    “That’s where Rossi says the deal started to sour, with Industrial Heat’s alleged ‘inability or failure to secure an adequate facility’ where the test could be completed, preventing him from completing that final milestone in accordance with the initial agreement.”

    The info about an alleged inadequate facility seems like an important area of dispute. Has it been thrashed to pieces yet?

    • Industrial Heat’s apparent failure to find an adequate facility and start the 1 MW plant test is highly problematic. Let’s not sugar coat it, if you’re IH and you’re sitting on the world’s most important technology development and you have business connections like they do, you simply don’t fail to find something unless you want to fail to find something.

      So if it is true that Rossi had to find a plant customer and location because Industrial Heat failed to do so then it’s easy to conclude that something had turned very sour at that very early point in the relationship. The most likely explanation in my mind is that the $89M payday scared them and they had a more take our time and solidify our IP position approach. This initial divergence of interests between IH and Rossi has led to where we are today.

      But the caveat is that this nugget of info comes from Rossi’s legal complaint and we must remain aware that we only have his side of the story in detail so far.

      • wpj

        Plus the comments of “Guest” who supposedly talked with IH people.

        • Up to each individual how much credibility to lend to hearsay and particular posters.