Rossi: ‘Snakes’ Alerting Authorities Asking for Prohibition of the E-Cat

After Andrea Rossi announced that three more E-Cat orders have been placed by the parent company of the customer who used the 1MW E-Cat plant, there has been a lot of discussion on who the customer might be, and some questions to Rossi on the JONP about the subject.

Rossi said that he is under NDA with the customer, and can’t give any information about who they are, or where they operate — and said they don’t want to attract the attention of the blogosphere. When Bernie Koppenhofer suggested that the publicity from the customer talking about satisfaction with the E-Cat and cost savings might be very beneficial, Rossi responded with this comment:

Andrea Rossi
April 15, 2016 at 11:48 AM
Bernie Koppenhofer:
Our Customer wants to work in peace.
Just for you to know: we have evidence ( undisputable evidence) that all the guys of the family of the snakes have sent libraries of letters to all the possible authorities asking for the prohibition of the E-Cat because it emits toxic radiations. These letters, that have been sent from the usual and well known and very vociferous snakes, ( our attorney got due copies of them ) give evidence of the fact that they want to kill the E-Cat NOT because they think it does not work, but because they DO think that it works: otherwise they could not think to stop it sending authorities to check ionizing radiations OUTSIDE the E-Cats. Your intelligence will allow you to make the logic deductions.
All the other considerations depend on our product’s distribution in the market, let in peace our Customer(s).
Warm Regards,

We are well aware how the E-Cat is a lightning rod for passionate support as well as harsh criticism. We have seen two incidents in the past where nuclear regulation agencies (in Florida and North Carolina) have been alerted by individuals about E-Cat operations and officers have been sent out to investigate, so it’s not hard to imagine this being done in other areas.

I can understand that an E-Cat customer doesn’t want negative attention from government authorities, but if E-Cat doesn’t produce harmful radiation, then what would be the harm of having some inspectors check it out? I the E-Cat is a commercial product, that is going to happen at some point. You can’t keep them hidden forever, and I think it’s best to get this issue out in the open in the early days of the technology to hasten its acceptance.

  • Not much mention of Indian work on cold fusion / LENR has been made here. A Google search on ‘cold fusion lenr india’ produces a good crop of links though.

  • cashmemorz

    Missed the part where I stated that “it is very PROBABLE that he did based on that It is standard practice for any smart/successful entrepreneur” ? This means I have no way to confirm that he does this but, it would surprise me if he did not have a daily journal from which he could compile personal evidence against Industrial Heat. This kind of activity is my understanding of how things are PROBABLY done by Rossi. I am an ordinary blogger throwing out probable scenarios, not trying to come across as if I have actual personal knowledge of what Rossi does or does not do. Why would you think like that?

  • Alex Fenrick

    Oh I agree with you there Orso…I am sure most people would do just about anything possible especially if they were convinced of their technology. Unfortunately for Rossi though…his carelessness in his use of the fake poster does make him look a bit dishonest from some points of view. Again I am not saying this is anything significant….I just think he might want to be a bit more careful with moves like this that many would consider quite dishonest and shady.

  • Alex Fenrick

    If he truly does not wish to do so…then that is a true shame for his reputation, the industry and potentially the world if he does “have the goods”. If Rossi is not able to do so because of contractual or legal reasons…I respect that…but I would reject his position if your statement in yelling bold letters is true. All speculation either way.

  • clovis ray

    No licenses needed , no ionising radiation, the regulatory body has already cleared it,,as not a threat,

  • cashmemorz

    Its standard practice for any smart/successful entrepreneur. It’s called keeping a paper trail. Even when I started my career at the level of a lowly designer, the chief engineer where I started work after high school, strongly suggested that I follow his example and keep a detailed diary of anything that MIGHT BE important. One does not know which details are or will be important so everything gets recorded just in case. There were other prominent, successful people I knew, who did the same and suggested I do this.

  • Roland

    There normally is adequate shielding in the maned crafts themselves, excepting for being caught in flare plumes from solar or cosmic events.

    The International Space Station, for example, has a designated shelter area for the duration of such events; some of which are, in fact, dangerously energetic.

    Life, as we know it, can exist here because the magnetic field around the planet shields us, almost completely, from the high energy radiations present right outside the magnetosphere.

    • cashmemorz

      No one knows how the Lunar Module kept the astronauts safe from radiation?

  • Roland

    No; you crush everybody out of the gates on multiple tactical axis’s, pile up huge money and brand recognition and then use the clout to strip the transgressors down to their underwear.

    Not everybody is inclined to hide like a mouse in a hole when the bass ring is already in hand.

    The product’s not called the E-Mouse…

    P.S. Some monumentally stupid people would hand the PLA the baton without a moment’s reflection on the ramifications for humanity.

  • Roland

    Of course you want to start a war, why quibble.

  • Engineer48
    • roseland67

      I the Ecat works as stated, it may well start a war

  • kdk

    The observers were independent of Rossi, or rather they didn’t know each other, to my knowledge, prior to being approached about testing the E-Cat. The Lugano and Levi tests had some of the same people doing them. Penon did the 1 day test, iirc, and 400 day test. That doesn’t mean that they’re not independent.

    As to why he might not invite MIT people… they were accused of academic fraud by Eugene Mallove earlier on in the P&F days, falsifying data in order to get a null replication which would have been positive otherwise –and had vested interests in hot fusion research — which he believed enough to quit his job at MIT over. Bockris got accused of fraud only because his test showed above background levels of nuclear products. Maybe Rossi is worried about the same from scientists he perceives as having similar biases, or that most mainstream scientists don’t want to subject themselves to what P&F and Bockris were subjected to. The fact that the Levi and Lugano scientists weren’t from a major US university doesn’t disqualify them, but Uppsala and Bologna are highly respected institutions.

  • cashmemorz

    Of course its foolish. Especially those of the religious bent who actually do that kind of praying and waiting. Then when no result is forthcoming they compensate for it not happening as they wanted by saying “god works in mysterious ways” or some such explanation, usually taken from bible text.

  • cashmemorz

    It is even difficult to separate the straight forward ads from the Public Relations pieces shown as if they are actual news items shown between “real” news like car accidents and bombngs in war zones. “And now we have a bit of “news” about a new process from an Italian American who has purportedly made a device that can produce more energy than put in…..” Would that last bit in parentheses be considered news or an advertisement?

  • LuFong

    I don’t believe it was generally known that the Florida healthcare department shut down the 1MW plant test for a while, as ‘Jacky’ states. If true only Rossi or a few close associates of his would know about this. Hmmmmm…..

    “JT Vaughn, in the same very days was writing to the authorities that your plant was not working and used a physicist connected with your competitors to induce the healthcare dept. of Florida to close your plant and interrupt the test. “

  • LarryJ

    This court case will run on for years. You might get the demo in you seek in 2020 but whenever it is it will be moot by then.

  • GordonDocherty

    High Energy Nuclear Reactions (HENR) are, indeed, dangerous. LENR, by its very nature, is a lot safer, as a simple measurement of radiation around and external to an LENR product would demonstrate – and has already been demonstrated (for example, those who worked in the 1MW container are still very much alive).

    In fact, going back over the years, it was the lack of High Energy Nuclear Reaction signatures that caused the mainstream to claim that LENR was not real at all…

    So, it is not LENR that will need to fit in with the regulations for HENR, but rather the regulations changed to fit in with LENR, and to distinguish between HENR (which is dangerous and always will be) and LENR (which is inherently safe).

    The sooner the regulators measure and characterize actual emissions from LENR systems, therefore, the better, for if the “developed world” drags its feet, with the promise of clean water, improved sanitation and cheap electricity, the developing world certainly won’t.

    • cashmemorz

      How does anyone “characterize actual emissions from LENR systems” if no such emissions are found to exist by the regulatory bodies? Do regulatory bodies ever take the time to characterize radiation that “actually ” is non-existent? Why would they bother with working on complaints about such things after the regulatory bodies find nothing there to work on? It’s like crying wolf, where there is no wolf. Those who propose such things are shooting themselves in the foot because if the time ever comes when a LENR system does “actually” show external ionizing radiation, the regulatory bodies may say, “it’s just another sour grapes complainant who doesn’t know when to stop complaining” and not treat the complaint with as much urgency as the situation may require, during which time people may be getting sick from said radiation. Best to keep complaints for incidents where both sides, believers and skeptics, can agree there is something to complain about.

      • GordonDocherty

        By continual monitoring and experience – and, if no emissions are found over an extended period, then it is reasonable to assume there are normally no emissions, unlike HENR. Using HENR measures to try to inhibit or prohibit the roll out of LENR makes no sense. As to “better to play it safe”, trying to live life “with zero risk” is the surest way to catastrophe (and insanity).

  • wpj

    Interesting comment from him

    “…….and because we have found just this week a way to make extremely difficult the reverse engineering”

    IH IP protection?

    • georgehants

      That’s good, it means he can send them out by the thousand all over the World for conformation.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Potting the container with resin, perhaps…

    • Ted-Z

      Only physical pre-treatment of nickel can be resistant to reverse engineering. Anything else (tungsten, platinum, palladium etc.) would be very easy to reverse engineer. My bet, as before, is that Rossi creates nano-crystals of nickel via cryogenic treatment (liquid nitrogen, 48 hrs, plus pounding/crushing of the particles). This is indeed very difficult to reverse engineer.

      • DrD

        I agree except the reverse engineering might be difficult but not impossible with the appropriate equipment. I suspect he has something subtle in mind, to hide it but at the end of the day some one will track it down. What worries me (for his sake and ours) is that in terms of his mass production he’s only talking in terms of many days per E-Cat not many E-Cats per day and as for E-Catx ???

        • Yes – that’s why IMHO Rossi’s core technology (assuming it works as reported) can’t escape into the public domain quickly enough. Thousands of developers and manufacturers urgently need to be involved, not just two.

          With an ever increasing number of individuals possessing some or most of the necessary information, MFMP and others sniffing limited success in producing LENR, and a very public court case pending, that is seeming more likely by the day.

    • Roland

      Field effects.

  • psi2u2

    I have to admit that this thought entered my mind also when I read it.

    • Alex Fenrick

      I believe no matter what the real story is in all of this….we just got the story that Rossi wishes to be perpetuated directly from the “Jacky” comment. The more I read it…the more I am firmly convinced it is Rossi in disguise. Im not saying this is a smoking gun of any kind by any stretch of the imagination…just really interesting to see what perspective Rossi wishes to be spoken about or at very least casually dropped in. Interesting…

  • Felix Meyer

    Some snakes want to forbit the e-cat.
    This is a complete nonsense, as the tests have showed that no dangerous radiation existes outside the e-cat.

  • Zephir

    Whole the situation with cold fusion research is schizophrenic. The mainstream physicts are well aware of their nearly one century standing dismissal and ignorance of cold fusion research, so that they fear lost of moral credit and social prestige by now. They also feel, that the whole areas of their well paid research gets threatened by cold fusion (I mean all these alternative methods of energy production, conversion, transport and storage: from solar cells over batteries to nuclear fusion research). All these people have good socioeconomical reason to boycott cold fusion research as a single man: from theorists to applied research workers. And they indeed boycott it.

    This situation introduces high pressure to premature practical applications of cold fusion, because mainstream science pathoskeptics aren’t willing to accept the cold fusion until some commercial solution will be implemented and sold at public basis. This forces the cold fusion researchers to push these commercial applications, despite the lack of reliable risk analysis. From various sources we know, that the cold fusion is not inherently safe, as it could lead to runaways, which are the source of neutron bursts so it could serve as a dirty bomb for various terrorist groups and dictator regimes.

    We even cannot exclude the option, however remote, that the runaway of large amount of cold fusion system could initiate the thermonuclear fusion, which would otherwise require expensive and difficult to obtain fission bomb to run. Therefore the principle of precautionary principle advices us to wait with commercial implementation of cold fusion systems, until we can be sure, how these runaways can be managed.

    • GordonDocherty

      A bomb would require fast neutrons, and lots of them, something noticably lacking in LENR (hence, the importance of the term “Low Energy”).

      As to runaway reactions, these are not of the “chain reaction running through fissile material” type. Instead, where they have happened, they are thermal runaways, as seen in the likes of thermite, only on a much smaller scale. There is therefore a risk based on overheating and fire, but that is about all. Also, LENR reactions are actually quite difficult to start and keep going, one of the reasons why “claimed replications” have often been anything but…

      Further, as LENR reactors use only tiny amounts of (more or less) “solid” fuels, there is little explosion risk, unlike when handling something like Methane (“natural gas”) through to Gasoline.

      In fact, LENR would (eventually) eliminate the need to ship fissile material to and from nuclear reactors, the storage and piping of natural gas into homes and the storage, delivery and use of gasoline (petrol) in cars. With some thought, it could even be used to eliminate Kerosine in aircraft at the same time as much extending their range, so making air travel much safer (no need to fly around inside a Kerosine bomb any more): 9/11 would likely have been very different if LENR aircraft had instead struck the towers.

      LENR would also enable a significant rise in the standard of living across the globe without putting pressure on natural resources, so reducing scarcity and easing political tensions, factors that are often found at the root of conflicts (those who have more have more to lose).

      So, introduction of LENR would most likely see a net decrease in risk.

      Finally, restricting the use of LENR reactors is very different from restricting the knowledge of how to build them. That cat is already outside the bag.

  • GordonDocherty

    Several people (not just Rossi) sat in very close proximity (the same crate) as running LENR reactors for a year and are still very much alive. “Toxic radiations” is therefore pushing it…

    Mind you, if we are looking to prevent exposure to potentially toxic radiation, then the following need (also) to be banned :

    1. microwave ovens – stuffed full of dangerous radiation…
    2. mobile communications including cell (mobile) phones – sources of dangerous radiation, in the case of cell phones sitting right next to the ear/brain (who says ever phone is always “safe”?)…

    3. luminous watches – they’re luminous for a reason…

    4. Granite – buildings containing a high level of Granite (like Grand Central Station or most of the buildings in the city of Aberdeen in Scotland) emit more radiation than is allowable at a nuclear power plant…

    5. the large nuclear furnace burning out of control in the sky – this is known to saturate the environment across the planet with high levels of radiation, although rather more so by day than by night…

    Yet, no such bans have been imposed. Further, as Rossi points out, these unfounded claims appear to be eminating from the same sources that also claim the e-Cat does not work, and never will, as LENR is an impossibility.

    • We’re safe from the nuclear furnace in the sky here in the UK – we only see it once a month at most.

      • georgehants

        Morning Peter, wait until Mr. Cameron has all his new semi-safe nuclear bombs scattered around the country side.
        Of course my idea of using all the unemployed to manufacture and fit solar panels on every roof is deemed crazy in this society.
        I doubt if any Research on this has been performed,
        The cost would be very low, as the unemployed are already being paid something.

        • GordonDocherty

          it would also soak up all that harmful radiation… but, seriously for a second, your idea is an excellent one … another reason why Hinkley C is just plain a bad idea … ah, well

        • Omega Z


          As I have heard and apparently Peter can attest to, those solar panels would only be of use 1 day a month. Not very economical I must say.

          • georgehants

            Omega, sometimes I have great difficulty understanding some of the reply’s I get.
            The below report seems then to indicate that there are an amazing number of people using them one day a month economically.
            Renewable energy
            Solar power set to provide record 15% of UK’s power

            • Omega Z

              Sorry George, My post was tongue in cheek
              I’m certain only 1 day of sunshine a month is a little exaggerated.

              About Wind/Solar.
              For every 2MW of wind/solar, there needs to be 50% or 1MW of conventional backup power. As the UK government is intent on eliminating all fossil energy plants, that leaves only Nuclear power. So build away on those panels. Nuclear plants are still in the mix.

              • Rene

                I could believe that for many parts of the UK, the USA NE. In sunny northern CA, I know my backup power needs are 3% (12% daily for 3 months), soon to be 0.2% It’s all about short term energy storage.
                Even in non-solar applications load leveling VRB batteries work to increase power generation efficiency.

              • georgehants

                Omega, no I am sorry, my wit detector went a bit dumb.
                I seem to be showing signs of that old age thing.

              • 1 day a month was an exaggeration. We’ve had 2 this month already, and it’s only the 19th.

      • GordonDocherty


    • Obvious

      6.being a pilot for a commercial airline.

      • cashmemorz

        Astronauts going thru Van Allen Belts twice, once going out of Earth orbit towards the Moon then second time on return leg of trip. An hour per each leg of trip. About 2 hours of hard radiation. And they didn’t have special heavy materials shielding to protect them. But they didn’t get sick, why?

    • Roland

      Ta Da … Beat the ‘radiation’ drum really, really loudly without ever, ever discussing actual measured exposures to the continuous background radiation as a critical reference point.

      Understanding the meaning of background radiation is foundational to understanding actual risks; unfortunately scaring people with ‘radiation’ (while, of course, continuing to expose them to actual risks as consumers) has been much more successful than getting technological illiterates to grasp all the necessary concepts to properly assess their risks from ‘radiation’.

      However; getting stupid people to relate primarily to their fears is well grounded in peer reviewed science, and as a consequence anybody with an IQ over a hundred can read up on the basics and get right to ‘work’.

      To usefully simplify; for future reference and/or the edification of your loved ones:

      Convert all radiation measurements into human x-ray exposures, using Google, and then ‘Google’ for the side effects of exposure to x number of medical x-rays over a given interval (the interval part matters a lot).

      This criteria holds up, reasonably, well for assessing the risks of all forms of human exposure to non ionizing radiation, background and ‘otherwise’ (‘us’).

      Of course everyone, that’s not stupid, will be doing their level best to measure every form of non ionizing radiation and every evidence of an/many Electro Magnetic signature/s (particularly so when related to any significant changes in the LENR reaction/reactor) with every piece of relevant hardware they can think of, lay their hands on, or invent.

      Rossi is, of course, too stupid to have done any of these things and thus has no evidentiary trail to fall back on.

      I’ll place my wager now before the rush builds and the odds slide:

      Non Ionizing radiation is a signal from pre E-Cat LENR designs (though valid signal, nonetheless, of low energy nuclear activity) and will only be of historical interest as the ‘signal’ that put the wind in the sails of the MFMP experimentalists; and that that in turn will be notable primarily for the very eclectic manner in which an early ‘open science’ initiative succeeded in doing ‘real’ science in full view of the, interested, public.

      Actually, I’d prefer my live science on a time delay so no morons can effortlessly learn new ways to blow things up and such; ya know, try ta keep it outta’ the hands of the kids for a while…

  • LarryJ

    Nobody will ever believe any demo no matter how irrefutable you might think it is. There will always be a large credible group who will refute it. A short controlled test with a small panel or a long controlled panel or any iteration thereof would be a complete waste of effort. The only proof for a paradigm shift is products in the market.

    The court case will be an interesting sideshow that may be resolved this decade but probably not. It will have no effect in the short term and in the long term will probably determine who owes who a licensing fee. By that point in time it will likely be a minor fight between two mega corps like when Apple sued Samsung for infringing its patents.

    • bachcole

      I just like Apple suing Samsung, most people won’t even know that it is happening and even more people won’t give a rat’s rear end. I barely knew that Apple sued Samsung, and it impacts my emotions exactly zero.

  • psi2u2

    The question of when Rossi/IH each knew things were going wrong has been discussed fairly extensively and it is pretty clear that both Rossi and IH had known for some months that a breach was coming. But of course it could not come until 5 days after the production of the report and IH failure to pay.

    • Alex Fenrick

      Months would indeed be enough to find funding. I must have missed that discussion…thank you for clarifying it.

    • bachcole

      I agree 100%. But how could Rossi know that I.H. wasn’t going to pay? The only way would be that I.H. was telling Rossi, either overtly or covertly, that the hugging and the kissing was over. At some point months ago the romance was over and Rossi knew it. I wonder how that went.

      • cashmemorz

        Any smart business man, and Rossi is that as well as an engineer, manipulator amongst many talents, always records all details daily just in case. Rossi did not necessarily gather details for court evidence, just details of everyday happenings between all who Rossi encountered daily, just in case. When the time came that it was becoming obvious that IH was not going to Pay Rossi, at that time pertinent details were pulled out of the daily notes and copied to form the 18 volumes that could apply to what IH might have been acting on towards not paying Rossi.

  • LarryJ

    The problem with including the court case as a factor in proving the ecat is the slow pace at which the courts move. I would be very surprised if we even see the jury selected this year. By the time anything comes out of the court case it will probably be moot. As a result I think the court case will be an irrelevant sideshow.

  • Alex Fenrick

    I am not saying they did not build the reactor…I am saying applying for a patent is apples and oranges from knowing if the technology works. There is no mechanism in the patent process to prove substantiation of an claims….it is not the focus of the system. The quote of 11 COP is nothing more than here say at this point and has nothing at all to do with a patent.

  • Alex Fenrick

    Michael that is no different than Rossi’s fraud conviction AND jail time pointing at Rossi being a fraudster. You can’t have it both ways. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.