Rossi on Restricted Access to the E-Cat Customer’s Production Facility

One of the interesting pieces of information to come out from Mats Lewan’s recent article following his meeting with Andrea Rossi was that no one from Industrial Heat had access to the production unit that was using the heat generated by the 1 MW E-Cat plant. The plant and the enclosed production unit were housed in the same warehouse in Doral, Florida where the 1 year test took place.

Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Andrea Rossi was asked why Tom Darden was not allowed to go inside the customer’s production facility. Rossi responded:

Andrea Rossi
May 20, 2016 at 5:07 PM
Sebastian:
In the agreement signed between IH and the Customer it had been agreed by the parties that nobody of IH was allowed to enter in JM area and nobody of JM was allowed to enter the area in which the plant was in operation. This had been agreed upon to defend the IP of both. This agreement has been signed by IH and JM, plus also me.
The text of the agreement has been written by IH and accepted by JM.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

To me, this indicates that JM (the customer) was involved in some very sensitive production process that took advantage of the low-cost heat that the E-Cat plant provided. Probably this was a pilot project that the customer wanted to test out to see if it was a profitable endeavor — and according to Andrea Rossi, they were satisfied enough to order three more plants from him once the test was over. Mats Lewan has reported that visitors to the plant met someone from JM. Mats wrote here:

Ok, so people I have talked to, who visited the plant, got a presentation from someone supposedly being the ‘Director of Engineering’ at JM Products Inc, that supposedly produced metal sponges for catalytic applications. The Director of Engineering told them that they were very satisfied since the yield per amount of electric energy consumed was significantly larger than in the company’s other production sites, maybe 10x or 20x (figure uncertain). Someone got a glimpse though a door and saw what seemed to be production activity.

This production is at the crux of the whole story surrounding the 1MW plant test. If the customer was satisfied with the energy received and were able to produce products at much less cost than they could do otherwise, the E-Cat is a success — regardless of how it works. If you are producer in a competitive industry and want to maintain an advantage over your competitor you might not want to alert them about a new source of energy that allows you to produce items far more cheaply, and still be profitable. You might not want word to get out what you are doing, and so perhaps that would explain the reasons for them wanting to keep their work so secret.

I wish the customer would be more public, however. It would be very interesting to hear them go on record about what they were doing, and what they thought of the E-Cat. Maybe we will hear from them in the court case if it goes to trial, as their role in the whole story is a critical one.

  • Stanny Demesmaker

    I find it’s strange how many people who follow this story for many years still thinks that the e-cat doesn’t work. Sometimes they’re convinced and a few stories later they start doubting again.
    It’s fascinating to see how the FUD effect affects them.
    When we talk about the E-cat, we talk about SSM, at that moment calorimetry is non- issue. It works or it doesn’t. The Idea that IH needs 3 years to check that there is excess heat or not, is a joke. It only takes 1 test to show SSM at work.

    • DFarwell

      Those of us here who distrust Rossi have very valid reasons to do so, the “FUD” comment is deeply worn out at this point. You are correct that it should not take IH 3 years to check if there is excess heat, Rossi could easily prove this in a week or less with good testing methodology among trusted observers, yet he has refused to do so. We continue to wait for verifiable legitimate proof of claim of the Rossi effect.

  • radvar

    “To me, this indicates that JM (the customer) was involved in some very sensitive production process”

    Love ya, Frank, but the more parts that are added, the harder it is to add the whole thing up. The simplest explanation, that accounts for all the facts, is that something very simple was going on in the “production facility”.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Access to the “customer’s” facility — don’t care. Want to see proof, not access to the heat exchanger.

    I guess there is no news here…

  • Thomas Kaminski

    The cooling for the Cray machines had to operate with efficient vapor compression systems. The hot side could not be too high in temperature, hence the need for a cooling tower. If you are allowed to exhaust heat near 100C, the cooling devices can be much smaller. For example, you could simply blow the steam off.

    Seymour Cray once stated that the two most difficult things about supercomputers were packing things close together (speed of light issues) and getting the heat out.

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

      And when cooling a supercomputer, you don’t have an endothermic process consuming/absorbing the thermal power. Even if that could be a good idea…

      • psi2u2

        Mats, has anyone run numbers on this? – I mean, assuming a certain volume of production of making, say metal sponges (for a guess), how much heat is absorbed? And then checking that against the different scenarios for the heat budget of the building?

  • Tem Templeton

    What millennia will a regular person ever get to see this. I’ve been following this for years and it’s nothing but a ghost. Kinda like UFO’s and aliens, know they’re there, just ain’t seen one…..

    • Thomas Kaminski

      You have to be patient. When I was a kid, NASA talked about going to the moon. Nuclear power would be “too cheap to meter”, and fusion was “50 years off”. NASA went to the moon, nuclear fission power is in its death throes, and fusion is still 50 years off. The next few years will prove whether LENR is real. If it is, the technology will spread widely in under two decades (my prediction). The economic advantage to use LENR will be overwhelming. It uses simple, mass manufacturable elements to build scaleable large energy systems. Current power systems are almost completely custom built. Once power comes from a mass manufactured system, like automobiles, they will spread rapidly.

      If LENR is not real, well we can still hope that fusion is commercialized in 50 years.

      • jousterusa

        I think it’s real, and yet I think it will come from China or India before it comes from Andrea Rossi. He is too cool for school and we will only see his stuff after someone else beats him to it..

  • SG

    Thanks. Was just curious. Seems like the MSM press blackout is quite extensive.

  • US_Citizen71

    I’m sure he did think your hypothesis was absurd.

  • theBuckWheat

    We are at the point where some public display of some form of e-Cat device is going to be necessary in order to retain credibility. Happily, we are seeing a sufficient number of LENR outbreaks (both short and sustaining) in experiments to know that the phenomena is real.

  • Josh G

    “As Weaver has stated, IH offered Rossi a deal to stop the trial, which he refused to do.”

    As far as I know, it was Rossi (via Mats) who made this claim. Weaver never rebutted it, but that’s not the same as him stating it. Unless he did so in another forum that I’m not aware of.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      I don’t remember who stated that, maybe jed, but the goal was to stop that useless test and focus on basic scientific evidence of E-cat technology.
      IH was unable to make it work and it is their only real problem, to know how to make e-cat that works.
      What Rossi can do is not their problem.

  • Timar

    Dear Sandy,

    that was neither clever nor convincing (twisting the stated fact that the flow-back temperature wasn’t accounted for in the COP calculation into the entirely unfounded assumption that it wasn’t monitored). Do yourself a favour and reattend that astroturfing course offerred by your employer APCO before you come back here or else they might figuere that you are a failure as a shill.

  • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Agaricus

    The loading doors were supposedly left open the while time, so perhaps a fan driven vent in the roof would have been enough to maintain a tolerable temperature.

    The alternative would be water cooling to drain. In the UK that would require a license above a certain limit, but I don’t know what the situation is in the ‘states.

    Assuming that Weaver is full of it, the heat had to go somewhere – there is no known endothermic process that could absorb more than a fraction of 1 MW in the volume cited by Rossi.

  • Andrew

    Please provide a source for this new found information.

  • sam

    WORLD changing energy tech proven in court!!!!”
    But still waiting to hear if F9 positive.