Rossi: “Centralized Heating” to be First Market Sector for E-Cat

As we deal with the Rossi vs. IH lawsuit and all the debates surrounding it, I would like to turn attention for a moment towards the future, and specifically where we might first find the E-Cat used in a practical application. Andrea Rossi was asked about this on the Journal of Nuclear Physics recently: “Which will be the first market sector that you will hit mostly at the beginning, which, if I have understood, is now ?”

Andrea Rossi responded: “Centralized heating”

I don’t think Rossi means here “central heating” which is found in many homes, since he says that domestic certification has not been granted yet. I think he refers here to “district heating” (sometimes referred to as “teleheating”), in which multiple buildings are heated from steam or hot water that is distributed via pipes from a central heat source. Typically district heating systems use gas, coal or biomass as the fuel source, but if the E-Cat can produce steam and/or hot water at the needed temperatures at a fraction of the fuel costs, it would be an obvious application of Rossi’s technology.

If I were to make a guess, I would think that Sweden would be where the first E-Cat district heating systems will be installed. Rossi has said that he wants to start manufacturing in Sweden, and he has been working closely with Hydro Fusion over the last few years who operate out of Sweden. Regarding the prevalence of district heating in Sweden here is some data from Wikipedia:

Sweden has a long tradition for using teleheating in urban areas. In 2015, about 60% of Sweden’s houses (private and commercial) were heated by district heating, according to the Swedish association of district heating.[53] The city of Växjö reduced its fossil fuel consumption by 30% between 1993 and 2006, and aimed for a 50% reduction by 2010. This was to be achieved largely by way of biomass fired teleheating.[54] Another example is the plant of Enköping, combining the use of short rotation plantations both for fuel as well as for phytoremediation.[55]

47% of the heat generated in Swedish teleheating systems are produced with renewable bioenergy sources, as well as 16% in waste-to-energy plants, 7% is provided by heat pumps and 6% by industrial waste heat recovery. The remaining are mostly fossil fuels oil, natural gas, peat, and coal.[56]

Because of the law forbidding landfills,[57] waste is commonly used as a fuel.

United Kingdom[edit]

So I think district heating could certainly be an excellent early application for E-Cat heat. Rossi has said that the low temperature E-Cat plants are ready to be deployed (although not yet in mass production), and if they can operate at a COP of 50, the fuel savings should be tremendous. For many communities any way to reduce the amount of burning fossil of fuels or biomass will be seen as a great advantage, and one would assume that if the industrial certification is apparently already obtained for the E-Cat, district heating would fit an industrial use since existing plant operators will already have the staff on hand to operate the E-Cats.

I must stress this is just an educated guess on my part, but it makes sense to me based on what I have learned so far.

  • Fedir Mykhaylov

    For district heating temperature is desirable to have direct network water within 130-150 degrees Celsius. For industrial district heating Rossi should bring coolant parameters for low temperature version at least

  • HS61AF91

    I did refer to the low energy type of ‘nuclear/nanoscale’ reactions, and experimenting with them. Heaven forbid another Manhattan Project!

  • HS61AF91

    pardon, I put my comment inadvertently here.

  • HS61AF91

    did anyone ever say something is perfect on the first try? Nope, trial and error point to success, so LENR experiments blowing up are learning points pointing to products safety

  • Gerard McEk

    I guess that AR wants to install a new plant at a customer ASAP that will provide operational details that AR can publish (not hindered by the trial). Once he has done that he will soon start to make Ecat commercials and he would welcome us to spread the details to potential customers. I hope we will see these details soon.

    • Gerard McEk

      Just to add: I believe that having a theory that backs-up the operation of the Ecat would greatly help the introduction of these LENR based commercial products.

      • Omega Z

        Not meant to be offensive- Just making a point.

        Had people not understood the Theory of (Internal Combustion Engines), We would probably all still be traveling in a horse drawn carriage, You Got Mail by pony express, etc, etc..

        Most people care only that it works and “Saves” them tons of money.

        Only Scientist and Business people have any interest in Theory. Better understanding means improvements and more money for both.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          I’d probably leave out the”business people”. They are mostly interested in whether it makes money…

          • Omega Z

            I include business people as they know you need an understanding of what’s happening to bring the 2nd, 3rd etc iteration. Scientists also chase the money trail.

            • Thomas Kaminski

              Sorry — I should have marked my comment as snarky.

              Good management does look ahead for future product evolution. Understanding the theory is useful. As one of my old professors said, “Nothing is more practical than a good theory”.

  • DrD

    1) NO
    2) The first one to become a commercial product with certification.

  • GrinigGammalGubbe

    The one that can produce the cheapsest energy even in condition like in northern Sweden where the sun won’t shine during winter.

    At the depth of winter in some northern parts of the country above the Arctic Circle, you might get as little as three hours of sunlight per day.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Earlier, we were talking about the possibility of there being neutrons.

    Just a quick thought about neutrons (if there are any).

    The following endothermic reaction could form neutrons.

    Li(7) + He(4) > B(10) + n -2.79 MeV

    8.6 MeV alphas, He(4) might come from the below reaction.

    Li(7) + p > 2 He(4) 17.3 MeV

  • cashmemorz

    We, and that includes Chapman and myself, can joke all we want here on the E-Cat world forum. I get that and will tolerate it. I can put up with it because I and no one else on this site will lose any money or sleep over some fun in our sometimes very serious discourses. It’s just that when one is trying to figure out how to get this E-Cat thing to market then considerations have to be made that take into consideration how the real world works in light of a new tech like the E-Cat. When Chapman says “do you get it that it is not a nuclear reactor” those who read that remark here can take it in the light that is is intended. But when we have to consider the real world and what it expects of the E-Cat to get it to market, then, lets say talking to an insurance actuary, you don’t get any mileage with such levity. At that point where one actually talks to an actuary, no levity intended here, then it’s “just the facts ma’am, and nothing but the facts”. Whether I or Rossi get it that it isn’t a nuclear reactor doen’t cut it any more. The insurance actuary, who happens to be a very serious fellow, has to convinced of that with detailed facts, no joking allowed. Currently the fact is there are no facts to prove that the E-Cat is not a nuclear reactor. To many people it could be. The theory must be had to satisfy insurance and certification. Without certification it can’t go further into the market.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Bruce,

    I guess you missed watching this Navy SPAWAR video?

    https://youtu.be/QxBJjWzlKl0

    They got 100% reproducible results.

  • Roland

    Perhaps they should have asked the original researchers, who according to the interviews they gave for the documentary achieved 100% replicability, to recapitulate their earlier success.

    There are no shortage of accounts of failed P &F replications, the common theme among them is that they devised their own protocols rather than follow the existing successful recipes. Poor experimentalists make for poor experiments.

    P & F received zero inquiries from failed experimentalists on how to modify their protocols and actually reproduce the results obtained by P & F.

    Have you actually watched the documentary?

  • Eyedoc

    And Chapman (I think it was him ?;) said there is no sense of humor on this board !

  • Frank Acland

    If the E-Cat/Rossi effect is valid and real (I believe it is) why set an arbitrary deadline for when to give up on it. I do have hopes that it will make it into the commercial sector, but I don’t know when that will be. To me, it’s not only the E-Cat product that is promising, but the whole LENR field. Why give up on it, just because something hasn’t happened by a certain date? I think it’s a scientific arena that shouldn’t be forgotten about.

    • HS61AF91

      Right, if enough people believe that it works, and project that conclusion, it will happen, physics or not. Try to remember that the will for something to happen causes it to happen. Think about your own ultimate desires, and how they materialized. So too with free energy, not suppressed, whether e-Cat or an iteration, it will prevail.

  • kdk

    Whatever you want to believe, but live in a cave yourself instead of trying to make all of live in it with you.

  • Charles

    As a former electronics engineering section head, I can tell you that engineers will “fix” some final problem until the end of time. They have to be told: wrap it up!.

    Rossi, the Engineer in charge, will work on this thing until the end of time or the expiration of financing, whichever comes first.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Charles,

      Actually I think Rossi is good at moving forward.

      There are at least 10 evolving products between the 2007 ECat in a Red bucket to the production dual ECat reactors used in the 1 year trial.

      A good effort over 8 years.

  • kdk

    I said “certainly not in the manner the word is intended as in fission.”

    You are equating it with fission. All empirical data show it is not fission, has no radioactive waste, and have never caused deadly or even dangerous levels of radiation with the lighter elements that have been used.

    If you are suggesting that Rossi start using Uranium, Thorium, or some heavier element along those lines, I would say that it would be time to start worrying more and consider along the lines you would a normal fission reactor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVB0F7kORII

    They have done extensive monitoring throughout cold fusion experiments for radiation. Significantly, all the researchers are alive and well besides the one who died from a high-pressure explosion. Monitoring for radiation is something that is well understood in today’s day and age and has already been done in conjunction with cold fusion experiments.

    • cashmemorz

      This point about what is causing the energy that is being output is at the crux of if it can or will be accepted as non-nuclear in certification whether by government or private, insurance affiliated institutions. If insurance companies want to cover their risk of insuring the LENR process, they will do due diligence perforce. When they get to the point of their due diligence where they ask where does the excess heat come from, someone will sooner or later tell them that the only explanation is nuclear. Their next question will be “where are the neutrons”, or at least “are neutrons involved”. Until someone, probably a peer review group, can convince the insurance actuaries the role and actual activity that neutrons have in the “Reaction” part of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, then certification with the blessing of insurers will not go forward. Due diligence must and will cover this point. This is where the theory of how LENR, or at least the E-Cat version, works, is required to make the thing commercially viable.

  • Billy Jackson

    Another explanation of his reluctance to give details was that the answer was so simple that it could be readily copied – Tony

    when someone of his prestige says something like that you cant help but wonder what he’s seen and knows.

  • hunfgerh

    The certification (Marketing autorization) an “e-cat” for the private sector
    in the EU requires:

    – Detection of radiation protection

    – Justification of the isotope or elements (ash)

    – Disposal justification of the isotope or elements (ash)

    I think this is still a lot of basic research to practice.

    From reasons of labor / environmental protection this also requires for industrial or military
    applications.

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

      Yes, the assumption that Rossi can just install a new type of district heating plant somewhere in Europe with nothing other than basic machinery safety certification (‘Machinery Directive’ compliance) is misinformed, to say the least. It would be impossible to install a new design of biomass boiler without a raft of certifications, let alone one that depends on a novel form of nuclear energy for its operation.

      To illustrate this, the link below is to a UK document that gives some idea of the bureaucracy involved in installing a simple ‘biomass’ district heating plant – basically a sawdust burner. It involves several established Standards for this kind of technology, for which there are currently no equivalents for a nuclear power source, and which would have to be developed at the manufacturer’s expense.

      https://docs.google.com/viewer?docex=1&url=http://www.kiwa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/About_Us/GaC/Biomass_HandS.pdf

      Possibly an experimental plant might be permitted to operate for a limited period and in the care of Leonardo technicians/engineers without the full panoply of regulations, but for any commercial deployment, there is a very long way to go yet.

      • Gerard McEk

        Indeed, that is what I would think, although the legislation differs per country. However, Andrea Rossi thinks that legislation will not cause any problem in the industrial sector.

  • GiveADogABone

    If you want a reliable, stable load, for an E-cat then evaporating water at 100C 0bar gauge is certainly one way to go. With a large water supply tank and dump valves for the evaporated water, even a full load rejection is entirely manageable. It is far more preferable to dump evaporated steam under fault conditions than allow the E-cat safety valves to lift. Sound steam engineering.

    That principle was used in the 1MW test, so I see this application as just an extension of the 1MW test.

  • Roland

    Do, in your experience, people with professional accreditations, such as lawyers and engineers, sign documents that they know are untrue, that are binding under oath, and then present them to a American judge?

    Perhaps you have the misfortune of inhabiting a nation where this is such common practice that it’s become the expected behaviour; I can assure you that in America the professional organizations that, respectively, allow one to practice law, or use the stamp of an engineer, will withdraw those privileges if they find that professional oaths have been broken.

    In case the significance of this continues to escape you, a lawyer who makes a false deposition is subject to disbarment and an engineer that puts his stamp on a document that he knows contains false information will lose his accreditation.

    In certain circumstances criminal charges can also result.

    If you’re of the opinion that the professionals involved are too obtuse to recognize the level of scrutiny every aspect of this case would eventually fall under, and that their livelihoods were on the line the moment they signed off on every document that was to be presented to the presiding judge, I’d come to the conclusion that you’re to obtuse to bother trying to reason with.

    There is a rigorously documented year long test at the end of which a certified engineer signed and stamped a document that says, among other things, that a 1megawatt E-cat power steam plant delivered an average COP >50 over that complete time span. Period.

    You don’t have to wait or hope, you just have to get up to speed; granting that you have the necessary intellect and actually want to, of course…

    If you are genuinely curious you’ll find that there are lots of helpful folks here; just ask good questions and be prepared to do some background reading. There are also some decent videos kicking around like the SPAWAR documentary that demonstrates that the Navy had 100% ‘cold fusion’ replication as early as 1992.

  • Anon2012_2014

    “E-Cat centralized heating pronouncement”

    Great — still none of these E-Cats seen in the wild and we are left to speculate whether it works or not.

    This is getting boring — all vaporware for 6 years straight.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Anon,

      Have attached photo of ECat reactor in Red Bucket in 2007 and ECat reactor in 2015.

      Do you see any difference?

      As an engineer that has done considerable R&D or product development, the progress in 8 years is amazing, especially considering there were at least 10 different evolving products.

      • Josh G

        Do not see any pics attached. You should submit a post with pics of all the different iterations of the ecat over the years with your thoughts about them

        • Engineer48

          Hi Josh,

          The images are there.

        • Skip

          Reload the page…

      • Anon2012_2014

        Engineer,

        First, that is the first that I have seen of the red bucket experiment. Thank you. Is that Rossi’s 2007 version of the LENR experiment?

        I agree that on the face of it the engineering and installation of the 1 MW plant in the shipping container looks great. This builds on Rossi’s earlier work with biofuel based gensets in Massachusetts. But I am a scientist and I need to confirm (for me) that Rossi indeed has a working LENR+ prototype. I would get confirmation by being able to reject the null hypothesis of no excess energy for the device. For this rejection, we need a simple but clean experiment with sufficient access and accepted feedback by other scientists to overcome all issues with the experiment’s design. It could be at Rossi’s lab or a third party’s lab, but it has to continue after the feedback has been received from the scientific community on weaknesses with the experimental design. A simple example of this would be the wet/dry steam uncertainty in the Levi test in Bologna. I would think that that experiment could be repeated under conditions that could prove only dry steam. Alternatively, a pure thermal mass experiment using the specific heat of water that is not boiled could conducted. I felt there were significant weaknesses that were not addressed with the thermal imagine experiments, and of course we have not seen the ERVs results.

        Like you, _I_ _am_ _hopeful_ that Hot-Cat, 1 MW plant, and now ECAT-X are producing significant excess energy with commercialization (i.e. sales) only development (not research away). But, like you, I have been reading about this for several years, but I have not yet seen Rossi convincingly overcome the null hypothesis. So we both wait. It is a bit frustrating.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Anon,

          Other reactors.

          Each more complex in build & control system. This is methodical, planned, progressive product R&D, driven by test data & market goal.

          By studing each build and the next, you can see where and why the improvements were made.

          NO other LENR researcher / product developer has done this.

          When Rossi says he has built 1,000s of reactors & burnt out / destroyed / melted down 100s I fully believe him. You can see it in the development.

          No one does this if they have nothing.

          Yes sometime Rossi over promises and underestimates the time needed but he always delivers and his product steadily progresses and improves.

          • Anon2012_2014

            @Engineer: “I fully believe him. You can see it in the development.
            No one does this if they have nothing.”

            I believe that Rossi honestly believes in his work. The problem is that no scientific peer review has occurred with Rossi responding and then correcting his experiments for the criticisms, to validated thermodynamically the energy production of his LENR+ systems. Rossi has repeatedly refused to do this, going with In Mercato Veritas. That will never convince me until I can buy one and test it myself for a reasonable price. No, $10 mm is not a reasonable price for a test. And so I wait.

            • Engineer48

              Hi Anon,

              Rossi is not a scientists & has NO interest in sharing his inner most secrets. He has no need for peer review and says his customer’s are his peer reviewers.

              And Yes I believe Rossi has sold 1MWt ECat reactors as when I approached him to purchase 10 x 1MWt ECat reactors for a potential client, what I found was a solid & business like process that required & understood each sides need to do due diligence. Once a pre sale MOU was in place, the clients experienced steam engineers would be invited to conduct further due diligence on a working 1MWt ECat reactor.

              This is real. So says my very experienced engineer’s gut.

              • Anon2012_2014

                @Engineer,

                “This is real. So says my very experienced engineer’s gut.”

                It makes me feel a bit more confident in Rossi. It doesn’t explain IH’s behavior.

                Bottom line — I hope you are right and IH just made a business mistake. It happens. We will see.

                In the interim, we the public just have to wait… Queue the music from “Final Jeopardy” …

                • Engineer48

                  Hi Anon,

                  This is the next step for the low temp 1MWt ECat.

                  Need I say Industrial clients that need 100C Heat in 1MWt steps.

                • Anon2012_2014

                  100C heat for commercial buildings would be hugely viable as well, particularly if the COP exceeds 10 and some of the base heat can be supplied with natural gas.

                • Engineer48

                  Hi Anon,

                  In regard to your question about why prople behave, Peter Gluck’s (retired chemical engineer and long Time LENR observed/commenter) blog of today might be of interest to you. BTW Peter is being attacked by Jed for his use of logic & experience in questioning what Jed claims to be true but can’t prove to be true.

                  http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/jul-07-2016-mini-interview-with-andrea.html

        • roseland67

          Anon,
          Ain’t gonna happen, gotta figure out another way to verify.

  • James Andrew Rovnak

    The E-Cat as a heater commercially shortly? District heating No less? Check comments by followers!

  • Frank Acland

    I find time limits before “losing faith” to make no sense. It either works or it doesn’t. I’ve been following this story for over five years now — we don’t have a commercial model in production yet — and am still convinced the E-Cat is real based on all I have learned.

    • Bruce__H

      Thanks. This is the sort of thing I was wondering about. It strikes me that the whole Rossi scenario has just entered another cycle that is remarkably like previous cycles and I wondered whether people are content to travel on that particular roller coaster yet again..

      On the other hand I think LENR research as a whole is on the brink of either a big step up or a big step down. I believe the MFMP will play a big role in pushing LENR in either one direction or the other. The MFMP feels like legitimate science to me. The adventures of many of the other players doesn’t.

    • HS61AF91

      sovsem otlichno! or Right on! that is.

  • Mats002

    Some facts about Swedish district heating (fjärrvärme in Swedish):

    http://www.svenskfjarrvarme.se/In-English/District-Heating-in-Sweden/

    Have been around for 65+ years in Sweden.

  • Gunnar Lindberg

    No Frank, not in Sweden. There is no way to obtain permission for a secret nuclear plant, with or without certification, to operate in Sweden. The same applies to secret factories manufacturing nuclear plants. Rossi has to find another location, probably outside the European Union. Maybe in Great Britain if he can wait a few years.

    • Lars

      Is the Industrial certification valid in Sweden?

      • Gunnar Lindberg

        That certification is a joke if it is a nuclear plant.

        • kdk

          No, it isn’t a nuclear plant, certainly not in the manner the word is intended as in fission. Fission always emits deadly radiation in the setting of an energy plant. Cold fusion has never killed anyone with radiation, or produced radioactive by products (at least when they’re not starting out with heavy elements like uranium), which is one of the reasons fission plants are highly regulated, the other being the products in breeder reactors which can be used to make nuclear weapons. Many people have spent many hours doing cold fusion research with successful reactions, and none have come up dead or reported dangerous levels of radiation.

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

        Any certification Rossi obtained in the past will not apply to a current production design for a heating plant, even if he has one. The only ‘certification’ of which there is a public record is the 2012 one conducted by SGS on a 1MW prototype in Italy. However this certification was only against an EU ‘directive’ relating to safety of machinery in general (EU Directive 2006/42/EC Annex 1 – “Essential health and safety requirements relating to the the design and construction of machinery”).

        This document applies only to the prototype submitted to SGS and cannot be carried over to subsequent designs. Each individual plant produced must be able to show conformance not only with the Machinery Directive, but also with a number of other Directives (Pressure Vessel Directive, Low voltage Directive, EMC directive etc.) plus a host of other ‘health and safety’ legislation covering chemicals consumed, waste handling etc. In the case of CF heating plants there is also need to be a new set of ‘Standards’ in place covering this specific class of machine – which does not presently exist.

        It’s clear from the lack of discussion that many people don’t want to recognise that Rossi’s statement that he has ‘industrial certification’ for his current designs is simply not possible, but this will not affect the difficulties that he faces if and when he launches a commercial district heating plant (or any other product driven by his large reactors).

        • HS61AF91

          all this to-do about certification, install working LENR in non-certification lands, and let the facts prove themselves. shiesh!

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

            Actually, I agree. India would probably be the best choice, for several reasons. As others have previously suggested, once the technology was seen to be establishing itself in another part of the world, then safety certification would suddenly become much easier in the ‘West’.

            But without such a move on Rossi’s part, only a few experimental installations are likely to be permitted, and manufacture won’t be possible for quite some time.

    • radvar

      Why do you think if would be treated as a “nuclear plant”? Because of the “N” in LENR?

      I would be more interested in Sweden’s energy budget and carbon emissions policies than a word in a government document.

      • Gerald

        https://sweden.se/society/energy-use-in-sweden/

        I think Sweden will be open to try new things in energy and budget will not be the problem. Sweden for me looks like the best country to start selling heat to in Europe.

      • Gunnar Lindberg

        The inventor has never fully transferred the knowledge of how energy development occurs. If the alleged energ density is true, at our present knoledge, the source of energy has to be the strong nuclear force, the same force that blow up Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Further, events including neutron radiation and runaway reactors has ben reported, not from a megawatt plant but bad enouth anyway. This is nothing that you overrun by a homemade certificae.
        The use of nuclear plants, fission and fusion makes no difference, are strictly regulated by law in Sweden as in most parts of the world. If you beleve that allows for a secretive inventor to set ut and use his LENR plant in Sweden you are very far off reality.

    • Rene

      Like the N in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)? That’s why it was changed to MRI and there is a high likelihood or MRI machines throughout Sweden and the EU. This is not the N of radiation and radioactive waste.

    • GiveADogABone

      http://analysis.nuclearenergyinsider.com/sweden-allow-new-nuclear-plants-us-utility-fixes-ap1000-build-cost
      Sweden to allow new nuclear plants; US utility fixes AP1000 build cost
      Jun 14, 2016

      http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b44e3214-2f13-11e6-bf8d-26294ad519fc.html#axzz4DheJV0QB
      Boost to nuclear energy as Sweden agrees to build more reactors
      June 10, 2016 4:23 pm

      Seems you information is out-of-date. Of course, these are not secret.

    • kdk

      I think the idea is more along the lines of fission which in energy settings always emits deadly radiation, not something that has never been recorded as emitting dangerous levels of radiation and creates no radioactive waste, like cold fusion.

  • JDM

    Gotta wonder what they would do with the accumulating waste stream that would no longer be burned (or landfilled of course)?

    • Mats002

      We recycle paper, plastic, metal and cardboards.

      Food and other wet waste is turned into biogas.

      We actually import waste from other countries (Italy is one I think) to have something to burn. Not joking.

    • HS61AF91

      Attack with bacteria! Tax garbage! Fine waste. Render it fertilizer. Reinvigorate Mars?

  • Lars Lindberg

    Have you heard in which city it could be?