Why I Believe in The E-Cat

There have been all kinds of opinions set forward on the Internet regarding Andrea Rossi’e E-Cat. I think I understand people’s wariness and skepticism. There are many good reasons not to trust people just because they make an extraordinary claim, and history teaches us that many of the most exciting and tantalizing pronouncements about miraculous breakthroughs have turned out to be mistaken, or in some cases empty words intended to deceive and defraud.

So it is no wonder that there is for some skepticism about Rossi and his claims. I was quite skeptical too when I first heard about Rossi and the E-Cat, but over time I have climbed off the fence and stepped firmly on to the believer’s side, and here are some of the reasons why.

1. Sergio Focardi. Focardi was an eminent professor of physics at Bologna University worked closely with Andrea Rossi on the development of the E-Cat. Here are his credentials from Wikipedia:

He led the Department of Bologna of the (Italian) National Institute for Nuclear Physics and the Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences at the University of Bologna. He was a member of the President’s Board of the Italian Physical Society.From 1992 he had been working on cold fusion with nickel-hydrogen reactors.

His statements about what he learned and witnessed during his work with Rossi are very forthright and unequivocal. He has stated that he believes that we are a the dawn of a new age of energy production based on Rossi’s invention. Here’s a video of Focardi speaking about the E-Cat.

2. Guiseppe Levi. This University of Bolgona physics professor has tested the E-Cat on numerous occasions and has issued statements about the validity of the E-Cat. Levi was the lead researcher of the team of European academics that performed third party testing in late 2012-early 2013 (see below).

3. Sven Kullander and Hanno Essen. These respected Swedish scientists were able to participate in testing of the E-Cat and both have gone on record stating they could find no other explanation for the energy production they witnessed other than a new kind of nuclear reaction.

I am sure that all of these established academics are not part of any grand conspiracy to trick the world into thinking that Rossi has come up with a new form of energy when they know he hasn’t — and based on the closeness of their work with Rossi (especially Focardi, who worked with Rossi over a long period of time) I don’t see any way that Rossi could have hoodwinked these professors with some kind of rigged machine.

4. The October 6th, 2011 test in which the E-Cat self sustained for almost 5 hours and heated water a constant temperature without any energy input. Again, I don’t believe that Rossi would have been able to have faked this demonstration.

5. Andrea Rossi himself. I find his words and actions convincing. The way he is going about his business seems rational given the circumstances and, most interesting, there doesn’t seem to be anything going on at the moment that resembles a scam. There has been no appeal for the public to send him money — and no one has come forward and said that Rossi has tried to defraud them. Some people might think that he is simply insane and delusional, but I go back to the involvement of the professors — if Rossi was insane, it would not have taken long for these men to realize it, and they certainly wouldn’t have stepped forward publicly to identify themselves professionally with such a person.

6. National Instruments. This major manufacturer of laboratory testing hardware and software has verified that Andrea Rossi’s account of their relationship is an accurate one. Rossi said they had worked together and that NI had been very helpful in providing advice, even though Leonardo Corp ultimately decided to work with another company.

7. Professor Roland Pettersson. This retired associate professor of chemistry at Uppsala University in Sweden has commented positively on two E-Cat demonstrations he has witnessed. He was present at the October 6th demo in Bologna, and more recently attended a private demonstration on February 20th in Bologna. NyTeknik reports that Pettersson said he saw the recently upgraded 1 MW plant and a prototype of the domestic E-Cat.

8. The May 16th 2013 third party testing report. (See here for a summary). This was a convincing report from qualified and reputable academics who reported that after two tests each of which lasted about 100 hours the E-Cat reactor the were testing showed that the energy source could not possibly be of chemical origin. They concluded that “Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources.”

9. The partnership with Industrial Heat / Cherokee Investment Partners. In a January 24, 2014 press release, Industrial Heat LLC, of Raleigh, North Carolina, announced they had acquired the rights to Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat. They said they had made this acquisition following the third party testing mentioned above, and conducting their own tests on the E-Cat. Industrial Heat LLC is a company formed largely by personnel from Cherokee Investment Partners, a private equity firm which has specialized over many years in cleaning up polluted ‘brownfield sites’, and also in investing in environmentally friendly technology. The Cherokee / Industrial Heat connection is an indication that serious professionals have done due diligence into Andrea Rossi’s work and have been convinced that the E-Cat is a technology worth investing in.

10. The Lugano E-Cat Report The same team of testers who published the 2013 report (see point 8 above) carried out new testing in Lugano, Switzerland, of an E-Cat device supplied by Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat. They ran the E-Cat for 32 days, nonstop, and measured an energy balance between input and output heat which yielded a COP factor of about 3.2 (when the reactor was heated to 1260ºC), and COP of 3.6 (1400ºC). The total net energy obtained during the 32 days run was about 1.5MWh.

In addition to the heat measurements, the testers found the isotopic makeup of the fuel changed during the 32-day run. They analyzed a sample fuel used in the reactor, before and after testing using a variety of standard measurement methods and quantities of Li, Al, Fe and H in addition to Ni were found in the fuel. The isotope composition in lithium and nickel matched a natural composition before the test began, but after the run was found to have been changed substantially. To read the full text of the Lugano report, go here; for a summary, go here.

11. The Work of Alexander Parkhomov. Alexander Parkhomov is a Russian physicist who analyzed the Lugano E-Cat Report (see above) and tried to create a reactor along the same principles as the one used in the report. In December 2014 he published a report describing a 90-minute experiment in which his reactor was measured to produce more energy than was input, with a COP of 2.58 when run at 1290ºC. Subsequent experiments have shown similar results. See here for more on Parkhomov’s experiments.

12. Tom Darden

In April 2015, Tom Darden, CEO of Cherokee Investment Partners, and chairman of Industrial Heat spoke at the ICCF-19 conference in Padua, Italy where he explained that he had formed Industrial Heat to invest in LENR research with the goal of creating non-polluting energy. He said in Industrial Heat’s research they had seen some success and that the field of LENR had reached a tipping point. In an interview with Infinite Energy magazine following the speech he explained that Industrial Heat had seen testing on the E-Cat before investing in Rossi’s E-Cat which was persuasive. He said that they had seen ‘some really good stuff’, and was impressed with Andrea Rossi as a researcher.

I believe that Andrea Rossi has made a very important discovery that will eventually lead to far more advanced and cost effective energy production than we now know. Rossi seems to realize this too, and is doing all in his power to bring his invention to light, including keeping the cost as low as possible so everyone will be able to afford it. As he says, “This will be a revolution, and, as I said already, a revolution must be popular to survive.”

Is there a chance that I am wrong in my conclusions? Of course — I’m certainly not infallible. But I have tried to be as logical and reasonable about this case as I can be, and from every way I look at things, I believe that Andrea Rossi has discovered a new and superior way of producing energy and that an LENR revolution is not too far away.


Frank Acland

  • Alex Ruiz

    Dear Mr .Acland

    I asked Mr. Rossi in JONP: “Aside from eventuell negative results (as you say) arising from economic, investement or other possible reasons, could you tell us the total energy balance figures of the 1 Mw plant up to date?” I got no response.

    Perhaps you can edit the same question in smarter or more polite mode. I have language limitations. By the way, I appreciate your efforts on trying to get significant responses at JONP.

    Best regards

    • ecatworld

      However one asks this question, it will not be answered at this point. Rossi has said many times we won’t get that information until the test is over.

  • bachcole

    Frank, if I were you, I would include Kim going to work for Cyclone in this list. (:->)

    • ecatworld

      That’s not really connected with the E-Cat, so I don’t see it directly pertaining to this article.

      • bachcole

        You’re right. Just this morning while I was reading the entire “Why I believe in the E-Cat”, I realized that the article said nothing about LENR per se and other LENR+ efforts. For me, my belief is strengthened knowing that LENR per se is a fact and other LENR+ efforts are coming along nicely. If I were doing this “Why I believe in the E-Cat” article, I would include two short paragraphs with links to bigger articles that would include that LENR is a worldwide fact and LENR+ is also a widely observed phenomena. (:->)

        • ecatworld

          In my mind, the E-Cat is the only conclusive evidence of LENR+ presented to date.

          • bachcole

            Perhaps I am doing a little “mirror” thinking. The E-Cat proves Defkalion. {not really} Therefore Defkalion proves the E-Cat. But you are absolutely right. I would give the E-Cat a 9 for proof. [A 10 would be burning my finger and associated observations, like lowering my utility bill.] Defkalion would be a 5. And Brillouin would be a 3.

  • Donk970

    The scientific method in laymen’s terms.
    1) Huh, that’s weird; I wonder why that happens.
    2) Maybe it happens because – yadda, yadda…
    3) I’m going to test that by doing….
    4) If my experiment doesn’t support my theory, come up with a new theory

    When someone looks at something like cold fusion and says it’s fraud because x, y or z they are not being scientific. They are denying that the initial observation can be real because it doesn’t fit with existing theories. They forget (or refuse to accept) that the existing theories might be incomplete or just wrong.

    I won’t say that I “believe” or “don’t believe” in LENR any more than I’ll say I believe or don’t believe in God because that’s not how science works. What I do think is that there is a very definite “Huh, that’s weird…” phenomenon here that needs to be explained and I am happy to see that there are people out there doing science to explain it.

  • Alexvs

    Right now, do you believe in Rossi’s E-Cat with the same intensity as in january 12th 2012?
    No doubts?
    No suspicions?

    • georgehants

      Alexvs, it is scientifically totally irrelevant whether one believes or disbelieves.
      Opinion is pointless and other than fun a waste of time.
      Only Evidence following research, good theory or even intuition is of any substance.
      The continual talk of people thinking that their opinion is going to alter reality is comical and intellectually redundant.
      Any scientist who debunks deny’s or attacks any subject, for instance the UFO enigma, Cold Fusion or the Placebo Effect, without advocating immediate research is incompetent and should not be allowed anywhere near such an important profession.

      • Alexvs

        But the thread title is: “Why I believe in E-Cat” and consequently my question is pertinent. Perhaps now there are facts, which of course I do not know, contributing to believe more or less or not at all in E-Cat.

        • georgehants

          As long as you agree that believing or disbelieving is totally irrelevant, as to if there is an effect.

          • Alexvs

            Sorry. I do not understand your sentence.

  • morse

    Celani has something which is real (scientifically confirmed)
    So maybe it is a small step from him to Rossi

  • Washington

    I’m very concerned with Dr. Rossi´s life.This is the bigest invention for the world.

  • Ivan_cev

    I do not want to belive or not belive in Mr Rossi, What I want to see are tbe facts, independent black box tests, with control units.
    I hope Rossi device is real and he tested hundreds of compounds and found the miracle catalizer.
    But no serious person sould “belive”, lets wait for Rossi report, he promised one on 10 Sept.
    I have read between lines that Mr Levi is not fully convinced and wants a test without steam, so he wants to just heat certain volume of water, if you take the delta time, delta temperature, and know the volume of water you could work out precisely the kwh used.
    In Rossi tests there is an unkown. the steam volume, how you test it correspond to the original water, how you know the whole flow of water was converted to steam? there is no conservation of mass, so the test is inconclusive.

    • Dionysius

      Just so… I have wondered why a simple ‘calorimeter’ consisting of a large volume of water in an insulated container wasn’t used in the first place… much easier to calculate total power out than going through all the conversions.

      • Max S

        this has been requested ever since the steam issue came to light. These are really basic scientific things. The ignorance of Rossi to deliver such a test makes me think that once meausured correctly the e-cat would no longer show any excess heat and the whole story would collapse.

  • Roth

    No doubt, there’s something in LENR. Since 1989 hundreds or thousends of experiments have demonstrated “excess heat” and transmutations. For practical purposes repeatability within a few percentage units is required. For me the main question is whether AR has already arrived to the necessary degree of repeatability.
    The 1 MW ECAT is imposing from this point of view, because it consists of nearly hundred cooperating units, which have to have reasonably similar characteristics.
    Nevertheless AR has not yet made comments on that matter. I wish he would.

  • GreenWin

    @ Georgehants:

    Skip over the invasion of skeptopaths and check this out: comment from an NPA paper “Bose-Einstein Condensate: Hidden Riches for New Forms of Technology and Energy Generation: Potential Glimpse into Inner Reality” Prof. Donald Reed, SUNY

    “The discernible trend is that in terms of the underlying contextual quantum engine possibly underpinning physical reality, everything is becoming, or at the very least is capable of masquerading as everything else. Beyond space and time we may find that physics could be the art of the inter-changeable. But in the proliferation of these startling masquerades, physical science is also taking on more than ever the aspect of creative art, in a medium that, with the advances of modern technology, is proving far less constraining than it once seemed.”

    Atoms mimicking photons, photons acting like atoms. Next we’ll discover we’re living in an artificial holographic world!!


    Have a lovely evening!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu_iwdjf1gI Thomas

    Nobody cares whether I believe in the easter bunny, or Batman or if I believe that WMDs were hidden in Saddam Hussein’s hat. Nobody cares if I believe in Jesus, or if I believe that gravity exists. For most people, it would make us feel better to feel as though other people we respected believed something before we did. That’s a human nature thing.

    I feel as though I have not seen a single thing that would allow me to explain Mr. Rossi, and this unfolding event in any other way than “there is definitely something real happening here.”

    I attend a filmmaker’s group in Philadelphia each month where I show various projects that I am working on. A few times I have shown things that I am working about LENR (including the silly music-video “I believe in the Ecat”). I am always fascinated by the stone silence that falls upon the audience of mostly 20-somethings. There is a kind of mind-bending “what the @#$%!” look on their faces. I usually finish the screenings by telling the audience that “I totally believe that the ecat will change everything about out culture…but I have no problem with people thinking that I’m an idiot”.

    • http://www.shake-speares-bible.com psi

      “I have not seen a single thing that would allow me to explain Mr. Rossi, and this unfolding event in any other way than ‘there is definitely something real happening here.”

      Well put. I agree.

  • Dave Hook

    I recently contacted The Department of Energy & Climate Change UK with regards to the Governmental line on LENR. I received this reply.

    “Thank you for your email dated 26 May, regarding low energy nuclear research. I have been asked to reply.

    Officials at DECC are aware that there are a number of reactor designs and technologies proposed for operation around the world however industry has not indicated that they would be looking to deploy them in the UK. Ultimately, it is for industry to decide what type of technology or fuel to use in its future reactor systems and as yet no proposals or arguments to develop cold fusion technology have been put forward.

    We understand that both Industry and a majority of the scientific community view the claims of the University of Bologna with some significant scepticism, particularly towards whether a nuclear process is taking place. Guiseppe Levi, who arranged a demonstration of Andrea Rossi’s experiment at Bologna, has concluded that more experiments are needed to ascertain what processes are occurring.

    We will continue to maintain a watching brief on this and a number of other technologies but we do not see this as a priority area for research, in the context of constrained budgets.

    I hope that this is helpful.

    Yours sincerely

    DECC Correspondence Unit “

  • http://www.robothouse.cz náplava

    When will we be able to build cities with cold fusion powered … architecture we already have

    • CarmenElectra


  • Barry

    I want to believe in the E-cat but that’s not good enough so I got to settle for hope. I hope Mr Rossi comes through. My biggest skepticism is he seems to be so much of a one man show. If he really has what he claims it can change the world. Shouldn’t he have a PR person to keep us all up to date working out of an office rather than a Miami apartment?
    Sometimes my faith in Mr Rossi weakens, but since I got wind of all of this back in February I can’t get enough info on the growing field of LENR. Something seems to be happening every week. My faith has shifted to LENR. I do believe it will change the world even if Mr. Rossi doesn’t.

  • Stephen

    I have mixed feelings…

    It looks like you believe in this eCat business mostly by “auctoritas” rather than by “facts”: you trust Focardi, you trust Levi, NI, etc… except for point #4.

    I think, this is exactly the game where AR is a master: using others’ authority, hopes, etc… to push his own cause (whatever that is). I don’t think one can base any conclusion on the behaviour of people: people are nice and make our lives worth… but one should also admit they can easily be weak, dihonest, emotional, etc… we all are, given the right conditions. This is why the scientific method exists!

    Examples. Focardi is old and surely frustrated by his inability to convince mainstream science that LERNs exist. I have the impression that both Focardi and Levi are looking for fame, to some level. The swedish guys… are swedish, they are not used to italians :) and anyway they never really endorsed the eCat, if you look carefully enough… etc… Also I am sure you can easily find a big number of equally authoritative persons believing this is all fake. Do they have an agenda? Maybe, why not. Again, they are people. This is why one should go back to the old and boring scientific method.

    Ok. We remain with facts, which are not many. Point 4 is interesting… however devil is in the details, who knows what AR really has in his machine. To me point 4 is curious, but quite insufficient for me to believe. A thought provoking question… you surely know that illusionists exist and that magic, ehm… no, it’s a just trick. Have you ever seen an illusionist show? On TV or, even better, live? It can be pretty impressive… based on the show, would you believe in magic?!

    Beyond this, I am convinced there is something in LENRs, but no, I can’t believe in AR claims. If we want to put it on the trust side: I don’t trust him at all… I think his history and his behaviour speak against him.

    • Stephen

      One addendum… I am convinced too that this LENR business is a very complicated one, with a lot of interests involved.

      However, if this was something easy and huge and reproducible as it seems in the case of the eCat… well, we are 7 billions people on this planet which can try this even in their garage if they want (note AR is not even a real engineer, not to talk about science)… if it’s easy I think that absolutely nothing could stop this to come out, not the CIA, the DEO, DARPA, whatever…

      My impression is that LENRs exist but they are extremely tricky. I liked the comment of the NASA guy on one of his presentations (can’t remember which one), where he commented that given their present understanding most of past cold fusion experiments were basically fully random and uncontrolled. Having something reproducible or at least statistically predictable is very important, otherwise most of people will never believe you. So I think it is probably a very tricky business… I don’t think that AR, a guy with a fake engineering degree and a good track record as a scammer, is the likely person to have cracked the problem. Very unlikely. To me, at least.

      • http://www.lenrforum.eu/ Alain

        Ni+H heat initiated only reactors are not so much complicated if you gather data from defkalion, Rossi, and Widom-Larsen.

        It is a surface effect, hydrogen have to be atomic, and surface have to be complex (like SPAWAR did with co-deposition, like nano-powder)

        electrolysis was a dead-end. High pressure hot gaz with nano powder is much moresimple.
        the only tricky factors are the catalyst to prepare atomic H to be in the good/best state, and surface condition of the powder (as said piantelli not only surface, but active state density at the surface)…
        It seems that defkalion, by large trial, have found many good catalyst, and powder characteristics (micrometric, not nanometric)… visibly not expensive, and not complex. Rossi seems a bit late.
        for the rest, just increase temperature and pressure, just before it melt or explode, like Defkalion have done…
        Stability is simple engineering, and engineers can master much more complex systems (rockets, industrial furnace, nuclear reactor).

        I feel that LENR Ni+H gas phase reactors are simple to build…even if the catalyst and powder recipe is a bit empirical.
        Except if you know what is an active site (as piantelli said) and the active ingredients (H+ it seems). in that case, passing from Watt to kW is simple straight engineering.

        all factors are easy to increase, provided you know what it is…
        only “ingredients”, “active sites”, and “heat to activation” are questionable in LENR.
        but ingredients seems to be Ni and H+.
        Active sites are to be better understood, or cooked and tested…
        The catalyst seems to be either only the H+ generator, or maybe the activator (heat to activation)… have to be either chosen among H+ catalyst, or guessed if different from H+ generator…
        If you know what are the active site and the activator target, enhancing it is simple engineering, otherwise it is trial and error.
        all the rest is classic engineering (surface enhancing, heat reuse, stabilization).

        the breakthrough in LENR is abandoning electrolysis to go to gas-phase and nano-powder.

        there have bee a discussion about the importance of gaz phase heat activated Ni+H reactors, saying that this kind of reactor if real, leads naturally to mass energy production, after predictable engineering work.

        • Stephen

          I agree with you that the electrolisys => gas-phase/nanopowder step was a very important one in cracking the problem. I have the same impression.

          Regarding the basic underlying effect, I personally found very fascinating and convincing the codeposition experiments at SPAWAR (nicely done) and transmutation in D2 permeation in Pd (Iwamura I think, very neat and controlled experiment, in my opinion)… Finally I almost fell off the chair when I learnt about the five peaks in the transmutation spectrum observed in different experiments and the fit using neutron capture by W-L. This is when I really thought “WTF… this is real”: too many coincidences (in the facts, not in the opinions of people, etc). But ok, these details are not very useful for energy production, probably.

          My main source of skepticism is the following. True, once one knows the basic ingredients engineers can be very effective in scaling everything to whatever power you might need. What I wonder is: eCat and Hyperion are an example of this possibility… or are they just an example of people exploiting some real frindge effect to create a smart and complicate scam? Given the declared power levels it would be very easy to show their machine work for real, without disclosing any secret. I don’t see any “minus” in performing a satisfactory demonstration. Differently, if they have real working generators, I see many “minuses” in their present behavior. Instead if it is a scam I would say their behaviour normal. This is why I have a hard time in believing.

          • http://www.lenrforum.eu Alain

            “Given the declared power levels it would be very easy to show their machine work for real, without disclosing any secret. ”

            right. this is why defkalion proposed his simple and hard to fake bare reactor test.

            for me the blackout is because of the “panicked” testers who ask for time because they cannot believe their eyes, and cannot admit the reality… they need time to make a joint report and save their butt.

          • Stephen


            let’s hope so…

    • http://COPPERKNIGHT.COM John Hardman

      “Oh yee of little faith” I remember when Robert Fulton first proposed to put a Steam Engine in a boat for propulsion instead of customary sails of that era. He was jeered where ever He went with taunts of “Fultons’ Folly”. When he fired up the steam engine that he had installed in a sailing ship that was docked on the hudson river; all the detractors were there. When Robert opened the throttle and that ship chugged away from the dock, the crowd grew strangely silent. I remember also standing on “Kill Devils’ Hill” in North Carolina when the Wright Brothers gave the first exhibition flight of their heavier than air “aeroplane”. And Enrico Fermis’ graphite pile atomic reactor..The 21st Century will produce more new inovations in Science, Literature, Medicine, Psycholgy, Energy, and many other discipines, and if I’m lucky I will be here to witness those events as well.

  • http://Ecatnews.net Alexandr

    A. Rossi struggles with all world Academic science.
    I wish Rossi very much health.
    Dr. Shadrin A.A. 17/03/12.

  • John Adrian

    I believe in Catalyzed Fusion – have since I became a Nuclear Engineer in the ’80s…

    I also believe in Ponzi schemes and false-starts…

    Finally, I believe in the common thievery exhibited by the scientific community especially by G-Funded Labs & Universities. This trait forces honest folks to be extremely secretive – it’s a cost-of-doing-business that prevents a lab from stealing an idea by “sneaking a patent”. It goes beyond someone competing with you – these folks will actually patent your idea and simply make it illegal for you to pursue it. The entertainment industry protects intellectual property better protected than the scientific community!

    UNFORTUNATELY the necessity to act secretly forces an honest endeavor to appear exactly the same as a Scam!

    I’ll BELIEVE in E-Cat when I’ve got one and get to play with it.
    — Until then, I hope Mr. Rossi is honest and successful, and that a smart research lab doesn’t find a way to steal his effort.

    • http://Ecatnews.net Alexandr

      I believe in The E-CAT A.Rossi and LENR.Read theory about LENR in my book “Vihrony”, 2011, Moscow, Shadrin A.A.in Russian.
      Dr. Shadrin A.A. 07.03.12

      • http://Ecatnews.net Alexandr

        Twenty first centure give birth to two direction of science:
        1. books based on theory mathematics
        2. patents
        First leads to Hot energy nucleosynthesis (HENS), second – LENR. Time and E-Cat choose one from two candidates. Springer printed in LENR book “Controlled Nucleosynthesis”,2007,S.Adamenko and others, 780p.- new physics.
        Dr. Shadrin, 19.03.12

  • dow daytrader

    It would be great if the website owner creates a “faq” section that answers specific math questions of what Rossi has done in the recent past and who has verified. Please boil it down (lol) to a math equation that almost anyone can understand. (input energy + processes = output energy) other variables would be quantity of all materials consumed, time/duration, temperature, how much initial energy used, and how much energy made over a period of time without initial energy supplied for startup.

    Facts. Math.


    • http://Ecatnews.net Alexandr

      Twenty first centure gives birth to two directions of science: 1-books,2-patents. First leards to Hot energy nucleosynthesis (HENS), second – to LENR. Time chooses one between two candidates. I choose LENR and E-CAT A.Rossi.
      Dr. Shadrin A.A. 17.03.12

  • Larry

    I believe that the US govt is strongly backing Rossi. I’ve read that the US govt bought his first reactor and have ordered 13 more for 34 million. They see this as the replacement for the Auto Industry. Rossi plans to flood the world market with his device at a price no one will be able to beat. His factories will be totally automated but the spinoff for the US economy will be enormous. Jobs, jobs, jobs supplying the world with energy. The US will control the worlds energy supply. These units need refueling twice a year so some country gets uppity then energy sanctions can and will be applied.

  • Another John

    Back in November, Sven Kullander said that there would be a detailed isotopic analysis of the “ash” from Rossi’s E-Cat “by Christmas” (http://ecatnews.com/?p=1416).

    As far as I can tell, the analysis has not been released, and no one seems to be following up on it.

    I wish Kullander would either release the report, or explain why he isn’t doing so.

  • http://na Rodney

    I just wish you hadn’t used the expression: “I believe in ….. “. You are getting into tricky territory there.

    • admin

      Hi Rodney — I understand what you mean, I think — just can’t think of a better way to express my confidence that this is a real technology without having seen one in operation. I guess it is all based on trust in what Rossi is saying combined with the evidence that has been presented so far.

      • Skeptic

        That’s Rossi’s trick. By talking about mass-production, it feels like the discussion about how it works has been put to rest.
        But it hasn’t.
        The e-cat has not been properly demoed.

        It would not take much to demo it: Just run it for a week with some people measuring in- and output.
        The only ‘evidence’ you have seen are video’s orchestrated by Rossi. You should demand some independent observer at a serious experiment.

  • RocketScientist

    One should question why a self-funded project is attacked by (foreign) government-paid Academics (who work for the same industry which competes with E-Cat):

    (a) this technology would benefit to CONSUMERS if it works;

    (b) this technology would threaten BigOil/Nuclear companies.

    Just let it come to market. Adn then let the market be judge of Andrea Rossi’s (hard) work value.

  • Chris Redd

    So this boils down to you believing in it because you don’t understand how it works? My prediction is the E-Cat will never actually be sold.

  • John

    I concur. I am basically sceptical about the whole thing but if it is a scam I can’t quite see how it would work. At some point a unit will be sold and when it is it will either work or it will not and I imagine the purchasers will be well qualified to decide which it is. At that point presumably they will want their money back and the E-cat dream will crash and burn. Some scam!

    • DC

      Some people just crave attention. Maybe thats why he is doing it. Maybe he doesn’t want to admit failure, Maybe he is just a bad decision maker. I certainly hope that Rossi is for real but I have seen him make very poor decisions, such as faking the flow rate of steam in the interview with S. Krivit http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Failure-of-Rossis-Energy-Catalyzer-Caught-on-Video.shtml

      He should never have intentionally played down the steam flow rate. He talked about steam visibility but the actual flow rate was the problem. It should have been much higher if he was producing 11.2 cubic metres of steam per hour. It makes him look like a fraud.

      • edward

        Home Depot? So he is actually talking to them. I dare say someone at Home Depot could confirm this. In the sale business, you always assume the the order. That is all Rossi is doing. But there is no order. It is unfortunate but the hole thing does not look good.