I thought this comment from Chapman from the Rossi selling heat thread was worth putting in its own thread, as it focuses on a theme that has been much debated here on E-Cat World.
I know that most folks were hoping for QX powered personal-mobility-units to be available by Christmas, but one must take a step back and realize his stated market approach is the best possible solution, both for himself, as the inventor and CEO, and for society.
The critical part of it will be for him to find industrial partners with a LARGE demand, that he can slowly scale up to. This will give him the ability to put into use the largest number of units, while maintaining the highest degree of control. This satisfies the acknowledged safety concerns, allows the roll out to reach a critical mass that goes beyond that which could be denied, refuted, debunked, or flat out hidden, and allows him to establish a working relationship with high dollar customers.
Like it or not, Rossi MUST keep profits front and center in his market strategy. As long as he is pursuing maximum profit (short of just selling the rights to an oil giant to be suppressed and forgotten) then the natural consequence will be maximum utility and market penetration.
I hope Rossi NEVER abandons greed!
As wise men have said, “Greed is GOOD!”.
Greed makes the REAL world work.
Greed is THE Great Motivator.
Greed gets mankind off the couch, and drives them to productivity.
Greed creates a better world.
I hope Rossi dreams of putting one QX in every home, one in every vehicle, and 100 in every business – and getting $5 for every unit.
I hope he dreams of being richer than Trump.
Richer than Gates.
Richer than Bezos.
Because for him to REACH that goal will mean there IS a QX in every home, one in every vehicle, and 100 in every business!
Thanks to Abd Lomax for finding and publishing the opening statements from the Rossi v. IH trial that was cut short when the two sides settled. Abd has published the court transcripts on his Cold Fusion Community website here:
There were actually two sets of opening statements published, as the trial had to restart after too many of the first set of jurors withdrew, so after a new jury was seated Rossi and IH repeated their opening statements (not sure yet if there were any changes — will have to study the transcripts), and also new statements from JM Products and Fulvio Fabiani were made.
Once the settlement was completed all trial activity was over, and the matter went into the history books. However there is still interest in the whole event and Abd has done an important service here in making these records available to study.
I have been trying to find out a bit more about the status of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat commercialization plans, and it sounds like they are taking a more definite shape. Here are a few recent questions and answers from the Journal of Nuclear Physics that can help us piece things together:
September 3, 2017 at 8:55 PM
You say that your the first plants that you sell will be managed directly by you.
a) Can you explain what you mean by that?
b) Have you any agreements to build plants for customers yet?
September 3, 2017 at 9:32 PM
a) that we will operate the plant and the Customer will not have access to the reactors
September 3, 2017 at 10:50 PM
Very interesting that you have agreements to build plants already.
a) Have you started building them yet?
b) When do you expect to have them completed?
c) Will you be selling the plant, or selling energy with these first plants?
September 4, 2017 at 6:32 AM
September 4, 2017 at 6:04 AM
Dear Dr Rossi
The older Ecat where 1Mw in output, will the newer Xcats be of similar output or larger for industrial use.
September 4, 2017 at 6:30 AM
Rossi stated recently that the control system had been finalized, and now he says that the construction of the first E-Cat QX plants is underway. We learn now that these first plants will sell heat — he won’t be selling the plants themselves.
In the near term that could make business sense, as it gives Leonardo a chance to monitor the performance of these first plants closely (essentially they will be prototypes), learn how the plants perform in real world situations, make adjustments as needed, while also preventing outside access to the E-Cat reactors which is the critical IP — at the same time making money from selling heat directly to customers.
I don’t know how long they would plan to keep up with this business model. It would seem to be quite labor intensive for Leonardo, as they would need to have their own staff on hand 24/7 to manage the plants. Rossi has said that these first plants won’t be mass produced in the sense that they will be made in dedicated “robotized” factories, but they have some level of automation — and they would have to if they are going to producing enough E-Cat QX reactors, and control sytems, to build multi-MW plants as he now states.
So it would seem to me, taking Rossi’s comments at face value, that phase one of industrialization has started. It is limited and probably quite costly for Leonardo, but it may be enough to get an industrial foothold, and allow them to build dedicated factories and next move into the mass production phase that seems to be Andrea Rossi’s ultimate goal.
An article written by James Conca has been published on the Forbes website making a case that in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, which has devastated parts of the gulf coast in the southern United States, nuclear power has proven to be the most resilient power generation source.
The article is titled “”Hurricane Harvey Makes Case for Nuclear Power” https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/01/12/polar-vortex-nuclear-saves-the-day/#5fa8613c6b08
He some excerpts:
“The two nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project plant near Houston were operating at full capacity despite wind gusts that peaked at 130 mph as the Hurricane made landfall. The plant implemented its severe weather protocols as planned and completed hurricane preparations ahead of Category 4 Hurricane Harvey striking the Texas Gulf Coast on August 25th.
“Anyone who knows anything about nuclear was not surprised. Nuclear is the only energy source immune to all extreme weather events – by design.
“Whether it’s hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, heat waves or severe cold, nuclear performs more reliably than anything else. There’s no better reason to retain our nuclear fleet, and even expand it, to give us a diverse energy mix that can handle any natural disaster that can occur.”
Mr. Conca does make valid points about the vulnerabilities of fossil fuel and solar/wind, but I was somewhat surprised that he did not mention the ongoing Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster following the 2011 tsunami in northeast Japan as a possible exception to his case. I think if we had E-Cat style LENR plants instead of the fission variety, which would eliminate the concerns about radiation leakage and waste then his case would be more solid.
Here’a response today from Andrea Rossi to a question I posted on the Journal of Nuclear Physics about what the significance of approaching 5 Sigma in his E-Cat QX testing in terms of commercialization.
September 2, 2017 at 9:00 AM
Premature to answer.
Sharks are around ( especially the most vociferous competitors, whose vociferity is inversally proportional to their capacity to make something real by themselves, otherwise they’d have not time to vociferate ) waiting for the availability of our products to copy them. It is true that our patents cover our IP, but litigations have a huge cost. The best protection will be our economy scale. This makes unlikely that we will put for sale our mass products before we will have completed the industrialization of the manufacturing, to put for sale the E-Cat at a price able to restrain the competition from the beginning. We will continue to sell only big industrial plants, directly managed by us until we will be ready to put in commerce our E-Cats at a price for which the competition will not be encouraged, or able, to proceed against us.
I find this quite an interesting response. He seems to be expecting reverse engineering attempts, I don’t think there is any doubt that this would happen once the E-Cat is available in the marketplace. It seems that Rossi believes that at least some of his vocal critics are in fact competitors who are waiting to copy the E-Cat when it is available, so until mass production is in place, it appears that only custom plants over which Leonardo has close control will be put into the marketplace. I suppose that they will take great pains to make sure the proprietary parts of the plants will be inaccessible to the customers.
After the lengthy litigation process he has just gone through with Industrial Heat, Rossi is clearly not wanting to count on legal recourse to protect himself from competitors. The bigger the stakes, the longer and more expensive legal cases would be, and I am sure that Rossi would far rather put all his time, energy and resources into developing the E-Cat than in fighting for it in court.
As far as the timing for mass production, Rossi has said recently he thinks it will happen in 2018, but he will certainly need lots of financial support to make that happen.
I found this comment from Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics interesting today:
August 28, 2017 at 7:24 AM
We are continuing to work very well. Now the control system is final.
I followed up with a question and got a response:
August 28, 2017 at 7:53 AM
With the control system now final, are you able to move beyond the R&D phase to begin the industrialization process of the E-Cat QX?
August 28, 2017 at 8:21 AM
The answer to this question is very complex. I can say that we are resolving problems, also for what concerns the partnerships necessary for the financial issues bound to the industrialization.
Basically, we are very close to Sigma 5 level of reliablity of the basic module and putting modules in parallel we can reach any power.
Hard work is on course. Our Team is getting greater by the day. As Maurizio Crozza says: ” We are not sharpening the tips of the Pyramids”.
From Rossi’s response here, it seems that not only is the technical development going well, but also the financing. I would imagine that for Rossi, the latter is going to be more difficult. When working in his lab, he has control over what goes on, but as we have seen in the IH relationship, business can be more of a challenge than science and technology. Of course both need to be in place before any serious commercial production can begin. As usual, there is very little detail provided, so it’s hard to evaluate the state of things. Still, from what I have heard, the planned demonstration is still going ahead in the latter part of November, so that may turn out to be the kickoff event that will set the larger commercialization into motion.
Thanks to Michelangelo de Meo for posting a link on the Journal of Nuclear Physics to a new paper published in the Physics of Plasma journal titled “Evidence of nuclear fusion neutrons in an extremely small plasma focus device operating at 0.1 Joules”. Authors are Leopoldo Soto, Cristián Pavéz José, Moreno, Luis Altamirano, Luis Huerta, Mario Barbaglia, Alejandro Clausse, and Roberto E. Mayer, from Chile and Argentina.
Here’s the abstract:
“We report on D-D fusion neutron emission in a plasma device with an energy input of only 0.1 J, within a range where fusion events have been considered very improbable. The results presented here are the consequence of scaling rules we have derived, thus being the key point to assure the same energy density plasma in smaller devices than in large machines. The Nanofocus (NF)—our device—was designed and constructed at the P4 Lab of the Chilean Nuclear Energy Commission. Two sets of independent measurements, with different instrumentation, were made at two laboratories, in Chile and Argentina. The neutron events observed are 20σ greater than the background. The NF plasma is produced from a pulsed electrical discharge using a submillimetric anode, in a deuterium atmosphere, showing empirically that it is, in fact, possible to heat and compress the plasma. The strong evidence presented here stretches the limits beyond what was expected. A thorough understanding of this could possibly tell us where the theoretical limits actually lie, beyond conjectures. Notwithstanding, a window is thus open for low cost endeavours for basic fusion research. In addition, the development of small, portable, safe nonradioactive neutron sources becomes a feasible issue.” (Emphasis added)
Here’s an image from the paper with the explanation:
“(a) A sketch of the NF discharge device. The driven capacitor (5 nF) is composed of two parallel plates (lower plate: anode; upper plate: cathode). A 0.42 mm diameter copper cylinder is covered with quartz, attached to the centre of the anode plate, and passes through a small hole in the cathode centre. Plasma is formed between the top of the anode and the cathode base. (b) The NF chamber (pointed in the photograph). (c) A time-integrated photograph of the discharge. Note the bright spot on the anode top.”
The recent test results from the MFMP showing apparent transmutations after charcoal has treated for two minutes in the George Egeley NOVA reactor are quite fascinating, although I think it is still premature to regard them as conclusive. My understanding is that the MFMP will be doing the test on a more pure carbon sample to see if similar results are produced.
I originally became interested in LENR because I though it could be an important source of inexpensive and low-coast energy, and so far, energy production seems to be the goal of many LENR researchers. However, it is possible that another equally important future LENR application will be either elemental, or isotopic transmutations (or may be both).
The goal of many of the old alchemists was to be able to make something extremely valuable (e.g. gold) from a common element (e.g. lead), but many centuries ago they did not have the understanding of chemistry, nor the necessary technological apparatus to make it happen. This changed in the 20th Century with nuclear engineering. Here’s an excerpt from a Scientific American article on the subject of transmutation.
With the dawn of the atomic age in the 20th century, however, the transmutation of elements finally became possible. Nowadays nuclear physicists routinely transform one element to another. In commercial nuclear reactors, uranium atoms break apart to yield smaller nuclei of elements such as xenon and strontium as well as heat that can be harnessed to generate electricity. In experimental fusion reactors heavy isotopes of hydrogen merge together to form helium. (An element is defined by the number of protons in its nucleus whereas an isotope of a given element is determined by the quantity of neutrons.)
But what of the fabled transmutation of lead to gold? It is indeed possible—all you need is a particle accelerator, a vast supply of energy and an extremely low expectation of how much gold you will end up with. More than 30 years ago nuclear scientists at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) in California succeeded in producing very small amounts of gold from bismuth, a metallic element adjacent to lead on the periodic table.
If LENR reactors are able to produce similar results at much lower cost, and safely, in reasonable quantities then we might find that transmutation is comparable in importance to energy production, especially if currently rare and valuable elements and/or isotopes can be created. It may be that we will see two very different tracks for LENR emerging.
Here’s a new video published by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project in which they look at ash produced from processing carbon from charcoal after two minutes in George Egely’s NOVA reactor, using a Scanning Electron Microscope.
In the video, they show results in which aluminium, magnesium, iron, silicon, sulphur, potassium, calcium, titanium, sodium, copper are identified.
From the video description:
NOTE: CHARCOAL AND GRAPHITE LEAD USED WITH UNKNOWN ANALYSIS
First look at 2 mins of charcoal processed in Basic NOVA reactor seems to confirm the claims of Dr. George Egely that it is producing George Ohsawa reaction products. Tests with controlled pure carbon needed to be certain.