Rossi Knows the Results of the Replication Work of Lugano Authors

The authors of the Lugano report have been quiet for a number of years now regarding their report of the E-Cat that Industrial Heat sent them in 2014 for testing. A number of questions and critiques have been raised about the report, but no responses have been made publicly by the authors.

From what I have been able to learn, the authors of the Lugano report (or at least some of them) decided that in an attempt to confirm their first report, they would attempt to replicate the Lugano reactor themselves by building their own.

Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Andrea Rossi has confirmed this. He says he knows the results they have obtained, but cannot reveal those results until they decide to publish. Here is the question about it on the JONP, and his full comment.

Darrin
October 11, 2017 at 5:33 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi:
Still about the replication made by the Professors of Uppsala: you said you can’t comment before they publish a report, but do you know the results of their trial to replicate the results of Lugano by themselves in a laboratory of the University of Uppsala?
Thank you if you can answer

Andrea Rossi
October 11, 2017 at 6:57 AM
Darrin:
Obviously I know the results, I have been informed about them by the Professors under NDA, but I cannot talk of them before they will publish a report, if ever, since they worked with the funding of a third party that wanted to know if the Rossi Effect exists beyond any doubt.
For this reason, they reproduced the reactor in the laboratories of the Uppsala University and followed the instructions contained in my patent. They wanted to avoid the complications generated by the infrared temperature measurement and measured the energy produced by simple calorimetry, by means of a heat exchanger and with liquid water.
I know the measurements have been very conservative, always considering only the lower values of the margin of error of the instrumentation.
I think I can say all this, because obvious.
I cannot absolutely add any further information. I will be able to comment the results only after such results will have been made public.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

So at this point we don’t know when, or even if the Lugano authors will publish. I think they will want to make sure that before they do, they are absolutely certain of their results.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi: About 95% of the Way to Sigma 5

Thanks to Jean Yves Metivier for a pointed question on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today. Andrea Rossi has been regularly saying in response to requests for updates something like “we’re on the way to Sigma 5”. Jean Yves was not satisfied with that reply and wrote this:

Jean Yves Metivier
October 5, 2017 at 7:10 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Your sigma 5 quest is interesting, but your answer to JPR is pointless.
What is your final goal, is it related to how much cycles you do, how many days without failures, or how many Watts without interruptions?
How far are you from the goal in percentage?
The answers to these questions will give the Readers a feel of your progress.
Keep it up!
Jym

Rossi replied:

Andrea Rossi
October 5, 2017 at 1:25 PM
Jean Yves Motivier:
The final goal is related to how many hours without failures.
We are very close to the target, I’d say we are around 95%.
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

So there’s a little bit more detail regarding the whole Sigma 5 thing. I’m not sure exactly when Rossi started this Sigma 5 campaign, but I think it has been close to a year. If a reactor running reliably for that long with no refueling at 2000+ degrees C with tiny amounts of electrical input can be verified, then I guess any partner he would be very impressed. I feel pretty confident now that the November demo is going to happen, and so I hope we get a much clearer picture about what the E-Cat QX is capable of quite soon.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

November Now for E-Cat QX Presentation?

Andrea Rossi has made some comments on the Journal of Nuclear Physics recently that seem to indicate that the upcoming test he has been planning for will not now be held in October, but rather November. Here’s the latest Q&As on the topic from the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Brett
September 23, 2017 at 2:57 PM
Dr Andrea Rossi,
How much are the probabilities you will make the presentation of the Ecat QX before November 2017?

Andrea Rossi
September 23, 2017 at 4:12 PM
Brett:
The probabilities that we will present the E-Cat QX before the end of November 2017 are 100%.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Conception
September 24, 2017 at 9:33 PM
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Please confirm once and forever that the presentation of the Ecat QX will be made not later than November 2017, with 100% of probabilities!
Conception

Andrea Rossi
September 25, 2017 at 7:49 AM
Conception:
I confirm.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

If there is indeed a delay, I’m not terribly surprised — there always seems to be delays of one kind of another in this story. Rossi was saying for some time that the presentation would be held near the end of October, if it’s bumped to November I don’t think it’s that big of a deal, however we would all prefer new information to be provided sooner rather than later — but I think we’re pretty good at waiting.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Leonardo Corp’s Website: Heat for Sale

Thanks to a reader who found on the Ecat.com website (Leonardo Corporation’s official site) that the company is now listing heat for sale on this page: https://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-energy

Here’s the text:

ECAT Heat Energy

Leonardo Corporation now offers ECAT Heat Energy as a separate product solution. The ECAT plants are owned and operated by Leonardo Corporation while installed in the customers facilities or at a location in the vicinity of the customers facilities depending on local needs and infrastructure.

The ECAT Heat Energy is delivered by steam at 100-120 Celsius and extracted through the customers local heat exchangers. Return temperatures can be in any range between 5-95 Celsius.

Leonardo Corporation initially look for customers with 24/7 facility operation due to ECAT plants preferred continuous operation. Please contact for quotes

It will be interesting to see what kind of response there might be for this, and whether anyone who does get involved will be willing to report their results publicly. There’s no mention here of price, but if it is significantly below current energy costs, this could be an attractive offer for any business who uses a lot of heat in their operations.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Interview with Me356: Working Towards LENR Commercialization

What are you focusing on in your work with LENR these days?
I am trying to simplify manufacturing process in the way that the most work can be done by machining, at least semi-automatically. This will minimize possible deviations from required model to achieve same results across the units. Initially everything was done by hand, especially welding, where the most errors can be made.
What is the scale of your operations with LENR — how many people working with you on it?
If we count also workers in external companies it could reach at least one hundred people that are directly involved with the reactors.
What kind of performance are you getting from your reactors in terms of power output and COP?
I would rather not answer, because without a proof it would look like a tales. But I can say that we have achieved SSM some time ago and thus COP is equal to infinity in certain periods.
We are traying to improve the technology all the time as there is much higher potential left. It looks like we will be able to double the COP after latest findings. Question is how safe it will be.
What insights can you share with replicators in terms of getting reliable LENR reactions?
We have found that once you put a transition metal in the hydrogen, sooner or later there would be some nuclear reaction. Unfortunately these are not detectable without carefull fuel analysis.
So the main task is to increase area where the reactions can occur. You do not have to buy expensive equipment as it can be all done with what you probably have at home. To encourage replicators I can say, that very likely you have already made some sort of nuclear reactions even if no excess heat was seen. Maybe you will be surprised. Excess heat is the last thing you will produce. The main issue is that you will need expensive analysis to show the results.
Piantelli, Focardi, and now Mizuno have all documented that proper pre-treatment to ensure a clean fuel surface is essential in addition to various methodologies to force hydrogen absorption and release to create an “excited” exothermic state. Could you share a fuel treatment routine that could be used by other researchers to start obtaining excess heat in their replications?
Their methods are good. To get excess heat you only have to proceed exactly according the instructions. Some can be also combined and improved. If you have a good microscope you can see immediately that what you are doing is correct or not. Without checking it is only guesswork. The major factor that is usually not mentioned is time. You will need more time than anticipated for the preparation. I recommend to start with as simple reactor as possible. You can get excess heat with e.g. nickel and protium alone. Adding other compounds mean adding next sources of errors.

Could you describe how monoatomic hydrogen interacts with the fuel of a reactor to enhance the excess heat effect?
It may not provide any excess heat. But its production will very likely lead to a nuclear reactions that can be utilized, converted to a heat. I wish to not provide any theory, since there are too many out there.

How are your reactors in terms of safety?
I am convinced that they are safe. At least with conventional measuring devices there is no detectable radiation.
Will you be selling heaters, and if so what will their size and cost be?
Yes. There will be various units for a different purposes but the universal one has dimenension 80x80x500 mm. Cost will be around 400 USD per unit where family house will need 2 – 4 of these units.
What do you think about Rossi’s E-Cat QX based on what has been reported so far?
I think that it is good evolution step. It brings simplicity and higher performance based on better understanding of LENR process. I was playing with nearly identical design 2 years ago and I was very satisfied. In the last days we have tested very similar devices (with a modifications based on QX) again with very good results.
What happened when the MFMP visited that caused the null result?
The reactor was far from ready. It was actually success that it was at least in condition that it was. But it was only one we were able to test in this way. We both knew about major problems days before it was tested. So we were both prepared for any results. It was not prepared for any conclusive testing. I was strongly appealing to not get into a similar situation months ago before the test, but unfortunately it happened. I don’t want to cause any harm and I consider it closed, lesson learned.
Do you plan to invite MFMP to test your reactors in the future?
Any group can arrive to test, but only once it is ready. To prevent any possible failure and weak points a proper communication and strict terms must be held.
How soon do you think it will be before you are able to host a group to test your work, under the strict conditions you mention?
This time will come as soon as the reactor will be ready for sale. Now I can see no reason to make it sooner. Actually it can help us to make it at the right time. The best for us is to make measurements by third parties under NDA which is/will occur repeatedly for the certification process.
How soon do you think it will be before you have a product ready for sale to the public?
It is dependent on the certification company. If it will take longer than anticipated we are ready to find other legal way. For testing purposes we can produce as much units as needed.

Have you patented your process, if so, when do you think it will be published?

No, after long thinking my conviction is that this technology should not be patented and is only money/time wasting. Patent can protect intellectual property only to a small degree. It is just enough to change design little bit and you are not encumbered by a patent. There is always room for it. What if the reactor is made by metamorphosing materials that can change shapes? Moreover there are countries where patents are irelevant. These countries need this technology urgently.
For public discussion:
In the attachment I have shared some photos. Here you can see direct evidence of reactions that are occurring even outside the reactor. Even on the carbon adhesive tape of the sample holder for SEM.
The sample was taken from device that we are using for fuel preparation. This device can produce active fuel from any transition metal.



 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

MFMP Returns to India to test ECCO Reactor

Bob Greenyer and George Egely have returned to India to try to get to work with Suhas Ralkar and his ‘ECCO’ reactor. If you recall, the last time they were in India, Suhas’ reactor had been locked in a building by a bank because of some financial issues; however, Suhas has been allowed to return to the lab, and has subsequently removed his reactor so he can have unhindered access to it.

Now, however, the reactor is again out of reach because the person who it was given to for safekeeping has gone away on a trip, and has not returned when expected.

In the meantime, while waiting for access to the ECCO reactor, Bob and George have been doing work in the lab and have prepared the following video in which they give a tour of Suhas’ lab, show some of the equipment there and discuss some of the testing protocols they will be using when they are able to test the ECCO reactor.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi: First E-Cat Plants Under Construction, Will Sell Energy, Not Plants.

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:

Frank Acland
September 3, 2017 at 8:55 PM
Dear Andrea,

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?

Andrea Rossi
September 3, 2017 at 9:32 PM
Frank Acland:
a) that we will operate the plant and the Customer will not have access to the reactors
b) yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Frank Acland
September 3, 2017 at 10:50 PM
Dear Andrea,

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?

Andrea Rossi
September 4, 2017 at 6:32 AM
Frank Acland:
a) yes
b) confidential
C) energy
Warm Regards,
A.R.

manuel cilia
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.

Thank you

Andrea Rossi
September 4, 2017 at 6:30 AM
Manuel Cilia:
Higher.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi’s Approach to E-Cat Commercialization: Economy of Scale Best Protection

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.

Andrea Rossi
September 2, 2017 at 9:00 AM
Frank Acland:
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.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi: E-Cat QX Control System ‘Final’, Resolving Problems with Financial Partnerships

I found this comment from Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics interesting today:

Andrea Rossi
August 28, 2017 at 7:24 AM
JPR:
We are continuing to work very well. Now the control system is final.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

I followed up with a question and got a response:

Frank Acland
August 28, 2017 at 7:53 AM
Dear Andrea,

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?

Andrea Rossi
August 28, 2017 at 8:21 AM
Frank Acland:
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”.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Transmutation Confirmed? New MFMP Video: “NOVA Basic – First Look at 2 Minute Processed Charcoal” —

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.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged