The E-Cat in Politics — Will Any Candidate Mention Rossi’s Invention?

Adapted from a post published on this site on May 20th.

Most of the discussion surrounding Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat has focused on the scientific aspects, and the future commercialization of the technology. Sooner or later, however, if this device is indeed a new and improved source of energy it will be discussed in the political realm.

We’ve now seen a spate of articles from well known media sources introducing Andrea Rossi’s energy catalyzer to the public, and it’s interesting that this is happening just as the United States 2012 campaign season begins to get into full swing. One of the biggest campaign issues in this election cycle is energy policy. Already a number of candidates have put out plans to reduce America’s dependence on foreign sources of energy. On the Republican side, candidates seem to see more domestic production of oil and gas as being necessary, while Democratic candidates seem to be pushing for more investment in green technologies.

What will politicians do when faced with the prospect of working cold fusion E-Cat technology that can produce clean, plentiful energy very cheaply?

Candidates will probably want to know what public opinion is on the issue before they take a firm position. It is highly likely that if E-Cat technology becomes understood and accepted by the voting public, it will be something that most voters will want, and want quickly. Winter is almost here and this is the time that people start worrying about their fuel bills. We just had a massive early snowstorm in the North East which has cut off power to millions of homes. Who would not want home based energy production in such circumstances?

And if there is a groundswell of support among the general public for E-Cat technology we are likely to see candidates embrace it also. I doubt that any serious candidate will run on a “ban the E-Cat” platform if it can be shown to be safe.

It may actually come to a point where in order to gain support, candidates might actually try and show that they are MORE supportive of the E-Cat than their opponents, and we might start seeing creative and ambitious proposals put forward to bring about a rapid adoption of this technology.

One of the big battles Rossi is going to have to fight is to get regulatory approval for home-based E-Cat units. The main reason that he says he thinks it will take up to two years to see small units on the market is because it will be necessary to get authorization from governmental bodies to allow thier use in domestic settings.

What if a candidate became a champion of the E-Cat and promised to push for quick testing and approval so the technology could be deployed as rapidly as possible? An energy hungry and financially strapped electorate which was conviced of the validity of the E-Cat could be very supportive of such a policy.

When it boils down to it, energy issues are at the heart of many economic and political problems. If cheap, clean and plentiful energy were available people would have much less anxiety about how they were going to pay their bills, business costs would decrease, goods would be cheaper, economic growth would be boosted, etc.

In one way it would be a politician’s dream come true — a candidate could make grand promises about a new and bright future, and people might actually believe them.

On the other hand there might be some nightmare-like aspects to a technology like the E-Cat for politicians. There will likely be some segments of the population who will be adversely affected by a much better energy technology. People who work in the fossil fuel sector could very well see their businesses negatively impacted. If oil prices drop in the face of a competitive new power source, some boom towns may go bust. If power plants transition to using E-Cats for power rather than coal, we might see the mining industry suffer badly. And what would happen to the alternative energy sector. Wind and solar projects could end up being abandoned.

So it is going to be very interesting to look at how political campaigns and government policies might be affected if there is a successful launch of the E-Cat later this year.

Do you have any ideas about energy policy proposals that would make sense if the E-Cat takes off? If you do, feel free to add a comment below.

And it might be time to start letting our elected representatives and political candidates know about the E-Cat story — they may need to start thinking about how they are going to deal with what could be a very important reality.

Frank Acland

  • Kim


    A mantra taught from birth for how many ages.


    How do you even begin to change this.

    The crux question is: are the true powers going to
    allow it into the paradigm.

    The politicians don’t do anything unless it
    has been sanctioned by the true powers,otherwise
    they commit political suicide.

    A good a start for this conversation.

    You tell me, has the true power given the green


  • Gray Champion

    If working, electricity producing e-cats were as numerous as “A personal computer on every desktop” there would be real competition against the established utilities down to the local level. I think the swell of freedom would be very appealing to the common man. “An e-cat vault in every back-yard” ? Heat and cool your house with it. Run your lights, fridge and oven with it. Charge your electric car with it. Or process your own fuel with it. Purify your own water with it. Neutralize your own sewage with it. Abundant power. Now there is a sense of freedom that Americans have not felt since the Spirit of ’76! A politician could arrange policy to expand freedom with it. Hmmm.

    • Kim

      Please let all of your friends you know that
      True freedom is upon us… the best you can

      Its mind boggling to understand the
      the true significant of this energy source.

      I have been doing the same…

      The president wants to create jobs?


      New Jobs and Unlimited Freedom


      • Wes

        Free round of drinks for all!

  • Pingback: The E-Cat in Politics — Will Any Candidate Mention Rossi’s Invention? | eCat Now! – Rossi eCat News()

  • Sojourner Soo

    Sadly, the US government’s patent office does not patent cold fusion devices. It seems to me that Americans probably want to lobby their political representatives to have that regulation changed. It is, indeed, time to start contacting all your politicians and making them aware of this new technology, as well as the restrictions on patents.

    In Canada, I have already made most of our federal and provincial energy ministers aware of the E-Cat, as well as sending emails to all the energy journalists I can find, who work for MSM. I’ve emailed many local news organizations, and blogged on their news response forums across the country. I’ve written to professors at many universities, in addition to all the major Canadian players in the environment movement. One person on my FB page, on which I post articles about Rossi’s E-Cat on a daily basis, has also posted news stories and comments on our federal energy minister’s FB page, only to have them deleted, four times so far. I have, myself, messaged Joe Oliver, the minister, both at his ministry office and on his FB page on several occasions. I have yet to receive a reply.

    You can understand, given that Canada’s tarsands now provides the majority of US oil imports, our government and MSM is going to ignore this new technology for as long as they can. It is a direct threat to the tarsands industry in Alberta, which has close ties to the American Koch Brothers, as well as others in the fossil fuel sector. TransCanada Pipelines, the company hoping the build the Keystone XL pipeline, is, in fact, an American company, despite its name.

    Not surprisingly, none of the media reports so far published on CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc, has yet to appear in Canadian MSM. We have a political fight on our hands.

    • Kim

      If we continue with oil we will
      inevitably blow ourselfs to
      kingdom come.

      Its very disruptive to our way of life, yet its the
      only responsible thing to do


    • Robert

      I think in the case of the US Patent and Trademark Office, they want a little more scientific rigor on the topic, as the basic concept of a “cold fusion reactor” has been discredited in their opinion.

      Still, the USPTO has patented faster-than-light communications devices and other complete nonsense, so I really don’t see it being a major issue. They quit rejecting perpetual motion devices some time ago as it too up too much of their time and those have long since been proven to be scams in every case. You can request an “appeal” for something that genuinely works, but for the USPTO they would likely require a working model that their examiners can work with. The patent application would date back to when the original application is filed in terms of protection, so “damages” could still be sought if there are competing companies producing the e-cat.

      Then again, if it is patent free in America, it opens up some other interesting prospects as well. For those of us who simply want one of these devices, I see that as a win-win situation where it doesn’t matter if the USPTO will acknowledge a patent or not. I would still respect Rossi and seek to license the device from him even if the USPTO is being a jerk, and I suspect others would as well.

  • daniel maris

    Well even Rossi is saying small scale E cats are a good two years away.

    And we haven’t had confirmation of post-purchase successful operation yet.

    I think this is a “bit previous” as we say in the UK.

    • Tommi Elonen

      Agreed. I highly doubt E-cat will be mentioned by ANYONE in politics, untill there are some functional units available to pucblic, outside the influence of Rossi.
      Only after this device has clearly proven not to be a hoax, then the politicans can mention it.

  • Bob H

    The prospect is exciting – almost as significat as mans discovery of FIRE. I hope it is true.
    If it is the changes will be staggering and disasterous for many. Millions of family & livelyhoods are supported by the structures & infrastructures of fossel fuels & electricity.
    If I was they guy who had a carbon paper factory or made buggy whips for a living- I would resist changes that made me obsolete. So would you

  • Alex

    I am surprised the Oil companies don’t buy up as many devices Rossi has to offer to keep them off the market long enough to make ready their utility companies and gas stations for transition to provide energy, or make more profit by spending less supplying “The Demand”. They can fight the patent process for at least 7 years, if Rossi is aggressive about it, and doesn’t get assassinated in the process. So I give them about 10 years of worry free profit making. Until then, the “only” thing politicians have to do, is avoid the issue, or make something else the worse issue, like jobs lost from the E-Cat. Even though this technology can be implemented quickly, there is a moral issue of whether it should. I think a slow introduction would be wise.

    • Alex

      Yes, I think in run-ons. Therefore, I type in run-ons. I am aware how foolish my point of view looks without proper grammar.

      • gillana giancarlo

        I don’t think this beeing correct time for politician to be involved in.
        Just wait for the commercial response on that subject, if response will be positive and public opinion will be interested, then and not before politician could move and start a campain in this revolutionnary item.

  • Francis

    I see the US (and probably the EU countries due to US pressure) resisting this as their economies are entrenched in oil. The best that can happen is that countries like Japan and other countries which have to by energy adopt the E-cats quickly. The western countries will have no choice then but follow.

  • Vic

    “And if there is a groundswell of support among the general public for E-Cat technology we are likely to see candidates embrace it also.”

    I’m not so sure. There is currently a large groundswell of public support for existing renewable energy technologies, but the demand has been largely neglected by governments the world over. 

    “I doubt that any serious candidate will run on a “ban the E-Cat” platform if it can be shown to be safe.”

    I wouldn’t be so sure about that either. Witness the current round of Republican candidates, every one of them running on platforms of climate change denial, an immensely unsafe proposal.  

    • Brian

      As far as the Climate change… The only thing that the significant portion of the actual public as well as the scientific community refuse to support as far as climate change goes is its cause being blamed on man; when there is no where near enough research to even support such a hypothesis, but there is a large amount of actual evidence supporting the fact that there were considerably more drastic temperature changes occuring on the earth well before man even existed.

      The only thing unsafe as far as climate change goes is the blind belief so many people put into it. Let me put it this way, human’s have been recording climate data scientifically for maybe 300 years that is about 2/3*10^-7 of the age of the earth; this is like deciding the cause of something just by looking at a 0.00024 second chunk of data when it has been going on for an hour.

      As for the actual article, very interesting. I honestly think that patent offices and the like are doing a disservice to why they were originally created. It is not their place to decide whether or not a device is scientifically possible or legitmate, but instead to prevent others from stealing the ideas of others for profit. If some crazy person wants to patent their Wellsian Time Machine then they should be granted a patent provided someone else had not done so previously. As the article states, this stupidity has resulted in futher discouraging people to spend time and money researching the current fringe sciences. (Note – all sciences were at one time fringe sciences.)

  • nima

    Peer review at it’s best.

    Psychologist admits to faking dozens of scientific studies

  • nima

    Interesting article from newscientist about cold fusion
    published in 2009.

  • Mark Silva

    How much money do you think the big oil corporations will offer to Rossi to keep the E-Cat hidden from the public, when they realize the device is real?

    I’m thinking about the possibility that the oil companies offer 10 billion dollars to Rossi, in order to Rossi keep the E-Cat as “an industrial secret”, and stop selling E-Cats in the market.

    Will Rossi sell out?

    • Frank

      I guess that is was Rossi hopes:
      An oil-sheik gets nervous because all this hype about the e-cat, and just to rule out the (very, very small) risk, that this device might work as claimed, offers him several millions for the exclusive rights on this invention.

      Then Rossi can walk away with his pocket full of money, without losing face. – And except statements like ‘Sorry, I am bounded to an non-disclosure agreement, I can not tell you anything morer about the secrets of the e-cat’ you would not hear anything more from him.

      But in order this can come true, he needs the support from all this e-cat believers to push this hype to higher levels, and needs to discredit all sceptic ones 😉

  • AR Slnk

    Let’s Be Brave.
    No power-center, doesn’t mater how mighty it is, can stop Rossi’s breakthrough as long as e-cat is real and it is a working device.
    Can you imagine; for example in Japan, people is enjoying almost free, plentyfull and clean energy while Italians are suffering in the name of keeping the Seven Sisters alive.
    Yes, Dubai and other artificial cities in the Middle East will fade away. But “99% of USA” in the Wall Street will not feel bad if the “covered ski center in desert” is no more.
    Let’s be brave. If e-cat is real it will win in a very short time, and what a win will it be.

  • PersonFromPorlock

    I suspect that IF e-cat works, it’ll be a replay of the print media versus the Internet, this time starring the petroleum industry.

    The more interesting question is whether government will use the savings to put its financial house in order, or roll up its sleeves and continue to spend with both hands. I am not hopeful.

  • jack

    The world debt crisis is the timing catalyst for this technology.
    At this point in time debt saturation has been reached in the developed world. The banking system is basically insolvent and Central banks cannot get consumers spending again all due to debt saturation. If energy costs are taken out of the debt equation then consumer spending power will increase and the banking system would get back to some type of normality. If the banking system control governments then its in their interest at this point in time to release this technology.The technology would be released not because of an altruistic government, but because it could save the International Central Banking System from imploding.

  • Sanjeev

    Sterling Allan :

    There was a test by a U.S. entitity whose name begins with N, but they apparently are not calling it “successful” by the parameters of scientific rigor.

    • Sanjeev
    • Robert

      There was no scientific rigor, and there hasn’t been any real science done on the concept other than some experimental procedures by Rossi and Focardi. There are some “related” concepts which have been studied by real scientists which suggest there might be some actual fusion going on, but I have yet to see anything demonstrating that Rossi has actually been producing “net energy gains” with his system.

      Certainly the tests have been no more rigorous than this somewhat similar test:

      Having seen some of the tests done by Rossi and some of the others, this particular video gave be a huge laugh. If you don’t have a sense of humor, it will seriously offend you.

  • Scott H

    The biggest threat is not to the oil companies. The amount of profit from a gallon of gas is 25 cents where as the government receives over 2 dollars per gallon. How could they possibly make up the difference? Along with the lobbing money from all energy sectors and companies like GE, you will also be adding Government labor unions.

  • Pingback: The E-Cat in Politics — Will Any Candidate Mention Rossi’s Invention? |

  • Brad Arnold

    I would be very careful about wish LENR becomes embroiled in the US Presidential race. Do you know how much money a Republican candidate could get in donations from the fossil fuel industry for coming out against the e-cat?

    For those who object that Republicans are for the free market – how about Republicans for state’s rights when the Supreme Court decided Rowe vs. Wade, but then against states rights when it comes to legalization of marijuana. Or how about for free enterprise, then legislate against importing cheaper certified drugs from other countries? Or how about freedom of choice unless a woman is raped and wants the pregnancy aborted. Or how about being pro-life, but cheering executions. The list goes on…

    • Brad Arnold

      In my opinion, a patriotic America ought to be for rapidly transitioning the US economy to LENR. Since Congress is broken because Republicans don’t want to give Obama a victory, I suggest the US Executive Branch do an Executive Finding deeming rapid LENR transition to be in the national security interest of America. Furthermore, I suggest declaring nickel a strategic asset.

    • PersonFromPorlock

      Do you know how much money a Republican candidate could get in donations from the fossil fuel industry for coming out against the e-cat?

      Realistically, both parties are for sale and big business is shameless – and indiscriminate – about buying them. The Democrats, for instance, get lots of money from Wall Street. But bribery can only do so much, and if the voters want e-cat, all the business ‘donations’ in the world won’t keep the politicians bought.

  • Robert

    The E-cat is not anywhere “mainstream” yet, and it is only very early adopters which are even going to know about this device, much less any presidential candidate. I’m not going to suggest there is no way it is going to happen, but don’t get stuck on yourself here thinking that the entire universe revolves around this device…. because it doesn’t.

    You didn’t hear about politicians talking about microcomputers in 1976, or other similar devices when they first came out. Really, this device isn’t a big deal until it proves itself and starts to pull large numbers of people “off the grid” and starts to have a real impact. Until that happens, it will be marginalized precisely because it is at the margins of society.

    I wouldn’t get paranoid about “big oil”. Indeed I believe what is going to happen here is that this technology is going to spring out into society so quickly that “big oil” simply won’t have a chance to react. I’ve seen that in other industries like how personal computers blew away the old guard like IBM, Wang, Control Data, DIGITAL, and other major computer companies at the time… how many of those are still around?

    I’ve seen this with enough emergent technologies to see that it isn’t nearly as big of a problem as is being claimed by some here. Don’t worry about it.

    The largest problem will be Rossi himself, as to if he will permit this technology to be licensed in a reasonable manner and get these devices pushed out to as many people as possible. If he holds on tight and tries to maximize profits on a short-term basis, he will not only lose many prospects but he will also give room for these competitors to react and get laws written to stop this from happening. If there is a clear constituent base, at least in governments with elected leaders, those politicians will step back and let the market take over.

  • Sanjeev

    Quote : “And it might be time to start letting our elected representatives and political candidates know..”

    Govts of the countries where Ecats are being shipped will be first to know. The shipping container will cross some port and customs and they will know the contents, seller and customer ,cost and everything.

    Italian govt surely knows, they have not banned the export of it. If they don’t then you can most surely conclude that there is no customer and the whole thing is fake.

    US govt already knows due to the involvement of Nasa and Spawar. They did not ban the import of a device with ‘nuclear’ stuff in it, it is amazing. If US customs do not know about it then again the claim becomes weak. It is also surprising that the names did not leak from there. This can be possible only if the customer is military or US govt itself. Only they can hide this shipment so effectively.

    Then I don’t know anything about Italian foreign policy, how could they allow selling this thing to a foreign military without making any exceptions or policies. I’m no expert in this matter and may be I’m building sand castles here.

    But I suspect that there are already some policies because you have seen no reaction from govts even though the deal has now become a public news item.

  • Sanjeev

    The power and efficiency of govts (of any country) is generally overestimated. If something big comes, they are mostly helpless against it.
    If something is in public interest, a govt which bans it, is soon destroyed. If its a democracy, it falls and in other cases revolts happen. For example, no govt in the world can control the internet or phone network too much because if they do, public will throw them out of power.

    The only weapon of a politician is deception. Fool them and rule them.
    Both politicians and businessmen are attracted to power and wealth. Currently oil is one of the resource which gives both, so they are with it. If something else gives them the wealth and power they will switch to it.

    Oil companies do not love oil, they love money and they will switch as soon as the money starts coming from other technologies. Right now the green techs do not make a good business because the oil is dirt cheap compared to solar or what not. Everyone prefers to buy oil. As soon as any other tech comes close to the profit margins of oil, the very same oil kings will switch to it.

    Btw, oil is no more a money tree now, IT sector has overtaken it. They are less powerful now. Hopefully soon green energy will overtake IT.

    Even the middle east knows that oil is not going to last forever and they will adopt any new tech which can keep them well fed and wealthy. They have enough wealth to buy millions of Ecats to transform their desert land into lush green forest. There will be unlimited cheap energy for this task.

    • admin

      Good points here, Sanjeev — individuals, companies and governments that want to survive and prosper will try to adapt to new realities.

      • Vic

        I think Frank Acland’s article and Sanjeev both raise some pertinent and fascinating points, however I’m struggling to assimilate the school of thought outlined in some of Sanjeev’s comments,

        “If something is in public interest, a govt which bans it, is soon destroyed.
        If its a democracy, it falls and in other cases revolts happen.”

        That is not what we’re observing in the real world where we see broad public approval for the deployment of renewable energy solutions, yet governments worldwide have failed to respond. This state of affairs has existed for decades.  
        If you’re arguing that an historic global revolt is soon (or perhaps has already begun) to topple the currently corrupted regimes, then yes, we could share in such a dream.     

        “For example, no govt in the world can control the internet or phone network too much because if they do, public will throw them out of power.”

        Again, this is not what we observe in the real world. Forgive me Sanjeev, from which side of the “great firewall of China” are you posting ?  If by chance you are posting from China, please take my advice and don’t try to overthrow your government. Such an act would likely prove fatal.   

        “Btw, oil is no more a money tree now, IT sector has overtaken it. They are less powerful now. Hopefully soon green energy will overtake IT.”

        If you think that the US $101 billion profit made by the big 5 oil companies this calendar year alone represents anything other than a money tree then sorry Sanjeev, you’ll just have to forgive me for marking you in my mental notes as “part of the problem”. 

        • Sanjeev


          I guess you find me a bit too optimistic 🙂
          It seems unrealistic, if you see only a small part of the world timeline. You must see the broader picture. Now I’m not saying that people will revolt overnight and throw their govts out. It builds up year by year, sometimes takes a few generations.

          Now on the particular examples of public approval for green energy and China, IMHO, govt has not actively suppressed green tech, its only that these techs are not in a position to compete at this time. If someone can make same amounts of profits on solar as those of oil, then he will soon takeover oil market and also feed a few bones to politicians. Right now its not feasible.

          I’m optimistic about Ecat because for the first time, something cheaper than oil and coal has appeared on the face of earth. Of course it has not yet become a fact.

          At least China has not banned the net and phones totally. There is no blackout there, on the contrary the data and telephone networks are growing exponentially there. I don’t take sides of Chinese govt either, it is a govt, and it will protect its status quo just like any other govt. The govts in west are no different, everyone knows what happened to wikileaks, they have fallen as low as sticking rape charges on the founder to protect themselves. I see no reason to single out China, all are same everywhere, lust of power and money rules them all.

          I’m posting from India. There’s too much freedom here, but the politicians and businesses are equally corrupt.

          • Vic

            Hi Sanjeev,

            Now that you’ve clarified the timescales in question are of the order of several generations or more, then I have to admit your reasoning is sound. But that is what worries me so much, that it may take another generation or more before humanity acts on climate change is truly horrifying, given what we already know about it.

            Your opinion that governments are not actively suppressing green tech appears quite understandable on the surface. It’s not until you scratch the surface that the cracks in your assumption begin to reveal themselves. Both the G20 and the International Energy Agency report that worldwide, subsidies to fossil fuel industries are of the order of US $500 billion per year. These are taxpayer’s dollars. The very same taxpayers that for decades have been calling on their governments for a phase-out of fossil fuels.  I dream of what might happen to green tech if it were bankrolled to a similar degree. I also wonder if even the e-cat could compete on such an unfairly stacked playing ground.

            Regarding your belief that China’s government is not guilty of widely censoring and controlling the dissemination of information within it’s borders, I suggest you ask yourself the simple question, if 20% of the world’s population has now been given access to electricity, computers, smartphones and the Internet, then where are they ? I know I don’t see them showing up anywhere here on the Internet that I use – certainly not at the same level as I’m seeing your fellow Indians joining the online world.  You could of course argue that their absence is merely a manifestation of the language barrier, yet we’re told that English is taught as a required subject in most schools in China at both the elementary and high school levels. Hmmmm.

            I watch with fascination India’s emergence as a global player and wish your country every success. Lord knows your people have been oppressed by various regimes for far too long. But I do worry about India Sanjeev, with so much of your population living so close to sea level, and so many reliant on the glacial meltwaters to the north. I especially worry how hundreds of millions of Indians have to share that same dwindling water resource with hundreds of millions of Pakistanis. The pessimists amongst us forsee very bad outcomes in that area of the globe in the years to come. Let us both hope and pray that the only “nuclear exchange” we see coming from that area is that of your respective manufacturing industries undercutting each other on the price of shiny new e-cats !   

  • nima

    Andrea Rossi
    November 6th, 2011 at 3:53 AM


  • Computers have made and are still making many industries and millions of jobs obsolete, yet nobody could stop their development and availability. Nuclear power is huge competition for other energy sources yet is is widely used.

    It’s silly to worry at this point about businesses and politicians resisting a revolutionary form of energy production.

    The MOST IMPORTANT question at this point in time is Will It Blend? 🙂

    If it blends, they will come! 🙂

    P.S. If there is any scientific merit to this technology no force will stop it from taking the world by storm.

    • daniel maris

      Combustible technologies don’t necessarily take the world “by storm”. By stealth might be more accurate. The first recognisably modern Internal Combustion Engine dates from about 1870 – but it was another 50 years before it would dominate vehicular traffic.

      Things may move faster now, but I think it could still be 20-30 years before the E Cat becomes the main source of energy on the planet.

      • Well, as you know, analogies to the past don’t always work so well since there are differences in the situations. From the little I read about the E-Cat I gather it’s really a form of “cold fusion” which is basically a nuclear reactor. (It’s like a “nano-sun”.) In other words, It takes the application of energy to get the fusion reaction going and after that, it’s self-sustaining and there is a net gain in energy produced. Whether there is really a net gain is what most don’t seem to be sure about. Apparently that’s kind of hard to measure accurately.

        But regardless of the facts, let’s assume that it is really a type of cold-fusion reactor and it does produce a net gain of energy. The best comparison would be to the invention (discovery) of nuclear fission. But even better, the world is now aching for energy. The world’s energy requirements are skyrocketing. In the 1800’s steam engines dominated and the internal combustion engine was much more complicated and took years of refinement. There were almost no cars. In fact the first car ran on steam and later some were electric! Of course battery technology was too primitive.

        Even today internal combustion engines are severely lacking, producing much pollution, noise, etc. If you want to get some portable emergency power the most unattractive choice is an engine powered generator with the gasoline types being the most repelling.

        The E-Cat is reported to be a revolutionary self-contained “energy reactor” which can be produced very inexpensively using easily available materials. Supposedly it can power a car for 4 years with no addition of any fuel! (Like the sun can burn for billions of years.) So will it become popular fast if that is true? I would think no less fast than the iPhone became popular.

        But the biggest question here is “Will it Blend?” 🙂


        • Colby

          I don’t feel that it is a question of “will it blend.” The biggest underlying factor to any new development is money. The question is, what will the companies with billions of dollars vested in combustible fuel sources do? Those companies already pay auto industries NOT to develop cars powered by electricity because it hurts their profits. There are cars that run solely on electricity but the only problem is that they don’t have enough backing to make them cheap. They are only available to a select few wealthy who can afford the cars. Without the billions of dollars it takes to abundantly and cheaply produce it is unlikely ANY technology will become widespread immediately. The regrettable fact is, the world revolves around money and the people with money and their interests. In order for this or anything like it to become mainstream there has to be some major financial contributions and a change in the mindset of the super rich.

          • Well, even money can’t stand in the way of truly revolutionary technology. Your example is electric cars. So think about it, if electric cars were truly revolutionary technology that had great market potential, no amount of blackmail money could stop anybody from pursuing their manufacture since the possible profits would far exceed any such payments. I love the idea of electric cars but the fact is that battery technology is primitive. If you ask people if they would buy an electric car if it was priced the same most would say no. People see them as less versatile and powerful, sort of like toys. Electric cars are expensive since demand is low so not many are made. There are some hybrid cars though which are selling well. However if the e-cat is a real revolution in energy production and it can power a car for years as I’ve heard, then why wouldn’t there be great demand for it. Whoever holds the patents to it would become the richest man in the world…

            So the only question is “Will it blend?” or more accurately “Does it blend?”