Quick Poll of E-Cat World Readers

I thought it would be interesting to see what most readers of E-Cat World think of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat technology. We get some very interesting comments on the site, but only from a small percentage of visitors to the site. I’m wondering what the opinions of the silent majority of our readers are, so I have posted a poll on the right sidebar of the site to find out. There are five options: a) Rossi has discovered a useful new source of energy; b) he has discovered a new form of energy, but the effect is insignificantly small; c) he thinks he has what he says but is mistaken; d) he is a hoaxer/scammer; e) don’t know.

There may be other opinions out there which may not fit into any of the above categories — feel free to post any alternative theories in the comments section below.

Frank Acland

  • Adam

    I tend to think more of probabilities, rather than one definite answer. I selected “Rossi has discovered a new way to make useful energy”, but my breakdown of the choices given, as a percentage would be:

    70% Rossi has discovered a new way to make useful energy
    5% Rossi has discovered a form of energy but it is insignificantly small
    5% Rossi honestly thinks he has achieved cold fusion but is mistaken
    20% Rossi has nothing and is perpetrating a hoax/scam

    I will keep open minded on this matter and adjust my probabilities along the way according to new information I see.

  • Hampus

    I would say

    90% it works
    10% he think it works but he is mistaken

    • Hampus

      O maybe it’s 95 it works and only 5 it doesn’t.

  • arian

    great papers for understanding and replication nickle -hydrogen reaction or similar metal with high lattice enthalpy with hydrogen from Rowan university.



  • bachcole

    There is this site: https://www.intrade.com/v4/home/home.jsp? It is a much more serious and reliable “survey” than us folks who are obsessed with following Rossi. I tried to figure out how to open a market with Intrade. Perhaps one of you-all could figure it out. It might also be a big money maker for us folks in the know. Most everyone else will be selling at ridiculously low prices and we could end up with all of the marbles when Rossi is proven right. Unfortunately, because of the way that Rossi is doing things, there may be no clearly defined date and event that would prove Rossi right, unlike “The US Supreme Court to rule individual mandate unconstitutional before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012”.

    I would appreciate thoughts on this one.

    • DaveK

      As far as Intrade, perhaps we could say something like “the power produced by Rossi’s E-Cat will be confirmed publicly by a well-known company”.

      The problem with this is what motivation does a company using the product have to disclose that it works? They would want to use the energy source as long as possible the competition can take advantage of cheaper energy.

      • Paul

        If you really believe that Rossi has an invention that will become the leading energy source for almost all purposes, you should be able to make enormous amounts of money by selling oil futures or selling short oil company stocks. I am not an expert in financial markets, but I believe that it is possible to make money if you know that a stock is going to drop in value.

        Of course you have to be right about two things: (a) that he Ecat has to be real and practical, and (b) that oil prices will drop as a result. . . .and then you have to get the timing right.

        Although I voted “Rossi has discovered a new way to make useful energy” in the survey, I have not bet my life’s savings on selling oil stocks short – yet. I do watch the oil futures markets daily for signs that they have woken up to the fact that the ecat will one day make oil obsolete – except as a raw material for making plastics.

  • Robert Horning

    For me, it is “None of the above”. I am open to the possibility that Rossi might have discovered or invented something, but I’m still not convinced. It isn’t black or white, but rather something to me that is still unknown. I can’t even say that it is a hoax, because even the “evidence” it is a hoax is shaky.

    The theater being used as “scientific evidence” is certainly concerning to me, although the lack of going through normal scientific channels to present the information is less so for me at the moment. All I care to see is if this works or doesn’t work as advertised. If one of these devices can operate for a prolonged period of time without an outside power supply (even if they have to support each other to achieve that), Rossi may have something worth looking at. So far, no such “test” has been done and certainly not done for something under the control of another group outside of Rossi’s core group of supporters.

    My response, if it was in the poll, would have been: “Skeptical that this might work, but willing to wait and see if Rossi can provide better evidence of its operation.”

  • arian

    Great papers for understanding and replication nickle -hydrogen reaction or similar metal with high lattice enthalpy with hydrogen from Rowan university.


    http ://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/RowanHydrinoReport2009.pdf

    • Robert Mockan

      The solid fuel compositions (developed by Black Light Power) that Rowan was testing have maximum 6.5 times thermal power out compared to all available power expected from “conventional” chemistry. With all the different testing and measurements, any nuclear reaction products (that would appear as transmuted elements), would have been observed. Over the years this comment has been made by many others. The Black Light Power solid fuel compositions do not appear to activate any nuclear process. When nickel is used by BLP it is used to disassociate molecular hydrogen into atomic hydrogen, that is then available for releasing energy by collapsing to the lower energy state using the BLP energy hole catalysts. But in the LENR process the atomic hydrogen appears to interact with transition metal (including nickel) d-orbital electron bands, and the longer matter wavelength of the resulting nuclear active state hydrogen is able to interact with itself (fusion), or with the metal nucleus (causing elemental transmutation). In addition the energy release appears much greater than what is realized with the Black Light Power process.
      But Black Light Power does have a hypothesis that it is the collapsed hydrogen (what they call a hydrino), being electrically neutral, that is able to pass through the electric field barrier of the atom and interact with the nucleus, under certain conditions. The importance of what Rossi is doing to “activate” his fuel can not be overestimated. His procedure essentially negates all of Black Light Power company efforts to create a new power industry with solid fuel compositions using the hydrino technology. If Rossi would disclose his procedure, it might enable other researchers to optimize power generation using LENR, and maybe improve power generation using hydrino chemistry. The E-Cat is a good start, but what is really needed is power generation at much higher temperatures, that can melt steel for example, not just boil water. Power that can be used in jet aircraft and space craft. Also power at much higher power densities. Not just 100 watts per gram, but perhaps megawatts per gram, of fuel. Also the ability to transmute elements, if perfected, might make it cheaper to transmute readily available common elements into those needed by industry, than to mine them. And finally, simple methods of making the fuel(s), available to every body, need to be publicized, so the technology can never be controlled by any Elitist oligarchy, to perpetuate debt slavery. Hydrogen and heavy hydrogen evidently have properties that need to be more fully understood, for either Black Light Power or LENR to progress to the next level. THE MOST VALUABLE KNOWLEDGE ROSSI HAS IS HIS ACTIVATION METHOD.
      That alone is priceless, but only until other researchers discover how to do it. That could be months, maybe just weeks away. And other researchers will discover how to do it, if they not already have. I would say it is a certainty, given their expertise and equipment they use to study hydrogen and nickel, that Black Light Power already KNOWS what Rossi is doing. And Piantelli undoubtedly either knows how to do it , or is developing superior methods. Miley also has enough knowledge and experience to compete with Piantelli and Rossi. Going through my information sources I can name at least 10 researchers who either understand exactly what the Rossi method is, or will know very soon.
      But until the activation method is known, by EVERY BODY, this technology might still be suppressed.

  • RichyRoo

    This is a stupid poll, the fact is that from publically available information we simlply cannot know what the truth is. Anyone who, based on internet informatin, claims to ‘know’ based one way or the other is deluded or stupid.

    • daniel maris

      It’s an opinion survey. The clue is in the title.

  • QC_JYM

    I’d say a) but with a light restriction. Discovery might be too strong a word,it’s more like improving on a old idea!


    • daniel maris

      I agree. It’s not really a “discovery” – that honour presumably goes to P&F.

  • PersonFromPorlock

    I think Mary Yugo has it about right (and congratulations to her for maintaining her cool in the face of frequent vituperation). Rossi, so far, has managed to come across less as Tesla than as Dogbert.

    The question we should really be asking at this point – while we wait for some proof that ecat works – is if Stremmenos and Focardi are being played for fools, or if their participation is evidence that Rossi has something besides blather.

  • arian

    [Vo]:Catalysts recipes from Dr. Randell mills ( he achieved 50kw thermal power output with this catalysts)

    David ledin
    Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:44:44 -0800

    >From Dr. Randell mills patent

    A method of preparation of the catalytic material of the present
    invention of catalytic systems that hinge on the transfer of an
    electron from a cation to another capable of producing energy holes
    for shrinking hydrogen atoms includes the steps of:

    Dissolving ionic salts of the cations into a solvent. In a preferred
    embodiment, the ionic salts are dissolved in deionized demineralized
    water to concentration of 0.3 to 0.5 molar.

    Uniformly wetting a dissociation material with the dissolved salt solution.

    Draining the excess solution.

    Drying the wetted dissociation material in an oven preferably at a
    temperature of 220.degree. C.

    Pulverizing the dried catalytic material into a powder.

    Example of a Ionic Catalytic Material: Potassium Carbonate (K.sub.2
    CO.sub.3) on Ni Powder

    To prepare the ionic catalytic material: potassium carbonate (K.sub.2
    CO.sub.3) on Ni powder, a 1 liter solution of 0.5 M K.sub.2 CO.sub.3
    in water is poured over 500 grams of -300 mesh Ni powder. The
    materials are stirred to remove air pockets around the grains of Ni.
    The excess solution can be drained off. The powder can be dried in an
    oven at 200.degree. C. If necessary the material can be ground to
    remove lumps.

    Hydrogen Spillover Catalysts

    In a preferred embodiment, the source of hydrogen atoms for the
    catalytic shrinkage reaction comprises a hydrogen spillover catalyst.

    A hydrogen spillover catalyst according to the present invention comprises:

    A hydrogen dissociation material or means which forms free hydrogen
    atoms or protons;

    A conduit material onto which free hydrogen atoms spill and which
    supports free, mobile hydrogen atoms and provides a path or conduit
    for the flow of hydrogen atoms or protons;

    A source of energy holes which catalyze the shrinkage reaction, and optionally

    A support material into which the former materials are embedded as a
    mixture, compound, or solution.

    Full Catalysts recipes


    • Robert Mockan

      I asked Dr. Mills several years ago if he thought LENR researchers finding transmutation products (indicating nuclear reactions) in fuel compositions that were very similar to what he uses in the experiments being done at his company means that the process he discovered (about hydrogen collapsing below the ground energy state) can result in nuclear reactions. His answer was that I would have to ask the LENR researchers about that. Having studied most of the experimental data available about the Mills work, and the work of other researchers in LENR and transmutation, it is clear to me that the Mills company MUST have observed nuclear effects in some of his experiments. And that LENR and transmutation researchers MUST have observed some energy generation at least partly from hydrogen collapse, in addition to nuclear effects. In some experiments the fuel compositions were not just similar, but identical. And the energy measurements were being made with functionally identical equipment. So my take on all this is that more work needs to be done on theory.

    • Robert Mockan

      In the excerpt from one of the Mills patents you posted the strontium niobium oxide was found to generate about 0.55 watt per 10 cc of material, and the power started and stopped immediately with hydrogen gas flow over the ceramic catalytic material. Note that this is much less than the Rossi E-Cat power density, but looking at the numbers s revealing. It has been noticed by all researchers in this alternate energy field, that the active regions of active materials vary. The more active the material, the more of it has the active properties. To go from the 0.55 watt per 10 cc of the Mills material to the calculated 110 watts per 10 cc of the Rossi E-Cat fuel means that active material is present 100 times more in the E-Cat. In catalysis research these kind of improvements are very common. The first hydrogenation catalysts (in normal chemistry, not nuclear active chemistry) were much less than even 1% active. Even the same materials, prepared differently, might have 100 times more active material depending on how it was prepared. And that might still be only a small percentage of the total material in the catalyst. In most experiments with Mills and LENR “fuels” power output is often nearly linear with the amount of atomic hydrogen that can be made available to the active reaction sites. In the early 90s with thin films loaded with hydrogen by electrolysis researchers did power experiments where over 3000 watts per cc of active material were being generated. Without more data from the E-Cat, we do not know what percentage of the nickel fuel composition is actually “active”, but the chances are is that much improvement is possible.

      • Robert Mockan

        correction: “100 times” should be “200 times.
        (200 times 0.55 equals 110).

  • Johan H

    I choose “I don’t know” simply because we haven’t got enough data to know. I find it very interesting though and I don’t we think we know all about physics to rule out the possibility. But it’s a very easy experiment to show if it really does work with the claims he makes, so if I would have been in a situation to be asked to invest I would have demanded a real test. I encourage him to continue and choose whatever method he find suitable to progress his invention. I would have been wary too about loosing the control of the invention to other companies, the revenue from a device like this can be enormous and the threat to other business are large. So the path he has chosen makes sense (show enough to interest large investors but not too much to reveal everything to the competitors). Keep control of the device to make sure it will be something beneficial to mankind and make sure you get something back in form of cash to develop it further or develop other ideas.

    • admin

      Thanks Johann — have just added a “don’t know” option to the poll.

  • Jim

    The circumstantial evidence suggests that he believes it works. It doesn’t really seem like internationally annoucing it would be the way to go if this were a fraud. Additionally, there are too many others involved for me to believe that it doesn’t really work. So I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. It’s possible that it’s merely that I really want it to be true but I like to think not.

  • Blanco69

    Why are we seeing posts from Randal Mills? After following his exploits for the past 6 years I’m convinced he has nothing. If/when Ahern comes up with his theory we should try and join it up with the balderdash comming from BLP. Nobel prize to the first person that can do it!

  • Al D

    Where there is smoke, there is usually fire. I think that enough knowledgeable and credible people have witnessed the e-cat in operation that there must be at least a glowing ember. I think that a lot of the problem is a lack of engineering. There is an awful lot to do in controls for maintaining a not too hot and not too cold temperature for self sustaining operation, packaging, and a method for generating electricity.

    There is probably also a lot to do in optimizing the precise size and mixture of the nickel and catalyst and controlling the flow of hydrogen. Is this H2 or H1? Would one be better than the other?

    There is also a lot to do in the measurement of the output. Heat energy is very difficult to measure due to heat leakage and placement of the measurement devices. It will/would be a lot easier to get precise measurements when/if it were creating electricity and driving a known load.

    I think these ambiguities and the primitive engineering have a lot to do with why Rossi is reluctant to perform very extensive tests. He probably doesn’t want to expose any possible “Gotchas”.

    Nevertheless, the e-cat is a disruptive leap forward in LENR technology simply because results, as far as they go, are reliably repeatable.

    • Robert Horning

      The “glowing ember” here is fusion power. We know it works, and you can see it working whenever you look up in the sky, at night or during the day. A nuclear fusion reactor heats up the Earth and a fully functioning reactor sits only 93 million miles away in something called “the Sun”.

      The trick here is how to harness that kind of energy on a more local basis and on a much smaller scale than trying to rely upon gravitational force to squeeze together enough Hydrogen in order to begin the fusion process. The only other proven technology which can do this, at least for a short period of time, has been a nuclear fission bomb that can have its effects significantly enhanced through the injection of elements which can fuse together in that kind of environment… aka the “Hydrogen Bomb”. Again, we know what this can do by the sheer destructive force these weapons can bring, but that isn’t really a practical solution to powering a city or operating a motor vehicle.

      The promise of a practical fusion reactor is what gets people interested here, and all of the speculation about what the “E-Cat” might be able to do is really just repeating what those who have been involved with legitimate fusion research have been promising for decades and have written up in science fiction novels for that same length of time. There are several approaches to generating power through a “small” fusion device that can be used for practical generation of power, and LENR is one of those possible approaches.

      For myself, LENR is a proven technology so far as I’m convinced through my own investigation that it actually does produce fusion reactions and is something worth investigating. I’m not convinced it can produce a usable amount of energy that can be harnessed on an industrial scale, however. I’m certainly not convinced that Rossi’s E-Cat even uses LENR processes or is anything at all.

      Don’t confuse the enthusiasm for fusion energy potential for anything real that may or may not be coming from Rossi and Focardi. The hope is that perhaps there might be something real here, but what is carrying this bandwagon right now is the promise of fusion power in general. I am hopeful that Rossi may have a winner here, but I’m also extremely skeptical at the moment because it has been the target of so many previous attempts at fraud in the past. Rossi’s track record with the Petroldragon enterprise also calls into question if this might be more of the same or even if he can pull off building E-cats into a viable enterprise…. presuming even if the E-Cat is a real device.

      There are a lot of levels of skepticism here, and there certainly are warning flags of caution if you think you want to invest in this concept as a business venture.

  • Martin6078

    It still there some people who not belive men at the Moon.They belive it wasn´t happen, a hoax.

    • Robert Horning

      If it wasn’t for the millions of people who were witnesses to the actual launches of the Saturn V rockets, or the thousands of sailors who were witnesses to the landing of the capsules, or to the great many people who have seen and actually held the rocks which came from the Moon (including myself), you might have a point.

      There is no comparison.

  • Les

    This story was very interesting for a while… But, like so many before, it is playing out in an old and predictable pattern. Here we are in the “blow off” lots of websites asking for money, and still no product. I’m sure that Rossi will soon move into his exit strategy (whatever it is, I’m sure that it will be “colorful”) Ya gotta hand it to the guy…he plays the game very well!

    • daniel maris

      It’s your assertion that there is no product. No proof. The proof is all the other way:

      1. NI stating publicly they were working with Rossi.

      2. Focardi confirming there is a genuine product.

      3. The US Naval defence agency not denying their purchase.

      • Les

        Yep…you are correct…I “assert” that there is no product. I hope with all my heart that I am wrong.

        1. NI sells control systems to anyone. They “stated publicly” that they sold some equipment to Leonardo corp. They never said anything about “working with Rossi”.

        2. Rossi and Focardi are longtime partners.

        3. You cannot “prove” anything with a double negative.

        Our world/society/species is rapidly approaching a singularity. The population is approaching the point where there simply is not enough energy/resources available to feed everyone. We desperately need a clean viable alternative to petroleum. If one is not found soon…then mother nature will take care of the problem has she has so many times in the past i.e. starvation, famine and war. For a while it looked as if Rossi really had something. Unfortunately…HERE and NOW, I only see 2 “facts”

        1. Websites asking for money
        2. No product.

        My $.02

      • Robert Horning

        This “US Naval Agency” hasn’t confirmed the purchase either. There is simply no proof either way. On the other hand, something like this would need to be purchased as a capital project and would be subject to “Freedom of Information Act” requests not to mention showing up in appropriations hearings, so hiding a purchase of this nature as an American federal agency is highly unlikely. That makes it seem very much like it didn’t happen than that it did. A multi-million dollar purchase (as is supposedly what was spend on the 1 MW reactor) is most definitely something that would show up as a line-item for purchase in an appropriations bill. Dig up the records for that purchase or get out of the way.

        As for National Instruments, the only thing they have confirmed is that they have sold equipment to Rossi and “Leonardo Corporation”, which is the only business relationship that they have. This isn’t proof that the device works, only that Rossi is spending money on industrial controls. It still is solidly on the “Don’t know”/”Could be Hoax” as a good hoax can still use industrial controls.

        As for Focardi, he is either a co-conspirator or at least a business partner who is going to be making money off of whatever happens in this endeavor. He certainly isn’t an independent outside observer.

        Yes, I know that I’m largely repeating what Les said above, but I think it needs to be said. Nothing has been proven so far as if this device really is legitimate, nor has it been tested by any outside observer even as a “black box”.

        BTW, I disagree with the conclusion that Les has presumed about humanity as a species, but I agree that dependence upon fossil fuels is going to end in one way or another, especially as an energy source. There are too many useful things that come from Coal and Petroleum to simply light it up with a match and burn it up. I have my own opinions for what we as a species are going to do if fusion power doesn’t get harnessed in an industrial capacity, but I’ve also not given up hope either. Rossi’s approach certainly isn’t the only one possible either and isn’t the one true solution to solve all of the world’s problems even if it works.

        • ACPhoenix22

          The government doesn’t have to tell us what they have purchased. We didn’t even know area 51 existed until it showed up in images from satellites.

          • Robert Horning

            I figured somebody would state this. “Area 51” was indeed a black project, but in this case what is the purpose for making this “black”? Even then, there needs to be a paper trail, and even “black projects” get audited by the GAO and the Inspector General’s Office. If it was “black”, Rossi wouldn’t have made any kind of stink about it shipping.

            So unfortunately, yes the government does have to tell us precisely what they’ve purchased and from whom they’ve made the purchase. It is a matter of public record which by law simply must be disclosed. In America, we have the right to know where our tax dollars are being spent, and there is no indication at all this might even be a black project of any kind.

            To show an example of the kind of disclosure that is required for government contracts (this is even a fusion-related project funded by the U.S. Navy no less), here is something to look at:


            Please, don’t tell me that working for or being financed by the military always is undisclosed, and such “black” programs are by far and away the exception rather than the rule. If this was a “black” program, we wouldn’t even know that it exists at all.

  • M.Hat

    When he invented the light bulb, Edison started with existing knowledge, then tested thousands and thousands of substance to find a filament that would generate the desired effect of a lasting light. He finally achieved success when he tried a carbonized cotton thread filament (later replaced by Tungsten). Edison published no papers on this work while he was doing it. He just did it, ignoring the naysayers. After looking over everything concerning Mr. Rossi’s E.cat project, I’m pretty convinced that Mr. Rossi has done it, and he did it in more or less the same trial and error method Edison used.
    Considering the catastrophic state the environment is in and the world’s current geopolitical situation as well, I think Mr. Rossi did it just in the nick of time. This makes it an even more critically important triumph than Edison’s light bulb. I believe this is the case and I voted accordingly.

    • Kim

      I find it very intuitive that LENR can exist
      its just a way to obtain Nuclear Energy at
      a lower transfer rate…


  • If it is a hoax, I simply cann’t see the point. If this is cash and carry, and easily verifiable product, then where the money comes into equation? Then there are only two possibilities: either he is very smart and very rich prankster, doing all thet just for fun of it, or it is something real and genuine. You decide.

    • Waiting

      Most hoaxes make money off investors, not customers. Investing isn’t cash and carry. It’s cash and wait.

      Rossi says the October demo is the last, because it convinced the investors. That’s the word he used: “investors”, not “customers”.

      • Kim

        Its not a hoax

        Get ready for the adventure of a life time


        • We won’t see proof or not until about 2 years time, though. So the adventure begins in 2013.

          • Kim

            If we don’t blow our selfs to
            kingdom come with a war, we
            will see proof of concept in
            less than six months.


  • Scammers usually use other peoples money. Andrea Rossi has committed many years to this project without pay, and actually paying to get work done.

    Andrea Rossi is capable of high salaries and was very well off in the past even sponsoring a formula 3 race team, being on the cover of readers digest 40 years ago and has been a guest of the white house. Making a scam so he could go live on a beach is not his style or he would have done it.

    Not only is Andrea Possi Patenting the nickel/hydrogen/catalyst generator, but others are also applying for similar patents. I doubt there would be so many if they were all scamming, and all using their own money.

    The list of physics professors who have seen this working and say it is the real deal is growing. There are many who are easy to believe, especially on youtube and in their lectures.
    Levi,Focardi,Giuseppe,Kullander to name a few.

    The U.S. has stringent scam laws, and he could have done this elsewhere or kept it in Italy, but he choose to bring it to the U.S., and even sell to the U.S. government as his first customer.

    A scam does make no sense at all. Everyday this looks more and more real. Now we have official website like http://www.ecat.com opening up, and endorsed by Rossi, as well as his teaming with National instruments.

    I just wish more people would realize these may soon be handheld units capable of powering a car. Even now at its existing size
    -an ecat could generate electricity for a electric car, and the size of the car would not be restricted by batteries. (come on electric S.U.V.’s)
    -An ecat generates steam, and instead of an on board generator we could revert to “steam engines”. Steam engines do not require the addition of water anymore, and are much improved.
    -With cheaper electricity another possibility to keep your old car going would be a cheaper hydrogen, and your car would require little modifications.

    All three of those options are options that have no emissions and are very green, and very cheap in the way of fuel costs. Families may drive across the country just because it is so cheap to do.

    Who would buy a sailboat when powerboats will go for a few nickels.

    Imagine 600 MILLION cars off the road.
    Imagine no smog when you breath deep.
    Imagine a dessert transformed into farmlands with the fresh water desalination plants powered by cheap electricity.


    • Kim

      If we all start to embrace the promise
      of the “New Fire”, a new reality will unfold
      before us. lets stop being so pessimistic
      and skeptical, the waters are fine, come on in.

      Nice Comment

    • Robert Mockan

      You said: “Who would buy a sailboat when powerboats will go for a few nickels?”.

      Let us carry this observation to the next level.

      Who would buy a “house” when one can have a live aboard powerboat with unlimited range, and enough extra thermal power available to travel and live comfortably from the Arctic circle to the shores of Antarctica? With energy independence would one stand in a soup line or wait for their welfare checks, suffering from collapsed economies and high unemployment, in a global depression, or would one rather be having plentiful sea food from anywhere they are in the world? Desalinate sea water with the waste heat from the boats reactor, and no more water bills. Use concentrated heat to operate an incineration toilet for no more waste disposal costs. Sunlight, fresh air, sea breeze, good food, healthy living. Of course one could still have the sailboat and many people will, because sailing can be fun. On the other hand, many might prefer a personal submarine for privacy. Let us sea how the TSA deals with that!

      • Kim

        Its hard for some people to push into
        these realm’s.

        They have been conditioned all of thier
        life for control,money,fear

        Very Good

      • daniel maris

        No beer, no wine, no butter, no bread?

        • Robert Mockan

          Make a stop in Tahiti.

  • K Reilly

    If Rossi hasn’t created fusion, then I want the technology he invented to simulate it as it’s probably just as good.

  • LENRfellow

    I think of Rossi as an “Alternative Energy Wildcatter”. He has quite a history in that field with loads of prior experience, know-how, and connections. He is by no means a “Professional Lab Rat”, though he understands the lab and uses it to effect his goals. I see him as deeply driven by wanting to be first to the market in LENR. Against that kind of drive, confirmation and repeatability by 2nd party laboratories withers in priority. He knows well that there are too many parties desperate for cheap, long-lasting heat sources to waste time driveling on satisfying every laboratory skeptic.

    Think of NATO’s challenges in Afghanistan. Think of the incredible cost of bringing in fuel from Pakistan to fuel generators to bring heat just to Bagram Air Base. Would 13, air deliverable, 1MW Rossi E-Cats be a dream? Think of the blessed heat in the Afghan winter. And even if currently only 30% efficient in the generation of electricity, it would probably be an economic bonanza against the ransom NATO pays for getting fuel into Afghanistan.

    Some not insignificant part of the next 13 1MW Rossi E-Cats may go into service in the strangest of places.

    • Kim

      Once the modus Operandi is understood

      God only knows how much energy we stand
      to make from this process

      We could see input/output reach 1/100
      and extremely high temps…


  • George

    I did fully believe Rossi had finally commercialized CF until now. I just watched the Thrive video on Sterling Allen’s website. Anyone who believe that crock or knowingly associates themselves with anyone that believes such BS has ZERO credibility in my eyes. I have not been so disheartened in a long time. I am disgusted and angered by those who perpetrate such hatred and ignorance.

    • na, they will just kill the inventors first

      • ment for Tim

      • Alain

        oil is not the worst looser.
        just longterms looser. vehicle will still love cheap oil (but not expensive oils!)

        the worst looser are sun and wind power, et worst of all the malthusianists.*

        then the nuclear energy guys will have to abandonn any new power plant, just move to be “dispantling an cleaning companies”. Areva can be good at cleaning, but EPR reactor will be doomed.

        big corps don’t kill (much) today. no need.
        they buy=steal (patents, companies, countries, resources), sue to court, lobby governments (war, green policies, safety regulation), change their business (firing workers in the bin), surf on new fashion…
        finally they can nationalized the losses, if there are no gain to privatize.

    • Alain

      sadly, it seems that Rossi simply have industrialization problem…
      the devices works some time but get unstable.

      defkalion pretends to have a different and better technology.

  • Tim

    The gas and oil people are in over-drive to develop as much as possible as fast as they can. We’ve got hydro-fracking for gas and then there are plans for a pipeline from Canada to the gulf of Mexica for oil. The Oil & Gas companies are also running ads on TV to convince the American public that their activities are safe and will produce jobs and are a matter of national security. Same old … same old. The E-cat is fighting an uphill battle. But it’s just a matter of time before we break free with the E-cat and many other free energy devices.

  • Jason B

    You know what’s funny…in a typical hoax/scam it would appear at the surface, that the system was legit. Only after due diligence and investigation would something appear fishy.

    I find the exact opposite true here. I was once a HUGE skeptic. I was with Maryyugo, Krivit and others that this simply appeared to be a hoax.

    The more I’ve researched though, in particular watching this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7lAlzMBzLQ these scientists seem legit, and refuted a lot of my concerns. What it simply Rossi’s measurements? Had anyone actually seen the device work? This seems to be answered in this video.

    Despite the obvious, it appears that credible scientific minds have seen the device, they have run tests, and they have seen the outputs.

    We do not know what is in Rossi’s “black box”. We do not know the catalyst. Maryyugo and others are right that there is much left involved to completely and totally refute Rossi’s claims.

    However, the more I see, the more I am boggled. Neither Rossi nor Defkalion seem to be taking anyone’s money. They don’t have a scientific explanation for the occurrence, but they don’t seem to be demanding money either.

    I wish the University of Bologna or Uppsala would come out and tell us their plans for researching this device, but I digress. Let the Swedish skeptics run one or two more tests, and I will be fully on board. Right now, I’m about 60% in Rossi’s favor.

    Thanks to Maryyugo though for providing the necessary skepticism. This is a huge deal, and she is preventing the hive mind from running rampant. Nevertheless, I have swung to Rossi’s corner. Some of these public demo’s appear to have legitimacy.

    • Robert Horning

      After watching this video, I remain very skeptical of Rossi’s demonstrations:


      You can compare this to other “demonstrations”, other than the fact that this “experimenter” doesn’t claim LENR as the source for producing heat in his demonstrator “reactor”.

      This certainly deserves to be the “control experiment” when comparing the “E-Cat” to another device, and certainly is a way to replicate the “E-Cat” at least on a superficial basis in a short-run experiment. This video doesn’t disprove the E-Cat technology, but it also shows how you can be made to believe something is happening when in fact it isn’t.

  • arian

    Defkalion GT interview with tovima.gr

    We not only continue our program and we are almost ready, with technology that precedes that of Rossi during a year. Specifically, within the next 15 days there will be announcements and initiated testing and certification by independent third parties. We will present the final product – not just a laboratory prototype – with all its subsystems to operate according to European safety standards. ”

    “All the technology used in devices Hyperion at the level of K W, and systems 1 to 5M W is our own design – different from those of Rossi” he replied.”As for the control, was already our own design and construction, and Mr. Rossi has signed acceptance certificate shows that it is ours. . However, the main and big difference in our device than that of Rossi is that our system is stable in performance, while that of Rossi or the last test failed to yield stable for more than five and a half hours. ”


  • Sanjeev

    It seems that Defkalion has already reverse engineered the Ecat and is now ready to announce a product in 15 days.

    http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg56139.html

    When they announced that they are going ahead with product development even after dissociation with Rossi, everyone was wondering how will they manage without the secret powder. This interview clears it up – they have their own powder most probably. And I’m guessing, they reverse engineered Ecat, nothing else can explain the short amount of time in which they could make a fusion heater.

    It’s still not confirmed whether they have a working product, but if a product is offered for independent testing in next 15 days, as they say, we will come to know for sure.

    • daniel maris

      It’s a delay isn’t it? They announced a forthcoming announcement within 14 days 7 days or more ago I think!

      • arian

        NO ,this interview was conducted at november 11.

        • daniel maris

          So, the announcement is going to be made by Wednesday 29 November???

          I’d like to have an alert on the correct date!

          • daniel maris

            Sorry scrub that – I meant by Saturday 26th Nov. Aren’t we most likely looking at a Friday 25th Nov announcement?

          • Sanjeev

            No dates are announced, as far as I know. Wait and see….

    • Alain

      AFAIK seems not reengineering, but competitive engineering.
      the working seems different, no catalyst, difefrent nanopowder, seemms inpired by other scientist…

  • racribeiro

    Hi all,

    I’m more and more convinced that this is true. 70% to Rossi. I would like to “see” a better test in order go 100%. Until then, we must wait for “happy costumers” to come forward and say that they are happy.

    But the reson of my post are another.

    The first is that I have this concern that “free energy” might not be as good for the economy as one may think in the short run.
    At the moment, prices are set based on cost and margins (% over cost that define your profit). Being energy a big part of the cost in production, reducing energy costs to almost zero would mean less cost (good…) and the increase (?) of margins. If companies increase margins, they would maintain the prices at the same level (no real benifit to consumers), although bosses would be able to pay more to their employees (but would they?). If they reduce the price of the product, by maintaining the margins, they would reduce the profit… if companies have less profit, it means less jobs and worse economy…
    I’m no economist, but it seems to me that, although clean energy is a good, “free” energy seems to be dangerous and “catastrofic” for the current economic model.
    Is there any economic model studied based on the concept of free energy?

    The second concern is about rising of temperature on earth based on this increase of energy available. As you know, most of the energy converts sooner or later into heat. With free energy, lots of heat will be produced, just because it is “free”. Society will use, more and more, energy eating the atmosphere with no constraints. By not emiting CO2 we prevent the “greenhouse effect”, but if we produce more and more heat, how does it get irradiated out of earth? Would we have machines that will consume power to send heat to outer space? (with free, unlimited energy I’m sure that will not be a major issue… the problem is that I don’t see what kind of technology can achieve that.)

    Beside my concerns, I’m crossing my fingers to see this working. Although current modules aren’t feasable for cars to move… this technology is great to make near to home powerplants that can be very efficient in producing and distributing electricity. With major breaktrhougs in battery technology, EV’s will eventually get cheaper and widen used.

    Looking at cars, retrofiting gas engines to hydrogen could be a temporary option, but, before that I’m seing gas/diesel sintethizing industries gaining ground…

    • Kim

      Yes it will be a tulmultious time
      as if no stearing rudder exists.

      Point your compass toward freedom!


      • Kim

        Once in a life time human-kind is
        given a great gift.

        Its our time.


        • Alain

          for really poor peoples, energy is survival…
          it can be water (desalinization, pumping), cooking, health (home heating/cooling, warm washing water, boiling, fridge), fuel for farming or selling (fuel synthesis), even fertilizer synthesis (nitrogen to ammoniac)…

          it is not luxury…

          it can also reduce air pollution and worker genocide in china.

          killing oil monopoly could also save many countries from dictatorship and weak democracies
          (only 300T of Ni, 0.02% of todays production is needed for all world energy)

    • Gisli Adalsteinsson

      If someone would invent a machine that could produce not only energy but everything that people need to flourish for virtually no cost then that would have devastating effect on the economic growth. But that does not mean that it is a bad thing for people, it only shows that economic growth is not a good measure of progress of human development.

      • Kim

        Energy is all a human needs to flourish.
        We are energy creatures.

        The problem is that we have been living
        a lie, and delusion passed on by a deliberate agenda of control,debt,fear,money


    • daniel maris

      One thing you can be sure of: the cost is NOT going to “close to zero”. All energy companies have to have premises, pay taxes, dividends etc. The Rossi devices requires substantial amounts of lead and needs to be assembled. It will need to be delivered somewhere…The list goes on and all these things cost money.

      I think a better working estimate is probably 2 cents per KwH long term – maybe a quarter of gas.

      I have read that direct heat loads are many magnitudes less than the carbon greenhouse effect. With less carbon in the atmosphere, there heat will be more easily radiated into space.

      Toyota’s 1000 km battery (projected to cost 20% of current batteries) is a real breakthrough. With that an E cat produced electricity I think the future for electric vehicles is secured.

      • Kim

        Yes these seem to be realistic
        assumptions at this time…

        Yet as the technology matures the cost
        will continue to drop.


        • Alain

          e-cat is already priced dow to 500$/kW by rossi…
          he estimate the cost of 100$/kW

          defkalion GT seems to have even a simpler device (no catalyst)…
          the price of nanopowder is ridiculous, despite it’s massic price, because you have a few miligrams per kW.

    • Concerning the worry of heating the Earth, this was discussed at JONP some time ago. As a rough order of magnitude, if one increases energy consumption hundredfold from the present level, the global mean temperature increases by a couple of degrees. Local and indirect ecological effects are likely to set more limitations for sustainable energy use on earth than the mean temperature itself.

  • Ron

    e for now, but a hopeful e.

    • steve pipkin

      Assuming the science behind Rossi’s mystery catalyst is sound then the benefit will be profound. His secrecy is reminiscent of the Wright brother’s protectiveness of their intellectual property in the years after their initial flight. I wonder if he doesn’t know how to best secure his intellectual property.

      Or it could be a hoax. Or perhaps he is deluding himself. We will all find out eventually.

  • Robert Mockan

    Skeptics need to understand Rossi did not discover the energy generating process he is using. What he has done is increase the number of active sites in the NAC (nuclear active catalyst) so it has a higher power density per unit mass of fuel than previous reactor designs.
    He did that by experiments evidently based on the advice of his consultant Focardi, who worked with Piantelli many years ago.
    Then he designed and built the E-Cat, that uses the process with the higher power density NAC.
    In deciding if the E-Cat really does generate excess thermal power, one needs to know the history about Piantelli.
    In the last quarter of the 20th Century, Piantelli did some research about why nickel sometimes generated heat when immersed in hydrogen. After his initial study, he set that aside and worked on other projects for many years. But one day he started to work on the nickel and hydrogen project again. In 1997, at least 20 years after his initial observations and research, 14 years ago from today, WO 9520816 was published, based on his research. It was titled, “ENERGY GENERATION AND GENERATOR BY MEANS OF ANHARMONIC STIMULATED FUSION”.
    When that document was published, every person in the world had access to all the information they needed to know to build reactors using the nickel hydrogen energy generating process.
    Now back to the present.

    If you go to the examples of reactor designs that Piantelli worked with that are described in WO 9520816, you will find example number 4:

    “In a generator like the one illustrated in figure 1, comprising a generation chamber crossed by a tube nest made of copper, on each tube a layer of 2mm of pure Nickel was electroplated, in which natural hydrogen (D/H = about 1/6000) was made to adsorb with the method of immersion in gaseous environment at the absolute pressure of 600 mbar and contemporaneous application of a magnetic field of 1

    Tesla obtained by means of a coil wound around the core and immersed in a ceramic matrix.

    The chamber containing the strip of tubes was then brought to a temperature of 210C, 57 above Debye’s constant.

    The startup was accomplished with the magnetostrictive method, or, in other words, by applying an electromagnetic impulse to the core through winding 9.

    More precisely, the startup was obtained with an impulse of 0.8 Tesla and rise time of 0.1 seconds.

    During the reaction, by means of thermal carrier fluid crossing the strip of tubes, an net total average heat of 4.9 MJ was exchanged per day, for a period of 6 days, after which, the reaction was stopped with a slow shutdown obtained with cooling below the critical temperature.

    The industrial applicability of the generation process and of the generator which actuates said process is, therefore, evident, given that they allow for the production of energy in the form of heat by means of nuclear fusion at limited temperatures, without emission of radioactive or otherwise dangerous particles and for long periods. The materials used both for the active core and for the rest of the generator are inexpensive, thus providing considerable possibilities for economic exploitation.

    In cases in which the active core is formed in a material having a higher Debye’s constant, such as Silicon (640K), the temperature at which heat exchange takes place is higher than in the examples described above.

    Therefore, it is possible to directly exploit the energy acquired by the thermal carrier fluid which crosses the generator, for example to move turbine blades or for similar applications.

    The creation of 3He, as a product of the reaction, is, furthermore, also industrially exploitable given the present high cost of this gas.”

    All right, back to me again. In the 20th Century bulk nickel metal was used, and not the small particles used later. In example 4 the nickel was simply electroplated onto copper tubes. Hydrogen was absorbed into the nickel using the process Piantelli was using then, that is only one of many different ways to do it. And when triggered the nickel hydrogen energy was generated.

    When you run the numbers you find that a reactor the size of the Rossi E-Cat, without using any special NAC material, just nickel metal with a clean surface, could generate at least 5000 thermal watts. And it could be built in any machine shop. It would have operated at the temperatures of the E-Cat, and it could operate in self sustaining mode. In other words, without using any external energy to power it.

    So why didn’t any body build them? We are talking about 14 years ago! Much was written over the years about why the discovery was ignored by most scientists, industry, and governments. But even what was written about why the discovery was ignored, was ignored. I will not go into it here, but it has very much to do with suppression of any new paradigm changing technology.

    So that is a bit of the history. I notice different people have posted their opinions, but without knowing the details of what happened over the years.

    Still a skeptic? By all means if interested in what I’ve said do not take my word for it. Check it out for yourself.

    • Les

      Actually…I have checked it out. I’ve been doing nothing else for the last eight or ten months. the story is interesting, important and vastly entertaining. It’s WAY more fun than trolling through old girlfriends photos on Facebook. The reason that Rossis claims look so promising, is that they are a logical next step to the results previously reported. But, take a step back and look at what is actually HAPPENING….especially in the last month or two. It’s just more of the same tired old cliché bull$#!t. I had high hopes for Rossi…It just seemed so right somehow…that Italy and Greece would be the focal point of a new renaissance.. a new paradigm of the human condition. Instead , all we have is a couple more websites selling “free” energy…..*sigh*

      Wake me when it’s over

      • Robert Mockan

        @ Les,

        What is NOT happening is what I’m worried about.

        A simple way to determine the precise energy qualities of the “fuel” is to have a few samples tested in a differential scanning calorimeter. One sample loaded with hydrogen, another without. Complete characterization of the fuels energy properties could be determined in 24 hours, and if done at a national testing laboratory would constitute proof of Rossi claims. Just confirming the energy properties would not reveal the “secret” of his activation method, but would satisfy everybody it really does provide energy. Even the most diehard skeptics.

        If he wanted a full disclosure the morphology could be determined with scanning electron microscopy, elemental composition with x-ray spectroscopy, and isotopic composition, before and after energy generation, with isotopic mass spectroscopy.
        These are pretty much standard procedures for characterizing unknown materials.

        I can understand Rossi wanting to build a company and become rich and famous. But if he would simply reveal the “secret” of the fuel, it would guarantee his being credited with developing a commercial fuel, of becoming rich and famous,and he could still build a company.

    • daniel maris

      Thanks Robert for bringing together all that science and experimentation into such a concise summary. This is indeed what the supersceptics choose to ignore!

  • Matheuu

    Where is the Copper that has been created?
    Transmutation from Nickel to Copper is a very serious claim.

    • Bob

      Where are the Gamma Rays???
      Why is he hiding these simple observations?

      • Waiting

        Rossi claimed gamma rays that could be stopped by 2cm of lead. That makes no sense. When someone actually measured without the shielding, they found no gamma rays.

        Rossi claimed no neutrons are emitted. Piantelli did see neutrons in his experiment. So Rossi is claiming this is fundamentally different than Piantelli. Piantelli’s results are evidence against Rossi, not for him.

        Rossi claimed the spent fuel contains copper created by fusion, and he claimed the copper has a different isotope ratio than copper found in nature. But when this was actually tested, the copper isotope ratios were the same as in nature. In other words, the analysis of the “spent fuel” suggested that someone had bought ordinary copper powder and mixed it with nickel powder, rather than creating the copper in a fusion reaction.

        • daniel maris

          The claims about copper and gamma rays are also made by Sergio Focardi (and others I believe) – in which case you have to ask why he and other respected scientists are trying to fool you as well as Rossi. Or are you saying that Rossi fooled Focardi over four years of close collaboration?

          • Robert Horning

            The suggestion here is that Focardi is part of the “conspiracy” or hoax, if anybody else is involved at all. Focardi is a business partner and stands to gain financially from this endeavor, regardless if this is a hoax or something legitimate. In that sense, he can’t be considered an outside and objective observer.

            Focardi does lend credibility to the endeavor, so it isn’t completely without merit, but I wouldn’t “trust” him other than as an initial contact to get “inside” and find out what is really going on here.

          • Waiting

            Focardi never said he analyzed the isotope ratios of the copper. In fact, he has stated he doesn’t even know what the catalyst is, which implies he hasn’t been analyzing the fuel at all. And hasnt been working very closely with Rossi. It’s possible for this to be a scam with or without Focardi’s knowledge.

            The isotope ratio is a big problem. If someone claims to create copper from nickel by a nuclear process, it’s hard to imagine the ratios being the same as is found in copper mines. It’s similar to someone claiming to have found an alien flying saucer, but when you look at the bottom, it’s stamped “Made in China”.

  • Morse

    I really hope an E-cat will be on the market soon because I am freezing my butt off and the energy prices are rising every year.
    And with cheap energy I can build myself a sauna, with an electrical heater !

  • John B.

    Having viewed all of the videos and read what has been written, I really don’t believe that he has come up with anything.

    When he said that it processing 7 lb of water an hour that is an indicator that there is not really much going on there. As well, if it was cold fusion, the temp, while not in the 800 to 900 degree C range would still be in the 300 to 400 degree C range and would move thorough what is essentially less than a gallon of water an hour to ten’s of gallons per hour.

    Also, if you will notice, the wisps of steam are moving in a very slow fashion and it does not indicate anything other than slightly hot water which is heated up by the heater that he states starts the process. With proper insulation it can steam for hours once the power is turned off. He said that you cannot see it because it’s pure hot steam. I for one did not see that.

    If wishful thinking was energy, we would have more energy than we would need.

  • Alain

    Hard to settle a strict opinion.

    the hypothesis that Rossi do a scan is not really credible. too many people and companies seems to share the scam. there are weak point, like secrecy, impecfect demo, short run… but could be explained else.

    if rossi is not scamming then,

    the hypothesis that Rossi is lying to himself about some Cf effect, is not credible, because he talk about long term internal usage, about experiments he have done… some partners too seemms convinced about some effect…

    the hypothesis that the device works perfectly is not credible. the demo would be much longer, less troubles.

    so for me simply, Rossi have problem to industrialize thr device. it is what he is saying with euphemisme, and what defkalion says. they says that the device should work for 48hours and Defkalion says it did not respect the contract…

    so for me Rossi have problems and is afraid to loose the race.
    maybe Defkalion will provide an industrial product before…

    1- cold fusion/lenr sure works
    2- Ni+H cold fusion works and can produce much energy
    3- Rossi have a more or less working device
    4- Rossi have problems
    probably :
    1- Defkalion have a more or less working product
    2- Defkalion have a better product that is stable

    Rossi, Focardi, Fleishman&Pons… all deserve a Nobel.
    a nobel of stubbornness (a compliment for me, the secret of genious scientist).

    • Robert Horning

      It is important to note that Albert Einstein didn’t receive the Nobel Prize for Physics with his work on Relativity…. it was far too controversial and required too much effort to figure out how it all worked. Instead, he got the prize for his discovery of the “Photoelectric effect”, which is the theoretical foundation that photocells (aka “solar-electric panels) operate under.

      It is possible that Rossi could get the Nobel Peace Prize, but that is a completely different kind of prize altogether.


  • Pipmon

    Hmmmm….looking at all these probability distributions, I guess, very fittingly, that the consensus is that Rossi’s e-cat is Schroedinger’s Cat!!!

  • I usually do not write many comments, but I looked at a few
    of the comments here Quick Poll of E-Cat World Readers | E-Cat World.
    I actually do have a couple of questions for you if you tend
    not to mind. Is it only me or do some of these comments look like they are
    left by brain dead individuals? 😛 And, if you are posting on other online sites,
    I would like to keep up with you. Could you make a list of all of
    all your social sites like your twitter feed, Facebook page or linkedin profile?