Rossi Admits NASA is a Competitor, Predicts Victory Like David vs. Goliath

Andrea Rossi has made some comments regarding the revelation that NASA is involved in LENR research. Rossi was asked on his JONP site to comment on the video that NASA released discussing its LENR work. He responded:

The fact that NASA is trying to copy my work honours me. But their theory is wrong. We will beat them, as well as all the other Competitors with our E-Cats: the E-Cats will have a too low price to allow NASA or anybody else to compete with us. They are Goliath, very big and strong, we are David.

When asked if NASA’s research into LENR was a vindication of his own work Rossi replied:

his is not confirmation, nor vindication: this is copyation. But the original is much better. In any case, these are real Competitors, not clowns with a mock up, like others around.

Rossi is not ceding any ground to NASA, but seems to respect their work, and sees them as a worthy competitor. Rossi has said that he believes he has a sure theory about what is happening in the reactor, but for competitive reasons has not yet disclosed it. The NASA video seems to show that they are siding with the Widom-Larsen LENR theory as they mention neutron decay, something that his held by Widom and Larsen. Rossi has said in the past that what happens in his reaction has nothing to do with Widom-Larsen — but he hasn’t yet says what he believes is happening.

It’s interesting how Joseph Zawodny of NASA mentions a home-based energy producing unit in the video doing exactly what Rossi is planning to do with his E-Cats. Since NASA is a US government agency it’s hard to see that they would be able to enter into the marketplace and offer products that would directly compete with Rossi — but they could partner with commercial organizations and provide them with the technology and expertise that would allow them to offer similar products to the E-Cat. As in any industry, competition stimulates companies to improve products and services and usually drives down prices — so having another player on the scene should ultimately help the consumer.

Frank Acland

  • Kim

    Its disgusting that people who could change the world
    tomorrow play games; while people of the world suffer.


  • Wow! I have to say this video of NASA’s is unbelievable. I’m waiting for the next shoe to drop.

  • arian

    please someone ask Paul from
    why you ban arian ? I can not post there since yesterday

  • arian
  • Found an article over on PESN, related to the World Sustainable Energy Conference 2012 in Geneva, January 10-12, 2012. Francesco CELANI has made a second successful reproduction using Nickel and Hydrogen, like that of Rossi’s technology, just about a week ago. He gave a presentation, here is the link:

    So, LENR is real. The E-Cat is the highest demonstrated experimental output device so far. The question still remains, what does Rossi know, that we don’t.

  • chad

    As you say, NASA is a government organization, not a business. They haven’t been researching LENR to beat Rossi to market, they probably do it because it would be insanely useful for space exploration.

    • daniel maris

      See my other comment. Where the device would be useful is in providing dependable and mobile power on other planets for long periods.

  • Brad Arnold

    To charactorize NASA as a “competitor” of Rossi’s is to misunderstand the nature of NASA.

    NASA is simply trying to influence corporate and government (and incidentally the public) perception. They are not going to jump into the market of providing LENR for profit like Rossi.

    Besides, most people simply don’t understand how bad of shape the climate is in – the Earth is about to very rapidly enter a hot stage, which means (prior to LENR) a human bottleneck.

    In other words, while Rossi’s goal is successful commercialization of LENR within the free enterprise system, NASA’s goal is aerospace and the environment (as per their mission statement).

    BTW, there is (arguably) no more important use of LENR than in aerospace. Whatever the profit of LENR applications in our biosphere, they are insignificant compared to those outside the Earth’s gravity well. Study the dynamics of new frountiers and colonialism in our past, then multiply that by infinity.

    • daniel maris

      Well space is a more difficult area of application – precisely because the Rossi-NASA devices will require v. significant mass (boilers, and steam or stirling engines). Of course in the more distant future it might come into its own to provide the power for ground stations powering laser beams or microwave beams to lift craft out of the gravity well.

      • Brad Arnold

        That is a misconception – LENR would be for powering spacecraft in space, not for liftoff, which needs more thrust. It takes about a million calories to boost a pound of mass up and out of the Earth’s gravity well – and LENR can also provide those calories indirectly at a very very low cost.

        • Brad Arnold

          Sorry, that is 7 million calories, not one million. I suggest for environmental reasons to use electrolysis to separate H from O in water, then compress them into liquids to make rocket fuel (i.e. expelling the high pressure and igniting the mixture). For the tremendous amount of mass we are going to need to boost, the rocket exhaust from this method if completely non-toxic and extremely plentiful.

    • Brad Arnold

      BTW, using the Widom-Larsen theory to explain Rossi’s LENR formula is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I bet NASA hasn’t even been able to duplicate Rossi’s COP. Frankly, I am surprised NASA is even able to grasp the reality of LENR via Rossi – they appear to the first inside the US government – kudos for that at least.

    • NASA has already filed patents related to creating heavy electrons in relation to LENR.

      If NASA were to discover the sciences behind the e-cat first, then Rossi may soon be out of the market after a few improvements have been made by various sources.

    • John W. Ratcliff

      Well, NASA is trying to get a patent on the most basic part of the LENR process. For what purpose? To make sure no one else can patent LENR by establishing this as prior art and to make their process available license free to the public and world at large, or to use it to compete?

      It’s unclear, but someone should ask them the question.


  • arian

    wow 50 $/kW !!

    Andrea Rossi
    January 13th, 2012 at 3:03 AM

    Dear Albert Ellul:
    Thank you.
    The big science, after trying to ridiculize us, now has understood that the E-Cat works, so now they are trying to copy and make patents to overcome us, discourage us and trying with this sophysticated way to stop us under a disguise of an indirect vindication. Is a smart move, but they are underevaluating us. I will never stop, within one year we will start the delivery of million pieces at 50 $/kW, with a totally new concept, at that point the game will be over. This technology must be popular, must cost a very low price, must be a real revoluton, not a bunch of theoretical (wrong) chatters.
    Warm Regards,

  • arian
  • Sanjeev

    Yet another LENR achievement. Currently COP=5.

    He uses Carbon which is transmuted to Nitrogen via a LENR like process. This may explain why NASA mentioned Carbon.

    More discussion on vortex-1.

  • Sanjeev

    ECat home version, concepts.

  • Jos

    Nasa and BlackLight Power?

    Co-PI, Team Member – NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts – BlackLight Rocket Engine Phase I Advanced Aeronautical/Space Concept Studies research project (Spring 2002 – Autumn 2002) Team Leader – PSEG Fault Tree Analysis Project – Rowan University – Department of Engineering (Spring 2001 – Autumn 2001)

  • Gunnar

    The italian genius vs. the multi-millionaire american industrial capability. What a match 😀

  • Pingback: Energia da fusão à frio torna-se viável | Free Energy Brasil - Nova Energia()