Rossi: First E-Cats Will Now Cost $50 per kW

Andrea Rossi is full of surprises. He recently announced that he would never be undersold by his competitors and said that a domestic E-Cat delivering 10-20 kW of power would cost between $1000-1500 USD. Today he has slashed that price by up to two thirds. In a comment on his JONP site he writes:

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.

At $50 per kW, a 10 kW E-Cat would now cost $500 USD — which puts the E-Cat in the same price range as a domestic appliance like a refrigerator, washing machine or even a television or computer. In other words, almost anyone will be able to afford one, and this is Rossi’s stated intention. He really is going for the revolutionary impact, and if all this turns out as he predicts, the impact of such a breakthrough can hardly be overstated.

Who would not purchase a device that would slash their home heating an air conditioning costs by 80 per cent or more? And when the E-Cat is able to provide electrical power, it is hard to imagine that any household without an unit. At this cost there is barely any thought of the purchase of an E-Cat being an investment — this is the same price as many disposable items. If he can deliver, Rossi’s biggest challenge will be keeping up with demand. 1 million E-Cats would be a drop in the ocean, when the world wide demand for these devices would be in the range of billions.

  • Martin

    “At $50 per kW, a 10 kW E-Cat would now cost $500 USD — which puts the E-Cat in the same price range as a domestic appliance like a refrigerator, washing machine or even a television or computer.”

    Let’s hope refills are cheaper than printer ink 🙂

    • timycelyn

      Good analogy Martin. That looks like the business model he may be going for – kill/neutralise the competition with a unbeliveably low capital purchase price, then make a little more money on the refills – for a long time….

      Having said that, I am not expecting him to really push the refill price (the way some inkjet printer companies do. I expect that huge mark up will be applied by our dear governments, in eye-watering duties. they’ll have to.

      Of course, with the replaceable element concept, I’ll be buying many and early, as I’m sure the duty/tax take will be ratcheted up over time.

      • Martin

        Well, if the UK govermint tax them up I guess cottage industries will spring up recharging them in back street lockups all over Britain, may have a go myself as I’m semi retired LOL

  • Tom

    Wowsers trousers! I doubt even NASA can compete with that. Rossi is the man with the plan. The revolution is almost upon us!

    • Steve Robb

      NASA is not in the business of building commercial products. I suppose the “competition” from NASA comes from patents and the spillage of technology into the commercial domain by their ordering of LENR based technology from the commercial world. They would in effect by building up Rossi’s opposition.

  • Pingback: Rossi: First E-Cats Will Now Cost $50 per kW | eCat Now! – Rossi eCat News()

  • Thomas

    Where can I order one?

  • Marius

    Might be they still will be around $1000, but he increase the output to 20Kwh

  • LENR4you

    Mr. Rossi will make the same as printer manufacturer do.
    Sell very cheap printer (ecat) and then sell very expensive ink (NiH-refill reactor).
    That is the best way for him to make longer money


  • Jorbeus

    Rossi should not wait until “next year”.

    He should launch the Home E-Cat on December 21, 2012.

    The Mayan calendar will be a good marketing strategy. The “beginning of a new world” at the “end” of the Mayan calendar. Will sell like mineral water in the desert.

    • Francesco CH

      NO, NO, PLEASE NOT: weird US ideas (as usual) that have nothing to do with sense and logic!!!

      • Steve Robb

        Thanks, it’s always useful to have the perspective of someone looking into this society with fresh eyes 😉

    • SH

      Actually, according to Carl Johan Calleman, who has 30+ years of research on the mayan callendar, it ended on the 28th of october 2011. Does that date ring a bell?


      • Kim

        Yes I was very aware of this date and even
        wrote to Mr Calleman about it.


  • Martin6078

    Very good news at Friday the 13th. Have somebody wind and solar certificates? I´m recomending sell it!
    Best regards to all.

    • sapain

      solar energy is still a very important energy source and lenr will help to drive cost down.

      • Steve Robb

        LENR will drive the cost of photo-voltaics to zero i.e. out of business. The only solar that could compete is called a double-paned window on a southern exposure.

        • daniel maris

          Prior to the arrival of LENR I was a fan and promoter of green energy, including wind and solar. However, I think this is the end of the road for all current technologies, including hydro and nuclear fission. We may see some of our lovely valleys returned to their former state. The graceful wind turbines will gradually decline in number.

          Solar power may have some residual uses I suppose where it is difficult to set up an E cat.

      • Roger Bird

        The cost of solar energy will remain what it is or drop slightly thanks to LENR. The price will go to zero because NO ONE will want to buy one.

  • daniel maris

    You could borrow a $500 over 10 years and pay back at $100 per annum – that’s covering just about all your heating and electricity bills.

    The first thing we may see is electricity companies massively increasing their grid connection. At which point a lot of people may elect to go off grid (maybe buying a second E cat).

    It’s not to have to say “If this is for real”…plainly the technology is for real…whether the E cat has met consumer needs remains to be seen.

  • clovis

    DAM, Back on the edge of my seat.
    What a great time to be alive.–SMILE

  • Robert Mockan

    Rossi is definitely into the paradigm changing range now. From the information he revealed previously my best guess he plans hydrogen under pressure as the heat exchange medium, besides keeping the nickel activated. That reduces cost. It will also help stabilize catalyst against thermal damage and enable operation at maximum temperature the material can withstand. Thin layer catalyst obviously to prevent hot spots. And applying some concepts from the Piantelli patent probably multiple metal sheets with catalytic surfaces and hydrogen flow between them.
    Nickel electroform with nanotube catalytic surface configuration, possibly upon a porous aluminum oxide substrate template that is subsequently removed with alkali solution immersion. Rossi is going to have stiff competition from Piantelli. Good luck Rossi!

    • Steve Robb

      I doubt he would use hydrogen moving through the nickel directly to a heat exchanger. It would make explosion hazard greater as there would be more leak points especially at the seals of a mechanical motor/generator. Longitudinal fins on the inside of the reactor in contact with the nickel powder and circumferential fins on the outside of the core in contact with the heat transfer medium would work and sounds like a trivial problem in heat transfer. Good old fashioned water would work well if only heat is needed otherwise a “Freon” medium for a heat pump motor would be needed.

      • Robert Mockan

        He has hydrogen in the reactor anyway under pressure. It would remain there. The internal design of the core would be for hydrogen to thermalize the catalyst layers.
        Calculating heat conduction through area of metal walls of a canister for 600 Kelvin indicates practical canister sizes can be used at 10,000 to 100,000 thermal watts. The actual “working medium” heat exchange fluid could be whatever is decided for a Rankine cycle, but it would heated outside the reactor core. I believe a thermo-acoustic linear generator design could be made using hydrogen also as the working fluid with minimal explosion hazard from leaks, and less expensive than the Rankine cycle Rossi comments about, but so far Rossi has not mentioned the possibility

    • Roger Bird

      I fear that hot hydrogen would slow certification down even more than the word “nuclear”.

  • Steve Robb

    Rossi’s talk about using a heat pump to move heat into a home doesn’t make sense unless the COP of the e-cats is low. Why use a mechanical device like a heat pump, prone to failure to move heat if the COP can be made rather high and the fuel is cheap? I can understand having the heat pump to cool the house. But really, a mechanical device should be avoided at all costs due to their unreliability. By moving heat from the E-cat directly into the home the heat pump could be spared for use for cooling, thereby extending the life of that unit. In the northern tier of states and in much of Europe an air-conditioning unit is not necessary, and the cost of a Rossi heat only unit could come down to $300-$600 depending on the needs.

    There is another use for the E-cat in providing off grid power to people who want to move into very remote areas and not throw vast sums of money away on a solar system. In that case even a very inefficient conversion of 15% to electricity to provide 10 kW would require only 67 kW thermal. If the devices and fuel are cheap, and they sound cheap and they forego cooling, that would be sufficient. The main problem and expense would come from having to dissipate all the waste heat via a large heat- exchanger or small heat-exchanger combined with a cooling “tower.” However it is done it would be much less than $20,000 for a solar unit.

    • Robert Mockan

      LOL! I keep having visions of those cone shaped cooling towers with steam escaping from the top, in the backyard of homes. Seriously, marine applications should be at the top of the application list for the Rossi fuel. I agree with your COP comments. Discharging waste heat is simple when you have the ocean as a heat sink. The COP=6 keeps being said when talking about the Rossi fuel. But the real question is what is the self sustaining output? No input power at all, how much thermal power is generated? Take 15% of that to get the actual quantity of electricity that can be generated (15% may seem inefficient, but for a small scale system it is probably at the upper limit of practical). From those numbers one can determine how much catalyst is needed. Self sustaining operation is COP=infinite.

      • Steve Robb

        They needn’t be large or expensive. After all an evaporative type cooler box, pads, pump and small fan would suffice. You’d have to have a separate cooling loop as the water would be loaded with minerals. It would be hardly larger than a present day large AC unit. If you actually get condensation forming it suggests it is operating efficiently.

        • Robert Mockan

          For a practical application (not the cooling towers!) for DIY I was thinking more along the line of an automotive radiator with the integral cooling fan (not the fan belt driven but using electric motor). I built something similar for water flow cooling the tooling fixture of a capacitive discharge motor magnet magnetizer used at a job many years ago. Clearly for home use one would need to use the atmosphere for the heat sink.

      • Steve Robb

        I suspect the COP of six he guaranteed was based on the untamed version of the E-cat. With controls I am sure the COP can be raised. The main problem is keeping the reactants away from the temperature that causes damage.

        • Robert Mockan

          Perhaps so. Maybe Rossi will reveal more COP details in the near future.

        • Robert Mockan

          In any event even if power density is lower (meaning more catalyst might be needed) in self sustaining operation, a cheap fuel means the COP equaling infinite of self sustaining operation becomes feasible.

      • James Pelsor

        This brings to mind an obvious question – what is the cycle and time delay for ‘on/off’ operation. People dreaming about using these in cars and such should keep in mind the extent to which we are used to hopping in the car and going. This issue killed the Stanley Steamer about 80 years ago. Mr Rossi, we really could use some more info as to how the ecat really will work.

        • Steve Robb

          I’ll tell you what, I would gladly forgo the convenience of a quick start just to avoid the need to refuel with petroleum based fuels shipped from the Middle East. I’d grin every time I passed a fuel station and would imagine giving the those wealthy-for-no-good-reason-pieces-of-shite the middle finger.

        • No delay at all! eCat as a steady and slow-responding generator of power mates perfectly with EV, especially its ultracapacitor variety. Pure eCat car is probably out of question, but 20 kWe(70-100 kWt) device makes an ideal core of a hybrid car.

  • mc

    What will be the price of a recharge ?
    cant seem to find this info.

    • Bill Nichols

      Calculations from others were a few to several tens of dollars, in the 20-50 dollar range. Rossi stated this range was accurate.

    • arian

      rossi said somewhere 10$ or 20$

      • He didn’t mention how much it would be per kWh. If he offers a 5kWh and a 10 kWh, they might be different prices for the refills. My guess it will be 20$ per kWh.

  • arian
  • jean claude

    The governments will loose a lot of money on taxation.
    But here in Belgium they will create a new one, excise duty on Hydrogen and Nikkel !

    • Philip

      The government can also save alot of money by using this technology in government facilities.

    • They will save money on not needing to go to war to protect oil, one of our national security issues. But will still make plenty of money selling weapons to other countries.

  • Robert Mockan

    There are many regions of the world with low population because it is cold, fuel is expensive, and logistics are a problem. Subsequently land is cheap in those areas. Now along comes cheap heat, that can also be used for greenhouses. One can readily anticipate population will move into those underpopulated regions, and land values will subsequently increase.
    For younger people wanting to secure their retirement buying land in Siberia, northern Canada, or far South in South America, might be the way to go. Except that governments lay claim to it, there is also the entire underdeveloped continent of Antarctica, over 5,000,000 square miles. By comparison the land area of Europe is only

    • Robert Mockan

      (sorry the post broke)
      …land area of Europe is only 3,800,000 square miles. Adding the areas of the underpopulated regions it is about 20% of the total land area in the world. So one might say that the fuel for the Rossi E-Cat product is potentially able to open up all that land area for development. Way to go Rossi!

      • Dear Robert !
        I’d like to put my photo in my avatar box,
        as yours, how to do ?

        • Robert Mockan

          The avatar box holds the gravatar (Globally Recognized Avatar) that you chose. Head over to, where all will be explained.

    • daniel maris

      I certainly think we will see far more greenhouse farming with this technology. We may see the development of urban farm towers as well.

    • James Pelsor

      you seem to have forgotten it’s still really cold outside when its below 0. Most people don’t even like the weather in Maine – forget Siberia!

      • Robert Mockan

        I’ve worked as an ocean diver in winter off the California coast. One learns to embrace the strong currents in the cold dark deep, imagining being carried away to the peace and silence of oblivion. But then the spark of mind flares up, however brief, and one decides, again, to continue, to experience another sun rise.
        My point being one adapts. Temperature control clothing with tube mesh cooling vests today are more common in spacesuit design, although I’ve tried one built for cold water diving that uses hot water flowing through the tubes. Using heated water flow, one wears them in deep diving dry suits, where the water temperature can be near freezing. An opportunity here. If many people decide to live in the cold places, they will adapt, and life will be enjoyable even fun. They will need special clothing, yes. No need to dress like an Eskimo. This is after all the 21st Century. Clear plastic helmets and heat exchanger masks, with hot water vests and polywear, stylish?
        What does that say on the box clipped to the belt?


      • daniel maris

        Yep, people won’t be migrating in their droves to cold regions. More likely we’ll see hot desert areas transformed into habitable spaces through desalination and water capture from the atmosphere.

        • Roger Bird

          I am going to go with the desert. Moving to Antarctica is just not going to happen, unless they install a really big dome.

  • $50 for a kW…

    Would that be kW per hour, per day, per week, per month or… ?

    My home uses almost 5000 k/Wh per year. That’s almost 14k/Wh per day.

    If I had 2 eCats that gave me 20k/Wh per day, I could cancel my power provider!

    • arian

      you misunderstood ,$50 for a kW mean price of a 10kw/H device is just $500 and after 6 month work you must recharge device for 10$ or 20$

    • Robert Mockan

      Rossi is talking about the E-Cat putting out “thermal” kilowatts, not electrical. The way you phrased your question I suppose your bill is for electrical kilowatt power. So 2 E-Cats would not allow you to cancel your power provider.

      When Rossi says the E-Cat is going to cost $50 per kW, that means the E-Cat will cost $50 per “thermal” kW (of generating capacity). If it is a 10 kilowatt E-Cat, it will cost (($50/kW)*(10kW/E-Cat)), that is equal to $500.
      The length of time it will generate the 10 kilowatts is the time between refueling. But once you buy it, you have paid the $500 for the E-Cat. The refueling of the E-Cat will be much less expensive than buying a new E-Cat. So your cost over the life time of the E-Cat will be “very much” lower than $50 per “thermal”kW.

      • Thanks for that. But I’d like to learn how much electrical power one E-Cat can deliver per day.

        I understand that one E-Cat will generate 10 kW between refuelings, which is 6 months according to Rossi himself.

        Doesn’t sound like much, so I probably still don’t understand.

        How much electrical power does 10 thermal kW yield then?

        How many E-Cats will the average home require to become independent from power providers?

        • Roger Bird

          It would depend upon your peak electricity usage. If the maximum electricity that you use is 3 kW, and at 30% efficiency, you could get by with a 10 kW system. The other 7 kW of heat would be used to heating the house, heating water, air conditioning, etc.

        • artefact

          a 10 kw e-cat is able to produce 10KW per hour for a time of 6 month without recharging. After that the charge for another 6 month is just 10 or 20$ and the device costs initialy for buying just 500$.

          As the kw are stated for thermal, for electric you have to devide it by 3. So for 10 kw electric you need to by 3 e-cats (1500$ and recharge it after 6 month for 30 to 60$) when the e-cat is able to produce electricity.

          IF everything is true…

          • Thanks for the clear explanation.

            You say ‘divide by 3’. Does that mean that Rossi has claimed that 1kW thermal converts to 0.33kW electric?

            (in other words: there’s a 33% conversion rate apparently?)

          • Robert Mockan

            I think Rossi is using the idealized Carnot efficiency formula to obtain the 33% conversion number. All right for PR, but practical operational thermal efficiency is unlikely to be much above 10%. Reason being the reaction shuts down below 400K, and heat exchangers need a reasonable temperature difference across the heat exchange path to have heat flow. That means the cold side of the Carnot equation will be substantially above the 300K of ambient, more so for air cooling. With proper heat exchange design the working fluid can recover reactor heat otherwise lost through the insulation to reach 400K before reaching the reactor core, but if the fuel is cheap, and given that heat exchangers are expensive, it might be more cost effective not to use recuperation, and use the working fluid heated to 600K (hot source) and use 400K for the heat sink temperature.

          • “All right for PR, but practical operational thermal efficiency is unlikely to be much above 10%.”

            Even at a conversion rate of 10%, the E-Cat would still provide a person with 1kW of power 24 hours a day.

            So that would be 24kW a day.

            The way I see it, one E-Cat is all an average household needs to drop the electricity bill to near-zero.

          • Robert Mockan

            Corrections and Qualifiers:

            Change “operational thermal efficiency” to just “operational efficiency”. Thermal efficiency in power engineering has another definition that can be confusing in this context.

            For a small system E-Cat being used to make electricity, the entropy changes and frictional effects are going to cut operational efficiency to at least half of Carnot.

            Also, Rossi talks about a heat exchange fluid other than water. For wide scale “affordable” use any fluid other than water isn’t practical, in my opinion.
            If water (steam) is used as the working fluid in a Rankine cycle it will be condensing at atmospheric, not reduced pressure (again for cost reasons).

            Thus although ideally Nmax=1-(400K/600K) does give a Carnot of 33%, I stand by the statement in the previous post that any conversion much above 10% is unlikely.

            For comparison solar energy conversion using parabolic reflectors heating water to steam for steam engines used on small homesteads in the 60s and 70s ran about 9% to 14% efficient.

            So take those numbers as demonstrated.

            These are the kind of reasons why the E-Cat must not use a lot of high grade power (electricity) to keep itself running. Self sustaining operation meaning it provides heat without ANY external electricity source would be ideal. That would allow all the electricity generated to be used in other devices.

          • @Robert Mockan

            Thanks for the detailed explanation. A lot of what you say is hocus pocus to me. I’m not an energy man. I’m a computer guy!

            But still… I now have a clear picture of what the E-Cat will be able to do. And at 10%, it will still be extremely useful.

            All in all I’m really enjoying this development.

        • Brandon

          A 10kW thermal unit produces 10kW of POWER. Power is energy/time. A kWh is a unit of energy. The 10kW unit would produce over the course of a day 240kWh (10kw * 24 hours) of thermal energy.

          This energy could be converted to electrical energy by means of thermocouples, turbines or what have you. The conversion would yield less electrical energy out then heat energy in.

          If you use a 30% efficient process the 240kWh of heat energy will translate into 72kWh/day.


      Silly question, a kW is not an unit for energy but for power or energy per second (1 kiloJoule per second) If you buy an E cat of 10 kW, it can provide you 10 kWh every hour. And remember, you must write kWh not k/Wh.

      • Silly response. Doesn’t answer my question.

        • Dean

          No, he is just leaving the simple math to the user. If converting to electricity was 100% efficient you would have 10kW * 24h = 240kWh per day.

          If it was 50% you’d have 120kWh per day, still almost 10x more than your current 14kWh per day needs.

  • Allen Perry

    To Rossi,

    How much for refills?

  • Bob Dee

    While I hope the system works, it is not clear to me how I could take advantage of it. I have a forced air heating/cooling system. I’ve never seen an explanation of how the e-cat home unit could be integrated with that, nor what that would cost.

    • Kim

      Build a 5000 gallon pool at the side of your house
      Heat for free to 212 degrees f. 24hours a day
      Circulate heat into your house.


    • kryptomaniac

      You could use absorption refrigeration for cooling. Generates cold using heat, like in an RV gas powered refrigerator.

      It would be another box which cycles hot water on one side, and chills something like the evaporator on our existing HVAC system.

      • Steve Robb

        Sell your present $5000 unit for ten cents on the dollar ($500) and install a Rossi system. From that day forth the swap is saving you thousands per year. Only the people who jump in early would be able to save the small and insignificant amount from scrapping their system and selling it to the slow boats.

    • Jerry H

      You’d use a hydronic coil in your furnace, replacing (or supplementing) the burner.

      We have two forced-air systems in our house with hto water coils fed from a high-efficiency boiler. Works great.

      • Jim

        I would love to add water pipes under the floors to give off a constant consistent level of heat. Since I have a basement, I could get away with this. It would eliminate some of the need for the force air system to run.

        I like how forced air gets a place warm fast, but I hate how the temp cycles a lot. A forced air system, at least my current one, only kicks off at full heat.

    • Simply remove the burner in your forced air unit and put a coiled ( radiator style ) loop for hot water. Run the blower which forces the air through the heat coil and ‘heats’ the radiated air along the ducts. Conversion would run mostly getting rid of the burner and tapping off the gas line.

      A/C i am not 100% of but would be much the same principle only using the system but through Absorption Refrigeration.. Again not certain how you would arrange the unit for that…

  • OnTheWaterfront

    Sell the sizzle not the steak.

    • Steve Robb

      So, useless comments of no substance whatsoever is the mote of foolishness to which the pathological deniers are reduce.

    • Roger Bird

      Virtually everyone here knows that Rossi has still not proven his case. Virtually everyone here would not put down a cent for an E-Cat until Rossi does prove his case. So OnTheWaterfront likes to stroke his ego by thinking that we don’t know that Rossi is on probation and OnTheWaterfront is some kind of wonderful genius who is going to save us all.

      • sparks

        Roger, I like your message. Didn’t realize that we see things similarly at first, but yeah, maybe we do. Keep on!

      • Jim

        If I find the e-cat at Home Depot, I’m buying one whether Rossi has proven his case or not.

  • Lu

    The E-cat looks to be a work in progress and is getting better and better. At this price why not won more than one and reduce all that piping?

    Still Rossi appears to be sticking to a COP of 6. As I wrote before, if Defkalion’s claims of a COP of 25-32+ is true it doesn’t matter if Rossi gives it away for free, Defkalion’s Hyperion will be the better buy in the long run because the energy cost is the biggest component of ownership.

    • Lu

      “won”=> buy.

      Also, you’ve gotta love Rossi’s spirit!

      • daniel maris

        I was going to say “you’ve gotta love the guy’s style!” !

    • Robert Mockan

      If Defkalion is using nickel-hydrogen fuel, then 25-32+ COP is an intrinsic property of the fuel, and Rossi should be able to ramp up the E-cat output to at least the same COP.

      • Lu

        I believe Rossi only guarantees a COP of 6 for stability purposes–he’s reported a higher COP in the past. Defkalion has stated that Rossi’s reactor had stability problems (which is why they parted ways) and that they have solved it with a different reactor geometry and thus the higher COP. If the reactor chamber runs too hot then the reaction stops and if not hot enough the it also stops. Just musings based on what I’ve read or heard.

        • daniel maris

          That was before…I think the assumption now is that he has somehow (with the help of NI??) resolved stability issues, which enables him to run at much higher COP values. (This is all speculation of course.)

      • Brad Arnold

        No Robert, you are wrong. COP is not an “intrinsic property” of the fuel, only the fuel density is. Using LENR, nickel is (theoretically) one hundred thousand times as energy dense as diesel fuel. OTH, the COP only has to do with the amount of electricity the LENR generator uses (primarily to maintain the stability of the reaction) as a ratio to the rate of energy the LENR generator produces.

        Regardless of the COP, the fuel density theoretically remains the same. BTW, Defkalion says their COP is higher because they are able to diffuse the LENR reaction within the nickel, so the LENR reaction is more stable. Wouldn’t surprise me if Rossi’s team is working on the same improvement – you can tell that the home E-Cat that Rossi as yet to mass produce is getting better and better (I.e. two tracks – one preparing the automated factory, and two continued research and development to make the soon to be mass produced model better).

        • Robert Mockan

          Thanks for the correction. I should have said something like “realized potential”, not “intrinsic property”.
          I get used to seeing COP used improperly and made me lazy, also. To point: When talking about LENR devices we should use thermal efficiency, N=Qout/Qin, where Q quantities are heat equivalent.
          By strict definition COP does not apply. One of the more mangled concepts in thermodynamics.

  • Jimr

    I would take all of these fiqures with a grain of salt. I doubt if he can sell these units for that price once he has all of Nation Inst. control devices and programs installed. Plus whomever he sells the devices thru,Home Depot whomever will need a profit plus shipping. Also I would think the insurance he would need on the early devices would be substantial. I can’t, believe that NI is past the beta testing phase after only 2-3 months.. I wish him well, I’ll be satisfied at $500 a Kwh.

    • Ged

      I think it depends on who is going to be manufacturing this for him. He can’t be purchasing and setting up a factory all of his own–he’s probably leasing some pre-existing, or contracting out to some company with the manufacturing capability to do this. The E-cat is an incredibly simplistic device, there’s no reason to doubt they could be made and sold for profit at that price or cheaper (the only pricy thing is likely the compressed hydrogen).

      Again, this all depends on scale of manufacturing: bulk greatly lowers the price of any device’s production.

      The 1 million figure probably means he’s contracted a company to produce him that many units, and that’s why it’s such a static number. For most big manufacturing plants, 1 million is probably a small test run.

      • Jimr

        GED, Just the many sensors and control valves needed for every ecat to enable accurate control is a substantial expense. The major advantage would be on the 1mega watt devices, with accurate computer (and they will need some type of cheap laptop/iPad to control) they may use, like 100- 10kw inits as opposed to present 300- 4kw units.

        • Jim

          A $500 / 10kW device doesn’t sound unreasonable to me. Cheap tablets are running about $100 currently, and a lot of that is the screen and tablets are for general purpose use.

          A relatively simply control system doesn’t really need a general purpose display, and only needs to check for a limited variety of data.

          In bulk quantities, I wouldn’t expect the control system to be more complicated than an electronic calculator, which sells for under $20.

          The e-cat itself isn’t supposed to be much bigger than a computer, and isn’t a very complex device. An RFG, a core, the control system, water system (pump and hoses maybe), and a pretty case.

  • PersonFromPorlock

    Sorry, but all these “Wow!” releases just show how easy it is for Rossi’s fans to lose sight of the fact of delay, delay. delay.

    Promise ’em the Moon on Tuesday. If it’s Monday night and they want to know if you’ve shipped, promise ’em Mars next week.

    • Steve Robb

      Where is the delay? Surely you don’t expect to move from the experimental device demonstrated January 2011 to a consumer ready product in one year.

      • Joe

        But still he is lowering the price of something that has yet to be duplicated by a 3rd party. Ever cheaper vapor ware, none of this is news. T

        • Brad Arnold

          It is “vapor ware” only if you ignore the previous successful demonstrations, expert testimonials, credible Rossi partners, and the mad scramble of the scientific community to explain the LENR reaction that previous had been poo-pooed by “skeptics.”

          Frankly, I continue to be amazed by people I interface with trying to conveniently ignore all the evidence, so they can maintain that Rossi is a fraud. Their magical thinking won’t persist long now (soon it will be, sure those 1MW Rossi LENR generators work, but the home versions are vaporware).

          • Joe

            That is because most rational people require more than a blackbox demo of that ducttaped covered bit of piping with experts observing to be convinced that free energy is real and will change the world.

            Too many promises in the past with nothing to show for it but excuses like its real but the govt or opec hitmen are keeping it from the world.

          • Steve Robb

            @Joe: That is because the average person is an ill educated, innumerate dolt, that knows nothing of thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluid mechanics, etc. An engineer knows that you do not need to know the minutiae of the inner workings of a “black-box” if you know how to apply the above to determine if the system (black-box) is in fact working as advertised.

    • Roger Bird

      PersonFromPorlock, I agree. I believe in LENR. I believe that Rossi has something. But this constant feeding of our “oh wow!!!” parts of our brains is just BS.

  • daniel maris

    The cost of electricity will come down with LENR in another way as well: avoiding the need to transmit electricity with huge power lines and sub-stations, will mean that huge savings can be realised. I suspect we may well move to a system where the grid survives only in isolated urban areas. Outside those areas, electricity will be supplied direct by domestic and commercial units.

    • Jim

      I would love to see that, but I think the grid will stay up at least until a majority of an area using it has converted, and until the e-cat can be started without plugging into the grid.

      I wonder what kind of effect the e-cat will have on power prices as their customers switch over.

      I wonder how quickly it will be before power lines are taken down for their material. They are ugly, expensive, dangerous, and hopefully soon to be eliminated.

  • Pingback: Rossi: First E-Cats Will Now Cost $50 per kW |

  • Alexvs

    Next announcements will be: COP increment, prices lower…

    • Alexvs

      Really Adrea Rossi is full of surprises. I fear that the biggest one will not be of the kind most of posters expect.

  • Frank

    $50 per kW. That means $50.000 per MW.
    The price for the first 1MW plant supposingly was $1.000.000.
    So, not such a good deal the first (secret) customer made, isn’t it?
    ( Maybe that’s the reason why he wants still to remain secret 😉 )

    According to Rossis blog, the first 1MW plant is still not in operation, because of re-engineering work for the control system.
    Did he ever say, that the payment was made (and the actual amount of payment)?
    If not, how could he finance his business endeavors?

    • Alexvs

      Excuse me. Is the first customer yet secret? I have missed some threads.

    • Brad Arnold

      Have you seen the price mark up of a new iphone compared to the price after a year?? That first customer of Rossi’s still got a bargain when you consider the amount of money they saved shipping in fuel that that 1MW Rossi LENR generatored saved them.

      • Frank

        If you read Rossi’s blog then you know that the ‘1MW plant’ is still under ‘re-engineering’ and not in operation.
        So, it didn’t save a single gallon of fuel so far …

        However, in my first post I wanted to point out the contradiction of the pricing for a 1MW plant ( according 1.500.000 $ => 1.500 $/kW ) and the ‘home e-cat’ ( according Rossi targeted as 50 $/kW )

        Or with other words: If you need 1MW heating capacity you could buy from Rossi the 1MW container for 1.5 Mio $, or you could buy sufficient numbers of e-cats (and run them in parallel) for a total costs of just 50.000 $.
        For me, Rossis business practices are hard to understand – same like everything else what comes from Rossi …

        • Steve Robb

          They used to call your types “Arm Chair Quarterbacks.” In other words people who know nothing but the art of criticism and sniping. It has been less than three whole months since the purchase. I have no doubt that the purchaser knew full well that the devices were prototypes and probably entered into a discussion with Rossi about the need for all parties to cooperate with the further development of the devices. If the purchaser of the 1 MW reactors are some branch of the US military they have very, very, very deep pockets and no interest in such trivia as to fine tuning exactly when to purchase an E-Catwhen they pay $400/gal of petrol air dropped to a remote outpost.

          It is remarkable, how much of the big picture is lost in the pettiness of such trivial postings.

          • Frank

            Ok, I got it.
            You mean I don’t know anything but you know everything and have the big picture!
            Useless and a waste of time to have discussions with people with such an attitude.

          • Randy

            Hello Steve Rob, That was well stated. I agree with you. Some interests are trying to squelch this good news. The accuser is usually guilty of the accusation. Frank has an attitude.

        • Steve

          Well, the other thing to consider is that the 1MW size plant might consume fuel at a more efficient rate than the consumer units. It was mentioned that the design between the industrial plant and the consumer device was different, but we don’t know exactly how or why. Its possible that only so many of these can be hooked up in series/parallel before the returns diminish from adding more to something not usable. That would actually be another question I would have about this device is what is the maximum number of units that could work together before an issue of some form arises?

    • Oh goodness… Of course the first Customer to any new device gets stuck with the sticker price of future development. How much money do people pay for a new drug for the first 7 years, huge amounts, then when it goes generic the price drops to the point of cost of materials + 30% – 40% ( Drugs are NOT expensive to make for the most part once you know how )

      This is a typical business cycle. Think Henry Ford versus the first Automobile manufactures. Now additionally Rossi will need to compete ( yes COMPETE ) with others who will offer the product for Manufacturing + 30 – 40%.

      So Competition + Industrialization of Output + Smaller size and single purpose utilization ( do you know you can run these in parallel, how much more difficult will it be, is there additional costs in labor, material, etc to do it )

      I am amazed at how people poo poo concepts and price reductions. Seriously… Look he could not get this thing patented. That means ANYONE can build one and sell it. You have to be first to market and have a price so low as to discourage competition because the margins are so low. That means odds are he has dropped the price down from the $100 to $150 per kW to $50 per Kilowatt ( possible also due to good news on the production and creation front )

      Now one last thing. When you create something on an industrial scale there are typically additional needs that must be addressed. Why not purchase 150 ‘sewing’ machines and start up a clothing manufacturing line? The answer is that it is not as simple as buying a set of things and connecting them together or running them in sequence, etc. Logistics and Design limitations of ‘home’ versions of machines get in the way of large scale industrial uses.

      Another example is making your own beer at home, why not simple buy 1,000 home brew kits? Well because even if it is ‘cheaper’ than an industrial Still it is NOT as efficient and the ‘refactoring’ to make it work is a lot of work and maintenance. Can you do it sure, but in the end there is a lot more to it.

      Finally The Industrial version will most likely drop in price to a cost of around $250,000 to $350,000. I mean seriously have you NEVER been in business, have you NEVER had to create an industrial application?

      • Steve Robb

        Well written.

      • Frank

        You can believe me, I’m in industrial business since many years – so I know very well from my daily work the rules this business follows!
        So, I think I know what is feasible, what sounds reasonable and what’s just hot air.
        ( I’m not so sure from where you got your ‘insight knowledge’ )

        And concerning the contradiction in the pricing of the 1MW container and the single ecats: The 1MW container is basically just an assembly of a number of single ecats connected in parallel (refer to Oct 28 ‘demo’)

        • Mv

          Don’t forget. The 1MW unit is available now, the home units might be available in a year. The 1MW unit is all hand made, and the home units will be cheap because they will be mass produced. The first buyer of a product like this probably doesn’t buy it because of the low price, rather for its specific characteristics (to use for research purposes, specific practical uses, researching potential different uses in the future,…). If they were willing to pay 2 million, that was apparently the market price at that moment (after all, they were the first in the world to have an e-cat, and that’s worth something, right) and it would be strange to come back complaining afterwards about the price. Btw, don’t forget that even 2M for a 1MW plant is cheap compared to any other technology, especially considering the cost of the fuel…

    • Jim

      It’s called making things cheaper by mass production. That first one wasn’t mass produced.

      If you don’t like paying for brand new technology, buy only 10 year old computers.

  • charlyw

    Have you calculated the amount of shielding such a device yielding 36*10^6 J/h in Heath through gamma radiation would need? Anyone buying such a unit would have to have a government permit to operate his own strong gamma radiation source! Shielding aside (with what would you conceivably shield such a small unit – depleted uranium?) without proof that the reaction is controllable no government in the world (well aside from Iran maybe) would allow anyone to operate such a menace?

  • Dennis

    I think i will let them have the nobel price. I shall work for this.

  • Andrew Johnsson

    E-cat is a scam. Check out Rossi’s biography. He’s has his university education at a university where they buy their grades.
    He has previously held companies on two occasions when he tried similar scams. Read his biography on wikipedia.

  • twmemphis

    My competing product, the i-Cat only costs $30 per kW.
    You can order now, payment in advance.
    But you may not test it before. I will also not make public tests, because I learned from Mr. Rossi that this brings up too many questions. I prefer to take money first and then deliver a working product as a proof!

    When I sold 1 million pieces, I will start to deliver, please believe me!

    • Dear sir please be aware of the fact that Mr. Rossi has published all of his data except for certain aspects of his systems for all of his information is public and has been since the start of his work. If you have something that will compete please offer the proof prior to anyone putting any money into your product as Mr. Rossi has offered proof all of these years. Best regards

    • Jim

      Lame. He hasn’t asked for money ahead of time. Nor is he asking for payment in advance.

      You really gotta do better if you are going to try to troll here.

  • ed

    why is this not scaleable to a larger unit located at a utility company?

    It would seem to me to be more economical and safer to have these units located at a sub station than in all our homes.

    also what happens when the controls are removed? Sounds like there could be a home made bomb ready for anyone to use.

    • Dear sir if you take the time to read the postings that are on many web sites Mr. Rossi is making commercials systems. But his focus is Home Systems and commercially operated systems for buildings large buildings and utilities and so forth the way the system is set up it is extremely safe and there’s nothing you have to worry about. When the control system is turned off the system literally shuts down that is because there’s no current traveling through the fuel to keep it going. it is a very safe process now that it has been refined and I’m sure that Mr. Rossi and his team will continue to refine it.
      Best regards