The Cures Effect — Will it Help or Hinder the E-Cat Cause? [Updated: Cures Identified]

Andrea Rossi has now acknowledged that the information leaked by ‘Cures’ is authentic, and that this person is indeed an insider. In a post on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, he makes this statement:

INFORMATION:
AFTER THE LEAKAGE MADE BY AN INSIDER WITH THE THE NICKNAME “CURES” REGARDING THE TESTS COMPLETED ON JULY 16TH, WHICH HAD TO REMAIN UNDER NDA, I HAVE TO INFORM THAT: THE TEST MADE ON JULY 16TH WILL BE REPEATED OFFICIALLY WITHIN THE HALF OF OCTOBER 2012 BY THE UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA AND THE RESULTS WILL BE PUBLISHED BY THE SAME UNIVERSITY.
ANDREA ROSSI

Was Cures working at the University of Bologna, or for Leonardo? I don’t think we can tell. It is significant, I think, that an official test from the University of Bologna is mentioned here, with the results being published by the University, rather than Leonardo Corp.

I don’t know if this leak invalidates the first testing that was done in July, but it could be that the leak will have the effect of strengthening Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat cause. For many months there have been people concerned that Rossi has said very much, but shown nothing. With this leak, there seems to be somebody, and something (the photo) that essentially confirms many of the things that Rossi has been saying.

Of course you cannot validate a technology based on a photograph or even data posted on a blog, but what we have here is another piece of evidence, perhaps the strongest yet, that the E-Cat is what Rossi has been saying it is.

I notice that as of Saturday morning, the Cures photo and comments are still listed on the Cobra forum, so apparently he hasn’t been ordered to remove them.

So what does the ECW readership think — will this leakage help or hinder the E-Cat cause? What might be the long term effect of this affair?

UPDATE: Here is Andrea Rossi commenting on the identification of Cures as Domenico Fioravaniti

Dear Antonella:
About the tests: the precise dates will be decided in an agreement that we should reach at the beginning of September: obviously we have to accept their needs.
About Cures: He has been identified as Domenico Fioravanti, it appears that the data from the test made on July 16th comes from him. If it is true, it is due to an excess of enthusiasm for the results, that have been obtained in a test directed by him and by 6 Professors from two Universities. The data had to remain confidential, but he could not help to talk about this event and the remarkable results.
He is making these tests as a Consultant of a military Customer of us and now probably he will have problems for the leakages, even if I do not think it has been so important: sooner or later the same data will be published. I knew Ing Fioravanti when he was a Student of the Politecnico di Torino ( the Engineering University of Turin, Italy) because he was making a research for Prof. Cesare Boffa (one of the best Engineering Prof. of the time) regarding the new technologies of Electrostatic Precipitators. It was the year 1976 and even if I was 26 years old, I was at the times considered an expert of the sector, so I gave to Domenico Fioravanti much papers I had wrote and he also sisited the electrostatic precipitators I manufactured in my factory of Caponago (Milan, Italy). The we never met again. After 35 years (!!!) I received an email from him in the blog of the Journal, in which he congratulated for the E-Cat, and for me has been a delighting surprise to hear from him again. I contacted him privately and he explained to me that he was a Colonel Engineer, expert of missiles tests. One year later, when with our Military Customer we had to choose a neutral Consultant for the test of the well known plant of 1 MW, I proposed Fioravanti, whom they knew very well, because he wrrked with NATO, with the Pentagon at the highest levels and always for engineering connected with thermodynamic tests. So we all have been glad to choose him.
His intellectual integrity and his knowledge of the matter has allowed a job that has been considered highly professional from all the parties involved.
This is it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • un passante

    I was thinking… what is the link between Cures leakage and the test by UniBo?

    it seems to me the best explanation could be that UniBo protested that there is an agreement that they had to be the ones to publish the results of the test.
    Cures might represent another entity (ansaldo?)

    so the need for Rossi to reassure UniBo that they are the ones who officially will publish the results of the test.

    rossi would have probably announced UniBo tests later if not for Cures.

  • zero

    I wish cures had taken the photo with a smart phone, then I would have been able to tell you the location of the test. I hope the information about the photo I put out before doesn’t get cures in trouble via the nda.

  • georgehants

    Adrian M
    August 11th, 2012 at 6:36 AM
    Dear A. Rossi
    If the July 16th test will be repeated then 2 questions need answer.
    1. Will you still present the result of the July 16th at the September Conference? If not… Why not? We were looking forward to see who was the third party that was involved in the July test.
    2.What is the estimate for the second test, that Univ. of Bologna will conduct, regarding press release? Within 2 weeks of the test? Within 2 months, jumping in 2013?
    Tank you in advance for your answer. I hope you will go forward and speed up the press releases regarding the tests, because this is the only thing that your the public has to look at for almost a year now.

    Andrea Rossi
    August 11th, 2012 at 6:49 AM
    Dear Adrian M.:
    1- yes, during the September speak of Zurich we will talk of the 16th July test and of the same test repeated further in the context of the certification
    2- it does not depend on us, but I suppose some week, as usually happens
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Peter_Roe

      But certification of what? You can’t get a prototype made with tube offcuts and fireclay certified, or even a proper fabricated version of the same thing. Certification applies to a finished product, whether domestic or industrial. If Rossi is talking about the original 1MW heater then is does not employ the ‘hot cat’ technology. I’m starting to feel like a mushroom again.

      • G_Zingh

        You got to wonder if recent advances in the Ecat technology going from 600C to 1200C as well as the switch from electric to thermal drive, that effect how the 1 MW electric power plant that they are working with Siemens R&D in Sweden is constructed have forced Rossi to redo the tests in Bologna.

        Perhaps the July 16th test did not document the 1000C sufficiently. I know Rossi had not reached stability at 1200C before that test, and now they are trying to get all their ducks in a row in case they want to start selling 1 MW electric power plants.

        • Peter_Roe

          Good point. Another possibility to try to factor in.

      • Jacob

        I think the e-cat invention is still in development and improvement stage and we will not be able to see a practical device in the market before two years from now.

        • dragonX

          We don’t care about how fast a practical device can be made. We care about Cold Fusion become the interest of the world and for the world to advance this field (transmutations included). We are interested in Cold Fusion changing the energy equation on Planet Earth.

        • Kim

          Andrea Rossi only wants to sell
          the reactor cores.

          I don’t think they are far from
          market if they prove to be stable
          with time.

          I would buy a reactor core myself
          just to heat my swimming pool in
          the winter for christ sake!

          Respect
          Kim

        • MPB

          The E-cat is already on the market.

  • Barry

    Off topic, Martin Fleischmann died just over a week ago. His death was a final contribution to Cold Fusion. Much of the press had to acknowledge his death and as a result had to address Cold Fusion. Some papers seemed to downplay CF where others gave enough on the topic to make many people curious. A certain amount of CF awareness came to the surface this past week as a result MF’s passing. Perhaps it was timely as part of his life’s mission. So much is happening. Perhaps CF, with all the other breakthroughs that are going on, is about to pour into the consciousness of many.
    This week Martin Fleischmann gave the Cold Fusion world another burst of light.

    • GreenWin

      Nicely said Barry. Thanks.

    • Stephen Taylor

      Barry,

      I agree with you. No matter how much we learn and advance there is so much more…so much better than fiction.

      Peace,
      Steve

      • Barry

        Thanks guys.

  • BS drinker

    Thanks a lot buddies for all this fun! Thanks also to Rossi, Cures and all folks.

  • AB

    Cures is Domenico Fioravanti:

    Rossi addresses him as Prof. Fioravanti

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501&cpage=5#comment-56084

    Cures also signed another post as Domenico

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=10#comment-72877

  • Hank Mills
  • Cures effect and/or Fioravanti leakage, will surely help Rossi’s LENR.
    How?
    By showing products and not selling words.
    Anyhow, U’ve done a good ‘dirty’ job 😉

  • Andrew Macleod

    I believe this will cause an uproar with the sceptics….. Mystery company wants to evaluate 1mw plant(oct test). The hired consultant turns out to be an “old buddy” of Rossi. 1mw plant never shipped. To be honest it doesn’t look good, the whole oct test is looking like a staged event. Sceptics will have a have hayday with this!! This new information is more damning then constructive.

    • daniel maris

      Isn’t it a field day rather than a hay day?

    • Jeff

      One thing I don’t understand.

      Imagine this device at rest (room temperature) with no LENR in progress. Now you turn on the electricity, generating about 3500W inside the outer steel cylinder. Obviously, it will get very hot in there.

      At some point, the reaction begins. In time, the total power dissipation goes 13KW+ as described. So the LENR is generating 9 to 10KW.

      Now, why not unplug the wires and remove all doubt? After all, 3500W was sufficient to start the reaction, and you’re now producing several times that much power from the LENR. If 3500W of heat was sufficient to start it, why is 9KW not enough to sustain it?

      • Robert Mockan

        I posted this recently elsewhere but no reply from
        anybody, that leads me to think nobody understood that what I
        was talking about is exactly what you are talking
        about.

        Now that Rossi is using direct thermal input, it is
        puzzling why he is not using the LENR thermal energy itself
        to sustain the reaction.

        Presently the coupling efficiency
        at the system level of input energy to output energy is
        appalling. What does this mean? The specific heat energy in
        1.5 grams of catalyst he says he is using in the high temp
        E-Cat is less than 800 joules at 1000 degree C. Now keep in
        mind that power in watts is joules per second. When Rossi
        says, just for example, that he needs to input 3000 watts of
        power (electrical or thermal, same thing) every 30 minutes
        to keep the E-Cat running, he is saying that it needs (3000
        joules/second)*(60 seconds/minute)*(30 minute) of energy ,that is equal
        to 5,400,000 joules.

        Note the energy ratio here, 6750 to 1!

        Obviously Rossi is using thermal input energy to do much
        more than maintain, or vary, the catalyst internal heat
        energy. Celani has shown that internal heat energy of his
        hydrogen loaded wires is sufficient to cause LENR, and
        thermal power generation, for many hours. Rossi most likely
        can improve his E-Cat again by using more of the LENR
        generated heat for internal system functions, and reduce the
        external sources of heat energy. Even using gas, if the E-
        Cat does not need as much, that would be a significant
        improvement. Or in other words, replacing external electric
        input with external gas input is good, but needing less
        external input altogether is better. The concept of
        “coupling efficiency” may be confused with system COP. Not
        the same. Coupling efficiency has to do with how much energy
        needs to be input into just the catalyst to keep it working.
        When we already know that LENR catalysts can self sustain
        (function without external energy into them), to have a 6750
        to 1 energy ratio at the “system level” in the E-Cat is
        ludicrous. Rossi undoubtedly knows this, but may be stuck
        with embedded engineering constraints. He may need to do
        some more design work on the E-Cat for his next big
        improvement.

        • Omega Z

          Note: Cures said this particular test was a phase change test.

          • Robert Mockan

            Phase change test? I missed that. He put a phase change material into the reactor to level the heat, or store the heat? Or is he talking about catalyst metal crystal structure phase change? Or is the phase change in the hydrogen storage hydride he is using? Or metallurgical phase change in the reactor construction steel he is using due to high temperature? Bleh. Without more information all we have to go on is guessing. Educated guessing or not, this becomes tiresome very quickly.

          • Ivan Mohorovicic

            He said it was a phase of the tests, not a phase change test.

          • Stephen Taylor

            Ah, yes.

          • Stephen Taylor

            Indeed, I need a nap.

          • Robert Mockan

            Me too.

          • Stephen Taylor

            He must have meant no phase change (a simple differential temperature test) unless he is referring to something mysterious inside the reaction chamber. The communication is difficult at best. Certainly nothing in the calorimetry relates to phase change.

      • Robert Mockan

        Rossi actually answered part of this question, in his usual convoluted way, when he was talking about the difficulty of “focusing”. He meant focusing energy on regions of the catalyst that are cycling through their nuclear active state, either to re-activate them, or compensate for local inactivity that can spread to adjacent regions, thus causing instability in LENR thermal power generation. He is trying to get around the focus problem by saturating the reactor with thermal energy from an external source to bridge the inactivity gaps. It is a brute force method, can undoubtedly be improved, and when he finally fixes the focus problem we should see COP go up.
        Previously I was unsure if he was only using the electric power for thermal energy, and he might have meant something else when he said “focus”.
        But the gas input resolves that issue.

        • Stephen Taylor

          Robert, you are right that Rossi has addressed this in a fashion. When people say it is thermionic do you agree they mean it is simply needing heat in all the right places to make it go?
          So if we have an abundance of heat all over the darn place why does it need electricity? Unplug the darn thing. Oh, that’s the 50% self-sustain mode and the COP as calculated is about 8 now. Maybe?
          As you say, tiresome.

          Steve

          • Robert Mockan

            My guess is his engineering design is not ideal for the physics involved. We know research by others reveal LENR can work with heat alone, and more heat often seems to increase LENR output. When he was using electric power we all had the question was he doing more with it than just heating. But now it looks like it was just a convenient way for heating. It can be turned on and off quickly, applied to specific regions with suitable resistance heaters, and so on. If it was just a convenience, what design changes has Rossi made to use gas heating, that somehow keeps the relevant convenience of electric power heating, but using gas heating? The tube within tube is a different configuration from the original E-Cat design. I’m sure it will all be figured out soon.

          • Stephen Taylor

            Thanks. It makes sense.

      • Jeff

        Following up my own post,days later – don’t know if anyone will ever read this. But the canonical answer to my question, assuming everything is on the up-and-up, is that the electrical power isn’t optional. See the Brilloin (sp?) presentation at ICCF-17 for an idea about how and why.

      • I observed the ineervitw and found both Dr. Focardi as well as Mr. Rossi to be open and direct in answering the questions posed. Their responses seemed totally reasonable and not evasive.Could it be that the earlier negative results observed during the taped video of Mr. Rossi’s demonstration are not typical? It is entirely possible that the E-CAT being tested was not behaving as expected and Mr. Rossi would rather wing it than allow the inconsistancy to be made public. As we are all aware, the difficulty of acheiving consistant results has long been a nagging problem of LENR devices. If Mr. Rossi has achieved a success rate of 60%(?) for the E-CAT units, he is a hero. He should set aside the other 40% for now until the process is understood sufficiently.

  • s

    For the admin – is there a reason why some of my posts do not make it to the forum?

    • admin

      Hi s, some posts get flagged for the moderation file for various reasons — some make it out of moderation, some don’t. It depends on the content of the posts. I have to make judgment calls in order to keep this site from becoming something I don’t want it to be. See the ‘Posting Rules’ page for the guidelines I try to follow.

  • If I had an E-Cat capable of putting out 13 kW with forced convective cooling, I would test the stability of the system and the ability of the materials within it to withstand high temperatures by running it without the forced convective cooling in the open as is being done with the one in the photograph. I think people have taken the 13 kW number too literally and attempted to apply it to the system being run as shown. 13 kW is the power output that would result if it was supplied coolant. The temperature of the coolant out would be less than the quoted temperatures depending on the flow rate. They are no doubt running this test at a lower power output but higher temperatures. It capable of putting out 13 kW, but in this test the power out is lower and the temperatures higher.

    • Jeff

      That makes perfect sense to me. But it isn’t what “Cures” said. As machine-translated by Google, Cures wrote:

      “Power radiated by the two inner and outer walls considered equal to a total of 13.39 kW …”

      He was describe the facts of the image at the time he wrote this – I don’t want to quote too much for copyright reasons, but you can click over to the page and see for yourself. In context, it does appear to be a description of what was actually happening, rather than what might happen in principle.