Energy in the Political Debate

I had wondered earlier this year whether the news of LENR would hit the mainstream during this US election cycle, but it doesn’t appear that it will be a topic that will come up in any campaigns this time around. The Popular Science story on Rossi and the E-Cat is the closest thing we have seen to what could be considered mainstream media coverage, but from all accounts (haven’t seen it yet — checking my library daily) it is an inconclusive and cautious article which raises the usual questions about Rossi and the E-Cat, but provides no real conclusion.

I watched much of the US Presidential debate this evening and couldn’t help wondering how different things might have been if the candidates had been aware of the breaking E-Cat and LENR story. There was plenty of discussion about energy in terms of costs, security of supply, and jobs in the energy sector. Oil, gas, coal, and traditional alternatives came up, but unsurprisingly nothing about a technology that could turn out to be the most significant scientific and economic issue of our age.

It seems likely to me, however, that whoever is the next president of the United States, or whoever is in position of power in any nation, will sooner or later have to deal with the reality of a new energy source that could turn the world on its head, and make possible a new economic and political reality.

If the E-Cat, or any another powerful LENR source, is verified conclusively and becomes common knowledge, it seems to me that it will lead to a period of intense debate in the public arena, with competing entities trying to protect their own interests, and the general public appealing for access to cheap and secure energy. It could cause a lot of headaches for politicians who currently have fairly stable bases of support.

So we may not hear cold fusion mentioned on the stump this time around, but maybe in four years things could be quite different.

  • Omega Z

    Frank

    We know 2 politicians are aware. Bruce Tarr of Massachusetts, Another I don’t recall his name off hand who has actually had some involvement with LENR.

    It’s unlikely Romney & Obama aren’t up to speed on this. It may just be that it’s not worth the Political Risk at this time considering that 1. CF has a bad rep & 2. At present only capable of producing hot water While still requiring a substantial amounts of Electricity. Most of the Public would have trouble comprehending what COP>6 would mean. A lot of campaign time would be needed to bring them up to speed.

    Once hooked up to a Generator producing substantially more Electricity then it uses, Then Politicians will talk LENR.

    Considering this involves many more people, Corporations & scheduling problems that slow things down, I’d be surprised if this were to happen or confirmed before June 2013. Realizing Rossi is just now starting to grapple with producing the steam output at pressure required. Also it will have to work with a ready designed off the shelf turbine as proof of concept. No Corporation, Not even Siemens will design a special turbine until after proof of concept. Rossi will have to make do with the best existing match up.

    If this is accomplished but has a few problems due to Turbine design, Then Siemens or any other Turbine Manufacturer would be more then willing to spend 10’s of millions on a Purpose designed Turbine, But not before.

  • Peter_Roe

    The only real argument about energy provision in the UK seems to be between the tories, who want fore fracking and a new generation of gas-fired stations to make use of the cheapish gas, and the libdems, WWF and something called the ‘climate change committee’, all of whom are signed up to ludicrous ‘carbon elimination’ promises and schemes.

    The upside if Camoron wins would be that modern gas generators would be very simply converted to packaged cold fusion units. Personally I would be up for new power stations fuelled entirely by polar bears if it meant no new nuclear fission.

    • Peter_Roe

      Previous comment moderated. The only candidates I can see are ‘arg ument’, ‘clim ate change’ or ‘ludicr ous’, which would all seem to be a bit over-sensitive. Hopefully this comment will make sense later!

      • timycelyn

        As a test:
        argument, climate change, ludicrous.

        Added in edit – it didn’t go into moderation

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks for testing, Tim. In that case I have to conclude that the moderation filter has somehow become sentient, and has taken a personal dislike to me and my comments! (Or possibly you might see some other possible ‘trigger’ when the comment becomes visible – beats the cr*p out of me!).

          • Blanco69

            Yes Peter, maybe Ecat world is moderated by Skynet as well as our good friend Frank!

          • georgehants

            Ha ….

          • Robert Mockan

            WordPress filters can be organized in different ways, and sometimes there are unintended consequences. Just be happy your browser does not take a dislike to you. Then it would not update web pages every time you visit, but instead display something from your cache that no longer exists. I have written commentary more often than I care to think about that simply … disappears… when I try to post it. Not even a moderation notice. I usually trace the problem to my evil browser. Even now I can feel it watching me with those horns and beady little yellow eyes.

          • Robert Mockan

            Just be happy your browser still likes you. Mine does not always update web pages every time I visit. Instead it prefers to display pages that no longer exist, even though I tell it to always update. Writing a comment to post on a page that no longer exists might be enough to confuse WordPress. Then there is the ISP itself that might be making problems for you. I have ATT, that is not a bad as AOL, but getting there. You sure you did not say anything, anytime, anywhere, that might put you on a “list”, for automatic moderation? Sometimes webmasters have to be careful what kind of .. low life (heh heh).. they allow to post, if the comment is not politically correct. Also, remember, Frank is a writer and author. You misspell something, and maybe off with your head!

          • Peter_Roe

            Now I do feel digitally unloved – my browsers (Chrome and Firefox) do exactly the same thing. I must have pissed them off, too!

          • Omega Z

            @ Robert
            @ Peter

            Make sure your settings are set for refresh every-time.

            Of coarse with updated versions of your browser, there’s always the possibility they broke something. Occasional glitches. So watch for update fixes. Also if there is no fix available for a glitch & you can verify there is one you can file a report.

          • atanguy

            PARANOIA EXISTS guys!
            Look behind you!
            😉

          • Peter_Roe

            Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they are not out to get you!

          • georgehants

            Brilliant.

          • Omega Z

            +1

          • Peter_Roe

            Not mine, sadly. It was quoted in the Mel Gibson film, ‘Conspiracy Theory’ but its older than that.

  • Filip47

    The only problem is that it’s not verfied by a third party, as soon as that happens everything will change. It’s all we need, one proof, just one.
    A ‘Yes He Can!’
    And Rossi is not able to give one, why?
    I am starting to get very skeptical again. Sometimes I feel like an idiot, maybe I am. Maybe most of us are, Rossi included. Soon this all will be over, for better os worse.

    • Casey

      As Rossi said many times,the real proof will be product on the marked.
      So, he will not reveal secrets of the E-Cat, until he get his patent and proper certifications.

  • Al D

    We know that NASA and possibly DOE is following e-cat and consequently, I’m sure that Obama is aware of it. After Solyndra tho, I think it would just be too politically risky to talk about it now or provide any easing of the way.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      What made Obama a laughing stock was giving huge loan guarantees to shaky companies(which happened to be owned by big Obama financial supporters). It’s a form of laundering tax money back into campaign money. How did you like stimulus spending to build an auto plant in Finland?

      LENR doesn’t need tax money. LENR just needs an even break in the USPO and with the regulators.

  • Voodoo

    What will doing 4000 Chinese companies, if Rossi refused to sell them production licenses ?

    These companies simply will producing Shanzaied LENR and some of them will even pay voluntarily fees to Rossi.

    This will ultimate proof of his broken strategy.

    Vivaldi invented his music pieces, however today 40 millions Chinese children play and “Shanzaied” (indigenous variations) his classical music.

    • Casey

      Then, it is needed to organize production plants, like the Taiwanese Foxconn, employ 1 million workers and made under own control, production for all world as the Apple company is doing with their electronics, made by Foxconn.

  • georgehants

    It is now to become criminal and antisocial to say that science is wrong and that Cold Fusion does exist.
    The High Priests are letting out their true natures.
    —–
    From Scientific American
    Antiscience Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy
    The United States faced down authoritarian governments on the left and right. Now it may be facing an even greater challenge from within.
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy

    • georgehants

      National Academy of Sciences
      World science academies release report to promote research integrity
      AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, and TRIESTE, Italy — To encourage researchers around the world to adhere to universal science values and ethical behavior.
      http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/naos-wsa101712.php

      • HeS

        @:”to promote research integrity”

        More power to scientific bureaucracy (and censorship).

      • Peter_Roe

        Wrong target (big pharma ‘researchers’ excepted). Its the institutions and journals that need a brand new set of ethics.

    • Peter_Roe

      “evolution, human-induced climate change, vaccines, stem cell research”

      Don’t you just love the way that to question AGW or the safety of vaccines is slipped in with those who question evolution or want to stop stem cell research. Subtle propaganda at its very best.

      • georgehants

        Peter, below — “despite years of scientific training” —
        What they are saying is that even with all the possible scientific brain-washing Dogma, most scientists disagree.
        If scientists where free to state their views without fear of retaliation by peers and the establishment the World may be a better place.
        ——
        Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
        ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
        University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

      • georgehants

        Peter, below — “despite years of scientific training” —
        What they are saying is that even with all the possible scientific mind bending Dogma, most scientists disagree.
        If scientists where free to state their views without fear of retaliation by peers and the establishment the World may be a better place.
        ——
        Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
        ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
        University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

        • A closely related deep-rooted belief, I think, tends to pop up in the cold fusion context: people think that it sounds too “good” to be true and therefore is likely false. As if the truth or falsity of a physical phenomenon would somehow depend on its utility value to man.

          • georgehants

            Pekka agreed, but much of popular belief is hidden because, especially scientists are afraid to stand up against the pressure of authority that is dictating what they are allowed and what they are forbidden to believe.
            This religious dictatorship must, I think, be removed, to allow a Wonderful unknown freedom to enter science.
            To follow for just once in it’s history the Truth.

          • jacob

            can’t see how this corrupt system can be changed,it is very much established with solid foundations and are well protected and fortified.

            Maybe a mayor global collapse in a form of a stockmarket crash, predicted to happen by ‘ insider Wealth Alert’ in 3 weeks time ,if true ,could be a catalist,I really don’t know.

      • GreenWin

        These are the methods developed by Herr Goebbels, master propagandist. To accuse doubters of pet theories like ICF hot fusion, AGW, Darwin, Newton the same as religious “Creationists.” It is high propagandist clownery.

        The doubting of the high priests continues as one by one their pet projects collapse into boondoggledem. The $4B NIF is a good example. The highest priests and experts said THIS is the grail of hot fusion. The failure of AGW to cow the public is another. Holes in Darwin & Newton keep opening. And attempts to make a triumph of a boson are short-lived.

        The ivory towers of science are being dismantled. A small team in Italy has given us what appears to be 20+ times more than all 60 years of hot fusion research. Wonder why there are “antiscience” beliefs?

        http://fire.pppl.gov/NIF_Science_Clery_092112.pdf

        • georgehants

          GreenWin, as Peter says it is all psychological warfare to them.
          They do not say that nobody would be anti-science, if science only follows the Truth with a completely fair and unbiased mind.
          They make out that those fighting for say, Cold Fusion are questioning the authority of the church of science and are therefore committing treachery against the population.

          • GreenWin

            Yes George. As the general population awakens to the manipulations of the orthodoxy, it will either change dramatically, or collapse. The treachery is to wield ignorance as a club. The crumbling church of science has been caught red-handed – and THAT is a crime against humanity.

          • Andrew Macleod

            Agree 100%

      • Tony76

        AGW is based on consensus of an exclusive club. It is not based on scientific examination of data, with accurate error bounds, nor is it based on risk, impact and probability.

        AGW is another good example of politics that contaminates all fields of human activity.

    • atanguy

      Basically this article is right, it attacks the antiscience conservatives who want to put their religious believes above any scientific facts. For example, you have the right to believe that earth has been created 6000 years ago or to deny Darwin scientific conclusions or the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. But all of those believes should be assessed by the scientific method and it proves that they are all false.
      Facts are stubborn.
      By the way the article doesn’t mention cold fusion contrary to what you imply.

  • Casey

    Rossi promised to start up robotized plant to make 1million domestic E-Cats/year. Since he can not do it now as he said, there is no problem since the same robotised plant, can make 1 million 10kW modules to build 1000, 1MW E-Cat plants, which will be more profitable for Rossi. The new version of Hot E-Cat look even simpler in design, so it is mere of receiving safety certification for the small modules. Since the Hot E-Cat is in testing period, it need to design proper assembly of the small modules,into 1MW plants.

    • Ged

      That seems to be the game plan change. It makes sense; as domestic safety certifications are much harder to obtain.

  • georgehants

    tomconover
    October 17th, 2012 at 10:55 AM
    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    In the test results, 218 hours of self sustained mode was identified. Frank on E-Cat News Live Feed stated today that “The Hot Cat, developed by Andrea Rossi, just completed a rigorous test in which it has run for 218 consecutive hours in self sustained mode.”
    1) Is it true? 218 consecutive hours in ssm?
    2) If not true, how long are the ssm event durations?
    3) Does the Hot-Cat still require one hour power, one hour ssm segments?
    God bless you Andrea, your work and spirit reflect love for all.
    Sincerely,
    Tom Conover
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 12:45 PM
    1- 218 hours of ssm is true
    2- the duration is regulated by the control system, are not regular, dependon many factors: can be 1 hour, 2 hours, or minutes
    3- no, the Hot cat works differently
    Thank ou very much for the wish, I need it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • frip

    There is an article in November discover magazine on lenr.

  • georgehants

    tomconover
    October 17th, 2012 at 10:55 AM
    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    In the test results, 218 hours of self sustained mode was identified.
    1) Is it true? 218 consecutive hours in ssm?
    2) If not true, how long are the ssm event durations?
    3) Does the Hot-Cat still require one hour power, one hour ssm segments?
    Sincerely,
    Tom Conover
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 12:45 PM
    1- 218 hours of ssm is true
    2- the duration is regulated by the control system, are not regular, dependon many factors: can be 1 hour, 2 hours, or minutes
    3- no, the Hot cat works differently
    Thank ou very much for the wish, I need it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Robert Mockan

      It sounds like what Rossi is saying is that, even with a constant radiative power output, the reactor requires time intervals of electric power input that vary erratically.

      It would seem to indicate the LENR active catalyst has large variations in thermal power generation even under conditions that one would think should provide a stable constant thermal power generation.

      If true, then that is very interesting. What could be changing in the LENR catalyst to cause such an effect?

      • ivan_cev

        To me this is mind blowing, how such a complex control system could be implemented over two wires conducting electricity to a resistive element, telepathy?, How big an complex could be this control system that have to read parameters and adjust at none know intervals? How Rossi gets the reading of the parameters, with the infra-red camera?
        it sounds like science fiction to me.

        • Robert Mockan

          It might be done just sensing the temperature from the reaction with a thermocouple somewhere in the unit. Temperature low, give it some juice. Temperature high, less juice. If he has a set point controller with low hysteresis it might “chatter” given normal variations in reaction rate, thus temperature. If very little hysteresis the control circuit might even react to variations in air currents around the reactor that cause small alteration in convection heat loss to the air. If we add to that the possibility the catalyst itself needs to be “zapped” with current going through it every now and then, it might explain the seeming erratic operation of his control circuit. Having worked extensively with set point controllers when employed at a company back in the 70s, my best guess would be the solution to a “chatter” problem would be to reduce positive feedback and go to proportional control circuit.

          • Ivan_cev

            Yes, but I posted before that this is improbable as the average temp in the report is 1050, it does not left much room for differences in temperature (nickel will melt at 1400), also in the “independent” report we see the curve of energy output, (calculated in base of temperature) and there are no fluctuations.
            So you could safely discard that possibility

          • Ivan_cev

            How you define: “hysteresis” ?

          • Robert Mockan

            In the regular electronic sense. It is the on-off differential designed into a set-point controller. For example the circuit turns off when the temperature sense measurement voltage is a bit higher than the set-point voltage, and the circuit turns on when it is a bit lower. That way a set-point controller will not react to the variations of temperature within a range as determined by the hysteresis. I also commented a few days ago that it is unlikely Rossi could safely utilize a set-point controller so close to the catalyst destruct temperature, as you point out, but it might be possible depending on the precise operation characteristics of the reactor and the hysteresis adjustment. For example if he can compensate reactor core temperature variations with hysteresis the outside surface might average 1050 C without exceeding reactor core destruct or shut down limits. Without more information I disagree we can discard this possibility. We simply do not know yet what the internal state of the reactor is when it is operating.

          • Ivan_cev

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis

            Basically is a delay in a input being transmited or reacted by/to the output, exist in dynamic systems. like magnetic hysteresis,
            hysteresis only exist in high frecuency proccesses. If a proccess is slow the effect disapears. You seem to be talking about something different here.

          • Robert Mockan

            No. Same thing. The concept applies to different subjects.

            The link you provide gives the general description, that is “..Basically is a delay in a input being transmitted or reacted by/to the output..”.

            The context I use it in is that of process control in manufacturing (my position manufacturing engineer).

            The magnetic hysteresis example you mentioned applies the general description to the phenomena of hysteresis in magnetic materials. It is not wrong, just a different application of the general description.

            In process control systems, like for example used in robotics assembly today, but 40 years ago simply called automatic control with set-point controllers, hysteresis may be applied as part of the controller transfer function. It is sometimes also called the Schmidt component of the function.

            Today control is implemented using a PID, or proportional–integral–derivative controller, with the control transfer functions programmed into a microcomputer, but 40 years ago when I worked on set-point controllers, we implemented the function using a resistor-capacitor network, (with a few discreet transistors as active gain components being used to compare inputs), that would act as a voltage divider in a feedback loop (from output to input), of the comparator circuit.

            The voltage division of the feedback could be adjusted (that is adjusting hysteresis), by adjusting a potentiometer in the feedback network, such that a state change of the comparator would occur,when desired, after the set-point was passed, either with the sense voltage going up or down, that would minimize circuit triggering by small random variations of the sense signal voltage (by containing them in the comparator null zone. In electronics unwanted stuff is called noise, and you try to nullify it so it does not affect circuit performance.)

            (That last is precisely the general description of the delay in the input being acted upon by the output).

            When the comparator did change state it would do so to effect the process being controlled, but only when it was really desired, and not for every unwanted transient signal.

            In the context of process control the hysteresis is not frequency limited to some low level.

            Does that help?

          • Ivan_cev

            I think in the sense you explain the hysteresis is the consecuence of the control you trying to apply.

          • vbasic

            I was so sure the first 1MW plant was sold to the US Navy, I thought we were going to get an ‘October Surprise’ from the President. Especially since Rossi spent so much time here in the US this year. But now that he’s back in Italy a lot, I guess not. So either the plant wasn’t as powerful as hoped (only .5 MW ) or it went to someone else. I do think if the US got it and it worked well and they wanted to buy more, the President would be talking about it. Unless the troubles at Solyndra, Fisker, and A123 caused him to be quiet on all alternatives, even if the US has it.

          • NJT

            Mistakes were and will always be made in exploration of science, that is just a part of the process, but no reason to put your tail between your legs and run home to momma because of a few failed efforts to move ahead.

            LENR is a NOW proven verifiable fact of science. These politicians need to crawl out of the holes they have been digging for themselves and see the CURRENT light of day. This science is on the move and it is past high time they get off their asses and with the program of moving our countries and our world ahead…

          • ivan_cev

            I believe we should be sure the e-cat is real before making so many conjectures

      • GreenWin

        The rate of available H1 and Nuclear Active Areas – i.e. nano-fissures with available condensed matter. The surface geometry of the catalyst is a large variable.

      • Thinksforself

        What if the reaction is mildly endothermic?

        I’ve read many theories/posts claiming that steps in the transmutations claimed in LENR are endothermic. Maybe the reaction Rossi is relying on doesn’t generate much heat or none at all, but does generates low level gamma, x-rays, etc. at large enough levels to explain the power output. Rossi has said in the past that much of the heat is caused by absorption of low level gamma. If you insulated the core thermally, but with materials that were close to transparent to higher energy rays the heat would largely be generated outside of the core area containing the reaction. You might need to keep heating the core to maintain the reaction.

        Just a W.A.G. !!!

        • Robert Mockan

          Research about physical reactions of hydrogen and metals has shown there are endothermic as well as exothermic reactions having to do with absorption and desorption. This is just the physical reactions and not LENR, but your point is well taken. The electric power needed to activate LENR catalyst, re-activate LENR catalyst, and so on, could be influenced by endothermic reactions not directly related to LENR.

  • georgehants

    Would anybody disagree that “Science training” should mean hypothesis, theorise and research, following Evidence.
    The scientific establishment thinks it means giving a religious decree of Dogma stating for example —
    There is no Cold Fusion
    There is no creator.
    there are no UFO’s.
    There is no Placebo Effect.
    There is no Telepathy.
    Animals have no Consciousness.
    Humans have no Freewill.
    The Universe is a machine.
    The Mind does not exist.
    Etc. Etc. Etc.
    Has anybody ever known science to be wrong.
    ——
    Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
    ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
    University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

    • The scientists I know do not say: “there is no X”. They say: there is no (or no compelling) evidence for the existence of X, or that X is not necessary to explain observations and experiments.

      Although I must admit that cold fusion seems to be some kind of an exception. There many scientists seem ready to say “there is no CF”.

      • georgehants

        Pekka, that sounds O.K. until you compare all the subjects with Cold Fusion.
        If you now read your comment again, you may agree that it then sounds rather hollow, simply an escape clause.
        Saying there is no Evidence when one is simply disregarding and denying the Evidence is surly not very scientific.

        • I didn’t understand your comment. My points were these:
          (1) I don’t agree with you that scientists would often say: “there is no X” where X is creator, UFO, telepathy, consciousness, free will, mind. Because I think that instead they say: “there is no evidence for X” or that “X is not a necessary assumption”.
          (2) I however do agree with you that they often say: “there is no cold fusion”.

          IMO, they are correct at (1) and wrong at (2). In other words, it seems to me that there is no widespread irrational denial among scientists at (1), although such exists at (2).

          • georgehants

            Sorry Pekka, not put very well.
            What I meant was that Cold Fusion is an exception because more research is being done on a phenomenon that lays itself open to proof.
            The other subjects being more difficult, without very careful investigation are easier to debunk.
            The statement you made of the views of others —

            “They say: there is no (or no compelling) evidence for the existence of X, or that X is not necessary to explain observations and experiments.”

            They are still denying Cold Fusion even with what now seems indisputable Evidence.
            The point becomes “hollow” in that” it is clearly a pointless non-scientific opinion.
            Until one excepts that the Evidence needs to be looked at unbiasedly and fairly one cannot reasonably make such a statement.

          • Omega Z

            George

            You were mostly on target when you pointed out “Science training” Or Better stated would be the Education of Science Students.

            Tho I don’t think it’s your Intent, you inadvertently throw all into the same pot so to speak. Most of these students do as taught. Which is the Problem. They should be taught to keep an open mind to anything. I separate these from the Dogma. There victims of the system. The Dogma comes from the top. That’s what needs fixing.

            Robert Duncan is a good example of how it should work. He was sure CF had been debunked, But was open minded & upon seeing the evidence
            to say wait, Somethings going on here that needs looked at.

            I would suspect even with the System we have, there’s many Scientist that are Open. They just keep there mouth shut & watch. I wont even call them Cowardly. They have their livelihoods at stake. Families to take care of. It’s like David & Goliath except they have no sling.

            Even McKubre of SRI has said they should stay silent until they’ve reached a secure period in their careers.

            Take Note George that their are at the very least a 1/2 dozen people who come to E-catworld on a daily bases who are involved with Science/Research. Who know they will be directly or Negatively affected by LENR & are still supportive of Rossi & LENR research. Their Open Minded. They deserve our respect.

            It’s only Natural they would take it offensively when you throw them all in the same pot. Cast a Smaller net.

            Or as I would say, Most Politicians(Not All) dance to the same tune regardless of Party affiliation.

            I would say Narrow your target George, Your Scatter shots tend to cause a lot of Collateral damage to the Innocent.

            Have a good day George & a glass of wine for me while your at it. I’m all out of Whiskey.

          • Tony76

            Good post.
            Yes, the problem is not “Science training”, the problem is politics and selfish behaviour in all spheres. Science is no exception.

            The anti-dote is obligatory logging of decisions and allocations and transparent access by the public to that data.

          • georgehants

          • Voodoo

            Folks, is there some volunteer, who have access to last issue of Popular Science and is capable note here in blog some 2-3 most interesant sentences from article about Rossi, which was not been previously published elsewhere ?

            Thanks

          • artefact

            here you can find at least some pictues of the article:
            http://pesn.com/2012/10/16/9602208_Andrea-Rossis_Black-Box–by_Popular-Science/

          • georgehants

            Omega, thank you.
            I have a very narrow target.
            To help to put right the terrible crimes committed in the name of science.
            I have no interest in the number or status of those who disagree with me.
            I make very simple points —
            Science should talk only the Truth.
            Science should follow Evidence and not opinion.
            Science should research every phenomenon of the natural World.
            There should be no Dogma, no pre-judgment, no dictates of what is and what is not permissible.
            Etc. Etc. Etc.
            I believe that anybody that has witnessed the corruption and clear distortion of Cold Fusion and does not feel that, things must change and that they would like to help change them, is in error.

          • phlatbeer

            There is no creator.
            there are no UFO’s.
            There’s more evidence of UFO’s than there is a creator

          • georgehants

            phlatbeer, for your certain knowledge, can I assume you are in contact with your personal creator.

    • ivan_cev

      George, Science is just ok, it advances and evolves slowly as new research and evidence mounts. actually today we live in the best world ever and the prospects for the future are great.
      The scientific method is correct, some people may manipulate it a bit like in the case of cold fusion, but you have to admit that after 23 years, we still do not have independent replication of a particular experiment and as consequence no peer review, maybe celani will change this.

      • georgehants

        ivan, you said —-
        “but you have to admit that after 23 years, we still do not have independent replication of a particular experiment”

        I ask, why do you think it is that after 23 years we have not moved further.
        What “scientific method” are you saying is correct —
        Please put that method clearly for me to see.

        • GreenWin

          Troubles arrive with those unwilling to name and root out corruption in their ranks. There can be no recovery for old science until it admits it has become deeply ill. The spectacular failure of hot fusion is a giant red flag.

        • Ivan_cev
          • georgehants

            Ivan, I do not visit Wiki-rubbish, as proven by it’s coverage of Cold Fusion it is not a reliable source of information.
            What ever scientific methods it is advocating, clearly, by the Cold Fusion fiasco, must be either not being followed correctly or is in error.
            If a method is in error then time for it to be reassessed and changed.

          • ivan_cev

            pathological fanatism is not healthy George.

          • georgehants

            ivan, you are simply abusing with no content.

    • Sandy

      George:

      “Free will” does exist. Free will is a political ideology; i.e., an explanation for human behavior that justifies a socially sanctioned system of rewards and punishments. Please do not make the MISTAKE of using free will as though it is a scientific theory.

      The behavior of an organism is determined by its physiology, its history of reinforcement and punishment, and its current environment. This scientific theory is the foundation upon which behavioral science is based.

      • georgehants

        Hello Sandy, could I ask, are you agreeing with the reductionist explanation of Freewill (Laplace) or do you believe that we have an independent ability to transcend any programing to attain our freely chosen goals.

        • Sandy

          George:

          If an alien came to Earth to study human societies the alien would observe that in some societies humans use a DOCTRINE called “free will” to explain human behavior. The alien would observe that in some human societies free will is a religious doctrine (especially in a theocracy) and that in secular states free will is a political doctrine.

          Free will is an ethnographic FACT but a religious/political doctrine cannot be used as a scientific theory.

          Behavioral scientists subscribe to the theory that human behavior is DETERMINED by a number of variables. They do not assert that human behavior is controlled by an invisible entity that has a capacity called free will.

          Social scientists sometimes make the mistake of using free will as though free will is a scientific theory. I strongly object to that practice. That practice is anti-scientific.

          A prosecutor can assert that a defendant has free will and is therefore culpable and deserves to be punished. But please recognize that free will is just an assertion. It is not a scientific hypothesis that can be subjected to experimental testing, so it cannot become a scientific theory. Free will cannot be weighed or dissected or examined under a microscope or analyzed with a gas chromatograph. Free will is an assertion that people use to justify assigning credit and blame, and then issuing rewards and punishment.

          Free will is a social convention; free will only exists by agreement. In that sense, free will is like a corporation. A corporation is a “legal fiction”; it only exists because we declare that it exists.

          I have no problem with you or anyone else asserting that humans have free will. But I want you to recognize that free will is a religious/political doctrine, NOT a scientific theory.

          • georgehants

            Sandy thank you.
            I respect your beliefs.
            Of course your interpretation is simply opinion and not based on Evidence of any kind.
            I personally like to believe that there is more contra- Evidence, that we are more complicated than a pre-programed robot unable to make choices beyond deterministic programing.
            The Quantum has quite clearly taken us beyond the outdated idea of having any knowledge of reality, so at this stage I think, to make a claim of knowledge beyond the Evidence must hold more that a little Faith.

          • freethinker

            Interesting. This is so out of context admin, so remove if annoying.

            But what you state is only valid in the observer frame of reference. In the objects frame of reference your statement is completely irrelevant.

            I have a free will, it manifests itself to me in a very individual manor and must be related to the integrated sum of all my experiences: relations, emotions, thoughts, dreams, and yes – rewards and punishments – over my lifetime so far. My free will is ME.

            I surely agree that it would be impossible to capture any “free will” frame of reference into nuts and bolts Science.

            With that said, I think the following phrases of a well known contemporary artist sums it up :

            “I am, whatever you say I am, If I wasn’t, then why would I say I am?”

            and

            “Will the real Slim Shady please stand up”

          • georgehants

            freethinker, if a scientist believes that their every thought, every action, is predetermined and not under their conscious control, then clearly they will have very little concern for the outcome of their actions or words beyond self-preservation.

    • hadamhiram

      Seriously, can we cut it out with the asinine anti-science spam?

      It’s a very stupid strategy to alienate and make enemies of real scientists, like myself. Your post reveals you to be completely ignorant of scientific method, scientific practice, the process of peer-review, the complex reality of scientific politics, and the most basic elements of the philosophy of science.

      Your tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense about UFOs and telepathy belong somewhere else. Your ravings are an embarrassment, and LENR does not need to be associated with such idiocy.

      Is there a Moderator that can help keep this spam off the forum and make room for intelligent, informed and productive discussion?

      • georgehants

        hadamhiram, as you are a scientist, you may rather than abuse and dismissal, like to put up a scientific response to my comments.
        Are you saying that UFO’s and Telepathy are not, like Cold Fusion, solid scientific subjects.
        Are you saying that science only investigates reductionist steam engines and pre-Quantum phenomenon.

        • georgehants

          hadamhiram, I may add that your comment would seem to be a perfect example of what P&F and many other scientific Rebels have had to endure.

          • Omega Z

            georgehants

            Some of the Topics you bring up would probably be better if taken to the E-catworld Forums. Many are Controversial & distract from the Main Topic here which is the E-cat.

            I would also add that many of the phenomena you bring up, I would agree needs looked into due to life’s experiences, Tho probably during better economic times. Resources are limited & as of now I would prefer they focus on the LENR. I consider it to be urgent.

            I would also note George that over time you have contributed a lot to E-catworld. You have pointed out many articles that have been of much interest in LENR. So don’t get upset or leave. Just move some of the off topics to the forums for those who are interested in those topics.

            Most of us are here for the LENR info, E-cat, Celeni & such. Many of us have limited time to follow & already have to deal with the Psycho-skeptics.

            If we are off topic, I would prefer it were connected to the E-cat, Such as available Electric conversion, Turbines, TEC devices Batteries & such. Present efficiencies, costs, etc… Absorption cooling systems aftermarket things. But even then during slow spells in E-cat info & also to be taken to the E-catworld Forums. Presented here only to bring attention to it. I consider these to be a very important to future E-cat success. Therefore only semi off topic.

            The E-cat is after-all just part of the overall Game plan.

            I’d note that I also have a vast array of interests & sometimes it’s really hard to stay on Topic, Especially when someone else goes off topic.

            But we then End up with dozens of posts that distract from the E-cat, Distracts from the Newbie’s who happen upon this site which can be discouraging to them. It hurts E-catworld & the E-cat phenomena we want to see succeed. And I’ll confess, I’m guilty of this too from time to time. We just need to reign it in a little. WE need to do this if for no other reason then Respect for Frank Acland who has provided us this great site.

            Have a good day George & a better tomorrow.

          • georgehants

            Omega, I disagree, in that my topics are directly related to why the E-Cat and Cold Fusion and many other scientific subjects have been delayed for 23 years.
            Discussing the E-Cat is interesting but it’s reality was determined years ago when Rossi (if genuine) first found his effect.
            All talk since then has achieved nothing.
            My philosophy is to change things that are clearly in error.
            I believe that anybody who does not feel the same way about the terrible crimes that science is perpetrating on the population, needs to re asses their thinking.
            I am discussing our children’s Future.

          • telecommuter

            Give it a rest.

            What alternate approach do you propose to replace the scientific method?

        • Ivan_cev

          UFO is a physical imposiblility to our current understanding, unless you could travel tens of hundreds of year ligths to some star in the universe.
          It may exist, but is in the realm of the improvable, unless we live in more than 4 dimentions (time included), or they came from the future, or there is an aberration in space etc etc, just speculations.
          Be sensible and do not mix things.

          • georgehants

            Ivan, you said —-
            “UFO is a physical imposiblility to our current understanding,”
            I think you have said that Cold Fusion is beyond Known science, therefore cannot exist.

          • ivan_cev

            I said this before, you seem to live in an alternate reality. your enthusiasm is good but you keep shooting all over the place.

          • georgehants

            ivan, would you be kind enough to show anything I have said that is divorced from the reality of science or the handling of Cold Fusion.
            Thank you.

    • LilyLover

      Summary:
      If it enslaves you, it is true.
      If it sets you free, it is false.

  • GreenWin

    This might become political. A reasonably well matched small steam turbine for hot-cat steam. Even at the low end of 7500lb/h steam @ 60psig, this gen produces about 100kWe. Plenty for home/small business, heat/chiller, appliances, plug-in EV, hot water, and sell-back to the grid.

    http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/groups/public/documents/marketing/05-810-003-25.pdf

    Undoubtedly fossil utilities will find this “politically incorrect.”

    • Omega Z

      Thanks GW

      Added this to my collection. I’ve done a little checking into various Generating tech. Especially those that can be incorporated into CHP as that helps make it cost effective.

      Also looking into scroll compressors. Some are redesigning them for low temp generators. Most are expensive, but Mass production & competition may bring down costs. I think Low Temp (300`C) makes it more likely E-cats will make it to the consumer. There’s already precedent set. Gas Range/Ovens.

      As you know the compressors work with various gases/refrigerants & it appears they could be very efficient given a little time. I have experience with compressors & my concern is the Life Cycle. Their great for intended use, But energy production changes the load factor in a very negative way. New materials will probably be required.

      As to sell back, I don’t count on it in the U.S. If I did, I would look more to a Co-Op system as every customer is treated as a shareholder. Excess profits not needed for maintenance or expansion is given back to the customer periodically.

      In this case, someone who produces a lot of energy but uses it can justify the expense where those who have a similar investment but cant use it get a return justifying the expense. It balances out if you know what I mean.

      I would Note that in early 2011 I came across a system(Don’t recall the name) that looked like it may have serious Future potential, But apparently so did G.E. as they bought it up. The Locked in price will probably prevent it from being of cost/benefit use in the future. A serious Concern. Suppression by cost instead of absence of availability.

    • hempenearth

      Very useful GreenWin. Thank you

    • NJT

      It should definitely right now especially be political. We are talking about the biggest social/big business changer right now occurring in our lifetimes, and nary a peep from those who currently lead and who wish to lead our nation into the future. How asleep can they be? Astounding indeed!

    • From the microturbine broschure: “Quiet operation, 85 dBA”.

      • Peter_Roe

        i.e., somewhat noisier than the maximum sound level permitted by US law for motorbikes travelling at speed! – “motorcycles manufactured in or after 1979 cannot exceed a noise level of 84 decibels (dB) when traveling more than 35 mph on a paved street or highway”.

        Actually that’s a bit surprising – other examples given are a snow blower or city traffic heard from inside a car.

        • GreenWin

          Gents, without checking I think the spec is for a non-baffled, acoustically untreated device. Combine active phase shift and acoustic tile and the number should drop ~50%.

          Also, these systems are generally designed for basements or HVAC rooms.

    • Pedro

      Price is a little steep…. there is an example calculation that says that at an annual saving of $187,000 pay back time is 2.5 years… this means that the price for the thinky is more than $450,000.

  • Omega Z

    @Frank Acland

    Posted Below by….
    Mickey on October 17, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Zurich Conference Papers Available
    Links to ecatworldnews which leads to clicking for futher info taking you to Gray Write other site.
    ——————————————————–

    Posted by Me
    Soooo What we have here is a Master of Deception.

    You post a tidbit of Info which takes people to a Gary Wright Web Site, Using a suedo version of E-catworld & adding news.

    Any Info requires an additional click on that site that takes you to shutdownrossi of which we all know is Gray Writes site.

    So Gary Write has to stoop to Deception in order to get hits on his Web Site. So Low. Does he get paid per hit I Wonder???

    ADDED: This is done on many other sites as well. MO- Method of Operation

    • Mickey

      You must have a very low opinion of the readers here.
      Do you think they cannot think for themselves?
      Do you think they need or want your ridiculous expose of every post and link on this site.
      .
      You guys remind me of the book burners. Those who think every person must be “protected” from every thought that does not agree with theirs.
      .
      Are we still living in the Dark Ages?
      .
      And you had to post your comments twice – afraid your hit piece wouldn’t get noticed?

      • Peter_Roe

        Omega Z (and Greenwin earlier) is absolutely right. Your post is no more than a sleazy ‘bait and switch’ tactic designed to send people to Wright’s nasty little website on a false pretense. Exposing this kind of misrepresentation is entirely appropriate. Please do not waste any more of our time.

        • Mickey

          I beg your pardon.
          .
          You are 100% wrong in your assessment.
          .
          The link I provided DID NOT send anyone anywhere.
          .
          The document is downloadable directly from that site.
          .
          You DO NOT have to go to Gary Wright’s website to get and read the document.
          .
          Get your facts straight before you accuse me of anything.
          .

          • Peter_Roe

            OK, I’ve checked properly and that does seem to be the case. I apologise for my completely unjustified comment.

            However your apparent association with Gary Wright is unfortunate as his name is not popular on this blog, any more than the generally anti-Rossi tone of your website.

          • Omega Z

            Peter

            Wasn’t necessary to Apologize to this guy.

            My provocation obtained the response I expected. Validating my point. To put me on the defensive against all other posters then attack me. His M.O.

            These 2 sites were already connected sometime back. Their the Same but Separate.

            You nailed it. Bait & Switch. How many people download. Most point click & read. No download.

            But thanks anyway.

  • NJT

    If verified, this result is absolutely phenomenal, Pay close attention Mr. President and Mr. Ronmey or chance getting caught with no place to go but OUTA HERE!

    Steven N. Karels
    October 17th, 2012 at 1:26 PM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Some clarification please on your comments.

    a. I therefore understand the total amount of time the Hot eCat spent in self-sustaining mode (SSM) was 218 hours?
    b. The 218 hours consisted of a number of separate SSM periods, ranging in duration from minutes to hours?
    c. During those SSM periods, no electricity was used to heat the Hot eCat, the electricity only supplied power to the control system?
    d. During the SSM period, the surface temperature stayed within some range. Can you specifiy the temperature range while in SSM?

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 4:40 PM
    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    a. yes
    b. yes
    c. yes
    d. 1030/1070 °C
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Robert Mockan

      Item b is a puzzle. What could possibly explain the erratic time intervals needing external electric power? This question is not the same as asking why it needs it, but the erratic nature of needing it.

      This means that if you have 2 reactors the time intervals of electric power would not be the same between them, even though the total time of needing it is the same?

      Very strange. By far the strangest detail Rossi has ever mentioned.

      Of course this is fixable, but a lot more information is needed to figure a good solution. Worse case just use multiple reactors in a power system to stabilize average power out. Best case would be fix whatever is going on with the LENR catalyst so it doesn’t turn on and off like that.

      In an application like for a plane engine, the average COP of the heat source needs to be kept constant, otherwise one takes a nose dive into the ocean?

      • But isn’t erratic behaviour the very nature of all previous cold fusion experiments also, even up to the point of often being unrepeatable? If it would run predictably and smoothly, the phenomenon would have been harnessed a long time ago regardless of any scientific naysayers. Rossi has seemingly been able to reduce the fluctuations to a manageable level. It would be more surprising, I think, if he would have been able to eliminate them completely.

        • Karl

          Because of unpredictable reactor behaviour, could it be a reason to arrange a considerable number of reactors to even the energy output and control it better?

          In the 1 MW case about just over 100 tubes and working together.

          I recall from this summer that Rossi also mentioned that they aimed at 100-200 watt reactors, thus potentially much small tubes.

          Let’s say 100 x (100-200) Watt = 10 – 20 KW for a home heater.

          He could potentially use the same or similar electronic technology and logic as were described in Zurich for the 1 MW.

          Could this be a reason why he is not talking any longer the initial flat packed home unit? Once 1 MW is working a similar model could be made for the home unit based on much smaller reactors.

          To my understanding the initial home E-Cat were based on one (flat) reactor packet reactor only and as such probably did deliver a much more unpredictable behaviour.

          • Voodoo

            Very probably old flat Home E-Cat is flawed and lower efficient then 2. gen.

            I am thinking it is not necessary to have 100 smal reactors for next gen home e-cat.

            Economically viable is for example 36 small reactors á 300 Watt = 10,8 kW (thermal)
            i.e. some 2,5 – 3 kW electric after conversion
            (minus self feeding) plus 7 kW waste heat for home heating.

          • Peter_Roe

            The ‘Mk 1’ COP6 reactor was obsolete from the moment the first ‘hot cat’ was fired up, and the ‘home’ e-cat idea also died at that point (it was already unwell for several other reasons, technical and political).

            On the other hand, Rossi needs to sell a few Mark Ones to raise funds for hot cat development, so I think the compromise (tangentially confirmed by Rossi at Zurich) is a deal whereby if you buy a 1MW plant, you get at-cost upgrades as the tech moves on.

        • Robert Mockan

          Many have had problems, but I recall Jed Rothwell saying that some LENR experiments are 100 percent repeatable.
          I think it was on the Vortex-1 web site sometime in the last few weeks.

      • buffalo

        the erratic behaviour of all lenrs appears consistent with some sort of translational assymetric exchange of energy occuring.my theory is the input heat energy is speeding up hydrogen spillover cycling between nickel and co-alloy(eg.copper) clusters or within pure nickel itself(defect sites),and that would lead to a kind of ‘jet’ of ionized H2 plasma from one point of lattice focused on2 adjascent point in lattice.type of nano particle accellerator perhaps.that would slow down when heat dissipates of course,requiring further input.

        • Robert Mockan

          Some kind of event with a random vector energy dissipation that causes local LENR activity shutdown? And then electric power applied in some way starts LENR up again?
          Yes, that might be. With all the questions that remain how the energy from LENR is dissipated without destroying the nuclear active sites, to suppose there are steps in the whole LENR process more critical than others seems reasonable. And if those steps are disrupted LENR stops?
          Perhaps a physical orientation of the crystal structure of all the nickel grains could be accomplished in such a way that disruptive effects to critical process variables can be dissipated harmlessly?

          This is worth thinking about more, in my opinion.
          Thanks for your comment.

    • phlatbeer

      Isn’t it possible the “natural” run of the e-cat was interrupted to interpret or alter the usual function of the device to change circumstances, and observe the response/s over different time shifts?

      • Robert Mockan

        If that were the case one would think Rossi would realize that is critical information he should have revealed in the demo data.

        So, I guess possible, but not likely since he said nothing about doing that?

    • ivan_cev

      This Questions are great, could some body ask if the control is in base of heat or radio waves?
      He does not answer my questions any more.
      If you put the question to elaborate then he will not answer it.
      This is how I asked if electricity was absolutely needed by the e-cat. he said no.

      • HeS

        @ivan:”This is how I asked if electricity was absolutely needed by the e-cat. he said no.”

        So answer is obvious. Control is based on temperature. Temperature monitoring is fundamental in every Ecat experiment.

  • Chris

    Who cares what the US president thinks?

    What the Chinese think about it has far more bearing to environmental concerns, and the Chinese care about one thing and one alone: whether it works. If they think it does, Rossi ought to make a licensing agreement with them for the whole of the People’s Republic, such that they can manufacture it as much as possible for internal use.

    But Rossi will be far too afraid of them selling his secrets to others, he’ll just keep being careful of who he delivers it to and this will keep things on low throttle for as long as he needs secrecy and is able to keep it.

    • Sam Blankenship

      I have emailed LENR information to several political campaign and news organizations. I also have cautioned them about getting ahead of LENR developments. Political organizations must carefully build components capable of assiessing and managing economic impacts of this new energy.

      Judging from pronouncements of what I believe to be coded words,I feel certain that major political campaigns are preparing to announce significant LENR development studies following elections. Some see this developing along the lines of Kennedy’s announcement of the moon-landing project.

  • vaulcan

    Where are all these home ecat units that were being mass produced in the United States and were to be ready for the market by Christmas. Seems to me the whole thing is a scam. What will happen next year when the super hot cat is invented, then I suppose the hot cat will be withdrawn. This is like the Wright brothers inventing the airplane and then not putting it on the market because they think they have figured out Jet technology. I think it is unprecedented that a company would set up a factory to manufacture a product and then not put it on the market because they think product mark 2 is better.