LENR: Having Eyes to See

There is much anticipation regarding the long-expected third party report of long-term E-Cat testing, and I think I am as eager as anyone to read it and find out the results of the testing. But I don’t feel much of a sense of anxiety about it, because I fully expect that it will once again demonstrate that the E-Cat is a non-chemical source of energy with the potential to be far superior in power density than any conventional energy source. I think that Levi et al. demonstrated that convincingly in last year’s report.

I realize that there was much wiggle room claimed by skeptics which allowed for the possibility for fraud by Rossi in setting up the experiment, and/or deceit on the part of the testers, but I see that as extremely unlikely, and a possibility I don’t take seriously at all. I know that is a judgment call on my part, but an informed one, I believe.

So my position is that the E-Cat has already been successfully demonstrated to be real and valid, and as such is an energy source that can solve many of the most pressing energy problems the world faces. It is a mature technology in the sense that it is ready to provide useful energy right now. Of course manufacturing, sales and distribution will be required, but technologically I think the first generation of E-Cats is ready to be deployed to provide at least heat in a variety of settings.

But of course ECW readers know that only a tiny percentage of the world’s population have any clue about this revolutionary technology, let alone accept that it is real. I would guess that only a few thousand people around the world are paying close attention to the LENR story. And while a new and better report might convince more people of its reality, it’s possible that following its publication we might find ourselves in a similar position to where we are now — with relatively low levels of interest in a technology that has the potential to revolutionize energy production.

I don’t think there’s a technological problem here — I think when it comes to acceptance of a technology like this, we are dealing with human psychology, and as we know people see things quite differently depending on their needs, interests and the things they are invested in (financially and emotionally). Those of us who are convinced of the reality and utility of LENR may wonder why more people aren’t as interested as we are, but when it comes to accepting radically new things, especially things that seem too good to be true, I think that most people are prepared to wait for those they consider reliable authorities to provide endorsements, rather than investigating on their own.

If this new report is to make a large splash and capture the interest of a wide public, I believe it will be because someone well known and well respected steps forward publicly and says the technology is important, and people should pay attention. That could be someone in the media, politics, business or science or some other prominent walk of life. If that doesn’t happen I think we will probably be carrying on as much as we are now, until the time comes when Industrial Heat or someone else starts publicly selling working LENR products that are an obvious advantage over current energy sources — which is really what is needed for this whole field to be of any practical use.

  • kenko

    Just let everyone know that aL goRe invented the e-cat.

  • kenko1

    Just let everyone know that aL goRe invented the e-cat.

  • Daniel Maris

    I generally agree.

    However, this is now make or break time. A sucessful sophisticated test implies that a proper pilot installation will follow quickly.

    • Owen Geiger

      Surely a pilot plant is already under way.

      • clovis ray

        There is one, running at present as i have it.

        • GreenWin

          KTH, Royal Inst. Technology in Stockholm is highly respected worldwide. Check my recent post on the Always Open Thread re: Roland Pettersson, Head Analytical Chemistry, University Uppsala, SE.

          • Ophelia Rump

            A better word for use describing your forsights would be militarization.

            It will be militarized. It would need to be a solid state core to weaponize, as opposed to the loose powder core currently possible.

            With solid state, you might potentially be able to activate all possible reaction sites simultaneously. That is because you would be building a metamaterial where you are controlling the structure atom by atom.

            Presuming you knew exactly the required optimal arrangement of atoms to construct dense clusters of standardized reaction sites.

            The first solid state nuke. The thermonuclear chip.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            Did you even read how much you misinterpreted my first post?

          • Ophelia Rump

            Well, I see how different your more elaborate clarification of your thoughts is from the first post. Your intention may be very clear to you, but I only have the words you wrote to work from.

            I did what I could to strike up a conversation on the subject.

            I think you might have a good idea about making arrays of cores to be run in an individual reactor. I bet they would lend stability to the reaction level in a statistical sense if they were sized and spaced properly. Sort of like rods in a fission reactor. It would go a long way toward reducing the size of the required housing. I like the idea in a technical sense.

          • Nixter

            Six months ago Dr. Rossi was talking about multiple tests that were ongoing, he didn’t answer my question, re: “Would the various test results be released as they become available, or if they would be combined and released together.” He then stopped talking about those other tests.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Yes and I read my words and retracted that statement, when I realized it was not at all what I was trying to say, much like you, my communications are often less than I desired. You have my apologies for the original version, it was really bad. That is why I retracted it. I thought it so bad that it was shameful. Thank you for being so understanding.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            Thanks for that post. Disqus had mailed me the unedited version.

        • Charles

          Tell us ALL about it clovis PLEASE.

          • clovis ray

            Andrea Rossi

            November 21st, 2012 at 10:09 AM

            Dear Clovis Alan Ray:

            You merit this info: yesterday the third party validation of the Hot Cat has been completed.

            Has been good.

            The results have been better that in the July 16th preliminary test.

            We are presently manufacturing 3 1 MW E-Cats:

            1- Low Temperature 1 MW E-Cat

            1- 1 MW Hot Cat

            1- 1 MW Hot Cat gas fueled

            A Report will be published after peer reviewing.

            We are working very hard.

            Warm Regards,

            A.R.

            http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=763#comments

        • BroKeeper

          You have one in your possession or you have the post? (confusing some here). 🙂

          • clovis ray

            Sorry,bro
            about the , (ihave it) my bad, just ment i think IH was had one running for some time

      • Daniel Maris

        Well that’s what I would expect.

        • Owen Geiger

          When do you think IH will make their big public announcement? After the new report is published in a few weeks? Or will they wait until the factories are ready to starting churning out products? And when will the report on the Mw E-Cat plant be ready? Come on Rossi. Please, we would love another update.

          • Private Citizen

            What marketing genius names a product SHT, anyway?

          • jousterusa

            I often wonder about the one E-Cat that we were told went to the US military, apparently to Afghanistan, where it provided power in remote regions of the mountains where US troops were in need of electricity and heat, or at least heat. I can certainly understand if this scenario was completely invented, though.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The best ‘catalyst’ for the acceptance of LENR would be an announcement of a big, globally operating company, such as GE or Siemens. Nobody would believe that they will invest in a technology that doesn’t work. A less effective, but also desirable step might be the presentation of a working plant by Industrial Heat. Perhaps they should wait with their first press conference until such a plant exists. It would surely convince much more people than a dry technical report.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The best ‘catalyst’ for the acceptance of LENR would be an announcement of a big, globally operating company, such as GE or Siemens. Nobody would believe that they will invest in a technology that doesn’t work. A less effective, but also desirable step might be the presentation of a working plant by Industrial Heat. Perhaps they should wait with their first press conference until such a plant exists. It would surely convince much more people than a dry technical report.

  • Gerard McEk

    I believe that the main issue is now to prove that the ecat cannot become unstable. As long as the theoretical background is unknown/unaccepted large scale rollout in the private sector will be frustrated. Therefore this second test is essential. It is needed to gain acceptance of the scientific world and the main stream media. The test should generate the required interest of those parties. If that does not happen, then I think IH will have a hard job to fully finance LENR R&D themselves and the ROI may take longer than expected.

    • friendlyprogrammer

      One of the suggestions posted was the concept of tiny capsule type ecats designed to overheat and explode. It is a nice concept.
      The Ecat was stable during the previous verification however and they said they had to cut power to turn it off. The stability issues have been overcome according to Rossi and verification, but it is worthy of note that stability issues were not mentioned during 2011 demo’s. We must pay attention to what is not said.

      • Ophelia Rump

        You should not make up such fanciful and negative imagery. This is subversive.

        No one has said many nasty things about you, should we then believe them all?
        I do not mean this to be insulting, simply illustrative of the logic employed.
        I am sure you are a fine person, with good intentions.

    • Ophelia Rump

      As I understand it the second test also involves research into the underlying process in a physics sense. This will go a long way toward gaining the stability confidence you mentioned.

      I think a few months of bills and books for an electric production facility would be a lot more attention getting than any amount of reports. I surely hope someone is working toward demonstrating a working successful facility.

  • Gerard McEk

    I believe that the main issue is now to prove that the ecat cannot become unstable. As long as the theoretical background is unknown/unaccepted large scale rollout in the private sector will be frustrated. Therefore this second test is essential. It is needed to gain acceptance of the scientific world and the main stream media. The test should generate the required interest of those parties. If that does not happen, then I think IH will have a hard job to fully finance LENR R&D themselves and the ROI may take longer than expected.

    • friendlyprogrammer

      One of the suggestions posted was the concept of tiny capsule type ecats designed to overheat and explode. It is a nice concept.
      The Ecat was stable during the previous verification however and they said they had to cut power to turn it off. The stability issues have been overcome according to Rossi and verification, but it is worthy of note that stability issues were not mentioned during 2011 demo’s. We must pay attention to what is not said.

      • Ophelia Rump

        I would hope no one weaponizes the technology, and I have severe doubts that it is even possible to weaponize it.

        A reaction which produces small bursts of heat is nothing like an explosive.
        The steam pipes would be more dangerous than the reactor.

        As for miniaturization, I doubt that you could get much more energy out of a device as it scales down than you could from a battery. For the current state of the technology you would have a difficult time scaling it down and maintaining sufficient reaction to attain stability in the sense of accurately consistent output.
        This is because the reactions are tiny bursts of energy output, place the reactions too densely together, and the core liquefies and stops reacting. Too far apart and it cools and requires a restart. The smaller the reactor, the fewer the number of reaction sites, and the more precise your control must be to make it work.

        • JohnM

          The “weaponizing” of this technology would revolve around Logistics. The reduction in the cost of fielding an army/navy would be tremendous.
          The “roll-out” of the technology could even be faster in this arena than in private industrial/residential.

          • Ophelia Rump

            A better word for describing your forsights would be militarization.

            It will be militarized. It would need to be a solid state core to weaponize, as opposed to the loose powder core currently possible.

            With solid state, you might potentially activate all possible reaction sites simultaneously. Six months of Hot Cat output at maximum potential, in a nanosecond. That is because you would be building a metamaterial where you are controlling the structure atom by atom.

            Presuming you knew exactly the required optimal arrangement of atoms to construct dense clusters of standardized reaction sites, and presuming it is possible.

            The first solid state nuke. The thermonuclear chip. With the ultimate bonus, infinite scalability, not radioactive and not detectable, more chip, more boom.

            God I hope they never take it that far. If nano manufacturing ever became commonplace any idiot could print one.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            Did you even read how much you misinterpreted my first post?

          • Ophelia Rump

            Well, I see how different your more elaborate clarification of your thoughts is from the first post. Your intention may be very clear to you, but I only have the words you wrote to work from.

            I think you might have a good idea about making arrays of cores to be run in an individual reactor. I bet they would lend stability to the reaction level in a statistical sense if they were sized and spaced properly. Sort of like rods in a fission reactor. It would go a long way toward reducing the size of the required housing. I like the idea, it has merit. It might be an elegant solution to the issue of scaling the E-Cat Reaction size.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            This was NOT my idea, and has previously been discussed here and even Rossi is aware of the concept. I wanted to point out that even though some of your comments may have been edited, I received a fairly harsh and undeserved comment from you that showed from Discus mail.

            It was your own mindset that interpreted explosions with war. My description was of “tiny capsule type ecats”. How you turned that into a nuclear bomb I refuse to entertain. Perhaps English is a 2nd language to you, but even if that is true I cannot fathom your interpretation.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Yes and I read my words and retracted that statement, when I realized it was not at all what I was trying to say, much like you, my communications are often less than I desired. You have my apologies for the original version, it was really bad. That is why I retracted it. I thought it so bad that it was shameful. Thank you for being so understanding.

            Honestly I rewrite most posts a dozen times, trying to get things right.
            Half the time that is not enough and I wipe it and start over.

            My English is excellent by anyone’s standards.
            My humanity and social skills on the other hand are what others have left me with, a conflicted, brutal, pacifist.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            Thanks for that post. Disqus had mailed me the unedited version.

        • friendlyprogrammer

          You’re the person who brought up weaponizing here.

          I was only commenting on a suggestion that was presented to Rossi and discussed in the past.

          The idea was that tiny ecat units be made and encapsulated in a cheap disposable design that is meant to overheat.

          Nickel melts at 1455°. Which limits the ecat to that maximum temperature.

          This was not my idea, but the idea was instead of having a large ecat run at 500°, mass produce thousands of pellet sized ecats in the smallest format they can muster and allow the reaction to become unstable and harness the heat of them collectively. It is a unique way to look at it.

          You bring up weaponizing it, NOT ME. I do not know how dangerous you think a very tiny ecat capsule would be, but I think the larger versions would create a bigger bang. LENR has killed people, McKubre still has glass embedded in his face from a LENR explosion that killed someone present.

          Why do you associate my use of the word explosion with weapons. Explosions occur 90 times per second in your car engine (rough), but does not mean we are going to start a spark plug war. Spark plugs are not weapons.

          You also say,

          “As for miniaturization, I doubt that you could get much more energy out
          of a device as it scales down than you could from a battery.”

          By scaling it down we would allow the reactions to reach their full potential of 1455°C instead of the stable versions leveling at 500°C.

          AGAIN. This was not my idea. It is a valid consideration though.

          Also…

          Since you want to discuss weaponizing LENR when you say,
          “I have severe doubts that it is even possible to weaponize it.”

          LENR has already killed. There are contents under pressure and if the ecat is not strong enough to contain the contents then explosions can occur.

          Do not jump to conclusions or put words in my mouth please. Weaponizing LENR was the furthest thing from my mind.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Ok.

    • Ophelia Rump

      As I understand it the latest test also involves research into the underlying process in a physics sense. This will go a long way toward gaining the stability confidence you mentioned.

      I think a few months of bills and books for an electric production facility would be a lot more attention getting than any amount of reports. I surely hope someone is working toward demonstrating a working successful facility.

  • LucaS

    I agree with the article. But remember: Rossi’s goal isn’t to convince that his technology is real! His goal is to sell final products in the market!

  • LucaS

    I agree with the article. But remember: Rossi’s goal isn’t to convince that his technology is real! His goal is to sell final products in the market!

  • Blackburn

    As it is believed that the Chinese Government has an awareness of LENR. What should we make of the large long term gas contract China has signed with Russia? Why would they do this?

    • GreenWin

      When electric lights became a reality people did not stop buying kerosene for their lamps. Transition to new technologies as fundamental as energy takes years.

      • Charles

        GreenWin, when I was a little boy in the 1930s, our electric bill was $1 per month, the minimum I presume. All we had was a few light bulbs and an iron. About 1937 we got a refrigerator.

        The E–Cat will rattle the world in a manner we cannot even imagine. In my lifetime, I went from a few lightbulbs to being the product engineer for a Ring-Laser Gyro Inertial Guidance system, the best in the world that is in use by US Atomic Subs. I don’t doubt anything technological anymore.

    • V.p.S.

      I think so far we can just say that China government is still either not fully aware or not yet convinced of LENR. China and Russia are not necessary true allies, but they have a common opponent they unite against. Would China be well informed of the groundbreaking effect of the upcoming report, they would do everything to not sign $400 billion gas deal for the next 30 years until the publication is made.

    • bachcole

      Almost certainly one hand does not know what the other hand is doing, or one hand does not believe what the other hand is doing.

    • Several possible reasons. 1. – Gas turbine technology is ‘off the shelf’ and can be used immediately to begin reducing dependence on coal (gas turbines can be imported in numbers if ‘home’ manufacturing capacity is currently not up to the job [– and then probably copied!]), 2. – Even if they are aware that LENR will gradually replace other energy sources, they will know that it will take years, possibly decades, before these devices are in full production, 3. – Large numbers of ‘gas cat’ boilers will in any case consume a significant amount of natural gas.

      There may also be strategic geopolitical reasons for fellow ‘BRICS’ nations China and Russia to forge closer trading ties.

  • bitplayer

    Suppose that the report is strong in the sense of having good protocol and a reputable team. It probably won’t get into science or nature and so on, and it probably won’t spur governmental action. It probably will increase the number and budgets of labs in existing industrial concerns that are silently watching or working on LENR. So in many ways not much will change right away. So what will change? That depends on who reads the report, or about it. The worldwide audience can be categorized the number of ways, starting with those who are aware of it and those who are not. Among those who are aware of that there will be a range from denial and suppression to acceptance and broadcast: on the one side skeptopaths, scientifically skeptical, opposed for economic reasons, working on it and not wanting to announce, and others, and on the other side..well, that’s where the interesting questions are. Who exactly would be willing to rebroadcast the information, what difference would it make if they did, and what could a small number of enthusiasts do to influence them? I think that’s a whole blog topic in itself.

  • bitplayer

    Suppose that the report is strong in the sense of having good protocol and a reputable team. It probably won’t get into science or nature and so on, and it probably won’t spur governmental action. It probably will increase the number and budgets of labs in existing industrial concerns that are silently watching or working on LENR. So in many ways not much will change right away. So what will change? That depends on who reads the report, or about it. The worldwide audience can be categorized the number of ways, starting with those who are aware of it and those who are not. Among those who are aware of that there will be a range from denial and suppression to acceptance and broadcast: on the one side skeptopaths, scientifically skeptical, opposed for economic reasons, working on it and not wanting to announce, and others, and on the other side..well, that’s where the interesting questions are. Who exactly would be willing to rebroadcast the information, what difference would it make if they did, and what could a small number of enthusiasts do to influence them? I think that’s a whole blog topic in itself.

  • mcloki

    Working prototypes producing heat on demand are the only thing that will go mainstream, and even then it will be like, “Oh look something that makes heat… What’s on The Bachelor.” We’re expecting way to much of the general public. Even when Hot Cats are available in Home depots. it’s going to take IH millions of dollars in advertising and marketing to push product off the shelf. Things don’t sell themselves.

    • Bernie777

      Unless someone like our President LEADS and says we are going to have a National goal like putting a man on the moon.

    • Omega Z

      I agree 110%.

  • mcloki

    Working prototypes producing heat on demand are the only thing that will go mainstream, and even then it will be like, “Oh look something that makes heat… What’s on The Bachelor.” We’re expecting way to much of the general public. Even when Hot Cats are available in Home depots. it’s going to take IH millions of dollars in advertising and marketing to push product off the shelf. Things don’t sell themselves.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Unless someone like our President LEADS and says we are going to have a National goal like putting a man on the moon.

    • Omega Z

      I agree 110%.

  • C Johnson

    I am planning on putting a copy of the report under Steven Chu’s office door.

    • GreenWin

      If it’s DOE you want to enlighten, it’s Ernie Moniz you should wake up. Presumably you know this and work at Stanford.

      • C Johnson

        I do work at Stanford. Passing by Chu’s office is a little easier for me than going to D.C. to bother Ernie. Even though Ernie is the boss now, Chu still carries more weight with the scientists. If Steven Chu started telling his “peers” that the e-cat is for real, then all hell would break loose. I should say that I’ve only been in the same room as Chu once, so I can’t guarantee anything.

        BTW, I am one of those scientists that georgehaunts is always complaining about. I spend my days staring at my navel and trying to figure out how to get more grant money while completely forgetting that I should be striving for the TRUTH. It’s a miracle Stanford keeps me around.

        Definitely OT. I collaborate at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab too. Chu was the director there before he went to D.C. They named a street after him in the lab because apparently if you win a Nobel prize, you get a street named after you and a parking spot. Anyway, everyone I know at LBNL refers to him as Chu-backa.

        C J

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Yes! And the current man in charge of DOE!

  • GreenWin

    When electric lights became a reality people did not stop buying kerosene for their lamps. Transition to new technologies as fundamental as energy takes years.

    • Charles

      GreenWin, when I was a little boy in the 1920s, our entire electric bill was $1 per month. All we had was a few light bulbs. Mom eventually got an iron, ca 1938. Next was a refrigerator.

  • Freethinker

    Agree.

    I, too, has been convinced not only of the validity of the phenomenon, but E-CAT as well. And I agree with your assessment of the volume of people who follow this subject. We are not many.

    WHEN the pending third party report comes out, the propagation of that news can either be killed, generally ignored or go viral. I hope for the latter, but like you hint- it might not be.

    But it does not matter in the end – as long as the tech is viable and end up in the marketplace. We already know that ECATS will NOT be sold at HomeDepot, but the energy players WILL take this tech to heart as it will be vastly cost efficient. It will then be a silent revolution. The populace need not know, in fact big energy likely will make more money the less and fewer people know about the tech.

    When at some point in time in the future small devices like the home E-CAT will be available, people will be ready to buy them – tech proven – if it gives a return on the investment to do so.

    I hope for that viral thing, because it will hasten the introduction, it will create a focus on this sector which will help drive development and prices low, it will make potential shenanigans from other players – wanting LENR to fail – less likely to succeed.

    Lets hope that there will be that splash, that someone step up and give it the focus, the endorsement. If it does not, we endure until next time the opportunity present itself, and let the silent revolution play out meanwhile.

    • ecatworld

      Thanks, FT — I would hope that it will go viral because public awareness and acceptance could lead to public pressure on decision makers.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Frank,
        I was channel surfing, the boop tube, when i came across the c-span program washington journal, and their guest was a tech reporter for MITT, The program was about todays top 10 best innovation’s, not a word about cold fusion, lenr, or the Rossi effect, one caller directed him toward hydrogen he the guest promptly shut him off. how strange is that from a school that has such a huge foot print in this field..

  • Freethinker

    Agree.

    I, too, has been convinced not only of the validity of the phenomenon, but E-CAT as well. And I agree with your assessment of the volume of people who follow this subject. We are not many.

    WHEN the pending third party report comes out, the propagation of that news can either be killed, generally ignored or go viral. I hope for the latter, but like you hint- it might not be.

    But it does not matter in the end – as long as the tech is viable and end up in the marketplace. We already know that ECATS will NOT be sold at HomeDepot, but the energy players WILL take this tech to heart as it will be vastly cost efficient. It will then be a silent revolution. The populace need not know, in fact big energy likely will make more money the less and fewer people know about the tech.

    When at some point in time in the future small devices like the home E-CAT will be available, people will be ready to buy them – tech proven – if it gives a return on the investment to do so.

    I hope for that viral thing, because it will hasten the introduction, it will create a focus on this sector which will help drive development and prices low, it will make potential shenanigans from other players – wanting LENR to fail – less likely to succeed.

    Lets hope that there will be that splash, that someone step up and give it the focus, the endorsement. If it does not, we endure until next time the opportunity present itself, and let the silent revolution play out meanwhile.

    • Frank Acland

      Thanks, FT — I would hope that it will go viral because public awareness and acceptance could lead to public pressure on decision makers.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Frank,
        I was channel surfing, the boop tube, when i came across the c-span program washington journal, and their guest was a tech reporter for MITT, The program was about todays top 10 best innovation’s, not a word about cold fusion, lenr, or the Rossi effect, one caller directed him toward hydrogen he the guest promptly shut him off. how strange is that from a school that has such a huge foot print in this field..

  • GreenWin

    The E-Cat saga highlights deficiencies not only in orthodox science, peer review, and research funding – it raises disturbing questions about mainstream press and First Amendment. Recall that Rossi got a smattering of press from NBC, Reuters, Bloomberg, etc. in 2011-12. CBS 60 Minutes has shamefully never followed up its 2009 segment “Cold Fusion is Hot Again.”

    The studied ignorance of LENR following each Rossi success, LENR conferences, papers, Elforsk report etc. confirms the overarching information blackout. The reasons are intuitive. The new paper will change little of that. BUT, splashy headlines are not needed to make fundamental changes in a world. Martin Luther brought about the Reformation by nailing a hand-written thesis to the door of a church. MLK, Gandhi, Dali Lama, JC, Buddha brought change by walking, writing, speaking.

    Rossi’s invention is not contained by its physics or reactor walls — it is a catalyst for change, bound only by human imagination.

    ” Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Dr. Margaret Mead

    • Omega Z

      Just to be fair- CBS 60 Minutes caught a lot of backroom Flack for that report.

      Jobs were threatened.

  • GreenWin

    The E-Cat saga highlights deficiencies not only in orthodox science, peer review, and research funding – it raises disturbing questions about mainstream press and First Amendment. Recall that Rossi got a smattering of press from NBC, Reuters, Bloomberg, etc. in 2011-12. CBS 60 Minutes has shamefully never followed up its 2009 segment “Cold Fusion is Hot Again.”

    The studied ignorance of LENR following each Rossi success, LENR conferences, papers, Elforsk report etc. confirms the overarching information blackout. The reasons are intuitive. The new paper will change little of that. BUT, splashy headlines are not needed to make fundamental changes in a world. Martin Luther brought about the Reformation by nailing a hand-written thesis to the door of a church. MLK, Gandhi, Dali Lama, JC, Buddha brought change by walking, writing, speaking.

    Rossi’s invention is not contained by its physics or reactor walls — it is a catalyst for change, bound only by human imagination.

    ” Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Dr. Margaret Mead

    • Christina

      Yes, but all that took a while. Some groups want to feed the world by 2030. or 2035 I think. With lenr it can be done earlier because everyone will have the energy to bring water to the desert to feed themselves–initially, with the help of charity and charities, I suppose.

      • GreenWin

        Agree Christina. That is the goal. One of the authors of the Elforsk newsletter article on E-Cat worked for World Bank. He is now a consultant to WB and might help speed things along. Thanks for your positive comments here!

    • Al D

      Yes, but these folks weren’t walking and speaking against a wind powered by an oil oligopoly generating upwards of $85 billion per year profits.

    • Omega Z

      Just to be fair- CBS 60 Minutes caught a lot of backroom Flack for that report.

      Jobs were threatened.

  • Bernie777

    Admin: Good article. It is my opinion Industrial Heat should disassociate the Rossi invention from the
    terms “Cold Fusion” and “LENR”. Those two terms have so much negative baggage IH, when making their announcement, should use a new name. I propose
    we draw on the ingenuity of this group and come up with a new name that can be used to draw the attention of the general public.

    • GreenWin

      The X-Prize people seem to like “Forbidden Energy.” It is imaginative.

      • builditnow

        Humm, who has a few million to throw at a Cold Fusion / LENR x-prize. Would it make a media splash? Could we crowd source an x-prize?

        • GreenWin

          Crowd source would be a haul, but effective. Most X-Prizes are funded by philanthropists who want to inspire entrepreneurs. Larry Ellison. Branson. Paul Allen. Sidney Kimmel. A $10M “Forbidden Energy” Prize inspires me!

    • JDM

      Company => Industrial Heat LLC
      Reaction => Industrial Heat
      Reactor => Industrial Heater

      • Daniel Maris

        Sounds clunky to me.

        Nickel energy would be better I think.

        Or how about parafusion?

    • clovis ray

      Bernie, Dr. Rossi has already officially, named it, new fire, the effect is to be called the rossi effect, very fitting if you ask me, he should get all the glory for this invention , many others had a hand in , but only Dr, Rossi, and mr. focardi , are the real deal.

      • Bernie777

        I agree Rossi/Focardi should get credit. But IH now owns it, they will decide how to publicize and market it.

        • Paul

          I think that the real revolution will start when the E-Cat will be put on the market. Not because it will be available, being an initial production largely inferior than the world demand, but because I think that the world will discover the extreme simplicity of this invention, that we can also see in the photos of an Hot Cat. So, it will be very easy for every company to copy the machine as an “experimental” apparatus for its own energy production. To build an HotCat will be largely simpler than build a PV panel or a wind turbine, this is the real advantage of this tech.

    • Bernie777

      So far I like “Nickle Energy” suggested by Daniel Maris. This would unassociate it from the F & P platinum reactor, which undeservingly received such bad PR. I think it very important IH stay away from the word “nuclear”. Maybe play with the appliance name the “microwave” and use Nicklewave or Rossiwave.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Pyrossi ~ pyr = Greek for fire & Rossi
        Pyronovo ~ new fire
        SLCR ~ Snakes to The left, Clowns to the Right.

        • GreenWin

          Tesheit ~ Irish for hot…

      • winebuff

        Big question I have is will rossi be alive by the time his device changes the world at the rate there going I think the chances are slim. This would be a good thread for everyones feedback.

      • BroKeeper

        LENiRgy

    • Owen Geiger

      IH is using the term nickle hydrogen energy in China.

    • Buck

      I think ‘Cold Fire’ points to the almost miraculous nature of cold fusion and holds one’s attention because of the contradiction in terms.

    • Omega Z

      We shall call it the OZ Effect.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Admin: Good article. It is my opinion Industrial Heat should disassociate the Rossi invention from the terms “Cold Fusion” and “LENR”. Those two terms have too much negative baggage. IH, when making their announcement, should use a new name and terms to describe their reactor.. I propose we draw on the ingenuity of this group and come up with a new name/terms that can be used to catch the attention of the general public.

    • GreenWin

      The X-Prize people seem to like “Forbidden Energy.” It is imaginative.

      • builditnow

        Humm, who has a few million to throw at a Cold Fusion / LENR x-prize. Would it make a media splash? Could we crowd source an x-prize?

        • GreenWin

          Crowd source would be a haul, but effective. Most X-Prizes are funded by philanthropists who want to inspire entrepreneurs. Larry Ellison. Branson. Paul Allen. Sidney Kimmel. A $10M “Forbidden Energy” Prize inspires me!

    • JDM

      Company => Industrial Heat LLC
      Reaction => Industrial Heat
      Reactor => Industrial Heater

    • clovis ray

      Bernie, Dr. Rossi has already officially, named it, new fire, the effect is to be called the rossi effect, very fitting if you ask me, he should get all the glory for this invention , many others had a hand in , but only Dr, Rossi, and mr. focardi , are the real deal.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        I agree Rossi/Focardi should get credit. But IH now owns it, they will decide how to publicize and market it.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      So far I like “Nickle Energy” suggested by Daniel Maris. This would unassociate it from the F & P platinum reactor, which undeservingly received such bad PR. I think it very important IH stay away from the word “nuclear” or “fusion”. Maybe play with the appliance name the “microwave” and use Nicklewave or Rossiwave.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Pyrossi ~ pyr = Greek for fire & Rossi
        Pyronovo ~ new fire
        SLCR ~ Snakes to The left, Clowns to the Right.

        • bachcole

          !!!!!!!!! Iggy hits a home run, again, with the bases loaded. Great suggestions. How about “novopyr” = fire new

        • GreenWin

          Tesheit ~ Irish for hot…

      • Brokeeper

        LENiRgy

    • Owen Geiger

      IH is using the term nickle hydrogen energy in China.

    • Buck

      I think ‘Cold Fire’ points to the almost miraculous nature of cold fusion and holds one’s attention because of the contradiction in terms.

    • Omega Z

      We shall call it the OZ Effect.

  • GreenWin

    If it’s DOE you want to enlighten, it’s Ernie Moniz you should wake up. Presumably you know this and work at Stanford.

  • Iceeater1969

    If the COP is 6, it is a big deal. If with mouse it is sustainable with much higher COP, this is a giant deal. Neither could be faked and would benefit mankind in a big way or a giant way.

    • deleo77

      That to me is probably the thing to look for. If the report is thorough and feels detailed and well written, then a CUP of 5 or 6 would cause a lot of jaws to drop. If the CUP is 1.9 or somewhere around there, many people could shrug and just talk about measurement errors etc. Mizuno just showed a CUP of 1.9 and while it wasn’t an independent test, few people seemed to take notice of it.

      • deleo77

        Sorry typo, COP

        • Private Citizen

          Let’s hope the COP runneth over

  • Peter

    Celebrity endorsements. If a famous actor, supermodel, pro athlete, or musician were to endorse the E-Cat, people would pay attention.

    • GreenWin

      Mayim Bialikwho plays Amy on “Big Bang Theory,” has a PhD in neuroscience. But George Clooney, Robert Downey Jr. or Jodi Foster would garner more eyeballs.

    • Allan Shura

      The e-auto prototype with the super efficient rotary vane engine hybrid was test driven by Putin.

    • Omega Z

      Maybe if Kim Kardashian or Justin Bieber were to speak of it People would at least become aware.
      Credibility on the other-hand would be lacking. 🙂

  • clovis ray

    I’m in agreement with most here, and like daniel,analogy, here in Oklahoma, we say it down to the nut cutting, in texas it’s down to the nitty gritty, the wait will soon be over, one way or the other for me.

  • clovis ray

    I’m in agreement with most here, and like daniel,analogy, here in Oklahoma, we say it down to the nut cutting, in texas it’s down to the nitty gritty, the wait will soon be over, one way or the other for me.

  • Christina

    I don’t know if anybody’s said this yet, but I think one of the scientists prominent on science series expounding on the universe and such in the last view years would be a perfect choice. He/she could even explain it.

    Of a politician is chosen, the people will take it more with a grain of salt than if one of the prominent scientists is chosen.

    At any rate, someone who is indefatigable in her/his explanation/defense of lenr needs to be chosen so that when people inquire of one another of lenr is true and coming those who trust this scientist’s reputation for veracity and pithy explanations of science will only say,

    “Is Pope Francis Catholic?”

    May God bless you and have a great day.

  • enantiomer2000

    I suspect that the report will be released by some European university nobody has ever heard about and nobody will pay attention to it. Look at the reports released by Blacklight Power. They clearly show huge energy surpluses but nobody cares. The only thing that will start to change things is when/if they actually start selling commercial units.

    • GreenWin

      KTH, Royal Inst. Technology in Stockholm is highly respected worldwide. Check my recent post on the Always Open Thread re: Roland Pettersson, Head Analytical Chemistry, University Uppsala, SE.

    • Wes

      Blacklight Power is an interesting case. Having made claims of an enormous energy breakthrough, it is back to business as usual. Did Edison hide his light bulb, only to make rare demonstrations? Of course not. That is because Edison actually had the goods.

  • Christopher Calder

    The reason I am interested in Solar Hydrogen Trends is that testing for hydrogen production out of water is easy and transparent. All you have to do is check the device for a hidden hydrogen tank. If you find no hidden hydrogen in the reactor design, and only add water and a little bit of electricity and get out of that device lots of H2 gas, then no one can deny the world of energy has dramatically changed. The CEO of that company does not look or act like a madman. His employees do not look like crooks. You would have to be mad to make such a claim and expect to make money out of something so easy to test. It either works or the guy is totally and dangerously insane. I suspect it works, and that device will change the minds of the energy establishment. The key is to make LENR perform useful work. It will be easy to run an electricity generator on hydrogen gas, or to run an RV on hydrogen and drive it coast to coast nonstop. Either Solar Hydrogen Trends will soon be exposed as a ridiculous fraud, or LENR will progress faster than we ever thought possible.

    • Allan Shura

      That volume of h2 at that low input is competitive with LENR alone. The direction being taken is to attract major investment to bring the product to market and should that happen soon it would be really great.

    • Alain Samoun

      Scammers of all countries unit!

  • The reason I am interested in Solar Hydrogen Trends is that testing for hydrogen production out of water is easy and transparent. All you have to do is check the device for a hidden hydrogen tank. If you find no hidden hydrogen in the reactor design, and only add water and a little bit of electricity and get out of that device lots of H2 gas, then no one can deny the world of energy has dramatically changed. The CEO of that company does not look or act like a madman. His employees do not look like crooks. You would have to be mad to make such a claim and expect to make money out of something so easy to test. It either works or the guy is totally and dangerously insane. I suspect it works, and that device will change the minds of the energy establishment. The key is to make LENR perform useful work. It will be easy to run an electricity generator on hydrogen gas, or to run an RV on hydrogen and drive it coast to coast nonstop. Either Solar Hydrogen Trends will soon be exposed as a ridiculous fraud, or LENR will progress faster than we ever thought possible.

    • Allan Shura

      That volume of h2 at that low input is competitive with LENR alone. The direction being taken is to attract major investment to bring the product to market and should that happen soon it would be really great.

    • Wayne M.

      Looks like SHT is another fraud or incompetency. Too bad.

      http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/

      Let’s stick with the E-cat. It’s vetted.

      • Private Citizen

        What marketing genius names a product SHT, anyway?

    • Alain Samoun

      Scammers of all countries unit!

  • Christina

    How about “Thousand Boost” or “Pro-Energy” or “Pronergy” or “Progy,” the last three for “Promoted Energy?”

  • Christina

    Or how about “Thunderbolt?” “Lighting” would be good too, but “Thunderbolt” reminds one more of the sound of a powerful engine. 😉

    Didn’t someone say or I read somewhere, I think, that lenr is in lightning.

  • Christina

    Energenie

    • Fortyniner

      I like that!

      • GreenWin

        Would one then “Dream of Energenie?”

  • GreenWin

    Mayim Bialikwho plays Amy on “Big Bang Theory,” has a PhD in neuroscience. But George Clooney, Robert Downey Jr. or Jodi Foster would garner more eyeballs.

  • GreenWin

    Agree Christina. That is the goal. One of the authors of the Elforsk newsletter article on E-Cat worked for World Bank. He is now a consultant to WB and might help speed things along. Thanks for your positive comments here!

  • deleo77

    That to me is probably the thing to look for. If the report is thorough and feels detailed and well written, then a CUP of 5 or 6 would cause a lot of jaws to drop. If the CUP is 1.9 or somewhere around there, many people could shrug and just talk about measurement errors etc. Mizuno just showed a CUP of 1.9 and while it wasn’t an independent test, few people seemed to take notice of it.

    • deleo77

      Sorry typo, COP

      • Private Citizen

        Let’s hope the COP runneth over

  • blanco69

    We must not forget that the purpose of this test cannot be ‘to prove that the skeptics are wrong and the believers are right. Surely this story is not playing out for our entertainment. The test can only be designed to attract more investment. If the ecat works then it works and Rossi surely knows it. Let’s hope there’s no need for any more tests after this one – even the dumbest wealthy investor would know that, based on the evidence provided by ‘nobody linked to Rossi’, the ecat is a sure thing.

  • blanco69

    We must not forget that the purpose of this test cannot be ‘to prove that the skeptics are wrong and the believers are right. Surely this story is not playing out for our entertainment. The test can only be designed to attract more investment. If the ecat works then it works and Rossi surely knows it. Let’s hope there’s no need for any more tests after this one – even the dumbest wealthy investor would know that, based on the evidence provided by ‘nobody linked to Rossi’, the ecat is a sure thing.

    • bachcole

      I would think that they would be doing their own internal testing all of the time, testing this tweek and that tweek. Also, if an individual investor wanted a separate test, he/she might very well get it.

  • Neanderthal

    Kurt Godel imcompleteness and completeness theory comes to mind, Sometime you have to think outside the box of conventionality

  • Neanderthal

    Kurt Godel imcompleteness and completeness theory comes to mind, Sometime you have to think outside the box of conventionality

  • Mats

    Well… If the upcoming report is positive (again) and we still are a few thousand people interested in this topic I am willing to quit my successful IT carrier (how do that word spell anyway?) for this new field of knowledge 🙂

    • winebuff

      Big question I have is will rossi be alive by the time his device changes the world at the rate there going I think the chances are slim. This would be a good thread for everyones feedback.

      • bachcole

        Rossi is currently 64 years old as of June 3rd. The average between the life expectancy of Italians (80.4) and Americans (77.4) [Yes, our health is the worst in the industrialized world, yet we spend 2 to 3 times more on health care than any other industrialized country and 1/2 as much on food] is 78.8. Plus, he was a world class runner and he is intensely doing what he intensely likes. Consequently, I would give him at least 18 more years before I am going to start worrying about him. I just hope that he is getting enough rest and eating healthfully, and I don’t mean Dr. Oz healthfully, I mean Dr. Mercola healthfully.

        I would be very disappointed if we don’t see major changes in the world due to the E-Cat before 18 years is up.

  • jousterusa

    If Rossi’s Hot Cat debut is a big success, you write, “… it will be because someone well known and well respected steps forward publicly…” So far, even with respected scientists like Rob Duncan and Nobelist Brian Josephson, and major media like “60 Minutes,” it hasn’t worked for cold fusion. I think therein lies Andrea Rossi’s strategic error. Had he developed Home E-Cats at the pace he’s devoted to Hot Cats, I think he would have found himself with a significant audience of fans and a lot of word-of-mouth support from people who were using the Home E-Cats to cut their power bills and put money in their pockets. Now he’ll have an executive or two – because relatively so few people have been involved in the initial sale and now the testing – who will speak up for it, but it will be easy to dismiss them as “self-interested.” Rossi will not have won any ordinary folks to his side, and public opinion tends to turn on that.

    • Omega Z

      Due to this being an unknown phenomenon, It can’t be certified for consumers without an abundance of safety data. This can only be obtained through Industrial, Then Commercial use.

      Also, Home use would only have been for supplemental heating for the foreseeable future. It will take time for the technology to become cost/benefit marketable for home energy generation.

  • Andrew

    There is one issue I can see with the Ecat, because it’s an exothermal reaction it requires heat to keep functioning. As you whisk some of that heat away to boil water(or do whatever) the reaction will lessen. At what rate can the Ecat lose heat and still function the same?

    • bachcole

      What is the quenching rate?

  • Owen Geiger

    When do you think IH will make their big public announcement? After the new report is published in a few weeks? Or will they wait until the factories are ready to start churning out products? And when will the report on the Mw E-Cat plant be ready? Come on Rossi. Please, we would love another update.

  • Bruce Williams

    Frank, I think you have summarised the current situation very well. Thanks.

  • Bruce Williams

    Frank, I think you have summarised the current situation very well. Thanks.

  • Fortyniner

    Several possible reasons. 1. – Gas turbine technology is ‘off the shelf’ and can be used immediately to begin reducing dependence on coal (they can be imported in numbers if ‘home’ manufacturing capacity is currently not up to the job), 2. – Even if they are aware that LENR will gradually replace coal boilers, they will be aware that it will take years before these devices are in full production, 3. – ‘Gas cat’ boilers will in any case require a significant amount of gas in order to run.

    There may also be geopolitical reasons for fellow ‘BRICS’ nations China and Russia to forge closer trading ties.

  • Paul

    I think that the real revolution will start when the E-Cat will be put on the market. Not because it will be available, being an initial production largely inferior than the world demand, but because I think that the world will discover the extreme simplicity of this invention, that we can also see in the photos of an Hot Cat. So, it will be very easy for every company to copy the machine as an “experimental” apparatus for its own energy production. To build an HotCat will be largely simpler than build a PV panel or a wind turbine, this is the real advantage of this tech.

  • Nixter

    Six months ago Dr. Rossi was talking about multiple tests that were ongoing, he didn’t answer my question, re: “Would the various test results be released as they become available, or if they would be combined and released together.” He then stopped talking about those other tests.

  • Paul

    In a previosus post, Bachole estimated that with a COP 18, we would have 5 electrical kW as net output. This is true for a company, more than on the residential market. However, I think that no big company will use the E-Cat in this configuration. The full potential of this machine is in the possibility of putting more Hot-Cats in cascade, so you can increase the COP as much as you want, provided that you use the necessary number of units. So, the real electric production for 1 input kW can be largely greater than the 5 kW estimated by Bachole, and this is the second advantage of the tech. PV panels and wind turbines have not a COP due to the definition of COP but if we try to “give” them a COP it is infinite, so only an E-Cat cascade is competitive with these techs also on that side.

  • Paul

    In a previosus post, Bachole estimated that with a COP 18, we would have 5 electrical kW as net output. This is true for a company, more than on the residential market. However, I think that no big company will use the E-Cat in this configuration. The full potential of this machine is in the possibility of putting more Hot-Cats in cascade, so you can increase the COP as much as you want, provided that you use the necessary number of units. So, the real electric production for 1 input kW can be largely greater than the 5 kW estimated by Bachole, and this is the second advantage of the tech. PV panels and wind turbines have not a COP due to the definition of COP but if we try to “give” them a COP it is infinite, so only an E-Cat cascade is competitive with these techs also on that side.

  • jousterusa

    As desperate as all of us are for news about the E-Cat, it’s time to remember the vast amount of hard work and personal sacrifice that it has taken on the part of Frank Acland to keep this site ion track. I can only hope that the Memorial Day Weekend will be one for you to remember forhe fun, rest and great food you so richly deserve, Frank!

    • ecatworld

      Thanks, Joe. I will enjoy being with the family this weekend. it’s beautiful here and I am enjoying the garden especially — but ECW will always be close at hand!

  • jousterusa

    As desperate as all of us are for news about the E-Cat, it’s time to remember the vast amount of hard work and personal sacrifice that it has taken on the part of Frank Acland to keep this site ion track. I can only hope that the Memorial Day Weekend will be one for you to remember forhe fun, rest and great food you so richly deserve, Frank!

    • Frank Acland

      Thanks, Joe. I will enjoy being with the family this weekend. it’s beautiful here and I am enjoying the garden especially — but ECW will always be close at hand!

  • Leonard Weinstein

    There are two potential problems with widespread use of e-cat or equivalent technologies in the near future, even if they work as expected:
    1) The cost of implementing and supporting use has to be at least (and preferably more than) competitive to existing technologies, and this has not been demonstrated yet. This is NOT free power. The electrical power needed to operate such systems, the capitol cost of systems and supporting equipment, and the long term operation cost may not be as favorable as some think.

    2) The difficulty and dangers of using these systems (heat exchangers, piping, control systems, possible problems with partial failures, etc.) is not yet clear. While these are mostly engineering problems, it may take a long time before systems are usable as mature technology.

    While the possibility of potential problems or limitations is not a reason to not go forward, caution is advised thinking this will be a straightforward jump ahead in the near future.

    • Rob Squires

      I don’t think it has to be that hard, here in the domestic UK market at least. Surely its just a case of transferring knowledge and skills from the air source heat pump industry, which is starting to go very nicely, especially with the role out of the Renewable Heat Incentive scheme over the next 7 years. If an ASHP typical COP is about 3-4, and an E-CAT can do 7 or 8, and maintain an equally high COP when the air outside is cold, then its got to be a winner.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      If we can put a man on the moon, we can convert 1000 coal plants to Nickle Energy. All that is needed is the President to establish the goal.

    • mo

      I agree,
      the fact, that the possibility of cascading the e-cats was always denied by A.R. and no one has ever seen an e-cat producing electricity makes it hard to belive in a real product close to be market ready.
      Since 2 years all what we heard about stirling motors, miniturbines or whatever capable of producing the input for continous operation or better said closing the loop, went to nowhere at least. With a COP of 6 or more it must be able to feed itself, anything else is rubbish.
      May be there is any logic behind, but i don’t see it. IH announces no detail up to now. Very frustrating story……

      • Paul

        No, Rossi denied only thermal cascade, not electric. Indeed, electric cascade gives no control problem if you adopt cross schemes.

      • Omega Z

        An E-cat power plant can’t depend on power from itself for operation. If the E-cat should become unstable, so does the power supply your using to control it. At best, It shuts down. At Worst, it melts down.

        Most of all existing systems Draw energy from the Grid that they feed power to. If there should be a problem, they still have a stable power supply for control.

        E-cat power plants would be no different & hooked to a grid would be no different then what we have. Note: If your E-cat system is small enough, A battery rack backup would suffice.

        Had Fukushima not lost it’s Grid Energy Connection, That Fiasco would have been avoided. Even the backup Generators had they not been swamped could Not have kept the Fukushima plant in operation(Not Enough Power), But they could have kept the cooling pumps working until Grid power was restored.

    • Alain Samoun

      The two problems that you see are the same for all existing energy sources. What should make a difference for LENR is the promised output of energy that is equivalent to nuclear fission without the radioactivity dangers and the need of centralized energy distribution.
      The factors against the change:
      – substantial inertia due to technical standards, organizational routines.
      – systemic features of energy supply prevent innovations from being implemented overnight.
      – political might of highly capital-intensive infrastructure of centralized distribution.
      The same factors that exists to implement renewable energy right now.

    • Paul

      You forgot other important potential dangers, like neutrons or strong magnetic fields. The intensities of both these quantities have never be shown, so we have to trust in Rossi. But remember that with high COPS he said there are neutrons, so these quantities matters! Moreover, the currents created by Rossi effect are probably associated
      with strong magnetic field, as suggested by a scientific paper
      describing this effect measured on an Hyperion.

      • Omega Z

        Neutrons were detected only when it exceeded COP>200.
        That was also in the Original E-cat.
        The Hot Cat operates differently then the Original E-cat so we don’t have a clue as to this even being a problem.

        • Paul

          Neutrons are not yes/not, there is a broad energy spectrum so your info that I perfectly know says something only on their detector treshold, not on the types and number of neutrons produced at varoius COP, and we have no information about it. But without such information, not yet officially released with a third party document but only as “Rossi says…”, a physicist or a customer would not sleep near an E-Cat, be sure!

          • yes, but the good point is that if detectors don’t see neutrons, then our body won’t be hurt.

          • bachcole

            Even my non-intellectual wife has warned me about getting too close to our microwave oven, since it is impossible to determine via experience whether one is getting zapped or not.

          • Omega Z

            I was just speaking of the Neutrons.
            As to other effects, This is why it wont be available for home use for some time. Being of a new phenomenon, it will require a lot of safety data by way of Industrial use for the time being.

    • jousterusa

      I think the hydrino reactor with the solar panels collecting hydrino-generated light bursts and converting them to electricity may be less problematic and easier to scale up.

    • Omega Z

      #2 is mostly of existing in use technology. So not a problem…

      #1 Is Valid. But IMO, Capitol Costs should be similar to existing technology.

      To Compare- A 1Mw Natural Gas burner & it’s boiler system will likely be much cheaper then a 1Mw E-cat & it’s boiler system. However, IMO- I think this cost will be offset by a longer Life-cycle of the E-cat. Any additional Expense will likely be offset by other savings.

      Ultimately, This should provide Cheaper Energy Costs. Also, Much Cleaner then Existing technology.

      Another possible benefit of E-cat Plants will be scale. They can be built smaller then Conventional Facilities closer to point of use while maintaining Efficiencies & cost savings. I’m thinking City Grids instead of regional.
      As Far as Home systems being of grid, I don’t think the technology exists as of yet to make this Economical. It will likely cost more then people presently pay due to the Capitol costs.

      Actual Results: Each Country, Each Region has it’s own Taxing schemes so Individual savings will very, But all should see a savings.

      As to the Roll out of this technology, I’ve explained this before. Now I’ll tell it from the point of view of the Experts.
      If the U.S. Government & States, Etc.. would Double Down on Tax breaks & Incentives, The U.S. could be producing as much as 45% of our Electricity by Wind & Solar by 2045.

      That’s an Optimistic 45% in 30 years. So My version of it taking at least 30 years for LENR to replace most of our existing system is truly Optimistic according to the Experts.

      I Still like my view better & think we could easily exceed 45% in that time frame With only 1 tax break. Allow them to write off the expense of new manufacturing facilities in a shorter time frame. Maybe 5 or 10 years instead of 20 or 30. This small revenue loss(Not really a loss, Just accelerated depreciation) would be more then offset by economic growth.
      But Ultimately, The Roll out time frame will be determined by Real World Finance. It will be built when we have the Financial means. No sooner..

  • Mark

    I admit it – I’m something of a fascist. I don’t believe that people have the right to their own opinions. I think that a lot of people need to have their opinions dictated to them, or face severe punishment. There are too many people like Scott Aaronson on this planet who need an attitude adjustment forced upon them. They actually have a real, working quantum computer called the D-Wave in operation, in more than one place, bought by more than one large company, like Google, and, yet, people like Aaronson still don’t believe that it is actually happening, probably because he views it as an “extraordinary claim.” (I wouldn’t believe it even if it was true) You can read about this sad state of affairs in this article:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27264552

    Even with an E-Cat in operation, there will still be far too many pseudoskeptics who will not believe it.

    • Fibber McGourlick

      Who cares? An E-Cat in operation will save the world from certain ecological destruction. When we see it in operation, that’s the question. What ever happened to the plants that Rossi sold two years ago. Why haven’t we heard anything from the owners. How could they keep the operation so completely secret.

      • jousterusa

        I often wonder about the one E-Cat that we were told went to the US military, apparently to Afghanistan, where it provided power in remote regions of the mountains where US troops were in need of electricity and heat, or at least heat. I can certainly understand if this scenario was completely invented, though.

      • Wayne M.

        Fibber,

        When the E-cat in all its forms is ubiquitous across our planet, it will be just as heat polluting and damaging as coal. This is the reason we hate coal. It creates green house gases, etc. LENR will skip the gases and directly produce the heat (for whatever). The new heat producing devices will go where no coal has gone before. In time, LENR will be in every home, car, plane, factory, ship, sidewalk, and road. It will allow people to penetrate and live in remote wilderness, forest, jungle, and tundra with all the comforts of the city – gadget wise. Heat pollution will be everywhere.

        If these LENR / E-cat devices are going to be of the Ni-H type, you can throw in the dangers of inflammable hydrogen gas and nano-Nickle powder which is toxic to people.

        I’m all for this new technology, but with all the excitement of this new discovery we only see the rosy side.

        Be careful what you wish for.

        • Omega Z

          Cheap Energy isn’t Cheap if you throw half of it away.
          So natural market forces will prevent what your concerned about. Costs will continue to drive improvements in efficiencies. Even if some don’t think this will continue.

          Also, Without major advances in multiple technology fields, I don’t see E-cats in individual homes other then supplemental heating.
          In this situation, It would actually be more efficient then our present system. Less overall heat would be produced as less energy would be wasted Considering using Electric heat results in 70% of the energy/heat is released into the environment at the power plant.

          Also, people all over the world burn wood, coal, cow dung, whatever for cooking & heating & a huge part of this is wasted & expelled into the environment. All in All, Energy & heat from e-cats could easily result in less heat production world wide. Not More…

          This said, IMO, other then Heat Island Effect, I think the heat conversation is over stated for political purposes. ( It’s for Wealth Redistribution.)

      • Mark

        People believing wrong things can (and DOES) have real-world, negative consequences. Aaronson is causing controversy where no controversy, of this type, should be caused. It is holding back progress in quantum computing. The same is true for pseudoskeptics of cold fusion and the E-Cat. If you want to take the standard United States line that we have to put up with such harm being done to our society in order to allow a poorly-defined notion of “freedom” in this society, then I can’t stop you. (though I would be able to stop you if I was running things) Still, it is important to acknowledge, one way or another, that that this so-called “free” system that we have in The United States does cause damage.

        Anyway, as far as your other question go…have some patience. Rome wasn’t built in a day, or even a few years. I’m sure that those questions will be answered, at some point, pretty definitively.

  • Bernie777

    Christiana……like your energy and all the names…keep them coming.

  • Chris I

    It is unlikely that Cherokee have become a den of conners. They say they have aquired the IP from him; they don’t conduct blackbox tests but instead produce it themselves, from available materials. The only remaining option is that they’ve been fooled too.

    Unless it works, of course. At this point, either they themselves still need the report to be sure, or else nobody really does.

    • US_Citizen71

      They need the report for marketing and R&D. An outside report is useful for bullet points on product literature as well as insuring that you are not fooling yourself with wishful thinking.

    • deleo77

      The big thing that doesn’t get mentioned a lot is that an e-cat has almost definitely been running for many months wherever IH has its R&D operations. It seems like the common thought is that an e-cat has only been running at the independent test site (probably in Sweden), and perhaps at another pilot test site. But it is hard to imagine that there isn’t an e-cat continually running in North Carolina, and it is being studied, tested, and improved upon by the engineers at Industrial Heat. Darden probably sees it himself regularly and gets status reports from those who are operating it.

      Darden and Cherokee have $11.5 MM invested in this IP, so to not be operating an e-cat continuously in-house with experienced engineers over the past year would be ludicrous. It doesn’t mean that the e-cat works exactly as Rossi has claimed, but if this were some giant scam by Rossi it would have been easily discovered by now. News of something going terribly wrong (a la Defkalion) would probably surface by now. The likely case is that the investors would quickly get their money back and some type of statement saying that Rossi was no longer involved with Industrial Heat or Cherokee would be issued. But so far none of this has happened.

      • sadly Defkalion proved that point.
        as soon as a partner have control on the test, he can spot the fraud.
        The error of Luca was to sign before he could do a test where he decided of the protocol.
        As you say, he instantly stopped relation with clients, and finally after some time waiting fro explanation he decided to throw the towel.

        Jed rothwell is right when he says that spotting fraud in calorimetry is easy when you can do what you want on the device… The red flag is raised when the reactor builder prevent you to change the test condition for an irrational reason.

        This is why the Levi&al test is a good evidence, because Rossi could not prevent someone to bring his IR cam, his voltmeter, his power clamp, his powermeter…

        • Daniel Maris

          Yes, this is my argument with the Skeps. Rossi can’t know just how sophisiticated the testers will be. If he were a scammer he would be taking a huge risk of discovery. The Skeps responds that Rossi chooses his “shills” well.

          • the two points are good.

            Random testers rule out fraud in real third party tests.
            The definition of a third party test is when the testers can change the testing protocol out of the black box, and divulgue the results, and their doubt on the measurement.
            There is no requirement for the test to be done in a third party resort, as long as the room can be tested at will.
            There is no requirement for the inventor to be absent, provided he cannot oppose any non intrusive test out of the blackbox.
            There is no requirement for opening any blackbox.
            There is no problem about NDA on trade secrets provided it does not cover the success,eventual frauds or “discrepancies”.

            But if you choose conspiracy testers, then all is possible. Just have to be sure that all who can change the protocol are in the conspiracy.

            You can also bet on incompetent testers, but it is very risky.
            See how SHT bet on Sterling Allan, famous for his optimism on free energy, who spotted the tricks, despite the test was a pony show clearly not even third party.

      • Chris I

        Actually there is no doubt about all this, as far as I go it would be superfluous for it to get mentioned (let alone a lot), but sadly there are many who can’t see beyond the tip of there nose. The reason I was much more concise is because it is often no use spelling something out better for those who can’t see it themselves.

  • Chris, Italy

    It is unlikely that Cherokee have become a den of conners. They say they have aquired the IP from him; they don’t conduct blackbox tests but instead produce it themselves, from available materials. The only remaining option is that they’ve been fooled too.

    Unless it works, of course. At this point, either they themselves still need the report to be sure, or else nobody really does.

    • US_Citizen71

      They need the report for marketing and R&D. An outside report is useful for bullet points on product literature as well as insuring that you are not fooling yourself with wishful thinking.

    • deleo77

      The big thing that doesn’t get mentioned a lot is that an e-cat has almost definitely been running for many months wherever IH has its R&D operations. It seems like the common thought is that an e-cat has only been running at the independent test site (probably in Sweden), and perhaps at another pilot test site. But it is hard to imagine that there isn’t an e-cat continually running in North Carolina, and it is being studied, tested, and improved upon by the engineers at Industrial Heat. Darden probably sees it himself regularly and gets status reports from those who are operating it.

      Darden and Cherokee have $11.5 MM invested in this IP, so to not be operating an e-cat continuously in-house with experienced engineers over the past year would be ludicrous. It doesn’t mean that the e-cat works exactly as Rossi has claimed, but if this were some giant scam by Rossi it would have been easily discovered by now. News of something going terribly wrong (a la Defkalion) would probably surface by now. The likely case is that the investors would quickly get their money back and some type of statement saying that Rossi was no longer involved with Industrial Heat or Cherokee would be issued. But so far none of this has happened.

      • sadly Defkalion proved that point.
        as soon as a partner have control on the test, he can spot the fraud.
        The error of Luca was to sign before he could do a test where he decided of the protocol.
        As you say, he instantly stopped relation with clients, and finally after some time waiting fro explanation he decided to throw the towel.

        Jed rothwell is right when he says that spotting fraud in calorimetry is easy when you can do what you want on the device… The red flag is raised when the reactor builder prevent you to change the test condition for an irrational reason.

        This is why the Levi&al test is a good evidence, because Rossi could not prevent someone to bring his IR cam, his voltmeter, his power clamp, his powermeter…

      • Chris, Italy

        Actually there is no doubt about all this, as far as I go it would be superfluous for it to get mentioned (let alone a lot), but sadly there are many who can’t see beyond the tip of there nose. The reason I was much more concise is because it is often no use spelling something out better for those who can’t see it themselves.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Ok.

  • Omega Z

    An E-cat power plant can’t depend on power from itself for operation. If the E-cat should become unstable, so does the power supply your using to control it. At best, It shuts down. At Worst, it melts down.

    Most of all existing systems Draw energy from the Grid that they feed power to. If there should be a problem, they still have a stable power supply for control.

    E-cat power plants would be no different & hooked to a grid would be no different then what we have. Note: If your E-cat system is small enough, A battery rack backup would suffice.

    Had Fukushima not lost it’s Grid Energy Connection, That Fiasco would have been avoided. Even the backup Generators had they not been swamped could Not have kept the Fukushima plant in operation(Not Enough Power), But they could have kept the cooling pumps working until Grid power was restored.

  • Omega Z

    Due to this being an unknown phenomenon, It can’t be certified for consumers without an abundance of safety data. This can only be obtained through Industrial, Then Commercial use.

    Also, Home use would only have been for supplemental heating for the foreseeable future. It will take time for the technology to become cost/benefit marketable for home energy generation.

  • Omega Z

    Blacklight Power Whats-New
    http://www.blacklightpower.com/whats-new/

    BlackLight’s Second Test of Automated Ignition System of Auger-Fed H2O-Based Solid Fuel Powder

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vh88aVr6i8&feature=youtu.be

    • Allan Shura

      This (engineering) looks to have an effect on the surface the rolling (electrodes?) with
      the appearance of pitting and residuals that typifies irregular arcing.

  • 6699

    Andrea Rossi
    May 25th, 2014 at 7:20 AM
    LMV:
    So far the scheduled publication is foreseen around the second- third week of June. I confirm that I di not yet know if the results are positive or negative, because the analysis of the data is still under substantial review. This is the last information I got three days ago.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Omega Z

    Cheap Energy isn’t Cheap if you throw half of it away.
    So natural market forces will prevent what your concerned about. Costs will continue to drive improvements in efficiencies. Even if some don’t think this will continue.

    Also, Without major advances in multiple technology fields, I don’t see E-cats in individual homes other then supplemental heating.
    In this situation, It would actually be more efficient then our present system. Less overall heat would be produced as less energy would be wasted Considering using Electric heat results in 70% of the energy/heat is released into the environment at the power plant.

    Also, people all over the world burn wood, coal, cow dung, whatever for cooking & heating & a huge part of this is wasted & expelled into the environment. All in All, Energy & heat from e-cats could easily result in less heat production world wide. Not More…

    This said, IMO, other then Heat Island Effect, I think the heat conversation is over stated for political purposes. ( It’s for Wealth Redistribution.)

  • Mark

    People believing wrong things can (and DOES) have real-world, negative consequences. Aaronson is causing controversy where no controversy, of this type, should be caused. It is holding back progress in quantum computing. The same is true for pseudoskeptics of cold fusion and the E-Cat. If you want to take the standard United States line that we have to put up with such harm being done to our society in order to allow a poorly-defined notion of “freedom” in this society, then I can’t stop you. (though I would be able to stop you if I was running things) Still, it is important to acknowledge, one way or another, that that this so-called “free” system that we have in The United States does cause damage.

    Anyway, as far as your other question go…have some patience. Rome wasn’t built in a day, or even a few years. I’m sure that those questions will be answered, at some point, pretty definitively.

  • Anon2012_2014

    “I realize that there was much wiggle room claimed by skeptics which allowed for the possibility for fraud by Rossi in setting up the experiment, and/or deceit on the part of the testers, but I see that as extremely unlikely, ”

    I have been involved at a serious level and have been following this LENR tech for over 3 years. I don’t believe Rossi is intentionally lying and I don’t believe Levi et al are intentionally lying. I do believe that they failed to close the holes in the prior Levi report and in the Rossi steam report. I am hoping, but I am not convinced that the new authors will do an effective job on closing the holes so that there is no doubt in a reasonable yet independent scientist, engineer, or investors mind that the effect is real and economically recoverable.

  • Anon2012_2014

    “I realize that there was much wiggle room claimed by skeptics which allowed for the possibility for fraud by Rossi in setting up the experiment, and/or deceit on the part of the testers, but I see that as extremely unlikely, ”

    I have been involved at a serious level and have been following this LENR tech for over 3 years. I don’t believe Rossi is intentionally lying and I don’t believe Levi et al are intentionally lying. I do believe that they failed to close the holes in the prior Levi report and in the Rossi steam report. I am hoping, but I am not convinced that the new authors will do an effective job on closing the holes so that there is no doubt in a reasonable yet independent scientist, engineer, or investors mind that the effect is real and economically recoverable.

    • bachcole

      Obviously Tom Darden and JT Vaughn don’t think that there are any holes.

      • Anon2012_2014

        Bach Cole,

        “Obviously Tom Darden and JT Vaughn don’t think that there are any holes.”

        Not true. I know (and won’t say how) that they were not 100% convinced when they made the investment. Hopefully they and we will be 100% convinced after the mid-June report. Those like me who were not enamored with the Levi et al report are very hopeful.

        • Frank Acland

          I suppose there is always an element of risk when making an investment, but I guess Tom and JT must have been fairly convinced to make the purchase.

          • Anon2012_2014

            It’s risk and return. Say the payouts are 10% lose it all and 90% make 10x. It would make sense to bet a large amount on the 90%. This is where I think the Industrial Heat investment is. My guess is they thought it was 60% when they put their money into Rossi. They are not scientist, but they hired some to prove it out: yes or no. Good luck to Industrial Heat — it will change the world if the answer is an unequivocal yes. We all are morally betting with Industrial Heat as when the patents run out in 20 years, we would have free energy. With free energy we can change the world, by making water and food, for example. And fossil fuels will be for hobbyist who like old cars.

          • bachcole

            After 19 months of deliberate and studied agnosticism with regard to Rossi, when Levi et. al. happened in May of 2013, it just seemed stupid to me to doubt Rossi any more. Given my faith in him, I believed him when he said that he sent the specs to IH and they reproduced the E-Cat and made it work. This is not an issue I feel any need to defend.

          • Anon2012_2014

            Bachcole,

            You jumped ahead of me. I have done a some first party research and analysis that I will not defend either. I don’t like the Levi test for reasons I have mentioned previously on this blog having to do with the volume of the chamber, the materials, specifically their mass measurement, and the proof that the materials in the chamber could not react chemically to produce excess heat for the duration of the test. I am not saying the test is wrong, I am saying that for THIS observer, they could have ruled out those issues for ME.

            I am hoping you are right — you’re the early adopter, and I am the slow one.

          • Omega Z

            Anon

            I agree the 1st 3rd party test could have been better, However, I cut them a little slack on 2 points.

            1- I’ve went to deal with things myself thinking I was fully prepared only to fined once involved, Not so Much. 🙂

            2- The test was never intended to be a for all conclusions to begin with, But to determine whether a more extensive in depth test was warranted. In that, it succeeded. Note: Elforsk is privy to much more then the sparse 30 page report that we have seen.

            I base this on information that was available at the time from Elforsk. A small sum of funds for the preliminary test with a substantially larger some for a follow on test should it be warranted.

            I presume this next 3rd party test report will be more telling & solid +/-.

            If Positive as many of us are expecting/hoping, I’m concerned with how it will perform when required to produce actual results.
            Rossi has mentioned trying to increase power density recently. Not sure how to view this. “Rossi Speak?” Does this involve maintaining the COP against the quenching effect that will occur when drawing power from the core?

          • Omega Z

            I would think the confidence issue would center on what happens when the Reactor is harnessed to produce work/energy.
            The coefficiency or COP “could” vary greatly between work & idle mode.

            And Please- Lose the “Free” energy label.
            The Device will not be free. And it will need periodic refueling$.
            It will merely be cleaner & cheaper then our present energies.

            I keep it in the perspective of a new fangled car that’s capable of getting 5K mpg.
            If Nickel should cost $1K per gram, I doubt many would think this Technology so marvelous. 🙁

          • Anon2012_2014

            My back of the envelope calculation based on nickel isotopes presumed to have reacted say it is will be 10x cheaper to produce electricity. This would make a huge difference.

          • Omega Z

            Retail will likely be in the range of 2 cents per 1Kwh. However, every region has their own little additives, Federal, State, Local taxes & other little fees. Ahh, means nothing.

            If people want this new energy to be/remain cheap, they will have to fight for it. One thing I’ve learned in Life. If you or I or anyone else find a way to save ourselves a Dollar, Some idiot out there is trying to figure out a way to get it back & then some.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Bach Cole,

    “Obviously Tom Darden and JT Vaughn don’t think that there are any holes.”

    Not true. I know (and won’t say how) that they were not 100% convinced when they made the investment. Hopefully they and we will be 100% convinced after the mid-June report. Those like me who were not enamored with the Levi et al report are very hopeful.

    • ecatworld

      I suppose there is always an element of risk when making an investment, but I guess Tom and JT must have been fairly convinced to make the purchase.

      • Anon2012_2014

        It’s risk and return. Say the payouts are 10% lose it all and 90% make 10x. It would make sense to bet a large amount on the 90%. This is where I think the Industrial Heat investment is. My guess is they thought it was 60% when they put their money into Rossi. They are not scientist, but they hired some to prove it out: yes or no. Good luck to Industrial Heat — it will change the world if the answer is an unequivocal yes. We all are morally betting with Industrial Heat as when the patents run out in 20 years, we would have free energy. With free energy we can change the world, by making water and food, for example. And fossil fuels will be for hobbyist who like old cars.

        • bachcole

          After 19 months of deliberate and studied agnosticism with regard to Rossi, when Levi et. al. happened in May of 2013, it just seemed stupid to me to doubt Rossi any more. Given my faith in him, I believed him when he said that he sent the specs to IH and they reproduced the E-Cat and made it work. This is not an issue I feel any need to defend.

          • Anon2012_2014

            Bachcole,

            You jumped ahead of me. I have done a some first party research and analysis that I will not defend either. I don’t like the Levi test for reasons I have mentioned previously on this blog having to do with the volume of the chamber, the materials, specifically their mass measurement, and the proof that the materials in the chamber could not react chemically to produce excess heat for the duration of the test. I am not saying the test is wrong, I am saying that for THIS observer, they could have ruled out those issues for ME.

            I am hoping you are right — you’re the early adopter, and I am the slow one.

          • Omega Z

            Anon

            I agree the 1st 3rd party test could have been better, However, I cut them a little slack on 2 points.

            1- I’ve went to deal with things myself thinking I was fully prepared only to fined once involved, Not so Much. 🙂

            2- The test was never intended to be a for all conclusions to begin with, But to determine whether a more extensive in depth test was warranted. In that, it succeeded. Note: Elforsk is privy to much more then the sparse 30 page report that we have seen.

            I base this on information that was available at the time from Elforsk. A small sum of funds for the preliminary test with a substantially larger some for a follow on test should it be warranted.

            I presume this next 3rd party test report will be more telling & solid +/-.

            If Positive as many of us are expecting/hoping, I’m concerned with how it will perform when required to produce actual results.
            Rossi has mentioned trying to increase power density recently. Not sure how to view this. “Rossi Speak?” Does this involve maintaining the COP against the quenching effect that will occur when drawing power from the core?

        • Omega Z

          I would think the confidence issue would center on what happens when the Reactor is harnessed to produce work/energy.
          The coefficiency or COP “could” vary greatly between work & idle mode.

          And Please- Lose the “Free” energy label.
          The Device will not be free. And it will need periodic refueling$.
          It will merely be cleaner & cheaper then our present energies.

          I keep it in the perspective of a new fangled car that’s capable of getting 5K mpg.
          If Nickel should cost $1K per gram, I doubt many would think this Technology so marvelous. 🙁

          • Anon2012_2014

            My back of the envelope calculation based on nickel isotopes presumed to have reacted say it is will be 10x cheaper to produce electricity. This would make a huge difference.

          • Omega Z

            Retail will likely be in the range of 2 cents per 1Kwh. However, every region has their own little additives, Federal, State, Local taxes & other little fees. Ahh, means nothing.

            If people want this new energy to be/remain cheap, they will have to fight for it. One thing I’ve learned in Life. If you or I or anyone else find a way to save ourselves a Dollar, Some idiot out there is trying to figure out a way to get it back & then some.