Elon Musk Sees Tesla’s Batteries Providing Energy Storage for all SolarCity Installations within 10 Years

We often discuss the future of home energy production in terms of what LENR could make possible, but it’s likely that it will be some time before home LENR systems become available. Meanwhile an increasing number of homeowners are looking to cut energy costs and increase energy independence by installing rooftop solar panels on their homes.

An interesting development is being reported by the Wall Street Journal which involves Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla motors, and also chairman of SolarCity, one of the leading companies working in the domestic solar energy industry. At a conference in New York on Wednesday, Musk appeared with his cousin, Lyndon Rive, (who is the CEO of SolarCity) where they discussed a future collaboration between Tesla and SolarCity in which some of the batteries produced at Tesla’s gigafactory in Nevada will be used for “grid scale storage”.

Energy storage is seen as a crucial partner to solar and wind energy because of the intermittent nature of these renewable energy sources. If you can cheaply store energy produced by solar cells on your home, it could be a very attractive way to move off the grid.

From the Wall Street Journal article:

Thanks to the economies of scale that will come from Tesla’s gigafactory, within 10 years every solar system that SolarCity sells will come with a battery-storage system, says Mr. Rive, and it will still produce energy cheaper than what is available from the local utility company.

Mr. Musk also noted that in any future in which a country switches fully to electric cars, its electricity consumption will roughly double. That could either mean more utilities, and more transmission lines, or a rollout of solar—exactly the sort that SolarCity hopes for.

Elon Musk has proven to be force to be reckoned with in bringing advanced technology to market in new and visionary ways, and it will be interesting to see how this partnership with SolarCity develops. One wonders, of course, what Elon Musk might do in connection with LENR if it is proven to be revolutionary and viable way to produce energy. Electric cars could be a natural fit if LENR electrical production becomes a reality.

  • Jonnyb

    I wonder if this is where Rossi’s e-cat plant is?

    • Ophelia Rump

      Rossi was up in Massachusetts talking to the Governor when he came to the US. So my bets are either North Carolina or Massachusetts. I think Vegas odds would favor Triangle Park.

  • Ophelia Rump

    They will get some good mileage out of the concept, before the well runs dry.
    The expense of storage will not be competitive with LENR on demand production.

    • Fortyniner

      When you’ve invested time and money in a product, I suppose that it is only natural to blow your own trumpet even when you know the technology will be obsolete very soon – probably long before the financial investment is repaid.

      In this case it looks like two doomed species in the energy zoo trying to bail each other out by encouraging a few less-than-savvy investors to jump aboard their hastily constructed life-raft.

      • GreenWin

        You may be too harsh on Elon. Solar has a future if only amongst those suspicious of new-fangled gadgets like E-Cats. And Tesla’s gigafactory is designed to build batteries for cars primarily. Heck, were I to power my mountain chalet with E-Cat, I’d probably put a battery backup unit in. So as not to miss Liverpool F.C.

        • Fortyniner

          I’m sure that battery cars will do very well, and they would be a ‘natural’ for a world in which electricity costs next to nothing. Unfortunately I don’t believe that this will ever be the case. It’s only in an utterly distorted market that solar-fed battery supplies, with all the inefficiencies of solar generation itself, battery storage losses, and 85% efficient inverters for making AC, could ever make any kind of sense when competing with LENR.

          So I suppose that what I’m actually railing against isn’t Musk but the expectation that LENR will be subverted to the profit making interests of the energy cabal supported by its tame politicians.

          • GreenWin

            A reasoned rail you have there. It is hard not to wonder just what the cabal is up to these days. Facing trillion$ in stranded assets, at what point do they switch from opposing LENR to accepting? And do they use the old “buy it and bury it” (NiMh) tactics? The cabal oddly now includes the solar/agw clan. They all fear LENR threatens their grandiose vision of centuries more sheeple control.

            In a sense solar represents the old “generate and transmit” method. Do we want energy scavenged after a 93million mile journey to Earth – or made locally?

          • Fortyniner

            I agree absolutely – there will be some strange bedfellows in the rump of anti-CF interests. We can only hope that it does escape into the wild, and fairly quickly, despite inevitable attempts to prevent this happening.

            Personally I always try to support our local producers wherever possible, but when I switch on an electrical appliance I have precisely zero choice as to where the power is coming from.

        • georgehants

          GreenWin, I am moving to an oil powered heated house, I am seriously looking at 4kw of solar power.
          If the economics work out I will have it fitted immediately.

          • GreenWin

            Sounds just wonderful George. A brief look at your Met office average sunshine chart indicates your is the sunniest place (SW England, S Wales – summer) in the nation. Does the system you contemplate include battery storage?

          • georgehants

            GreenWin, I am completely dumb on this situation, just now starting to get good information.
            I don’t think that Penzance falls below 0,C very often, so as you say may be good place to have solar.
            Good wind to as we are on the coast.

          • Fortyniner

            George, I looked into PVs 2 years ago, and decided in the end to fit water heating panels and a ‘thermal store’ instead, as the projected fuel savings were far greater, and the cost considerably less (admittedly I did get the panels free!).

            Assuming you have no prospect of getting a gas main laid in, the heat pump idea seems pretty good to me, especially given the local climate. Maybe a woodburner as well, to provide a cosy hearth for the winter?

            You would need to fit small thermostatically controlled ducted fans in walls and ceilings to distribute the heat around the house, if the heat pump was the normal air heating type (much simpler and cheaper than installing ‘wet’ central heating, although cheap ones can make a noticeable noise).

          • Fortyniner

            Very few people bother with batteries to store solar power in the UK, as there are still huge subsidies available (‘feed-in tariffs) for sending the surplus to the grid. There is a whole industry here dedicated to persuading people to fit their ‘free’ panels to their roofs, then taking the subsidy for the life of the installation.

            The additional grid power obtained this way is completely unnecessary as it is only available when demand is low (warm, bright days), and the cost is astronomical, but hey, it’s green so who cares what it costs (the consumer is paying, anyway).

          • GreenWin

            Feed in tariffs are great for PV industry no doubt. And another way for the grid to stay in control. Should batteries become cheap enough to store household usage — choice to reduce grid to backup only is plausible.

          • Omega Z

            People like Elon Musk & Rossi are usually overly optimistic on time frames.

            On that note, I also wonder if Musk has allowed for new improved battery tech that will possibly be ready to come to market at about the time he’s planning on starting up production in this new battery plant.
            Batteries with half the size, half the weight, half the cost & a 500 to 1000 mile range & double the number of recharge cycles before needing replaced.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            In the face of the huge efforts in worldwide research it seems more than likely that we will see drastically improved batteries within the next ten years. But that could become a problem for Tesla in the case that another company would own the technology, and were not willing to license it on acceptable terms. At least from Tesla’s direct competitors I would not expect such a generosity.

          • Omega Z

            Andreas Moraitis

            Details, Details…
            Musk does not own the battery tech he aims to build.
            He has formed a partnership with one who does.

            Basically, He is providing the Building & most of the financial arrangements. The partner will provide the manufacturing technology & machines.

          • Broncobet

            Right. Panasonic. Plus hundreds of other companies will be under one roof.

          • One only needs to see what happened to Stanford Ovshinsky’s battery & solar technology.

          • Broncobet

            I used to follow him forty years ago, I assume he’s dead.

          • I’m much more boring .not yet any contact with DGSE

            It tooks me 20 years, Internet bubble from inside, Financial bubble from inside, climate bubble from beside, LENR by accident, to understand that conspiracy theory are sometime mainstream, and that other conspiracy theories are just there to hide the reality.

            UFO are there to protect US citizen mind from criticizing violation of their ethic by their government…

            MH370, MH17, LENR, Climate, the things are simple…

            we simply have difficulties to understand the absurd logic of groupthink…

            MH17… shot down by those who were there with fighters, because not even 10 drunken operator can shot down a civilian plane which is tagged as civilian by IFF transponder… assuming pilote error under low oxygen is more rational. fakes on twitter and audio is pathetic. assuming the only one who don’t have any missile nor any plane is guilty, while neonazi driven party with 10 missiles and 2 fighter are assumed innocent… remind me the MIT fraud… Conspiracy with plastinated corps is just to make the real theory look fantazy.

            MH370… sure hijacked, and shot down above diego garcia… trajectory is logic, and sure if the plane was in the around as witness seen, it was seen by the electronic big ears of diego garcia… behavior to send research far from the logical zone is pathetic. Conspiracy with secret planes kept in DG is just to make the real theory look fantazy.

            hot fusion : a good idea that does not work finally but makes bigger budget, long tenure, big publication index, big business. budget and failure despite known hopeless challenge, while ignoring aneutronic and small solution is pathetic.

            Climate : a good idea that does not work finally but make bigger budget, long tenure, big publication index, big business, big ideology, big religion, big politics. Even Koonin is leaving the boat now http://online.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565 (time for me to consider climate theory if Koonin challenge it ;-> )

            use Occam razor, not consensus.

            my new amateur job make me understand how information travel the community network… some information are protected to spread, and others spread like virus because some intrinsic properties, and by media support…

            see how Blacklight and NASA Zawodny articles spread more than E-cat stories… I’ve seen it…
            see how EmDrive is allowed to spread by journalist, much more than cold fusion.

            see how facts (not theory) on MH17 don’t spread… at least in France.

            groupthink is only one structure of information propagation.

            rumor follow other ways… press works another way (sheep, and ideology bias). CIA is today quite good at legally spreading counter fires to media, helped by mainstream parrots and social puppets.

            today in france I see how politicians, helped by puppet journalists, can spread counter scandal to react to an affair… that is a job.

            no conspiracy, all is public. reality is simplest.

          • Fortyniner

            I’ve been sitting here in my conservatory for the last hour and a half, watching a clear blue morning sky being turned into a hazy grey mess by jets flying in parallel to known flight paths across to Wales, and others (white painted refuelling tankers, no markings – I keep a telescope handy) flying at 90 degrees to this this where there are no flight paths, both leaving trails that persist and spread out across the sky for hours.

            This is in plain sight, but unnoticed by 95% of the sheeple and rationalised away as ‘normal’ by most of the remainder, who are simply unable to conceive that something so huge could be happening without public information or engagement.

            There are thousands of hours of movies online, millions of photos, and hundreds of analyses of rainfall following spraying, that together prove beyond any shadow of doubt that harmful chemicals are being routinely dispensed into the atmosphere for whatever reason or reasons. But if anyone confronts the average citizen with the facts, most just think ‘conspiracy theory’ and dismiss the facts, just as they have been trained to respond.

            In the end, most people can’t handle cognitive dissonance, breaking free of groupthink, or additional stress, and instead simply choose to believe that all is well — leaving the perpetrators free to continue with whatever it is they are attempting to accomplish. So it is for all the ‘big lies’ – AGW, weather wars, Fukushima cover up, false flag events, manufactured wars, planetary financial manipulation, real and imaginary pandemics, and the rest of constructed ‘reality’.

        • Ophelia Rump

          If it ever becomes self looped, A Tesla battery will be a must for your chalet.

          • GreenWin

            A nice variation is for Tesla car owners to plug their vehicle into a V2H system (Vehicle to Home.) This will charge the vehicle and provide household backup (E-Cat control) without a dedicated home battery. Of course if the significant other is off skiing when the Cat goes wild… Which is why I shall keep an old Mr. Fusor in the attic for emergent situations. http://energycatalyzer3.com/files/2011/08/Mr-Fusion.jpg

        • Ophelia Rump

          Look into Geothermal, it is still the best investment. There are systems which use ground-loops buried under lawns, and wells to pump water up and send it back doing heat exchange upon it.

      • Ophelia Rump

        They will make tons off of the enterprise, and do great good for people in the process. The brass section is part of the show, listening to the trumpet is interesting, good news is all too scarce these days.

      • Billy Jackson

        We have to remember that the e-cat is not free energy just yet it still requires energy input for stabilization. plenty of room for solar and battery storage to advance. with the new meta materials and graphene’s supposed effect on battery storage who knows what the future on those fronts will bring.

        at the start i see LENR as a supplemental technology to battery storage. the ecat isnt an on demand device. its an always on device.. the reaction takes hours to get up to speed before it kicks in. as such their are just devices that wont work without some type of storage capacity to hold energy.. cars being one right now

        Its not like we can just take out an engine at the moment and expect it to work right away by putting in a e-cat. lots of redesigning needed.. energy storage for on demand use. safety issues (900 degree steam needs a way to get AWAY from the car in case of an accident otherwise your children may wind up soft boiled from escaping steam….) (looping/reclamation of steam/water for a closed system?)

        LENR and Batteries for the foreseeable future will go hand in hand for many applications that require mobility.

  • Daniel Maris

    It will be interesting if the figures do add up like that, as it will be a fundamental shift in energy provision.

    Countries like Germany and Denmark will accelerate their drive to green energy.

    I have always thought the choice is not between LENR and carbon/nuclear but between LENR and green.

    • GreenWin

      Agree Daniel. And choice between solar + storage vs E-Cat or SunCell may resolve around installation and maintenance. “Green” philosophy is fundamentalist – thrift. LENR is a philosophy accepting abundance.

      • Billy Jackson

        unless the e-cat can be self sustaining with the ability to recapture steam to loop back into water for a continuous supply i think that battery storage is going to continue to grow and improve. Solar will remain until the e-cat goes self sustaining.. at that point… if you dont need an energy input to get it started.. then their is no need for solar or the ‘Grid’

  • Bernie777

    I have been following Musk for several years, his first
    Tesla car is an engineering marvel, especially when you understand they built
    this production car from scratch. It bothers
    me a lot that he has not embraced LENR, he has apparently looked at it and decided solar
    and battery storage is the way to go, or he decided there is room for
    both. The new battery factory is going
    to be larger than the largest Boeing factory.
    This guy really knows how to scale up, we need someone like him running
    LENR, I am not sure IH and the biggie behind them are up to the task or have
    the motivation. There is one thing for sure unlike Musk they like to work in secret.

    • Billy Jackson

      LENR is still an unproven technology wrapped in plenty of conspiracy. as such its not something a company can logically make a business plan on.. its a complete unknown. Solar on the other hand is a known technology still growing slowly with improvements. We have no clue what restrictions or regulations LENR will face for public use. until then its a wait and see game.

      I expect that if LENR gains acceptance and is as abundant as being predicted then we will see “adjustments” in future plans of many companies such as Elon Musk’s.

      • Omega Z

        Yes, We can easily assume many power players are aware of LENR & Rossi, yet say nothing. And they won’t until solid targets are met Such as the 3rd party test & a working plant with decent results.
        Only after these targets are met will they start talking about it.

  • Guru

    Musk dreaming about Mars …… meanwhile Goldman Sachs warns: Tesla Will Need To Raise At Least Another $6 Billion


    • Bernie777

      Ha, Goldman Sachs works for the oil, gas and coal trillionaires.

      • Omega Z

        Goldman Sachs works for profit like everyone else.
        They will be more then happy to see LENR come on board.
        100’s of Billion$ even Trillion$ over decades in financing new power plants & all that entails…

        • they will just give advice to their client to buy oil field, while selling them.

          • Bernie777

            Right, and now they are bad mouthing Musk/Tesla, guess what they are doing?

          • Omega Z

            I think what you mean is if he would get it to market so that we can heat a cup of water. I’ll add to that. So we can heat 10 cups for the cost of 1, Because there is no doubt it gets hot enough to heat water.

        • Bernie777

          Goldman Sachs works for those who pay them and make them the most money, and that is not the LENR “industry”, if you believe their propaganda you are very naive.

    • Daniel Maris

      What’s that cost per annum in interest? About $240million.

      Space X alone is pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars per annum, much of which will go directly into Elon Musk’s pockets.

      Musk is that rare being: a big dreamer whose capacity for dreaming is matched by a wonderful pragmatism and business sense.

  • georgehants

    I am just moving into a house that has oil heating in the UK that is relatively expensive.
    Do any of our US friends have any advice regarding heat pumps etc.

    • BroKeeper

      George, heat pumps lose their efficiency quickly under 0C. However, as a dual supplemental heat source, oil can kick in around -3C. We have a
      high efficient heat pump with oil and experienced a savings of ~ $100.00 per winter
      month, especially with high oil costs.
      Overall it has paid for itself after 8-10 years. IMO, I think, It is also more efficient than
      most singular air conditioners. Hope this helps.

      • georgehants

        BroKeeper, many thanks, all this heating, solar etc. is not easy to work out, that’s how they like to keep it, profit, profit, profit.
        Roll on Cold Fusion, but that will still be highjacked for profit I expect.

        • BroKeeper

          I suspect it so as well, but then we have the China factor. Interesting future.

    • Omega Z

      Geothermal Heat pumps. Can Average COP>3 for heating/cooling year round regardless of outside temps.

      Issue’s: Expensive to install.
      Can be problematic if improperly sized & improperly installed.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Geothermal heat pumps are great; I would like to have one. But as far as I know they need to be combined with a floor heating. With normal radiators they won’t work effectively, due to the required higher temperatures.

  • ecatworld

    My guess of ‘some time’ before LENR home electric LENR systems are on the market is based on what Rossi has said about the difficulty of getting product safety certification for the home e-cats. He says that certification will depend largely on the long-term safety data of industrial E-Cat Plants.

    I am very optimistic about LENR as an energy source, but I see there are technical and legal issues that have to be dealt with, and as with many cutting-edge technological developments, it take time to deal with them.

    In this case, I don’t know how long that time is, but I would think longer than the most optimistic ones among us hope for.

    I hope I am wrong. I would love to see this technology somehow get fast-tracked, and I think it deserves to — but we have seen in the E-Cat World, things don’t always move as fast as we would like.

  • builditnow

    E-Cat revolution could be faster than you think.
    Wright brothers example.
    Only 6 years after the Wright Brothers first demonstrated in public, a french pilot entertained crowds in a Bleriot XI aircraft in South Eastern Australia. Think how much faster the E-Cat revolution can be once the realization hits the public.

    The Write Brothers first flew in 1903, keep it secret until 1908 demonstration flights in France and the US. There were many detractors who apologized “Leading French aviation promoter Ernest Archdeacon wrote, “For a long
    time, the Wright brothers have been accused in Europe of bluff… They
    are today hallowed in France, and I feel an intense pleasure…to make
    amends.”[93]” “In January 1909 Orville and Katharine joined him in France, and for a
    time they were the three most famous people in the world, sought after
    by royalty, the rich, reporters and the public. The kings of England,
    Spain and Italy came to see Wilbur fly.” (wikipedia). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers#European_skepticism

    Only 6 years later in 1914, a french aerobatic pilot traveled around Australia doing aerobatic stunts to amazed crowds.


    Things can happen a lot faster in 2014 than in 1908.
    Many could be surprised with the speed of E-Cat implementation.

    • Bernie777

      Are “massive subsidies” the cost for clean air?

    • Omega Z

      Power plants take years to plan & build & billions of dollar$.
      All these constraints plus limited numbers of people with the skills & expertize to build them.

      Just because you have a very efficient heat reactor that replaces the Gas burners will not change all the other dynamics. A power plant is still a power plant.

      Note that there is are existing orders for about a 1000 power plants. There is a need for far more then that. 2x or 3x as many. No one adds to the list because it already exceeds 10 years in waiting.

  • Bernie777

    For you old guys it is like the fight between Betamax and VHS formats. Betamax had a better product but VHS beat them to the punch with product availability and marketing. If Rossi and IH do not get on the availability and marketing bandwagon soon it might be too late.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Bandwagon? Someone else has a product, a factory, multiple validations reports and a demonstration plant, scheduled for this year?

      • Bernie777

        Sorry I was not clear, I was talking solar/battery vs LENR. Solar will have a 25% panel in the next 6 months. This will decrease the installation cost, which is the major cost of home installation. Some are projecting the new Tesla factory will decrease the battery cost by one third, not counting new tech battery advances.

        • psi2u2

          This is all wonderful and will no doubt help to further diversify the world’s energy portfolio in the right direction, but unless we are wildly overestimating the potential of LENR, I don’t see solar as having any near term potential to displace it. For one thing LENR can be deployed 24-7, which has very significant competitive advantage. Even in the best climes, solar can only produce during daylight hours. And in Seattle – where I grew up – ???

          • Rene

            In Seattle (and in Kirkland) you find PV systems atop homes. The efficiency of the panels is higher than in sunny California because they operate at lower temperatures, and so the 65% solar isolation in Seattle WA vs. San Jose CA generates almost the same amount of power, throughout the year except in winter where Seattle gets seriously socked in rain and sometimes snow. Even in central California, where I have my off-grid home, I see a small shortfall December through February. A generator charges up the batteries once a couple of days or so during that time.
            Yes, LENR is great… someday. I do not expect home LENR for at least 5 years at best.

          • Omega Z

            You Optimist…

          • Rene

            Fact based observations.

          • Omega Z

            Murphy’s law.

          • Rene


          • Broncobet

            If the CF reactors were free it doesn’t mean the price to the public will be low, in any case profit will be maximized.

          • psi2u2

            Hi Rene,

            I see you are rather new to this discussion and full of “fact based observations.” I appreciate your clarification of the potential of various solar hot water applications to capture low grade heat even on an overcast day, but that does not change the underlying calculus against solar compared to the potential of LENR. Like many who have followed this story closely, I am confident that LENR is going to hit the market much sooner than five years, although you may be correct that home versions will take up to 5 years – and that’s assuming that there is not a manufactured scare against the technology.

          • Rene

            Not in the least new to the discussion. I was one of the first to be placed on the “send me a home ecat” list, still waiting, and the wait will likely 10 years in total. I haven’t said much because all this is speculation. It is headed to the ‘real’ category with the demonstration plant but even that is still cloaked in secrecy. Once the TIP report goes public, and access to a working plant happens, then hurray!
            BTW, I was not referring to solar hot water collection at all. I am referring to photovoltaic collection aka electricity. When I said my home is off-grid it means that PV panels are generating electricity that powers the home.
            Will LENR hit the market sooner than 5 years, probably, for industrial applications. But this discussion was solar/battery for home usage vs. home LENR, and that one has a low chance of seeing daylight for many years to come. It has been discussed before here (many times) that the regulatory and safety issues for the availability of LENR based home products will create a very long delay, even longer if a manufactured scare campaign happens.

          • psi2u2

            Great! Hadn’t seen your posts before. We have a minor difference in perspective. Pleased to meet you.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, I believe they have a $73,000 model.

            The fact that they have a $113,000 model that will with their
            new revolutionary battery plant now cost $100,000, or they have a model that
            was $73,000 that will now cost $70,000 is STILL a MOOT point. The simple fact
            is these are high priced luxury cars in a NICHE market.

            The BASIC point and knowledge I have imparted here is not
            changed by their lower cost product. The simple matter is some 30% cost reduction in their batteries DOES NOT in any signification way change the cost structure of their cars.

            And worse is those in “many” areas with HIGH priced electricity,
            those without suitable homes (or parking stations), and those in colder areas
            cannot practical take advantage of such vehicles. And toss in the very high
            cost of these cars, then indeed such a choice is really only for those that
            hardly care about the cost of their vehicles they purchase.

            As noted while the above is solid reasoning, at the end
            of the day I still think the Telsa is a great product as along as one realizes
            its target market and limited usability for average vehicle owners..

          • Heath
      • US_Citizen71

        Even rural Mexican culture has competitiveness. You have heard of machismo correct? Machismo is the epitome of competitiveness, ie who is the manliest man.

        • hempenearth

          We have twins, one of each. At about eleven months old, the girl was doing all the movements/excersizes that happen before walking. We thought she would be first to walk. The boy wasn’t doing any of those movements and so it was to our surprise that one day he pulled himself up and started walking around the living room. He had been walking for a week or two when the girl left her mothers arms in the hallway and walked about 4 metres then stopped and looked at my son and I. I smiled but my son walked straight up to her and pushed her over. Since then I have believed that competition is part of human nature.

          • Bernie777

            I answered this question when, I think it was georgehants, asked the same question, if you missed it I will try to find it for you.

  • Bernie777

    Please get on you-tube and listen to his interviews. Have you seen his rocket that takes off and lands to enable cheaper earth orbit?

    • georgehants

      Thanks bkrharold, I notice how quickly everybody on page jumped to answer my simple question.
      So until all power comes from solar, wind, Cold Fusion etc. it would seem a bit daft to use electric cars?

      • GreenWin

        George, if you do not get caught up in the terror of AGW, using an Electric Vehicle is a convenience in home “fueling.” That is, you can recharge your car at home, rather than paying BP at the petrol pump. While your electric energy comes from fossil/fission – (18p/kWh – UK average) it is quite a bit less costly than petrol (4.91£/gallon.) Thus, you will not save the world from climate change, but you will likely save yourself some cash.

        Looks like the favorite EV in Britain is the Nissan Leaf: http://www.thegreencarwebsite.co.uk/blog/index.php/2014/08/08/nissan-leaf-still-ev-king-in-the-uk-as-sales-surpass-2013s-result/

        Ask your Cornwall Nissan dealer to give you firm cost/savings numbers for the Leaf – electric vehicle.

        • georgehants

          GreenWin, I think you are not taking into account the corruption of a capitalist society.
          I can remember when in the UK, diesel was half the price of petrol until it became popular, now it is more expensive.
          The rich and powerful are going to tax Cold Fusion like everything else just to keep themselves rich and powerful and the lower plebs busy working to pay their taxes and bills.
          Why are solar panels in the UK not being fitted universally free of charge by the unemployed to bring oil imports to nearly zero.
          These people are being paid anyway, not to work.
          The reason is that it would stop the obscene profits from other polluting and expensive sources.

          • GreenWin

            Yes, on the prospect of a CF tax you and Peter agree. The difference between CF and fossil is volume of resources. Fossil is widely believed a diminishing, finite resource. CF, from what we are learning is plausibly using an IN-finite resource to create energy.

            Taxing CF will be a little like taxing the air we breath. If the sheeple allow themselves to be bamboozled this way – they deserve what they get. IMO. 🙂

          • Fortyniner

            That seems a little harsh, GW. At one time or another, there have been some very large public protests about fuel taxation here in the UK (where we currently pay around £7/$12 per gallon due to taxation policy). One or two planned tax ‘hikes’ have been temporarily cancelled as a result, but the overall effect of such protests on fuel taxation has been next to zero.

            No party here promises to reform the massive 70% tax burden on fuel, so it doesn’t matter who is elected, and short of taking up arms (which we were long ago deprived of) there is nothing much left anyone can do, short of selling their petrol/diesel cars and buying a ridiculously expensive EV in protest (or a bicycle).

          • GreenWin

            Right, I see your point. However, the taxing authority in UK assumes petrol is finite and can therefor invoke a “diminishing resource” argument. CF will scupper that, hopefully. On the other hand, the Nissan Leaf EV averages £22,490 (medium kit added) which IS $10k more than US, but not ridiculous I think. Personally, having driven an EV briefly, I loved to drive past gas stations, knowing I never had to pull in there to keep driving.

          • GreenWin

            Roger, they are the same unit, i.e. the British Pound Sterling. So, assume 5£ per US gallon would be $8.17. The electric would be $0.29/kWh. In the USA this translates to a per annum savings of about $1250.00 for the Nissan Leaf EV. According to owner records: http://drivingelectric.blogspot.com/2014/01/five-months-in-our-2013-nissan-leaf-and.html

    • Bernie777

      Right, all these experts are wrong and you are right.


      • GreenWin

        It’s a matter of requirements. What many LENR supporters see is grant seeking climate scientists parroting the “consensus” required to obtain funding. These same scientists disbelieve LENR evidence – also required to obtain funding. “Consensus” for AGW, is same as “consensus” against LENR.

        This is the result of politically biased, half-a$$ed simulation code.

        • my mind is disturbed since Steeve Koonin have wrote


          since he exactly state what skeptic, reasonable climate-skeptics like Judith Curry, were saying since climategate…

          It is time to support climate consensus theory… the man whi killed Cold Fusion in caltech cannot be right…
          or he took the lesson before dying, to feel lighter in front of St Michael?

          anyway, climate theory is right, IPCC is it’s proxy on earth, and LENR will solve it!

          • GreenWin

            Koonin is corrupt, ignorant or both. Though his climate science is better than most – he is still the “scientist” whose ego and ignorance caused the demise of P&F’s good works. History will see him for the charlatan he is. Yes, he is trying to salvage his reputation before St Peter? rightly kicks him out.

        • Bernie777

          GreenWin……We will just have to agree to disagree on climate change, can we agree that using LENR instead of fossil fuel will be positive for the world?

      • Fortyniner


        • Bernie777


      • Broncobet

        No,the climate scientists are right but why should you care? If the steps taken to fix the climate not only don’t cost you a penny,but they give you money then you should be for it. I agree most liberals like Al Gore are terrible, and they hurt the climate the most because of their opposition to the best method of reducing CO2 ; advanced nuclear. Plus the rich pollute more than those with less.

  • Sandy

    “The Hutterites are a communal people, living on hundreds of scattered bruderhöfe or colonies throughout the prairies of northwestern North America. On average, fifteen families live and work on the typical Hutterite colony, where they farm, raise livestock and produce manufactured goods for sustenance. The communal lifestyle of the Hutterites finds its roots in the biblical teachings of Christ and the Apostles”. http://www.hutterites.org

    Hutterites do not starve to death. Their version of communism, which might be described as “tribal communism”, works very well. The Hutterites are the most successful people on Earth in the sense that their population is the fastest growing. The average Hutterite couple has 10 children, and those children almost always reach adulthood and reproduce.

    Communism can work very well on a small scale. The Hutterites are living proof of that. Send LENR-powered Hutterites to Mars and they will cover that dead rock with life in just a few thousand years.

    • US_Citizen71

      What you are describing is less a function of ideology and more a function of necessity. A small collective needs all members working at close to 100% effectiveness in order to survive. If Johnny isn’t fed, clothed and housed he won’t be able to carry out his duties effectively, if he doesn’t carry out his duties the whole collective/commune suffers. This forces sharing for the common good. If those collectives were allowed to grow to say 1500 families specialization would cause the members to need to work less and would trigger the competitiveness we see throughout the world today in large groups. The history of the growth of civilizations throughout world has shown this to happen time after time after time.

    • Bernie777

      Just look at the list of the number of scientists that approved the climate report, you are saying all of these women/men are corrupt, nonsense. As laymen, do you agree it is best to mitigate the threat, rather than taking the chance of you being wrong and passing a huge, much more difficult to solve problem in 50-100 years to our grandchildren?

  • Bernie777


  • Private Citizen

    University of Missouri (MU) researchers have developed a prototype of an efficient nuclear-energy-powered* battery that does not require recharging and could be a reliable energy source in automobiles and space vehicles.

    “Betavoltaics [a battery technology that generates electrical power from beta-particle radiation] has been studied as an energy source since the 1950s,” said Jae W. Kwon, an associate professor of electrical and computer engineering and nuclear engineering in the College of Engineering at MU.

    However, the existing solid-state designs are limited by the radiation damage to semiconductors and the subsequent performance degradation, he said.

    Kwon’s solution is a water-based battery.

    MORE: http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-long-lasting-water-based-nuclear-energy-powered-battery

  • Fortyniner

    Thanks for a very well reasoned critique. It seems pretty clear that this technology is not yet ready for a mass market.

    • Omega Z

      I’ve seen statements to the effect that “Price competitive tends to mean it only costs twice what you’re paying now.”

      Their meaning of price competitive does not fit my meaning.

      • Bernie777

        bachcole: To answer your question: Your comparison of climate change scientists and scientists
        that do not accept or do not know about LENR is what I call Fox News logic. There is no comparison, like comparing apples and pickles. Lets take 1000 scientists, 5% have done the LENR experiments and are getting excess energy. 95% of the 1000 scientists have not done the
        experiment and are waiting on peer reviewed confirmation. Climate change: 95% of the 1000 scientists have done extensive research for two decades that says man made climate change is real, and has been reported in 100’s of peer reviewed articles.

        Here is a hilarious clip:
        You can go to 2:90 of the clip after ad.


        • Omega Z

          Interesting Scenario.
          Do you realize that if you flip flop the scenario, It works just as good & just as accurately.

          • Bernie777

            No it does not.

          • Bernie777
          • bachcole

            You are just repeating stuff that everyone in the modern world has already read.

            (1) The disagreement is not about climate change. The climate changes constantly.

            (2) I disbelieve the 97% figure.

            (3) Even if I believed the 97% figure, believing authority figures is religion, not science.

            (4) The science that I have seen convinces me that human CO2 emissions has a very small impact on the environment. Here is an excellent rendition of why I disbelieve AGW: http://burtrutan.com/downloads/EngrCritiqueCAGW-v4o3.pdf I first so most of his information elsewhere, but he did an excellent job putting it all together.

            (5) Pollution sucks. I look forward with extremely keen anticipation to the E-Cat greatly reducing all forms of pollution. The only reason that you and I and anyone else at e-catworld.com continue this pointless debate about AGW is for ego reasons.

            (6) You did not address my point that disbelieving LENR is better supported by mainstream science than is believing AGW. 99.9% of all physicists disbelieve in LENR, while a measly supposedly 97% of all “climate” scientists support AGW.

          • Bernie777

            I have addressed your point comparing LENR and man made climate change. Let me put it another way: On a scale of one to ten, of the entire “scientist” community, those who are aware of LENR is a ONE, mainly because most “scientists” get their information via peer reviewed articles, and there have been zero on LENR. Those “scientists” who are aware of man made climate change is a TEN, mainly because there have been numerous peer reviewed articles about man made climate change. Therefore, you are comparing apples and oranges. There is just no basis for comparing the two unrelated subjects. I am not sure why you want to compare them.

          • there are many peer reviewed article on LENR, some but few recent. (takahashi on iwamura process…).
            the only but pathologically real problem is that in both case only high impact journal are counted and they have an editorial policy about what is the truth to propagate.
            They behave like some french press, french national TV, BBC, who are conscious that they are opinion leader and think that they have to prevent bad information like cold fusion to spread in the public.

            the common point on AGW and LENR is :
            – importance of leading high impact scientific journal in organizing a peer review blocking, which is documented in both cases.
            – importance of leading media like BBC, national TV, NyT, Libération in passively or actively blocking dissenting voice judged as anti-science and unethical.
            – importance on Internet as free speech media
            – presence of internet watchdog defending consensus
            – blocking of free speech in scientific forum in France.
            – both dissenters are opposing the dominant Malthusian/green memeplex, and the big science, big state, big academic memeplex (it seem both memeplex have merged).
            – both dissenting position propose a better world for emerging countries and populations, than the “need to work hard” consensus.
            – there is huge vested interest for AGW (renewables, nuke) and no-LENR (hot fusion physics)
            – AGW and LENR are based on streetlight modelisation… modeling what we know, ignoring what we cannot modelize.
            – in both case the models are clearly challenged by evidence… the pause on AGW, by tritium/heant/he4/transmutations for LENR.

            the difference is that
            – AGW is a positive consensus (it exist), LENr is a negative consensus (it does not exist)
            – dissenters push mostly “absence of evidence” for AGW, and “solid evidence” for LENR
            – AGW is very hard to refute./prove as it is 100years window for low quality highly corrected evidences. LENR is just clearly proven by mass of lab evidence and can be with industrial tea kettle. Most AGW claimes are nearly impossible to prove in an undeniable way as, temperature ate 60-100% of warming corrected, catastrophes are impossible to detect before a century.
            -AGW is politically polarised, and there is massive political investment in US on both side, even if there is huge asymmetry elsewhere, while LENR is only fought by academic and skeptic societies. AGW dissenters are supported by anti-statist politicians, and LENr is defended by “fan club” and individual labs or scientists.
            – Oil companies are cooked by AGW consensus, and cooked by LENR dissensus.

          • Bernie777

            After all of that, the fact still remains that “scientists” get their information from peer reviewed “high impact journals”.

          • that is the problem.
            not better than couch potatoes who get their news from TV or Excec from NyT/WSJ.

            variety of sources, or direct source is a requirement to have real information, but it is too expensive.

            people who have data from mainstream sources only should not debate. they can trust their source better than fringe sources, but should not use their numbers to get prevalence above those who have real direct sources.

        • bachcole

          The scientific case and consensus for NO cold fusion is MUCH better than the scientific case and consensus for AGW. Trying to castigate me by implying that I look at Fox News or that my thinking is like Fox News does not count; it just makes you look incapable of presently a good and reasoned argument.

          • Bernie777

            Is that the best retort you can come up with?

  • Omega Z

    “there were many small, communistic groups in the USA in the late 1960’s”
    Today, Most of them are called Wall Streeters.

  • Omega Z

    It will take several decades to replace our current power plants in the U.S.
    Whether using Gas burners or E-cat reactors, A power plant is a power plant. Labor intensive, expensive & time consuming to build.

  • Omega Z

    Take Note.
    Many have commented on JONP that E-cats will replace most existing energy production.
    To Which- Rossi has repeatedly stated that all energies will be integrated which leaves many scratching their head. Say What?

    Take Note.
    I found a post by Rossi that Said- that all energies will be integrated for a long time. The meaning was clear.
    All energies will be integrated for a long time, Because, It will take a long time to transition to LENR. Thus we will use all of them until the old is gradually phased out.

  • GreenWin

    “A home own does have options to install higher amp and special charging
    stations at home, but that’s not a practical choice for most people.”

    Albert, 90% of North American homes are wired for 220VAC 40-60A – to power electric stoves and clothes dryers. EU standard is 230VAC 32-50A. A home owner can run an additional 220V circuit to a garage for about $250.00 electrician fee.

    You are correct re electric rates in Cali (New York, CT) EIA retail average is 18-20 cents/kWh. Which makes the advent of $.01/kWh residential or district electric (LENR) extremely attractive. Many apartment buildings with underground parking are now installing 220V charging circuits – and commercial charge stations e.g. in shopping malls are arriving daily.

    Still, Tesla’s EV is expensive. The Nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt (hybrid) retail after tax breaks around $25k. EV automakers are in a good position to take advantage of LENR lower electric rates even at half present cost. The “Green” carbon concept is utterly corrupted by climate claims to save polar bears and ice caps. Yet another confirmation of outdated simulation bias.

  • jousterusa

    Demand for home E-Cat units will be through the roof if they can save a homeowner or renter substantially on energy costs and are available at about the cost of a hot water boiler.

  • Bernie777

    If the return on investment is good enough the money will be there

  • Andreas Moraitis

    According to an article in German news magazine „Stern“, the Liechtenstein-based company NanoFlowcell has obtained a license for use on public roads for their electric sports cars:


    They are using salt water batteries, a technology of which I had never heard before.

  • Len Fusioneer

    So, What If:

    – one of the many new battery technologies has already proven to be appropriate to those in the know, like Elon? (my favourite for the last few years is the sugar battery by a Utah(!!!) Professor)

    – he wanted to hide the development of a novel new battery until it was ready for installation in a proven application?

    – he, who has blown the word away with his car tech, and stated that the charging of the cars will be free, expects to ramp up production/sales beyond what he can do with his charging stations?

    – Mats Lewan and/or AR didn’t want to spill the beans, so made only passing mention of AR and EM contact?

    – EM knows much more about CF than he mentions in his interviews? (I wonder how much he cringed when his wife mentioned his interest in CF)

    – this clearly talented, resourceful out-of-the-box thinkng entrepreneur needed to produce batteries but the world couldn’t supply them anywhere near as quickly as he wanted?

    – he wanted to sell his cars with the capability of charging themselves?

    Wouldn’t it make some sense to build a large manufacturing facility, say, out in the desert somewhere, to produce power systems for sale?
    Both to Tesla and other consumers of such integrated packages?

    Ya, and say it’s for Li-on batteries because that’s the current technology and what everyone expects.

    Oh, and cover the roof with solar panels because that’s also expected, and he can probably find an affordable source…

  • georgehants

    Roger if your reply had not been so silly I would have been happy to have spent time discussing with you.

  • Fortyniner

    I take your point about Rossi’s encounter, but this may only reflect a certain degree of unawareness on the part of vested interests at the time. The nuclear battery and any similar devices are covered by legislation relating to fissile materials, and are therefore already entirely in the corporate province – as CF is likely to be in due course.

  • Fortyniner

    I have to agree. There is still no sign that the gap between hype and reality has closed significantly, and Mills may well burn his way though the next tranche of investment without significant practical results, just as he’s done before.

  • Bernie777

    Right, too beautiful is usually a big problem. (:

  • Christopher Calder

    My prediction is that Tesla motors will be out of business within 5 years. He is selling products that no one really needs, and at a very high price. When batteries/capacitors become really usable and affordable for electric cars, the big automakers will sell the most electric cars and Tesla will be a fad boutique company that came and went.

    • bachcole

      Probably. Tesla/Musk just doesn’t have the muscle that GM, Ford, Toyota, etc. has.

      • Broncobet

        Tomorrow he could own GM.

    • Bernie777

      They said that five years ago, his motor company now has a market cap of 33 Billion Dollars, and they are standing in line for delivery.

    • Omega Z

      Probably not bankrupt…
      A Big Player- Not likely, but still a player.
      Likely a small company selling maybe 200K plus cars a year in addition to selling drive train parts to his competitors. Yes, they already do that. In addition, they’ll by his batteries.

      Even the Big players sell certain models in the low numbers.

    • Heath

      Perhaps you should look at their business plan or watch a fw of his more recent interviews. They are looking to release a ~$30,000 car in the next few years to grab more market share. Look at what Musk and SpaceX did for rocket technology in just a few years and image what Tesla will do with battery innovation with the Gigafactory. I believe they have a bright future.

  • Bernie777

    Nonsense, they are not denied funding or get funding based on their opinion about climate change, you remind me of the Chairman of the Republican led House SCIENCE Committee, “we won’t have any sea level change because ice melting in water does not increase its volume.”

    • Broncobet

      Well he’s party right that ice in the water melting doesn’t raise the water much but you are right Bernie, because melted sea ice means dark water that absorbs more heat, and cubic miles of land ice on places like Greenland melt each year and change is accelerating .

  • Omega Z

    Your right,
    Musk actually has a good track record. Especially when personally involved in his own projects. However, I think he hedges his bets. As in, His personal deadline for getting something done may be sooner then official deadlines.
    I learned long ago, It’s better to have a client say he had it done 2 days early rather then 2 days latter then promised.

    My point was certain people tend to have things in common, Like Rossi saying, “The stone age didn’t end because they ran out of stone.” Elon has his sayings of a similar manor. They are also of a Driven nature. We need more people like this.

  • Broncobet

    Check out the nuclear battery that goes thirty years without a charge.

  • Bernie777

    bachcole, you said, “there is a higher percentage of them (scientists) that cold fusion is bunk than there are that AGW is true.” That is just a crazy statement, 95% of “scientists” have not debunked LENR, because they have not done experiments on LENR and have not read any peer reviewed articles on LENR, because there are none, to gain knowledge to have a negitive opinion. Every “scientist” I have talked to has reacted like “I am open to it, show me the proof”.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Roger, you are comparing apples and oranges. The preconditions of research in climatology and condensed matter physics are totally different. Physicists can test their hypotheses by experiments, not only by computer simulations, climatologists cannot. They are operating necessarily on a much more uncertain ground.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    But the degree of consensus depends on the epistemological preconditions. The better the methods for testing existing hypotheses, the more hypotheses can be ruled out. If you cannot rule out them reliably, they will continue to coexist. Thus, there will be fewer consensuses between the researchers.

    • bachcole

      I see. But you are assuming that the koolaid drinkers know this. It also assumes that the 97% figure is true, but I have seen discussions where that number is torn apart.