One Week after the E-Cat Report, the Story Awaits Final Resolution

It’s been over a week now since the publication of the Lugano E-Cat report, and we’ve had lots of discussion and analysis here and elsewhere about the results that have been reported.

If people were expecting the world in general to finally open its eyes and accept that LENR/Cold Fusion is a new and superior energy source, I expect they have been disappointed. We have seen that there has been at best a muted reception to the report by the world’s media, and most critics of the E-Cat are still in the same camp, even after this new report, raising various objections.

I think there has been some new interest in LENR generated by the report, and it seems that many people, according to the poll running here on ECW, have an increased level of confidence in the validity of the E-Cat. Traffic stats here at E-Cat World show that there are at least twice as many users visiting the site as before the release of the report — but that traffic is variable, and could drop off over time. But I think the audience of people paying attention to this story is still relatively small.

What will it take for a general acceptance of LENR’s reality? I think Andrea Rossi is right. He has always said that only a product working in the market will change the views of critics, and cause widespread attention. Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, Rossi repeated his position:

The 1 MW plant in the factory of the Customer should be the first stone of the commercial breakthrough, and a commercial breakthrough resolves all the discussions: in the late seventies the “experts” used to say that the idea to produce computers for “housewifes” was ridiculous and technologically impossible. Whatever they are saying now is totally insignificant, as well as what they said in the past.
The Sword will annichilate them.

It sounds like we will have another wait ahead of us when it comes to seeing this plant. Rossi is talking about at least a year, so E-Cat watchers will be back in a familiar holding pattern of waiting.

One thing that I think could get some more attention would be if someone were to carry out a successful replication of something similar to the E-Cat. I know there are some efforts underway in this area — Elforsk says they will begin research into LENR, and the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project are discussing a replication effort — and perhaps some that we are not aware of. There are more clues to work with following the release of this report, but still no straightforward instruction. But smart persistent people with curious minds (and time and money), could make a breakthrough here.

So the story continues without a full conclusion. My own response to the test is that it is another piece of evidence in favor of the E-Cat, but I cannot hold it forward as ‘proof’ that the technology works, even if I am personally convinced that it does. In some ways I am glad that there will not be yet another public third party E-Cat report (according to what Rossi has said). The wait is always tedious, and there is always plenty to debate over. And once the test is done, it’s done. The way these tests are set up, there’s no way for the testers to go back to the lab and re-check something, since they are reliant upon Rossi/Industrial Heat for the reactors.

I hope the next E-Cat that will be revealed will be the one operating in the factory of Rossi’s customer.


  • Daniel Maris

    Well, yes, Rossi is right that only marketisation will resolve this issue. From a personal view I am pleased we are leaving behind the era of testing and moving into a new era.

    That said, the fact Rossi has given himself a year before there is any chance of seeing the 1MW in operation, will raise suspicions. This is why I say it would be good to hear more than a snippet from IH e.g. some assurances from Darden that he has seen the 1MW in operation and that the customer is to some extent satisfied.

    In terms of the test, as expected, it’s come under some very hard pounding. But it’s still there. Why Arvix or some medium status science journal won’t give it house room seems to me an indication that there is an attempt at suppression. Please don’t mention replication – the idea that you can realistically attempt a replication from most scientific papers is pure fantasy. There has probably been a special attempt to keep it out of publication, because of the connection with the patent application.

    And Rossi remains unprosecuted and out of jail…despite I am sure some formal complaints to bodies with oversight.

    • Sanjeev

      If its an attempt at suppression, its a very weak attempt.
      Arxiv.org is no authority, in fact it hosts a lot of junk. At most it looks like a cowardly attempt to stay away from any controversy. Some old man there decided that its best to protect his job rather than host a potentially false report.
      It will be nearly impossible to suppress Ecat or lenr now.

  • Sean

    Lockheed Martin Fusion appearing as big news in the U.K. Sound like they want to beat the rest and supply the utilities. Only Ecat can be the solution for true energy freedom for the individual. I am prepared to wait for a year Re. 1MW. But hey, lets get some small units made up. Can anyone else duplicate or experiment with this technology?. There are a lot of smart people on this board.

  • jousterusa

    “The Sword will annichilate (sic) them” is a reference to the very obscure works of a 16th Century writer named Thomas Lodge (1523 – ?), incorporated by reference by Dante Aligheri, a great Italian poet. It suggests that Rossi has ab education of greater depth than most have suspected.
    And operhaps the same flair for the dramatic! There are also abundant Biblical parallels, to which I suspect both Lodge and Dante are indebted..

    See:
    “http://books.google.com/books?id=qFEeAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=The+Sword+will+annichilate+them.&source=bl&ots=BNQOS2LnrF&sig=1ZVmsZpPQd0tyXlWoOlAairkZGM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tkJAVOqiBc_GggTFpIK4BQ&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=The%20Sword%20will%20annichilate%20them.&f=false”

    • psi2u2

      I have always detected in Rossi’s statements a significance knowledge of literature and philosophy, so this is no surprise.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi in his statement “The Sword will annihilate them” came about in responding to a comment from “orsobubu” who referred to the Alumina Hot cat appears similar to the Jedi Lightsaber’s handle.

  • psi2u2

    “What he told to the local press was a bunch of nothing!”

    Do you think its possible that he wanted it that way?

    • Omega Z

      I agree.
      Even if the MSM were to take interest, they would be asking questions that would not be answered.

      How does the E-cat it Work? We can not discuss what happens of the internal workings of E-cat.

      When do you expect to begin full production? We can not give that information until we have consolidated the data from the 1 year of operation of the 1Mw Pilot Plant.

      Where is this pilot plant? We can not disclose that information. Our customer does not want to be interrupted. He wants to work in piece.
      End of Interview.

      Rossi/IH are no where near ready for this discussion & the headaches that would come with it. It would be very disruptive to the development of the technology at this time. They would find themselves surrounded by Paparazzi.

      I’m not sure the MSM will ever give it that much attention myself. I think this may just evolve quietly from a public point of view. Corporations will have the big interest. But, Rossi/IH have to take the above scenario into serious consideration. It would be problematic.

  • LuFong

    The fastest way for Rossi to get acceptance of his technology would be for him to disclose the basic details of the E-Cat and his theory. In theory a patent would be sufficient. It would not take long thereafter for the world to accept the E-Cat as there would be a mad rush to replicate it. Of course, Rossi would then lose his competitive advantage in the race to commercialize his discovery so it’s perfectly understandable that he would not do this (despite him on record as saying otherwise).

    It’s interesting to see the response to the report. One group is focused purely on the tests themselves and looking at the results and they are going over everything very carefully. Still others are looking at the device itself and trying to understand from the sketchy details in the report how such a device might or might not work.

    I would like to see the E-Cat’s secrets exposed so I support all the replication efforts. But I have a very low expectation of success. If the E-Cat is a scam then of course no one will be able to replicate its performance. If not then Rossi efforts including what we can glean from the reports is the best indication that it is not so simple of a machine. As Rossi has stated, “As I said many times, the E-Cat is a machine much, much more complex
    than it appears to be. Somebody really thinks that I am a stupid guy,
    and that the E-Cat is fallen on my head casually from a fig tree, while I
    was eating a banana, with problems in managing how to peel it ( and
    jetting the peel on the flowers too);”

    So I think it will take a while for someone to replicate this thing although there are many clever and determined individuals out there so who knows what will happen.

    • Omega Z

      I would agree, that this is not so simple. If it were & given the state that Rossi has reached, He should have this wrapped up & start mass production within weeks. RIGHT?

      Unless of course, Rossi is stupid, but then if he were, he wouldn’t have achieved what he has to this point. The argument settles itself. It is far more complex then many believe.

      As to replicating the E-cat. Obtaining the effect may be possible if you aren’t aiming for full replication. And Tho I greatly appreciate MFMP’s efforts, Should they achieve the Rossi Effect, It would likely only get mileage from the blogs. To have a big impact, they would have to turn it over to an Entity with a name that Really catches the attention. Elforsk or some major research entity.

      I mean no disrespect to MFMP. It’s just the way the world works. In the World of things, MFMP is a small fish. People only pay attention when Jaws shows up off the beach.

      • LuFong

        The point is that if MFMP replicated the E-Cat they would also disclose what they did. Then others would replicate it and so on and in very short order the E-Cat would be proved.

        • bachcole

          I think that it is obvious and axiomatic that the E-Cat has already been proven to Darden and his friends and associates. That is what counts. And it is proven to many of us, which doesn’t really count. (:->)

          • LuFong

            My guess is Darden etc are trying to sell manufacturing licenses and/or technology licenses. In terms of money that’s what really counts and for that they will need much more proof. Sure Darden and others have *risked* some money on this but that does not imply the E-Cat has been *proven* to Darden in the sense you are implying. For me, this is just an interesting saga…

          • Gerrit

            Rossi doesn’t need financing, where did you get that idea?

            The invention is owned by Industrial Heat, they seem to have all the resources they need to get this to market.

            I have no reason not to believe that they actually have a 1MW plant consisting of several ecats in parallel up and running, or close to up and running at an undisclosed customer location.

            I see no reason for Industrial Heat to take any further steps now in starting a media campaign in this phase.

            When the first reactor has been running fine for a year and the customer wants several more. Then will be the right time to show the world this device is really working.

          • Enrique Ferreyra

            That report lacks a lot of needed attributes for a serius journel, been the most important that its not peer reviewed and there is no chance for some independent group to even try to replicate.

          • psi2u2

            Actually, if you follow the news, replication is already underway by Pons and Fleischmann memorial project group.

          • morse

            How is replication possible if Rossi is not giving his sauce (catalyst) to the public?
            Or am I missing something here?

          • Fortyniner

            Just the knowledge that cold fusion is real will probably be enough. It is no longer a question of ‘If’ but of ‘How’ – and there are plenty of clues.

          • bachcole

            There are lots and lots of somethings that you are missing, but none of them discount your point. Rossi does not want to reveal his catalyst because he wants/needs a patent for the purposes of making a profit. But the patent office won’t give him a patent because the New Fire is not real to them and he won’t reveal his catalyst so that other people can replicate it. It is sort of a catch-22, except that Rossi is just going for commercialization and to hell with the academics and the Patent Office.

  • Jimr

    My opinion, a single ecat can be made to operate ,however it takes constant readjustment ( triac voltage and possible freq.) per the latest test, under computer control. Since there is such a variance between devices it would require separate sensor inputs and multiple outputs to each 10kw ecat which would require an exotic multiplexer to control each of the 100 ecats individually, therefore the problems they are having when they try to ship a 1mw unit. This may end up to be not cost effective. We may have to wait until 100kw, 1mw , etc. individual units are developed. The bright side may be that a reliable 10kw unit could be ideal for the a singe home unit at some point in the future.

    • Omega Z

      I agree that controlling 100 reactors could be daunting as it’s a new technology, but it’s a matter of time & engineering. It is doable.

      This kind of control is done on a daily bases. The fact few people are aware shows it can be done silently in the background. Might I mention the Internet, The flying Wing, Drones, Space X reusable rockets, Etc..

      They all manage 10’s of thousands of inputs & deal with it quite easily. The computer board to control a 1Mw plant will eventually be quite small & inexpensive, The human interface on the other hand will be larger with it’s LCD screens & manual control switches & higher price tag.

      No doubt, these are the major issue’s Rossi is dealing with in the 1Mw pilot plant. Initially with multiple problems & gradually working it down to a near zero event over long periods of time.
      Note, This scenario will repeat when IH/Rossi start the 1st Plant to produce Electricity. However, experience with just providing process heat will be of high value.

      As to home units, They will be used for base load heating initially supplemented by conventional heating for peek demand periods. The E-cat has great potential for many uses, but, it has certain inherent issue’s to be overcome before it becomes truly practical for all things in the home. The Biggest issue is, required 24/7 operation, because it takes hours to start up. It has a similar shut down period, but that’s not of much concern.

      The test report shows it is well suited to ramp up as comparable to conventional heating purposes, however, there is the question if the economics suffer. It’s most efficient at peek power. What happens if that peek is only needed for short spells & most of the time it operates at half power.

      Note: This will vary by your geographic location, but in Illinois, you will need 1- 10Kw e-cat for every 500 sq. ft. of floor space for winter heating. Many variables here depending on temp & whether this is peek or base load. Base load would be about 1 per 1K sq. ft.

      PS, 100Kw or bigger E-cats are many years of R&D away.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    The “parallels” to the computer industry in the 1970’s is
    rather remarkable. While some companies were producing a home brew computers
    like Heath Kit, the REAL race was to get a useable and working computer in the
    hands of the public. Thus out of near nothing billion dollar companies like
    Apple were born in a garage.

    LENR is exactly he same thing. You have lots of small
    groups tinkering and playing with LENR. Make NO MISTAKE, this is an opportunity
    of a life time. You cook up a working device that is “consumer” friendly as
    opposed to lab coat friendly and you will create the next BILLION dollar
    company.

    It is RARE that such opportunities come along in our
    lifetimes. The race for LENR is not if it works, but WHO can get a working
    device into the hands of the public or industry.

    Worrying about some replication of LENR is LONG PAST. The
    REAL issue and magic frontier is producing a WORKING product for the consumer
    or industry.

    It looks like Rossi and IH will be the first – as a result
    they will create the next Apple. On the other hand, just like the Auto industry,
    or computer industry, history is littered with failed startups. And while some like
    Atari or Commodore are well known history antidotes (and so is Packard for autos),
    they were eventually “muscled” out by other players like IBM and Apple.

    So really, at the end of the day talk about replication,
    or sharing some trade secrets to spread LENR is really moot and PAST history.

    On the heals of Rossi is others like Brillouin and more
    that will SURLY follow.

    We are witness to the birth of a new industry. And like the
    exploding computer industry or the rail road bonanza, these “revolutions” were
    NOT based on sharing the theory of the steam engine, or the fact of low cost
    off the self WHOLE COMPUTERS existed on a SINGLE chip.
    Apple, PET, Commodore did not did not build or create the 6502 processor, but simply realized that those tiny computer on a chip were ONLY worth something when placed in a
    working package that anyone could flick on the power switch.

    We are now in the state of WHO gets to market first and the replication and theory is a purely a waste of time except for the academic community.

    The SHIP of LENR is about to sail out of the harbor – it just
    a question of who gets their boat out first!

    So really, I see little worry here – the advent of a LENR
    box with an “on button” will fix any issue as to how to spread this amazing new
    energy source.

    Regards,
    Albert Kallal

    • TomR

      Thanks for the post Albert. If MFMP can replicate and offer a kit to the public it will break this wide open. Even if the kit puts out only 100 degree C temps I know a lot of people that would buy one or two.

    • psi2u2

      Sir,

      I have just been reading some of your past posts. Welcome to e-cat world! Your articulately framed optimism and solid knowledge, especially of the history of innovation to draw comparisons, are clearly appreciated.

  • Omega Z

    I believe that if ELFORSK or MFMP were to replicate the E-cat results, you will see the same fuss about the results as with the ITP reports. Cheers from the supporters gallery & sneers & jeers from the clowns & snakes gallery.

    Only after several working plants have been installed will the MSM pay attention And it will likely be presented something like this.

    The Main News will be an update on the continued advances of ISIS & the spread of Ebola and the news will end with a side note.

    While everyone was sleeping, a new energy source has been quietly replacing our current system. Instead of fossil fuels, it burns nickel. This should result in a decline in your home energy bills over time. End of News Report. Nothing will ever come of the suppression of this technology & those behind it. Very little back story.

    People will nonchalantly go about their daily lives. There is nothing NOVEL about Energy. If it becomes cheaper great. Other wise the General population aren’t concerned about the mechanics or the technology that provides it.

    The only people that will pay attention to this are those who are already involved. The numbers may vary up/down to a certain degree, but this is it. If your expecting a ground swell of support, you’ll probably be disappointed.

    Ultimately, The support will come Not from the masses, but from the Corporate Board Rooms. I strongly suspect that there are a great many of them watching with great interest at this very moment.

    If, A year from now, Rossi comes out and says, In regards to the 1Mw plant in the customers concern. All is consolidated & the results are fantastic, the Flood Gates will open in the Corporate world.

    I would suspect Tom Darden will need to appoint someone to take care of his duties at Cherokee, He will be much to busy with business concerns of Industrial Heat. If you wish to consult with him, Make your appointments early. You will be many months on the waiting list. Bzz Bzz Bzz. busy busy busy.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Sh, I was taunting him.

    • robyn wyrick

      Admin,

      I would like to ask for a post (possibly a guest post by someone). I am not a nuclear scientist, and cannot read the new report with a trained eye.

      So I would love a primmer. I see the large points, >3COP, 32 days, etc. However, I would *really* love a layman’s synopsis –

      And then, I would love a list of the major, (reasonable) critiques of the report. I understand that the “ash” may have been handled by Rossi, and that raises concerns about the NI62 result. But I have not read any actual criticism of the testing environment, the measurement, or the analysis of the outcome. That would suggest to me that the >3COP is uncontested, and so is generally considered valid (if silently so) by the critics.

      But again, not being able to evaluate the scientific validity of the critiques, I can’t tell if someone is talking from an informed position or just throwing dirt. I read that someone claimed that “Rossi bought NI62 from him, ergo, Rossi is a fraud.” That is hearsay, and not evidence – and more importantly, even if true is out of context, and may mean nothing.

      So, the short of this is that I don’t know how to read either the report or the critics — and I am looking for a summary.

      Any thoughts? Many thanks, Robyn

      • pelgrim108

        It would be helpfull if there was a place where the main critics and there possible refutations where collected together with their layman translations. Off course the testers will also answer some questions, those can be added to this place. I think a forum-post would be most suited where the first post will summarise and order all new pieces and bits contributed by subsequent posters to that forum post.

  • Ophelia Rump

    You are correct, absolutely!

  • Warthog

    Perhaps you missed the part where they submitted it to arkiv (sp), which then stonewalled it. This is just another in a continuing series of “denials of publication” by the entrenched academics. The same thing has happened to virtually all work in LENR.

  • Sanjeev

    Probably this link will demonstrate that a published paper means nothing really. Its only a means to add “credibility” and does not automatically make anything “True”.

    Studies show only 10% of published science articles are reproducible.

    http://www.jove.com/blog/2012/05/03/studies-show-only-10-of-published-science-articles-are-reproducible-what-is-happening

    Then there are papers written by bots that were published by “reputed” journals. And there is a prophecy by a Nobel laureate that it will take airborne pigs to get a cold fusion paper published. But I won’t go there , its all very messy.

    • bachcole

      The Für Elise version of righteous indignition and clarity of perspective.

    • Daniel Maris

      Thanks for that – intuitively I had already made that point… The E Cat is being held to much higher standards than most science papers for a reason – an ideological reason.

  • bachcole

    Come on, Mike. Don’t hold back. Tell us what you and a lot of us feel.

  • pedro

    Over on Vortex a guy named Ian Walker published a story that is absolutely priceless. It refers to the “Galileo test”, the refusal by his opponents to look through the telescope to see the moons of Jupiter by themselves because they “knew” there were no moons.
    See http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg98900.html

  • Rene

    I do not believe the goal of this last round of testing was meant solely for a peer reviewed article. Had that happened it would have been a bonus, but the purpose of all this testing was probably part of the due diligence process any investors would insist must take place before they release further funding. This, I believe is far most important because with a successful conservative run of tests, it turns on the capitalization taps to go full out on manufacturing. No one in mainstream is going to believe this phenomena is real until the cat’s out of the bag and power is flowing.
    I personally want to see rapid deployment to establish a sufficient database that can then make it possible to achieve domestic power production.

    • Fortyniner

      The manner of the publication and IH’s relative silence (and Darden’s apparent downplaying of their interest) strongly indicate that you are correct – the test was required by a sponsor, but IH would now like the whole thing to fade away quietly for the time being.

      Even when the pilot plant is unveiled, the pathoskeps will continue to bang on about hidden wires, power measurement failure and so on. I would guess that only when units are offered and purchased in the open market, will the world finally wake up to what is happening. in mercatu…

      • Donk970

        I agree completely with one difference. I think IH will build these things in China and it may well be that the report was for the benefit of the Chinese government to convince them to put the resources into a crash program to develop an E-Cat manufacturing base.

  • Freethinker

    Ok,

    Note that the reactor is powered by a control system. There are a k-probe feedback to the control box, measuring the temperature of the charge.

    Inconel X750 has melting point 1393 – 1427C, Ni has 1455C. In no way will the control system allow the global core temp to be higher than 1455C, taking intot account some safety, and temp distribution and the fact that the Inconel cable may be damaged, that is likely also accounted for.

    LENR is a highly localized phenomenon. There will be sintering and melts on the small scale, because there is where the NAEs are. There will be local intense heat that will change the characteristics of the powder.

    I believe there are ways to explain that the radiative temperature of the reactor surface being hotter than the core. If the core has a mean to sporadically burst energy that will be absorbed by the reactor tube inner wall, it may pump the energy deposited in the reactor shell. If the outer surface convection is not able to readily conduct away that energy, and it is equally inefficient inward it will cause a higher radiative emission to compensate, and an thermal equilibrium will be found. As it is this radiative cooling, in a way, that we measure with the thermal camera, the thermal temperature could be higher than the average temperature of the innards of the reactor. If anybody has a different take on this, I’d appreciate knowing.

    The IR cameras used in the test operates in 7.5-13 microns. In this interval the alumina is opaque. You will not see through it. The alumina will behave like a black body. To calibrate the camera the emssivity is set, but this is done for the dummy at lower temperatures. This is OK, because the emissivity in the range of 7.5-13 microns does not vary (or very little) with the temperature, see Morrel 1987. A small systematic error may be attributed to the higher temperatures, making them be slightly overestimated. Morell 1987 : Morrel, R. (1987) Handbook of properties of technical and engineering ceramics.

    The transparency (transmission) window for the alumina is 0.150 – 7 microns. Looking at the Planck curves, the black body radiation, for the interval 0.15 to 7 microns give at hand that red is 2-3 orders of magnitude stronger than blue. Add to that the fact that the alumina is not crystal clear, and there will be all kind of refractive scattering going on, then you should expect to see an orange/amber diffuse light in the visual. This is what is seen in the visual images in fig 12 page 25 in the report. In this case, we of course are under the assumption that the thing radiating on the inner side of the reactor itself behave like a black body, but likely it is close enough.

    So. basically, no real problems here.

  • Oceans2014

    The Chinese do not have time for the US Patent office, their cities are polluted at unacceptable levels, they will buy several billion dollars worth of commercial eCats – then what – Cold Fusion is here now humanity waits.

    • Donk970

      They will buy the rights to build E-Cats in China and then go on a crash program to replace all of their coal plants in the next decade. If Darden is smart he will require that all rights and information derived from putting these things into production remain the property of IH so that IH can put these things into production elsewhere. Of course the Chinese will ramp up capacity to deal with their own internal energy problems but they won’t stop there. They will also start to export E-Cats to the rest of the world and IH may well loose the ability to control their IP.

      • Omega Z

        I doubt China would export any for 40 or 50 years.
        They will take care of their own needs first.

        Flip side is they could reek havoc on the fossil energy markets by reducing their own demand..

        • bachcole

          They will do whatever provides a profit for any individual business person. I doubt that the government is going to change it’s hands-off policy. And even if the government steps in and slaps export restrictions of the E-Cat children, it wouldn’t be that difficult to smuggle a unit and design out of the country.

  • Warthog

    alumina can take many different forms with different transparencies. See “sapphire”. Artificial sapphire is about as transparent (in the visible wavelength region) as it gets. But other forms are opaque. The key point the skeptopaths are ignoring is that the reactor temperature was determined WITHOUT THE CHARGE using the same optical methods (i.e. as a “blank”). So the data already shows that the “E-cat with charge” is much hotter than the “E-Cat without charge”. Any errors because the cameras were “not calibrated at the higher temperature” are talking about minor errors, not enough to invalidate the results. Also recall that there was a “calibration spot” affixed to the support rods, which has to be COOLER than the reactor.

    • dbg

      Yes, and thanks, that was the point I was making about shifting goalposts. Despite the alumina analysis in the report, photos of the rod glowing orange in the visible spectrum (see Freethinker’s point below) and the description by the professors, Barry Kort and his cheerleaders were arguing that because ceramics can be transparent (as you describe), therefore the E-Cat must be transparent and invalidated measurements made in the infrared. I just couldn’t follow his logic.

      I thought it was confirmation bias too, because Barry selected a specific point of contention that ignored all the other evidence, like the dummy run and calibration spots and COP etc.

  • Donk970

    I would guess that IH is going through the motions of getting a US patent but probably isn’t counting on getting one. My guess is that IH will partner with the Chinese and build thousands of these things in China.

  • Robyn Wyrick

    I am growing more paranoid (suspicious) by the day. I cannot find a single major media outlet mentioning the new test – and yet find unending coverage of LM’s claim of a “Compact Fusion Device in 5 to 10 years”.

    One story is that a real-world, working Cold Fusion device has been repeatedly tested by credentialed scientists, in the context of numerous, similar reports of similar successes by other parties (P&F, Celani, Toyota… )

    The other story is that the Hot Fusion research industry has nothing working, nothing at all. But like for the past 50 years, they ++think++ they will have something working in the near future, and would like more government money.

    Oh, and the other angle on this story is that one of the parties has been criminally indicted, proven corrupt, lying, false, and inaccurate; and the other party is Andrea Rossi. (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/14/world/us-fines-lockheed-13-million-in-china-satellite-case.html)

    Sorry, that was a misstatement: Rossi is not actually part of this story – because he didn’t write the damn report. It’s really a choice between a company that violated the US Arms Export Control Act, and a group of independent scientists.

    To simply ignore this test, you have to believe that *all the measurements were wrong*, or that the *entire group of testers* (an everyone at IH, and Elforsk) were in on Rossi’s scam.

    It’s simply incredible – in the most literal sense of the word.

    • important people know that and prepare.

  • Fortyniner

    But why focus on these small quibbles? The report confirms that there is now a major new clean power source that will transform the world. Isn’t that something to celebrate rather than pick at?

  • Fortyniner

    Given the nature of the supposed buyer, and IH’s close-lipped approach, the story is unlikely to be either confirmed or denied. Who cares – this is ancient history, and if a prototype unit was purchased as stated (as seems possible – at least one 1MW unit disappeared at some point) it would have been for research purposes and would not affect ongoing commercial development.

    • Mark

      I care – LOL! I’m also trying to figure out why other people don’t care as much. There was so much intense speculation for a period of time, and, then, when no one could figure it out, everyone just seemed to move on. It didn’t matter to them when the bombshell was dropped, because they had already moved on. As far as whether or not this story is unlikely to be confirmed or debunked…well, even if you’re right, you’ll never know if you don’t try. Unlikely stuff happens, occasionally. Let’s just suppose, for a minute, that Kullander was right, and that the first customer really is The Naval Research Lab in The United States. Imagine if there was an effort, in the cold fusion community, to try to find someone who was influential enough and/or had connections to someone who was high enough up in the US government. Imagine if that person could be convinced to partially declassify and release a press release confirming, if not the location and what the excess heat was used for, at least that The Naval Research Lab did buy an E-Cat and that it is working according to the specifications. I think that this would be hugely significant. Even if unlikely that something like this would ever happen, it might be worth a shot. It’s looking like we might not have a whole lot better to do in the coming year, or so.

      By the way, I’m not really clear on how you know that the first plant would have been used for research purposes. I mean, it might have been used for that, but maybe not. Do you know something that we don’t?

  • Joniale

    It seems there is an error in the ECAT report.

    Could somebody confirm this?

    Please, see the comments of Mats in the following article

    http://matslew.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/interview-on-radio-show-free-energy-quest-tonight/#comment-3604

    They are discussing about an inverted clam that can cause the COP 3.
    Please i need to know if this is destroying the report.
    🙁

    • the symptom of inverting a clamp cannot be discrete. it is clear as some power get negative or pure reactive… the waveforme are illogical…

      they cannot be corrected.

      the only problem that I notices from McKubre, is that the calibration is done at 450C, and thus it is extrapolation ond model.

      anyway the 800->900W 1250-1400C excursion is the evidence of COP>1, even if all models and assumption are wrong.

      • Freethinker

        “the only problem that I notices from McKubre, is that the calibration is done at 450C, and thus it is extrapolation ond model.”

        McKubre also states that he is not familiar with the methodology of thermal cameras. ” I have little direct hands-on experience” he says.

        I have looked into it. Even though I am not a practitioner of thermal camera measurements in my daily life, I am not ignorant of this kind of instrumentation, the physics around it, and the properties of them.

        I wrote an extended comments below on my take on the temperature measurements etc, this is the snippet about the calibration:

        “The IR cameras used in the test operates in 7.5-13 microns. In this interval the alumina is opaque. You will not see through it. The alumina will behave like a black body. To calibrate the camera the emssivity is set, but this is done for the dummy at lower temperatures. This is OK,
        because the emissivity in the range of 7.5-13 microns does not vary (or very little) with the temperature, see Morrel 1987. A small systematic error may be attributed to the higher temperatures, making them be slightly overestimated. Morell 1987 : Morrel, R. (1987) Handbook of properties of technical and engineering ceramics.”

        If you find anything wrong in my reasoning, please let me know.

  • Donk970

    The customer is using a nuclear reactor to generate heat. Maybe they are worried that despite Industrial Heat getting a certification they may still get in trouble for using a nuclear reactor. I think everyone is on very shaky ground here and the customer may be very reluctant to reveal themselves for fear of some blowback from government regulatory agencies or from the local public. Think about the news headlines if the local micro brewery installed an E-Cat to generate steam to boil wort more cost effectively. I can just see it now. “Joe’s Brewery Caught Using Nuclear Reactor to Make Beer”. Can you imagine the public outcry?

  • Donk970

    It occurred to me as I was reading other comments that people are missing one important thing. The public, in general, has a very negative view of anything nuclear. Think about the hysteria that surrounds light water fission reactors. They are much safer and cleaner than coal but just try explaining that to Joe Sixpack. Think about the political shitstorm that would ensue in whatever community Industrial Heat’s customer has installed this heat plant if people find out. It will be impossible to explain to anybody that it’s a different kind of nuclear reactor and isn’t dangerous because everyone will have stopped listening at “nuclear”. This is the kind of thing that could stop the E-Cat in it’s tracks. Imagine a coal company getting hold of this information. They would spin it as “dangerous, untested nuclear reactor being used in urban community”. This is probably the best reason I can think of for IH to build these things in China.

    • Robyn Wyrick

      Sorry, but I can’t let this simply go without comment: Fission Reactors are a serious failure every day of their existence. The production of high-level radioactive waste is not a hypothetical disaster, it is a disaster already – we don’t have a way to clean it up, and and we’re making thousands of tons of it every year. That on top of millions of acres of now-unusable land in the US alone. That on top of contamination of drinking water and other water systems.

      And that doesn’t count for the Fukushima meltdown, which is not under control by any reasonable measure. It doesn’t count the risk of a terrorist attack (that the 911 planes could have flown into Indian Point Nuclear Plant, or Limerick with 8 million people in a 50 mile radius).

      You say, “Think about the hysteria that surrounds light water fission reactors”, but if the reaction of “Joe Sixpack” isn’t credible for you, how about the actuaries at America’s private insurance companies. Because they won’t touch Nuclear Fission plants without a gigantic federal bailout (Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act).

      PS: as someone who has watched this industry for 35 years, and doesn’t drink, I think your little, BS, “Joe Sixpack” derision is insulting and would appreciate it if you would have a little more respectful tone.

      • Fortyniner

        I agree with everything you have said about the ongoing disaster of nuclear fission. and think that Donk970 is seriously misguided when he repeats the nuclear industry’s shallow and disingenuous ‘safer and cleaner’ propaganda.

        However this doesn’t invalidate his argument that cold fusion could become entangled with fission in the minds of the less well educated because of the ‘n’ word. IMHO, the term ‘low energy nuclear reaction’ was a mistake from the outset for this reason, and is handing the opposition a convenient club to beat the technology with.

        It may be too late at this point but I would really like (but don’t expect) to see the term LENR dropped in favour of ‘cold fusion’ or a newly invented term as quickly as possible – certainly before the pilot plant or similar devices from other parties are rolled out in public.

        • bachcole

          I am confused. Why would the nuclear industry be saying “safer and cleaner” when they refuse to consider any new technology and their technology is the same ol’ same ol’ for the past 50 years? Is it because it is easier to lie than to consider radical and hopeful new technology.

          • Fortyniner

            Basically, yes. Not only are many hundreds of billions of dollars invested in fission reactors plus fuel supply infrastructure such as mines and processing plants, most of which would become both redundant and unwelcome overnight, but they would also be left with trillions of dollars in liabilities, including decommissioning their white elephants and having to find some way to tackle the huge legacy of high level waste and ground contamination.

            There is also the factor of the world’s nuclear arsenal, much of the cost of which has been hidden in and offset by the civil nuclear program. Without this ‘cover’ or the reactors they need to produce plutonium for their bombs, the militaries of all large powers would be left high and dry – something all politicians in the countries affected will fight tooth and nail to prevent (q.v., Cameron in the UK).

            Politicians will also be aware that should the nuclear industry collapse, the financial institutions that are the ultimate owners will quickly hive off their nuclear interests and make these subsidiaries bankrupt, passing the cost of dealing with decommissioning and waste on to their governments (i.e., the public- not exactly a vote winner).

  • Freethinker

    You may be right, but it is a bridge that must be crossed eventually, even if the MaryYugo’s of the world will be standing road side and generously sharing their “insightful” opinions.

    No doubt will this be new territory in which to be pedagogic and explaining this to the community.

    And somehow, would that not be just an extension on the divine comedy and joke on LENR, if when it reached fruition it will again be viewed with suspicious eyes, this time for being “nuclear”.

    That bold customer will have to stand up. And likely they will understand that they have to, if this is to progress. If they don’t understand, maybe IH can fix that with some monetary incentive.

  • Freethinker

    Those test will come, but likely on replicated reactors.

    Rossi and IH does not seem very perky on the subject of redoing this very soon, and likely there are preconditions (due to this being a product, there are IP considerations, and NDAs etc) other labs might object to.

    With an open project, a public and freelance project like MFMP or at some accredited and open minded universities, can more readily be repeated again with less or no constraints.

    Then, with papers published, MIT, CALTECH and the others might feel the pressure to look at it, and maybe this time they will be able to get the loading right ….

    No offense intended against Hagelstein and Schwartz, connected to MIT, but those guys are apparently quite lone on that big MIT campus…

  • Mr. Moho

    Well, that’s a twisted logic there.

  • Fortyniner

    You seem very determined to highlight this ‘error’ (two identical posts plus one similar over the space of 4 hours). Is there some reason for that?

    • Joniale

      Yes my mistake. And i just want this issue to be clarified.

  • Fortyniner

    Do mean this one?

    “Mats Lewan: Unless you accuse the whole group of fraud I don’t understand your point.If you didn’t switch probes on both instruments, someone would have noticed during the 32 days that they were showing completely different values. I don’t believe that one of the instruments was in overload all the time, and that everyone thought this was ok.”

  • clovis ray

    PT, and what would you think will happen, if the customer is reviled, to answer my own question, they would be harassed, to the point that Dr. Rossi work would be impacted,

  • psi2u2

    I think you are missing the point, which to a reasonable person thinking about how the real world of industry operates, seems incontestable. Talking about kids building reactors in their garage is utterly beside the point, as anyone who thinks carefully about it will notice.

  • Donk970

    So, given the choice of coal or a light water fission power plant to generate electricity the fission power plant is the best choice. Do a bit of research and find out how much radioactive waste a coal power plant releases into the environment per GWh of energy compared to what a lw fission power plant does. Do I like light water fission? NO, light water fission is an inherently dangerous sixty year old technology that was never intended for civilian use. Light water fission power plants are horribly inefficient in their use of fuel; 95% of the waste is unburned fuel. And that is my point, the public is badly misinformed about nuclear energy in general.

    To anyone who is informed, LENR type fusion is by far the best alternative if it can be made to work. But there are alternatives to dangerous light water fission that would also be a big step in the right direction. There are molten salt reactor designs that would actually consume spent fuel rods from lw reactors for fuel – ton of spent fuel rods in with a 100 pounds of waste with a half life of a few hundred years out sounds like a big plus to me. Another molten salt design would use thorium as the initial fuel with only small amounts of waste produced.

    My point being that not all nuclear is created equal and as long as the public at large doesn’t really know the difference between fission and fusion, the mere mention of nuclear is going to be a problem for acceptance of the E-Cat.