Rossi: Customer’s Only Demands: Make Money, Do not Pollute. (‘The Time of Tests is Over’)

At the end of the Lugano report, the authors of the testing team conclude with this statement:

“Moreover, the E-Cat results are too conspicuous not to be followed up in detail. In addition, if proven sustainable in further tests the E-Cat invention has a large potential to become an important energy source. Further investigations are required to guide the interpretational work, and one needs in particular as a first step detailed knowledge of all parameters affecting the E-Cat operation. Our work will continue in that direction.”

The tone of this statement is one of expectation that this team will continue their work, and determination to carry on until they get to the bottom of the E-Cat mystery. This expectation, however, does not seem to be matched by Andrea Rossi, at least. I posted the quote above on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, and asked Rossi whether the testing team would be able to continue their work on the E-Cat.

This was his response:

The Professors of the ITP are independent from us.
Now we of IH are focused on the industrial plant and the related R&D.
Our Team has to make sure that the performance of the 1 MW plant respects the contract IH made with his Customer. There is no room for anything else, at the moment. I think for us the time of tests is over, because from now on the Third Party becomes the Customer, whose validation criteria are substantially based on how much money they make with a plant, i.e. how much money they save making heat with the plant. They are not very much interested to technicalities, with one exception: the plant must not emit any kind of pollution. That’s all: make money, do not pollute. Numbers will be just numbers, not comments.

So we have two very different perspectives and motivations here — and Industrial Heat is in control of the E-Cat, so if they say no more E-Cat testing, it won’t happen. This would mean that “detailed knowledge of all parameters affecting the E-Cat operation” would not be forthcoming, and they (along with the rest of us) could be in ignorance for quite some time about what makes the E-Cat tick. Successful replication by another body might be the best hope for people who want to study the mechanisms that make the E-Cat (or similar) operat.

  • bfast

    The time for science geeks to fiddle about who is swindling who needs to be over. The scariest part of Eng. Rossi’s statement, “I think for us the time of tests is over” is the “I think” part. Is that the position of IH, or just of Eng. Rossi? Lets get on with making a working model that is on public display. Lets let the science geeks figure out how it works when they get around to it — probably some time after they drive to work in an LENR car.

    • GreenWin

      Actually the “science geeks” have blown their opportunity. We are going straight to market without a care for the antiquated approval of Academia.

  • LuFong

    Really, how much effort and expense would it be for IH to send these trusted professors a couple of E-Cats, a few grams of fuel, and some instructions on loading, starting, and stopping? Not much. The manufacturing department of IH could handle it all. The marketing and sales departments of IH can pay for it. And the communications department of IH can handle all the communications and publicity. Oh I forgot, the legal department of IH would have to draw up some agreements but that’s not unusual. No need to involve the R&D department of IH and its Chief Scientist at all.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Where did you get the idea that the professors would not be able to continue their work independently? I believe that IH has already been generous enough toward the scientific community. It would be counter to the best interest of their shareholders to fund scientific research. Either science is interested in funding through the usual channels or it is not.

      It does seem that IH’s secrets will remain guarded for at least a few more years.

      • GreenWin

        Interesting is it not how some insist upon private, self-funded ventures turn over their intellectual property to the public. Yet these same plaintiffs demure from demanding the same from government which millions of tax payers fund. Should Rossi reveal his secrets, will publicly funded “black projects” be revealed as well??

        • Ophelia Rump

          Only a cretin could rationalize a world of free lolly pops at the expense of destroying the ability for anyone to be successful producing them.

          A freeloader’s fevered dream it is.

          • mytakeis

            I recall the fate of the transistor radio. Made a lot of money, then slowly got cheaper and cheaper. May the E-Cat do likewise.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Elforsk’s research program on the E-Cat runs until 2015 inclusive, so I would expect them to continue it. The question is if IH will provide additional reactors for further tests. But even without that, Elforsk might be interested to look into LENR in general. It would not be difficult for them to find appropriate partners in the industry if necessary. But they should ensure that the current report is updated as soon as possible in order to refute the raised objections.

    • When working on getting a new product into production, you really don’t want to waste time with external distractions. Testers will always something more – a replacement E-Cat after trying a high temperature run, another fuel charge to see if that comes up to operating temperature quickly, etc.

      The manufacturing folks will be as busy as the R&D folks, maybe busier, and anything that garners communication and publicity is not going to be handled completely by PR folks (or you get silly things like the Lockheed reactor having a big battery bank – it was probably capacitors).

    • Gerrit

      Lufong, how much effort would it be for the science community to channel a tiny 1% of the annual expenses for hot fusion towards cold fusion research.

      Here is the deal, you go get this funding set up and when you are successful I will talk to IH.


    • Omega Z

      There are proprietary(secrets) about the reactors that IH doesn’t want known. Patents have been applied for but not yet obtained.
      I guarantee that all the components supplied & the ash not provided for analysis is all back at IH/Rossi labs under lock & key.

  • Ophelia Rump

    The only surprising part to me was the emphasis on the customer’s demands of no pollution.
    That is an decidedly absolute statement. I wonder who the customer is, that they are so hardcore green. Most manufacturers would be delighted to have below average pollution.

    I wonder who they could be?

    • GreenWin

      OR, we might speculate whether a human being who naturally expires CO2 might be considered a “polluting lifeform” by certain prejudiced others.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Oh, GreenWin, that is not nearly the worst of it, I assure you!
        We have far more toxic byproducts than that.

        • GreenWin

          LOL! You are stalwart, and admirable.

      • Frechette

        When I was in New Zealand a few years ago there was talk of a flatulence tax on livestock. It was eventually dropped by pressure from the powerful farm lobby.

    • Omega Z

      “Switching to a nearly free fuel may more than double their net profits.”

      Ophelia, There are some processes that Energy not only exceed profits, But in some, it exceeds labor costs & profits combined. If this happens to be in a very competitive line of business, It would be a huge edge over the competition.

      As to no pollutants, This could be a concern of Carbon- Cap&Trade taxes coming down the road.

      • Ophelia Rump

        With a great leap in profits, I do not believe a little carbon tax would be a significant issue.
        Carbon tax is certainly a consideration for any business but a general interest in zero pollution says something stronger.

    • Frechette

      The customer may even sell pollution credits to polluters to make additional profits. Hydro Quebec struck such a deal with California.

  • Rene

    I am not at all surprised by Rossi’s statement “I think for us the time of tests is over…” because as I suspected, the purpose of the test seems to have been for internal eyes: investors and the customer. The customer is happy, now they want an execution plan. I am not worried about the patent issue either because of copious documentation on Rossi’s part, anyone else trying to slide in a LENR patent is going to run into the prior art brambles.

    The downside is for the rest of us not having any closure soon on what makes it work. That’s life in the world of trade secrets. The upside is it pretty much stops the patho-skeptics since they are fueled by public disclosures.

    • GreenWin

      Rene, very good thoughts. Keep in mind that we use MRI and all manner of superconductor technology today and still have no firm understanding of how superconduction actually works. The lesson here is we need not know the intricacies of a technology, that betters our lives.

  • Sanjeev

    Probably he means that the dirty and painful job of proving it to all these people holding torches and forks outside his house, is over.
    If they want to develop products and improve them, then the tests and experiments will continue, but without any noise.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Yes as lead research scientist “The time of tests is over” sounds like something you say at the unemployment office.

      I think more precisely the time of trial is over for Rossi and his invention. It sounds like they have completed the installation and tailoring and are now fully operational in the customer site as well. Coming this long after the test, I suspect it is as much a reference to the state of the customer site. I wonder will they hold at one customer for a year, or will they move on to the next.

      If I were IH I would be working toward the most direct implementation of Electrical Production. If I could get over COP 6 I would build a few simple steam piston generation plants and produce power. They could sell it back to the grid, turn a profit and make it a public demonstration of their own.

      I would put one in some tourist location and give free shows to bus loads of tourists all day long.

      • GreenWin

        Hmmm, EPCOT Center springs to mind. Perhaps a call to Bob Iger. And if Bob cannot grasp the bonanza, maybe Elon Musk. Or Richie Branson. Universal Studios. Or… the Boston Museum of Science… 🙂

        • Ophelia Rump

          Boston Museum of Science. The children will see it for what it is, even if the adults cannot.

          • GreenWin

            Deserving of the title Sage, Ms Rump. It IS a hall of inspiration. 🙂

      • GordonDocherty

        Steam locomotive – then they can run it to demo sites under its own steam – quite literally 🙂

      • Leonard Weinstein

        E-cats at least 400C would be needed for any electric generation system. Steam power generation at kW level is far less efficient than high MW levels. COP 6 is not enough for small piston steam engine to electric production (net about 5%-10%). However, Stirling cycle could work at this small levels of power (net about 20%-30%).

        • Omega Z

          I believe Siemens has a steam turbine that can produce at 350’C @30% efficiency. However at COP-6, half of that is lost in feeding the system.

          There are other systems that work at lower temps, but you run into dwindling returns. Not just in efficiency but cost/benefit. Hardware is expensive. Stirling engines fall into this category. They would only be good for proof of concept.

          • Frechette

            Dr Mitchel Swartz at this year’s MIT LENR Symposium demonstrated a Sterling engine running from an LENR heat source.

          • Omega Z


            They are great for proof of concept.
            They are not cheap. They have a short life cycle And tho interesting & even handy under some situations, They are not practical in general.
            Why are most people following this LENR technology.
            1. Cheap energy. 2. It’s clean Tech. 3. Independence.

            #3 will be at great cost.
            #1 is not a given.
            It can produce cheap energy, but you need to include total costs of obtaining that energy.
            “IF” you can produce that energy with the E-cat for say 1 cent, When you add the costs of the sterling & generator, heat exchanger Etc, that cost grows. And if that Sterling only achieves 25% efficiency, Also not a given, your energy from the E-cat is now costing you 4 cents per Kilowatt Electric plus the cost of the hardware. This is part of the cost. You have to figure this in or lie to yourself about imaginary savings.

            Food for thought. In the U.S., the average household has the equivalent energy access of over 15- 10Kw E-cats at there finger tips at a moments notice either by electricity or heating.
            I have a switch. I can go from ZERO to full out in minutes.
            Your E-cat/sterling may provide 2Kw usable. Most homes have instant access to 24Kw with a switch.
            Most of the E-cat energy will be lost.(It operates 24/7) What Utilities produce is all used by shifting & adjusting to need/demand. There scale allows this. With your arrangement, You have extreme limits. Watch TV or use the computer. Not Kidding.

            Though the technology is fantastic, Deploying will need a rethink. Replacing 1Gw of grid power would likely require 10 times that for individual deployment. That’s a lot of waste & given a little time, that waste will evolve into ever more expensive nickel.

            I would be content with 2 cents a kilowatt grid power. Cheaper then the interest on the hardware for being off grid independent.

          • Frechette

            Not quite so.

            Sterling engines are indeed very practical. NASA has developed them as a free piston engine integrated with a linear alternator. They have also been developed for use in solar thermal arrays at Sandia National Labs NM.

            Sweden’s Gotland Class Subs use Sterling engines for propulsion. See link below:
            All new Japanese subs are being designed with Sterling engine propulsion systems.


            Perhaps these folks know something that we don’t.

          • Frechette

            NASA has developed a free piston Sterling engine with an integrated linear alternator.

            Sandia National labs NM is using a Sterling engine on a thermal solar dish to convert the suns energy into electricity.

            Sweden Gotland Class Subs use Sterling engines for main propulsion.


            All new Japanese subs will use similar power plants.

          • Leonard Weinstein

            The steam turbines that can reach 30% efficiency can only do so at 100’s of Megawatt to Gigiwatt levels. Smaller systems are far less efficient, and at a few kilowatt levels of power, are never more than about 10% efficient. Also the systems that give good efficiency (30%) at 350C use river water cooling to drop the low end of temperature in condensation, and also likely use a reheat cycle. At higher temperatures and with reheat, these can approach 40%. These high steam turbine efficiencies are not possible with e-cat power level systems, even to a few Megawatts. Only Stirling cycle holds hope for >15% at the few kilowatt power level.

          • William D Fleming

            What am I missing? If you want to burn a green log you might sit there with a gas torch to keep it burning and get a COP of two or something like that, not very useful. Pile up a stack of green logs and they’ll burn nicely, infinite COP. Even though each log has a COP 2, collectively they supply each other with heat to spare.

          • Omega Z

            There are several systems that could reach 25% efficiency with 10-20Kw E-cats. They just aren’t practical. At $20K/$30K a pop & a life-cycle measured in a few 1000 hours. Well I just don’t see people shelling out that kind of money every 6 to 12 months. And due to their cost, they aren’t even a good option as a backup generator.

            I agree with your point of view. Power plants are positioned based on certain cost based criteria. The presence of rail or large pipelines for fuel which dictates building large plants which require large amounts of water. Lakes, Rivers, Oceans.

            I do think E-cat/LENR could be built to 40% efficiencies in 20Mwh scale near point of use say at the cities edge. This size allows economical self containment with cooling towers. Little additional water needed except for topping of the coolers periodically. In larger municipalities, this waste heat could be utilized reducing the scale of cooling towers.

            All this could provide a large savings to the consumer. Considering people’s energy use habits/necessities, This would be cheaper then having privately installed systems, With 1 exception. An E-cat providing base heat in colder climates. Otherwise, people will not want the cost & inconvenience of an all in one system installed in their homes. It wont be cheap & will require attention. People don’t even like changing filters in the furnace/AC systems. They don’t realize that it doesn’t just save energy costs. It can greatly increase the life cycle of the system. Replacement of which can be very expensive.

          • Frechette

            Not so. Siemens has a combined cycle turbine with just over 60% efficiency. It is installed in a German Utility power plant and has been in operation for 2 years.

        • Ophelia Rump

          150 C will do quite nicely for a piston.

          • Leonard Weinstein

            You can make a steam piston engine run at 150C, but the thermal max (Carnot cycle) efficiency of the engine (assuming cooling to 50C) is only 0.23. Conversion of the output to electrical is typically far less than half this, so a net of <12% can be obtained. For small systems, the result is far lower than this, and 7% electrical might be typical. Thus the system could not even break even for COP 6.

  • Bernie777

    After two or three successful industrial installations, they will add the secret sauce to their patent and have twenty years to make profits in all countries that honor patent laws. China and other countries that do not honor patent laws will get another free ride.

    • Omega Z

      I think we are approaching a point where even China will start abiding by patent protection. China is starting to develop a string of patents that they want protected. It’s funny how having your own interests builds incentive to abide by the rules.

      However, full enforcement will take a while. They are working on an enforcement structure but note, They still can’t prevent unauthorized Coal power plant construction & illegal coal mines.

      • Bernie777

        I hope you are right, but like you said it will take a long time to enforce and you are right Coal is king in China the switch to LENR will be hard economically and politically.

  • georgehants

    Perhaps we could have a poll on page asking for the score that readers on page would rate academic and institutional science regarding there competence in the handling of Cold Fusion for 25 years and now.
    I think I know the score I would give.

    • blanco69

      Err, George? I think we all know what score you’d give. Good to see you back by the way.

      • georgehants

        blanco69, many thanks, There are a few scientists in areas of science that I have to applaud and complement.
        I would love for there to be many more and not have to point out such terrible unprofessional crimes being committed in the name of science.

  • Jonnyb

    Grangemouth refinery is undergoing a major refit to operate on shail gas. I remember on this site it mentioned that the E-Cat was being adapted to work on Gas. It would be ironic if LENR’s first commercial device was used in the Petro-chemical industry.

  • Omega Z

    I agree with Rossi. No more tests, Just build working products.
    Let Science catch up latter. Many things in every day life were developed & in use long before Science understood how it worked.

    Contrary to what many people think, Tests take much time & money to accommodate those who want to test something.

    Even a simple test can burn a lot of man hours that would be better spent developing it for market. Note that the reactor used for the test is nothing more then scrap other then what may be learned from additional ash analysis scraped from it.

    I would only hope that Rossi throws us an occasional bone to chew on.
    Possibly someone could donate an old Instamatic camera that he could occasionally take a snap shot with that contains no metadata that he could scan & upload.

    Seems more then a few people were very adept at exposing the metadata from digital media. Made Rossi very shy of providing pictures.

    I particularly liked the 1 that you could click & remove the black box & expose what wasn’t meant to be seen beneath it. Or the 1 that was cropped, but included all the data to uncrop/return to full image.

    • So Rossi is saying: “Read my lips – no new tests!”

      • Omega Z

        No new tests as far as “WE” are concerned.
        In house R&D tests are probably continuous.
        And Highly Probable for specific entities when required.
        I can think of any number of Corporate or Government agencies.

  • Pierre

    Duh. A business report for a business process for business objectives.

    Why am I not surprised?

  • Frechette

    The Romans invented concrete before anyone understood the chemistry it was based on. They constructed buildings some of which are still standing today. Rossi has it right. No more tests just successful products.

    • Jim

      A good analogy. Concrete actually has a complex chemistry. And what happened when Rome collapsed? The knowledge was lost during the Middle Ages, and was only “rediscovered” after modern methods of chemistry.

  • Buck

    I think an important question needs to be asked: “What will IH choose to do as a possible response to the USPTO hypothetical refusal to grant the Rossi patents when including the results of ITPR2?”

    I suggest one possibility is to aid Elforsk and the ITPR2 team with ITPR3. It would essentially have the same conditions protecting those elements of the IP that IH/Rossi chose to protect in ITPR2. However, the protocols would be tightened further based upon the lessons of ITPR1 & 2. Presumably, the design of the Hot-Cat won’t change yet again, enhancing the objective of duplication between ITPR2 & 3.

    I would like to think that IH/Rossi, Elforsk, and the ITPR team all gain.

    Regarding the patents, IH/Rossi would then have additional proof (customer site, duplication across ITPR1,2, and 3) as well as an even stronger relationship with the electric industry covering a significant portion of the EU.

    In the end, my hope is that the USPTO does not reject ITPR2 as a basis for approval.

    • Ophelia Rump

      How like a salmon you seem, swimming against the stream like that.

      • Buck

        I like salmon.

        • Ophelia Rump

          They are magnificent.

  • pierre

    for all we know, rossi and IH have already shown way more test results to the patent office than they have shown to the public

  • Ophelia Rump

    I have a difficult time imagining that without images of violence.

  • Ophelia Rump

    “As Rossi is incapable to create the device”
    . . . . . . . . ____________

    I have underlined the something which must be wrong.

  • bkrharold

    It was most frustrating to see the fawning response from the press to an announcement by Lockheed Martin of an idea for a small scale hot fusion reactor. They do not even have a prototype, but somehow have attracted hundreds of $millions in funding for a project which will not even have a prototype for 5 years. This was reported in every science web site.
    It was only slightly less annoying than a similar breathless release a couple of months ago, claiming that hot fusion had finally reached COP 1, with energy output equal to energy input. On further investigation, it was disclosed that this happy state of affairs only happened for a small fraction of a second. This “achievement” was accomplished at astronomical expense to the taxpayer.
    How much longer should we allow our politicians to waste these vast sums of money, while ignoring LENR and refusing to issue patents for it. Something is very wrong here.

    • US_Citizen71

      Actually it was worse than that. The cherry picked fact was the energy out exceeded the energy in of the X-Ray laser light energy reaching the target. The X-Ray lasers produced the light energy with a COP of less than .01.

    • georgehants

      bkrharold, Do you think there is anything wrong with science by allowing such distortion and corruption to be freely used in its name without comment or correction?

  • mytakeis

    Make money and don’t pollute are initial great goals. They inevitably lead, however, to personal exploitation, wherein a household will make energy and not pollute. Then this warring world will find peace, plenty, and repast.

    • winebuff67

      Why wouldnt the change in fuel to ash give physisists a raging hardon to figure out whats up and where it fits in the standard model?

  • Omega Z

    You are right. Things could suddenly change.
    As they did when Rossi made this post you present..
    It was made in the view that he had a business partner of which the money was to come from to pay the cost of that University R&D agreement. Of course when that partner dropped the ball, Things changed.

    It appears that many Universities are Officially more then willing to study LENR if it comes with Funding. Are you aware that when a researcher obtains funding for a project, that a percentage of that funding goes to the University to do with as they please & may have Nothing to do with the research is was given to.

    We now know the difference between Science & Junk Science.
    Science: Someone is more then willing to provide “NSA” free Money.
    Junk Science: You need to scrounge & Beg for pennies. How degrading for people of their stature.

    Provide plenty of free money & I imagine even POMP & Friends will begin to say, Well Maybe we should at least take a look see.

  • Omega Z

    Was a Time I think some type of partnership between them would have been possible. Godes actually offered some arrangement of collaboration.

    Sadly, that was after Rossi had already been burnt in a prior partnership arrangement & several attempts by outsiders trying to steal his IP.
    Rossi has become a little paranoid & with good reason.

    That is to bad because, I think that together, great leaps could be made. They both appear to have different parts of the puzzle.
    Rossi appears to have huge power output.
    Godes appears to have the magic key to turn it off/on at a moments notice. Not several hours.

    That would leave only 1 piece of the puzzle to master. Direct conversion to Electricity. At that point, Everything becomes possible.