Rossi Learning New Things about the E-Cat with 1 MW Plant Project

I have been noticing that Andrea Rossi has been talking about problems and challenges regarding his work on the 1 MW plant, which is slated to be the first commercial E-Cat plant for a non-secret customer. . The plan had been to launch it this year, but now we are told it could be at least another year before this plant is revealed.

Here is a question that I posted to Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today:

You have mentioned recently that you have problems to solve — some easy, and some hard. Also you mention that you are involved in ‘difficult’ work. This seems to indicate that the commercial plant is posing a significant challenge for your team.

1. Are you learning new things about the E-Cat now you have to put it under load in an industrial setting?

2. How confident are you in your ability to meet your contractual deadlines with your current customer?

Rossi’s response:

Frank Acland:
Thank you for your continuous attention.
1- yes
2- Our team is very strong, all te bases are covered ( electronic engineering, physics, mechanical engineering and top level blue collars). I have good reasons to hope we will not disappoint our Customer, while I am sure we will give the maximum of our skills.
Warm Regards,

The interesting thing to me here is that Rossi admits that there are new things they are learning about the E-Cat now they are putting it under a continuous load. You would think that in all his work over the years with the E-Cat that Rossi would have had a good idea about how it would operate in an industrial setting, but apparently there have been surprises (as with the nickel enrichment in the Lugano test). Rossi talks of this installation project now as an R&D activity also.

Rossi has said that the output of this plant is heat in the form of steam (not electricity generation), and that it needs to run continuously round the clock for 350 days per year. The customer is going to have to be satisfied with things before they will sign off on the purchase. There is apparently a contractual deadline to get everything right, so the pressure must be quite heavy.

I’m not sure that we’ll hear much about the details of this project, and the nature of the problems — so we are going to be in a familiar waiting mode with this situation.

UPDATE: A follow up from me:

Thank you for your responses. Would you say the problems you encounter are increasing as your work continues, or diminishing?

AR’s reply:

One by one, we are resolving all the problems. With patience and dedication, united with the consciousness that if we go through we will have written a page of history.

  • LCD

    So, besides the responses of the testers, what do we have to look forward to in the next six months again?

    Rossi is dragging on, at this point I hope somebody else gives him competition.

    • bitplayer

      More action at MFMP

      • Ged

        Here here.

      • Omega Z

        PS…I meant to include that the E-cat would have to have a high COP to compete with Gas. Like COP>10. Electricity here in the states are starting to rise. You know, The Cheap electricity from Wind & Solar is starting to come into play..

    • tlp
      • LCD

        What’s their claimed COP?

        • tlp

          Infinite. Meaning that it generates enough electricity to keep it running plus some more.

          • LCD

            That is almost to good to be true. And with BLP that is usually the case.

            That would essentially overshadow the Ecat (and everything else in the world)

            Hard to believe.

    • Gerrit

      ICCF-19 will be on 13-17 April. Hopefully some abstracts will be published a few weeks before.

  • Ophelia Rump

    It will have generated about $1,000,000 worth of heat in one year.
    If the COP is 10 that would be 900,000 in savings.
    Less than two years to payback. Very nice indeed.

    • Alain Samoun

      COP refers to ratio of output energy to input energy If the input energy is,like for the last test, from electricity,then the saving is not the way you are calculating it, as the output is heat. In addition it depends also of what the customer uses the heat for: If he uses the heat to have some kind of mechanical work process,he will lose a good part of heat made by the E-Cat to the Carnot efficiency. Also it will depend on the cost of the energy used by the customer before using the E-Cat ($/KWH). Thermodynamics and ROE are not so simple…

      • Ophelia Rump

        I assume that the customer gets the same efficiency from the handling and use of the heat itself whether they generate from LENR or another source.

        They get the same bang for fewer bucks.
        If you put one in, and get ten out, you saved nine compared to when you put ten in and get ten out, regardless of whether you wasted half the heat either way.

        • Alain Samoun

          “that the customer originally used electricity to generate the heat.”
          In that case you are right but it is not likely. Most industrial application will probably use a fossil fuel,so E-Cat, as it is, using electricity as input will have to have a large COP to compete and your rosy ROI scenario won’t apply.

      • LCD

        It’s really a moot point id fit can generate its own electricity.

        • Omega Z

          You need a minimum of 3.33Kw heat to get 1Kw Electric just to break even.

          • Omega Z

            I believe that burner has a flue vent. It bends back on itself & exits near the gas valve entry block. Anyway, the E-cat wouldn’t need a vent.

          • ivanc

            Why?? support your idea with analysis, please.

          • Omega Z

            That is the average efficiency conversion of heat to electricity(33%). With large power plants & the use of super critical heat in Gas Turbines, up to 60% can be achieved.
            In smaller systems, the number goes down.
            All this is based on Carnot Cycle.

      • ivanc

        What you talking about. a device with a cop of 3.6 will be able to produce electricity and self sustain.
        The numbers are simple.
        a sterling engine with a 50% Heat efficiency
        a generator with a 90% and a transformer with a 95%.
        now 800watts input give 2880 watts output.
        feed to the sterling engine generator and transformer we get:
        2880*.5*.9*.95=1231.2 now take away the 800w for the input power needed to run the e-cat, now you have a net 431.2 watts to burn the way you would like. 400 watts will completely illuminate my house using LED lights.
        4 to 5 ecats could give me all the electricity I need.
        2 e-cats will feed my hot water tank.
        Rossi do not have to produce electricity, but if He is 1/10 intelligent He says He is. He will build this device and present it to the patent office. andmake billions of dollars after is patented. But he is not doing the obvious. why????

    • Axil Axil

      Andrea Rossi

      October 27th, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      Will Hurley:
      Thank you for your attention.
      As I said, our team is focused on the operation and the R&D related to the 1MW plant. We do not sell small commercial units, for obvious reasons related to the defense of the IP. I am sure you can understand. Thank you for your suggestion, though: the suggestions of our Readers all can hekp us in our difficult job.
      Warm Regards,

      Without competition, Rossi will never provide an E-Cat for the common man. The E-Cat will be a captive of the corporations forever. This is why another Reactor developer with a kinder heart or an open source group is needed to break the IP stranglehold that the corporations will have on the E-Cat.

      • LCD

        Well clearly he has some upcoming patents that will go public in six months or so.

      • Omega Z

        Axil Axil
        Although I appreciate your posts here, I disagree with your view on this.
        Most of what we take for granted today started by sales to those who have the cash.

        Computers were insanely expensive & were actually quite limited in the beginning. Only the Government could finance them. As they progressed & became cheaper & better, Corporations bought them & gradually reached smaller business concerns.

        Eventually it came into reach of hobbyists who gave up all else & put all their discretionary income into it. Then today, Even many of the poor have a computer. Computers, Cars, TV’s, high end stereo surround systems & even the phone followed the same path.

        First adopters always pay the considerable up front costs of new technology & tolerate it’s initial shortcomings. The cost of building factories, the technology for mass production & continued R&D will run into multiple Billions of dollars. All these costs go into the price of products & most of this is in the early phase that can span Years.

        Imagine Industrial Heat having to build 10 or 20 thousand of these reactors & run them at their expense for several years to accumulate the safety data that will be required for consumer use.

        Well, We wont have to pay for all this. The 1st customers like this pilot plant will provide that data while benefiting from the energy rather then Industrial Heat just burning away wasted energy in that quest for safety data.

        As to competition, Bring It. They may have a different approach that overcomes some of the E-cat shortcomings. Faster improvements in the technology. Faster price reductions as the up front costs are recovered instead of a lag period.

        I don’t want everyone building E-cats with the difference being the Name Label. Competition is good.
        Rossi’s Hot Cat takes 4 hours to come up to operating conditions, But Wait, Our Fusion Box is ready in 2 hours. Ahh, But Wait, Our Incinerator fires up in minutes & it’s half the price. So yeah, Bring it. Competition is good. Competition equals innovation.

        As to open source, that will only delay the spread of consumer products. No one invests Billions ether in research or product development just so someone else can profit from their expense.

  • sabbie

    This article reminds me that one argument I’ve seen from the usual skeptics is “Rossi said that it worked like this in 2010, now he’s saying something different.” or “the e-cat looks different from the previous time:. What those people don’t get is that in the real world nothing is static. Rossi is learning about his invention every day, and his invention is evolving every day. Rossi might have come up with a bunch of wrong theories over the years, but it doesn’t mean that the e-cat doesn’t work.

    A lot of his work seems to have resulted from trial and error such as finding the right particle size etc. You can invent the airplane without knowing much about aerodynamics.

    Once the e-cat is out of the bag it will be up to the scientific community to figure out how it works exactly.

    • LCD

      Yeah it’s an old and tired tactic that most people that have been around this long enough see through, but it still works on new people that just begin to hear about the ecat. It reinforces their initial suspicion that the ecat is a hoax.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Valveless pulsejet engine.
    Can anyone think of a way to run this without propane?

  • LCD

    In condensed matter physics there are A LOT of levers you can pull and knobs you can twist with the standard model that really have not been explored. But there are some things that seem to defy even that.

  • Bob Greenyer

    It may well be that the CUSTOMER is General Shale and the “1 MW plant” is a brick kiln (thanks Mr. Moho)

    For a full explanation, go here

    To just see the video that points to this conclusion, go here

    • Mr. Moho

      If (big assumption!) General Shale is the customer, then by extension Wienerberger AG, the world’s largest brick manufacturer, would be one too. Wienerberger AG acquired General Shale in 1999. You can see this easily in that they share the same logos and color theme in their websites.

      • Bob Greenyer

        You’re on fire Mr. Moho!

      • Gerrit

        General Shale has a production facility some 30 miles south west of Raleigh in Brickhaven

        “Expansion of capacity in Brickhaven
        Brickhaven – one of three General Shale plants in North Carolina – is
        optimally suited for the expansion of capacity because of its plant
        structure, large clay reserves and strong local demand for bricks. A
        third kiln line will increase production by 90 million SBEs (standard
        format for facing bricks) to 270 million SBEs. A total investment of €
        13 million is planned for this project. Construction is scheduled to
        start in December 2004, and the plant will reach full capacity during
        the fourth quarter of 2005.”

        • Bob Greenyer


        • Daniel Maris


    • kasom

      The first 1MW plant under load was said to be operating at 120 Celsius, a “cool-cat”!
      Can’t see this in a brick kiln…..

    • ecatworld

      I had a brief phone conversation with Andrea Rossi after the publication of the Lugano report and asked him what the output of this first 1 MW plant was — he said it was steam.

  • Omega Z

    Actually, I think what Rossi has stated many times is that,
    Before you go for the exotic explanation, you need to explore all the possibilities in the standard model first. He is just being prudent. I think Rossi has been schooled on this by Focardi before his passing.

    Being a great advocate myself of finding ways to circumvent or breaking the laws of physics, I have to agree with Rossi’s caution. One has to be scientific about it.

    • georgehants

      As long as nobody says it cannot be anything beyond the standard model, if they do it is clear one is dealing with a fool and it is time to laugh and walk away.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        What could it be beyond the standard model, can you give an example?

        • georgehants

          Clearly the unknown.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Yes, to most physicists, and I think also to Rossi, “beyond standard model” means something which would be manifestly in contradiction with the SM, typically breaking a SM conservation law for energy, momentum, charge, lepton number, baryon number… For example, does biology or does the E-cat obey the SM? It’s a useful working hypothesis to think so, until experiments prove the opposite.

  • wpj

    Yes, and the burners tend to be powered with waste; all of the organic waste solvents that we generate are taken away for use in kilns where they are combusted at over 1000C which also consumes/destroys any chlorinated solvents (I assume that the acidic gases from these are scrubbed).

    Also, didn’t Rossi say that the plant was for high temp steam?

  • Gerrit

    [OT] It seems that mainstream journalism is starting to look at cold fusion with neutral view.

    Journalist Gwynne Dyer has written an article about the Lockheed Martin hot fusion announcement titled “Fusion power: Goodbye fossil fuels?”. The article is published in several online news sites.

    Interestingly at the end of the article he writes:
    “COLD fusion power, which depends on low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR),
    was dismissed with much ridicule when it was first mooted in 1989. Now
    it’s back on the table, and highly reputable organizations like the
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) are taking it

    As Dennis Bushnell, chief scientist at NASA’s Langley
    Research Center, said in an interview last year, “Several labs have
    blown up studying LENR and windows have melted … When the conditions
    are ‘right,’ prodigious amounts of energy can be produced and released.”

    The Age of Wonders is not past.”

  • BillH

    This is an intriguing story that many of us have now been following for a few years. NDAs and secret customers can only stay that way for so long. If we have to wait another year for any practical results I feel many people will lose interest. I see no reason why basic information from the installed plant should not be made available, this would surely keep interest high?

    By that I mean, estimates of heat output from the plant, and whether it meets the customers expectations. The efficiencies of the 103 individual reactors, the actual power input in terms of cost saving. When break even in terms of installation and running costs is achieved. I would estimate this being around the 4-6 mth point from the COP figures being quoted. And of course the final outcome at the end of the year in terms of cost savings and reliability.

    • Daniel Maris

      I tend to agree. Even if we weren’t told about the plant, is there any reason why we shouldn’t be introduced to some of the team? It doesn’t seem much to ask.

      Well let’s hope what we are being told is genuine, and we get to see the pilot plant in operation soon.

  • Miles

    When will the final e-Cat Domestic Unit be released to the public???? The e-Cat Australian website shows the Home Unit at 10Kw being available in early 2014. What’s the latest with what is happening? The report that was recently released is great but what the next step for Rossi???

    • ecatworld

      Rossi has said the next step for him is to get the 1 MW plant at the customer site working perfectly. I don’t think we’ll hear much until they are satisfied it is up to the job of providing heat 24/7, 350 days per year.

      Rossi has said at some point, selected visitors will be allowed to see the plant in action and report.

      • miles

        Thanks Frank.

    • Fortyniner

      Rossi has said on a number of occasions that ‘domestic’ e-cats will not be possible for reasons of safety certification until there is a long history of safe operation in industrial situations. Websites like the Australian one you cite are just debris left over from an earlier phase of Rossi’s enterprise, and most have probably not been updated for years.

      I would hope that Rossi/IH have by now fully repaid the initial wave of ‘licencees’, who have been cut out of the sales loop by subsequent developments. If this is the case they should request the individuals concerned to take down their old websites, which are now doing little more than providing outdated material for ‘skeptics’ to recycle in the hope of introducing doubt and uncertainty..

  • Fortyniner

    I am not familiar with Armen Guloyan’s work, although it sounds very interesting. However I am inclined to agree that Rossi/IH’s methodical single-track progress – now quite widely flagged – is leaving the door wide open to any more adroit competitors.

    e-Cat is simply too important for the conventional test/fix/retest method using a single development path. IH don’t seem to be short of resources, and a more productive path might have been to design a ‘test bed’ heat exchanger that could be fitted with various alternative designs of reactor and control system. This could be replicated and handed to a number of semi-independent teams so that a number of different designs could be developed and tested in parallel.

    I think the best hope is that someone outside IH will be able to replicate the Rossi reactor very soon, to put a rocket under IH’s development efforts.

  • Omega Z

    Sometimes, When I read someone’s posts, About half way through I can’t help but wonder.
    Who ties their shoes??

  • Obvious

    Shouldn’t that pulse have destroyed or damaged most of the metal objects in the immediate vicinity? Even aluminum is affected by fields that strong.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Hi Mike, I keep thinking about Hot-Cat powered aircraft.
    This link might help us figure out how many Hot-Cats would be needed for an

  • LCD

    That I’m not that worried about as you are. I think I’m a little more forgiving being a tech startup owner myself.

    But I do think it’s not so simple that he can easily create a product. There are still issues we are not hearing about.

    It may be 3 more years before there is a commercially available product, that would not surprise me, but it would disappoint me.

  • Obvious

    1.2 GJ is about the same kinetic energy as 1200 tonnes moving at 100 miles per hour. Or about the same energy as contained in 135 pounds of candy. I’m not sure about cars.

  • LCD

    No I think they created a company with Rossi and brought in investors and now Rossi I’d not the majority owner. Typical startup stuff.