Battery Powered E-Cats — Rossi asks for Help

Here’s an opportunity for the ECW crowd to maybe help Andrea Rossi out a little bit.

I have been thinking about the natural gas powered E-Cat which Rossi has said they are pursuing because of its cost efficiency (natural gas being much cheaper than electricity at the moment), and started thinking about the possibility of battery-driven E-Cats, where the electricity is generated from a ‘free’ fuel source like wind or solar. So I posted this question on the Journal of Nuclear Physics:

There is a lot of effort being expended these days into producing better batteries, and other energy storage devices that can be charged by ‘free’ fuels like solar and wind.

For example, Tesla Motors’ gigafactory (currently under construction) which will manufacture batteries for electric cars is planned to be powered solely by a combination of solar, wind and geothermal.

What are your thoughts on the possibility having battery driven E-Cats?

Rossi’s response:

Frank Acland:
It is an interesting idea: under a theoretical and technological point of view, I do not see why not. The issue is in the price: if the electric energy supplied by batteries will be competitive with other sources, the coupling between high efficiency batteries and the E-Cats will be surely possible. Have you an idea of the cost per kWh supplied by this new generation of batteries? I am curious.
Warm Regards,

I don’t have a good answer to Rossi’s question, so I figured I would throw it open to readers here. I really think that with competitive battery technology, there could be a strong boost to the E-Cat. It seems the electric drive is a more well developed technology at this point, and potentially a useful solution, especially if battery or other energy storage technology is cost effective.

What’s a good answer to Rossi’s question?

  • Billy Jackson

    Call me short sighted, narrow minded, say i lack vision or patience.. i might even agree with you. right now all i want is a working device that i can point to and tell my friends this is what i have been talking about.. see the difference between last years electric bill and this one? E-cat & LENR pull up a seat and lets talk about its potential future..

    what i am uninterested in is a parade of devices that never become viable as endless testing and improving leads to a product that just never hits the shelf for us to buy.

    Pick a point and say when our product can produce X COP to generate Y Savings then we can sell it. until then i don’t have any interest in a battery cat, gas cat, furry cat or grumpy cat.. please give us a working product.. improvements will come with later iterations.. if you go for the perfect product from the start.. you may never even get to the launch point. I applaud Rossi and IH for what they have done.. but i Abhor the lack of leadership and directionless meandering that has been apparent since the last test.

    • georgehants

      Billy, I would tend to agree with you, but we must never forget that science has had a 25 year start and has achieved absolutely nothing regarding a working device.
      Even today with a scientific report only the uncensored Russians have reported in a scientific journal.
      I think before attacking Mr. Rossi and IH (understandably) one needs to make clear one’s understanding of the failures of establishment science, to justify one’s position.

      • Billy Jackson

        I cant disagree with you.. I hope they see it less of an attack and more of a conformation that the constant new this and that is getting old since we never even got our hands on the “old” items let alone waiting on a new round of testing. I want a working product within the next year or two.. not 10 years down the road.. and i know that is my own impatience speaking.

        • georgehants

          So agree, people are dying, literally waiting for this technology to become generally available.
          We have a lot of problems to “thank” our leaders for in many areas.

          • Observer

            If “leaders” could solve problems by themselves, they would not need followers.

          • georgehants

            Morning Observer, I can find no way to understand your comment in reality, please expand.

          • Observer

            There are persons of consequence. There are leaders. These two groups are not mutually inclusive. A person of consequence does not necessarily need followers to have consequence. In order for a leader to have consequence as a leader he or she must have followers who are persons of consequence.

            If you do not follow and support a person “in authority”, they are not your leader.

            What defines a leader are his or her followers. Somewhere along the line we have forgotten that it is the act of following that determines who will lead.

          • georgehants

            Observer, yes of course, but that statement is so full of holes and simplicity’s that it would take a week to address them.
            Can we say that some good benevolent leaders leading the easily influenced masses in a good direction would be good?

          • Observer

            I would rather have a “good”, “fare”, and “just” system than a “good” and “benevolent” leader. (You can not be benevolent or merciful without the option of being self-centered and malicious.) Leaders are subservient to the system that rules their behavior, just like everyone else. Bad systems create bad people. Of course, they are not the only source.

          • georgehants

            So you don’t think that by definition you need “good leaders” to put in place “good systems” maybe you think they will be just appear out of the bright blue sky.

          • Observer

            Leaders come and go. Systems only die when they fail. The oldest social systems have no leaders; just members with varying levels of responsibility. They are practiced by the ants and the bees.

            Quit waiting for a “Leader” to solve your problems and live up to your own resposibilies.

          • georgehants

            Observer, you say —-
            “Quit waiting for a “Leader” to solve your problems and live up to your own resposibilies.”
            That statement is so incongruous when discussing the World problems that I cannot again answer.
            Thanks for chat.

        • Omega Z

          I do not find “Wanting a working product within the next year or two” to be impatient. Unless there are issues we are not aware of, I find it quite reasonable.

          I don’t even care if after 1 year, the 1Mw pilot plant is a magnificence as long as it performs within basic expectations. Perfection can come later.

          • Jonnyb

            Try the Tidal Power that may be produced between Caithness and Orkney Island in the North of Scotland. They are talking of putting this in in the very near future. Our Local MP is championing it.

          • Fortyniner

            Likewise a string of tidal ‘lagoons’ proposed for the Severn estuary. It begins to look like a 240MW pilot scheme may be built in Swansea Bay, now that £100M of private funding has been pledged by Prudential.


            The government is of course nowhere to be seen in this genuinely ‘green’ scheme that could potentially provide up to 8% of the UK’s electricity needs (30 TWh per year) – probably about the same as the HPC nuclear project, allowing for the outages that nuclear generation is plagued by). For them though, new nukes are the only option, and one of the first things Cameron did on gaining power was to kill the preceding Severn Barrage hydroelectric scheme. My local MP unfortunately toes the tory party line in all things.


          • Manuel Cruz

            Tidal generation has already been implemented in Spain and it was an absolute fiasco. In any case, I oppose it because I have the feeling it uses the same principle as Perpetuum mobile that extract energy from a magnet. At some point the magnet just demagnetizes, stops and falls, except that the magnet in this case is the Moon.

          • georgehants

            Interesting, any wind turbine certainly will change the weather, but is there a difference in extracting energy from the tides against it being naturally dissipated on a beech etc?
            Peter will know.

          • Fortyniner

            AFAIK George, your assumption that the tidal energy would be dissipated anyway is correct. All that happens is that the human intervention slightly delays the point at which tidal energy converts to heat, i.e., there is no net loss to the system – not that such miniscule amounts of energy would make any discernible difference anyway, even if measured over millennia. Manuel need not worry about the moon falling departing its orbit, even if we covered all the coasts of the planet with tidal generators.

    • Jimr

      I totally agree with you last sentence. The change I would make is that I feel it started earlier than the last test.

    • Bernie777

      I agree I need something to take the farcical smile off my friends faces. (:

      • catfish

        An Alphabet Engery E1 device (google it) can convert heat energy directly to electricity. It’s designed to work with the exhaust of diesel engines, so I do not see why it could not work with e-cats.

    • Omega Z

      I think Rossi just muses on occasion. In the latest, he may just be curious about the cost effectiveness of looping with a battery. This can just be a momentary distraction. Kind of a break from the primary focus of the Pilot plant & Hot cat. A momentary Vacation of sorts.

      I agree with you tho, I want to see 1 project completed that dispels all doubt for “a reasonable Person”. So I can point it out to those I’ve had discussions with. Everything else will follow.

  • The “fuel” for wind, solar, and geothermal is “free”, but the construction costs are enormous and wind and solar are inherently intermittent and unreliable. You never know what the wind will be doing next week or even tomorrow. Geothermal is acceptable depending on location and the costs of drilling all those holes. Geothermal sites eventually run cold, so they have limited lifespans, and the best geothermal sites are usually far from civilization. The costs of electricity from all these sources is well over 10 cents per kilowatt hour in real-world conditions, and higher than that for wind and solar when 24-7-365 electricity is required. Adding the cost of batteries to wind and solar just makes it all financially impossible. Natural gas is the right choice for the E-Cat.

    I hope we hear from Defkalion soon as their spark activation system is potentially much more efficient and could produce a self-looped LENR reactor that runs efficiently on its own electricity.

    • Bob

      I am afraid Defkalion is a non-entity now. I followed them closely until last year and they now have seemingly disappeared. I hope I am wrong, but I was unable to find any supportive evidence that they are even in existence. Mats Lewan does not seem to have a lot of faith in them and that certainly does not bode well.

      The demo at ICCF 18 seemed to be a bust or at least very suspect at least.

      I have not even heard anything from their staunch supporter here at ECW. (Cannot remember his call name)

      Again, I hope they are going strong, as I hope all CF/LENR players do well. The more players the better off we will be. However I am afraid we have heard the last from Defkalion. 🙁

      • Only time will tell. I believe their technology works and will appear publicly relatively soon. They were offered huge amounts of money to sell the rights to their technology, but turned down the money. They believe in what they are doing because they know it works. Don’t believe everything that Mats Lewan says. He makes mistakes and he gets biased opinions from Rossi supporters and repeats them as if they were proven fact. Defkalion’s LENR method has tremendous commercial potential, and they deserve success because they did the work using the scientific method.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          You are talking about existing rights. But has anyone ever seen Defkalion’s patent applications? They should have been published long since.

    • Oceans2014

      Defkalion may be the only party that has seen the Rossi Catalyst up close, they just do not know how to make it work.

  • Bernie777

    Good question Frank. I live in a growing exploding community, houses being built five feet apart, with farm land, two miles away, that stretches for a hundred miles. One of the reasons our communities are stuffed into small areas is availability to utilities, gas, power, water etc. Could the solar/wind/battery E-Cat change the above situation?

    • psi2u2

      It would seem so!

    • Omega Z

      There are multiple reasons people live in clumps, but the overall winning reason is.
      They want to.
      I have relatives who live in the big cities that occasionally visit.
      Always, they rant, The crime, the noise, the crowds, pollution, Etc, Etc..
      So you look at them & say, Well why don’t you move.
      They look at you like your nuts & say, But I Love it There.
      I guess some people enjoy a skyline of Brick, Mortar & Glass.
      Me, I prefer the hills, grass & trees.
      I spent 3 years in the cities & that was about 4 years to many.

  • Job001

    Think about it this way. It does not matter what wind and solar and storage installed cost is, once it is installed, from an accounting view the costs are “sunk costs”.

    After that point, one is foolish not to use it, no matter what positive value is assigned to the energy, this energy cost is the marginal operating cost and is very low, let us estimate 1 cent/KwHr, to cover depreciation, etc.

    However, let’s say one is estimating “full load” costs before deciding to go RE. It has been estimated that by 2020 wind and solar most places will be below “Grid parity” based upon experience curves and installation rates for wind and solar that are growing about 30%/yr roughly for the last 20 years. For the average American, grid parity is 14 cents/KwHr.

    Consequently, I’d recommend using no more than the 14 cents/KwHr, especially given the long term learning and experience curves guarantee even lower rates in the future, and given that existing installations should use exceptionally low “sunk cost” smart decision making.

    • MikeP

      Job001, you are ignoring maintenance costs which are high. Most wind turbines, from my understanding, are not repaired when they fail. Lifespans are proving much shorter than promised as well.

      • Job001

        Changed marginal operating cost estimate to 1.5 cents/KwHr per your suggestion. In high cost labor countries with fast innovation cycles, hardly anything gets repaired, we just buy the latest and greatest more efficient replacement new model. For instance, some new wind machines are doing away with gearboxes while operating in lower winds thus providing higher up time and lower maintenance.

        • Omega Z

          “they can and do get stolen”
          Yes, Solar Electricity is very cheap when obtained in this manor.
          Not Even E-cats can compete.

          • Jack T.

            I love those chumps from Solar City at Home Depot and Lowes who try to get you to take out a loan for $20,000 to pay for $5000 of equipment $5000 of labor and $10,000 for their CEO and call it “FREE!!! WHOOPIE!!!”

          • Alain Samoun

            Hey Jack! you live in the U.S.A. don’t you know?

      • Bob Greenyer

        My solar array in India which cost around $3000 has cost $0 to maintain in 7 years – If I had a grid tie inverter, that would be the end of it.

        I have had to maintain the batteries. about $40 spent over the same period. Could do with changing the batteries now though as they used to provide 8 hours backup and down to about 1 now, which still covers many power outages.

        The benefit has been light and fans in the 1000s of power outages and brown outs over these years. Worth every penny.

  • Brent Mosley

    “Electroscource Inc.” developed an excellent battery called “Horizon” and the Chrysler Corp. stole it in a stock market scam.

  • Alain Samoun

    I wonder if Rossi knows the last invention of Dean Kamen: His stirling engine seems perfectly adapted to the E-Cat:

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Much agree – perhaps someone should ask Rossi about the Becon 10

    • BroKeeper

      I also wonder if Dean Kamen knows about the E-Cat. a perfect match for the Stirling engine and his Slingshot water purifier for the third world countries? Maybe they could meet on EHarmony.

    • Omega Z

      It wont work.
      Dean Kamen’s Becon 10 is designed to work from available sources like wood or even cow dung. The E-cat needs electrical or N-gas heat along with electricity for the controls.

      The Becon 10 is supposed to provide an absolute minimum to a village of people who have absolutely nothing. And I mean Village. These aren’t for individuals. It could be used to recharge a cell phone if they even have cell service available. These would be placed at the village center.

      This approach is akin to throwing a glass of water on a forest fire. It seldom ever amounts to much. Most of these grandiose plans ultimately fail. Not because people didn’t have good intentions, but because they don’t fully understand the situation.

      There is a reason society & power companies don’t use sterling generators. Contrary to the claims, They are not cheap, dependable nor durable. Thus Power companies don’t use them to capture the 65% waste heat. Operational cost far exceeds the gains.

      Kamen would be far better off supplying a few deep cell 20 year life batteries & a few solar panels with a $400 inverter. Without an on going attendance by technicians, the Beacon 10’s will over just a few short years become trinkets made from their scrap while the solar cell battery combo could easily last 2 decades.
      AND I’m not even a big supporter of Solar.

      Note: With a big enough Solar/battery setup, You could even combine it with E-cats once they can produce electricity.

      • Alain Samoun

        You may be right,but have you read the Forbes article? It seems that Kamen has already installed several 10KW systems working with NG and that he is developing a 2KW Becon. Do you have other information?

      • Albert D. Kallal

        @Omega wrote:
        The Becon 10 is supposed to provide an absolute minimum to a village of people who have absolutely nothing. And I mean Village.

        No, that not the case at all. Dean started out looking to build a power source for those villages, but realized the design and technology is IDEAL for co-generation and residential use.

        Quote from Dean Kamen

        the Beacon 10 is just right for businesses like laundries or restaurants that use a lot of hot water. With commercialization partner NRG Energy, he’s so far deployed roughly 20 of the machines.

        Kamen expects to put them into production within 18 months. “Within two years I would expect high-end builders to be installing them.”

        But the 10 kw models are just the beginning. It won’t be long before Kamen has a smaller version ready for commercialization. He’s already been running a 2.5 kw Beacon at his New Hampshire home for four years.

        The INTENT is a washing machine sized unit and SPECIFIC for the residential and home market.

        The basic setup results means that the natural gas you use to heat your home and hot water ALSO results in generating electricity.

        The electricity is essentially a free byproduct of heating your home.

        @ Omega wrote:
        >There is a reason society & power companies don’t use sterling generators. Contrary to the claims, They are not cheap, dependable nor durable.

        Let’s not be silly. Durable compared to what? You think a steam turbine for home use is practical? Going to place a cot down there with a full time engineer to maintains the water levels and keep that system going?

        No one is suggestion to take a “large” commercial sized steam generator and scale down to home size. And NO ONE is suggesting to scale up a sterling engine to replace a large coal plant. However keep in mind those large power plants take up several city blocks and have 100+ full time workers to maintain and keep that system running.

        With a sterling engine you can run 24/7 – WITHOUT the maintenance.

        In fact larger commercial systems generating electricity expends a LOT of waste heat for no good use. You THEN have 20% loss for electric transmission.

        Why not send that SAME natural gas to on-site generation? The result is far more efficient.

        The key concept here is sterling engines are FAR LESS maintains then a typical gas (internal combustion) engine used to run a generator. The MAIN reason of course is that you don’t mix the fuel (heat source) with the internal moving parts and working fluid (in this case air or helium). Thus such engines are sealed, and run for years on end – just like your refrigerator.

        The sterling engine runs ABSOLUTE CIRCLES around the internal combustion engine in terms of maintains and trouble free operation.

        The cost of building such a durable engine is more then a “cheap” internal combustion engine, but not more then something that needs to be durable (run 24/7).

        You don’t see small sterling engines on the end of a say a “weed eater” because the power to weight ratio in a sterling engine is LOWER then a typical small gas engine. However the efficiency of sterling engines can easy compare or even exceed internal combustion engines.

        So you are DEAD wrong about durability issue.
        So you are DEAD wrong about the efficiency of such engines. What power plant are you talking about that has ZERO maintains for say 10 years at time of 24/7 operation?

        Please do share with the readers as to such a setup? Most solar batteries systems require more maintains then the sterling engine – just to check battery fluid levels.

        Do a simple BinGoole on co-generation. You find Honda and tons of example systems. Most are NOT sterling since the given manufacture ALREADY has good smaller gas engines. Some are using steam engines, but they tend to be more expensive then a sterling engine.

        The simple matter is construction costs for a smaller sterling or “heat” engine is not “that” much more then a using a gas engine. And this is ESPECIALLY if you building engine that runs 24/7. Just try running that small portable Honda generator 24/7 for 5 years — forget it! (you have to change oil and even check the oil level). And they are NOISY!

        The BECON 10 is DESIGNED exactly for operating 24/7 and MORE important the exhaust output can be vented directed to the room. And it is QUIET – no muffler is required. And the TARGET IS residential.

        No one suggests your running a wal mart 5000w generator 24/7. (they not durable enough). And larger systems are turbines.

        On the small residential/commercial level the Beacon 10 is IDEAL for home owners.

        Listen to Dean Karmen speak about his design and look at the unit he has for home use – an absolute home run.

        So they are MORE durable and HAVE LESS maintains then an internal combustion engine.

        The burner using in such a system is much the same as a typical stove top burner which also does not need venting to the outside.

        Like many technologies, they become practical on a smaller and smaller scale. Today most co-generation makes sense for hospital or apartment buildings. As technology improves (and cost of electricity goes up) then burning natural gas on site to produce heat (which you have to do anyway), and using such heat to produce electricity makes HUGE sense.

        Do watch the above videos – feel free to follow up with any counter points – clearly the LONG list of co-generator systems available today don’t agree with your assessment.

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada
        [email protected]

  • I have developed Utility-Scale Solar projects ,based on Concentrated PV. (1/12 the footprint of thin film or crystalline , 3 junction, GaAs Cell -30% efficient ). Three years ago the cost was $4.0 per Watt. The current price is about $3.00. Boeing has developed the next gen GaAs 5 junction cells @ 50% efficiency for aerospace applications. This should drop the cost even further. I have all the details contact me privately for more info.

    Regarding battery storage there are a number of viable choices. Musk is gambling big time on lithium, using the same production model he uses for Space-X (raw materials in =finished product out, all under the same roof). By eliminating the necessity to ship various stages of products to three locations for further processing, the cost will be driven down. Also now that Stanford Ovshinsky’s lithium battery mass manufacture patents are in the public domain (no longer in the clutches of Chervon – sold to them by GM) this should further drop the cost of a lithium based system.

  • The brightest future and the best choice for electrical storage is by far graphine. Its inexpensive, easily manufactured, safe to store and handle, biodegradable and superconductive. Extremely efficient. It can recharge 100x faster than lithium or NiCd batteries and can discharge a huge amperage instantaneously, which has advantages rotating electrical generators or heating elements (LENR).

    • Andrew

      Easily manufactured in very small quantities, larger sheets not so easy…. Yet. But it is anamazing material.

      • Omega Z

        I believe I recently read about a company that can manufacture graphine in large quantities, cheaply & at large scale/size.
        Actually to be proven. If I recall-
        The facilities may be in the process of being built or expanded.
        It is headed up by a Female.
        And I think it is in Britain.

        We should know soon. Unless I just dreamed it.

  • BroKeeper

    Once the E-Cat goes domestic (major goal of IH/Rossi), batteries, supercapacitors or
    supercapatteries will provide better load balancing and consistent voltage levels during differing hour demands. In effect this is what capacitors provide within electronic circuits by smoothing out current/voltage fluctuations. They will also help regulate input to the E-Cat during normal operations or initial startup.

  • LilyLover

    Ultra fast charge/discharge? EEStor? Costly, E-Cat van-octopus arrives in a parking lot of a mall. While people are having their lunch, roomba-like robots from the van stretch out to charge the car in 10 minutes. E-Cat generates energy – provides it to off-road-roadside discharged Teslas, charges them up. Advt + utility. When automation in cars is perfected, they’ll start to ship out with lifetime-insurance included. Similarly, lifetime roadside charging can be a premium service or the mobile charging vans coming to charge your car with an army of drones that brings you your food from your fav restaurant to your table at office or home. This Energy for man and energy for car E-Cat van need not be cheap or efficient; simply fast and reliable.

    • If we are takling about cars, the latest is regenerative acceleration. Thane Heins has developed and patented a way to do just that. No you can recharge your battery when you accelerate not just when you brake.

  • NT

    Hi Tom,
    “If it was just the safety certification, you would see them now, in countries where safety certification isn’t needed.”
    Are you suggesting the small 10KW e-cat doesn’t function/fit for domestic applications?
    Please explain this contradiction in your statement…

    • TomR

      Hi NT, the first sentence says that until Andrea Rossi gets IP protection we are not going to get the 10 KW machine. I don’t know any other way of explaining it.

      • Omega Z

        I think NT missed the IP connection & possible loss of rights.
        As to safety certification, Rossi responded long ago & it was that he would not sell them without certification regardless what any single countries laws/rules were.

        • TomR

          I think you are right about Rossi saying that. I think if the IP problem is resolved and Rossi and IH are satisfied that the E-Cats are safe in all situations, we will see domestic E-Cats in China soon after that happens.

  • Alain Samoun

    Yes John it seems a good idea to ask DEKA again.
    Frank: Maybe you can ask AR if he knows the Becon too?

    • Omega Z

      Rossi will not divulge such information positive or negative. People tend not to want the public attention at this time. To Bad. It would be really interesting to know exactly who is paying attention & making contact. But I fully understand people’s reluctance to come forward.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Use a small scale thermonic generator to recharge any desired battery. Convert a portion of the heat to electricity to run the E-Cat. Alternatively use a large scale Stirling engine. Waste heat from the process could be used as the heat source, powering the entire operation and making it more efficient overall.

    Here is a breakthrough thermonic generator technology being worked on by Stanford University.

    • BroKeeper

      Thanks Ophelia. For a school project my youngest son and I with the help of my middle son (now an engineer) built a Tesla Turbine out of CD’s and its CD case with a hair dryer as input. I couldn’t believe the RPMs generated. It nearly tore itself apart. I’m convinced the Tesla Turbine has a potential for resurgence.

      • I think your statements are unfair. Time will reveal the reality of the situation. There is no point in us arguing about a future that neither of us know for certain.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        His process seems to be such that its power density (W/m^3) increases polynomially but slower than T^4 as function of absolute temperature T (one knows this because the HotCat is thermally stable and is cooled mainly by T^4 radiation at the upper end of its temperature range). To be stable, the reactor (its volume, surface area etc.) must be designed so that if left without input power, it cools more rapidly than heats up so that the process dies gracefully. The input power cannot be another E-cat sitting inside the first one, because that other E-cat’s output power output would not be constant, but it would depend on its ambient temperature which is dictated by the first E-cat and such pair of reactors would be thermally unstable.
        He could (in my opinion) try to modulate the cooling function instead of the driver heating function and in that way to probably achieve higher COP – however at the expense of having less constant output power. Maybe in most cases a user wants more or less constant output power level and hence he has not pursued that route, at least not in public. It would also require moving parts.
        In theory he probably also could try to run in periodic mode (alternating driven and self-sustain mode) where he allows the self-sustain mode to become rather hot, and then try to store that heat in some heat battery from which it can be taken to act as a driver. However, given the ~1000 C temperatures it sounds technically complicated to do. Some military fission reactors solved the problem by using liquid metal coolants. It worked, but the engineering was definitely not easy.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Someone needs to design self tuning input ports for it. Like a carb for an automobile, it’s weakness is the requirement for matching the input ports to the flow. They are only optimal in a very narrow range of flow.

  • fritz194

    Needed power, needed energy, availability, service cycle, ROI, alternative energy source choosen – and you can calculate the optimum solution.

  • BroKeeper

    Agreed, once the cash flow appears, I foresee a pyramidal R&D structure with many sub levels to test and meet many technological developments for hundreds of applications. Each of the current workers under Andrea Rossi may head his own department with perhaps thousands of IH employees.

    • BroKeeper

      Also think of the many millions of jobs generated from such off-shoot innovations from evolutionary energy devices. Imagining its potential is endless.

  • georgehants

    John Milstone, you have ventured out from ECN to give us your wisdom, many thanks.
    Could you explain why dumb establishment science and many pseudo- scientists are still denying Cold Fusion after being handed the Evidence 25 years ago?

  • ecatworld

    Thank you, John. I think that’s the number Rossi is looking for. I will pass it on.

  • Sandy

    If an E-Cat operates at a high enough temperature to cause the disassociation of the hydrogen and oxygen in water molecules, and if the hydrogen can be captured and stored, then the hydrogen could be directed into a fuel cell when needed and thereby generate an electric current. The electricity could be used to power the E-Cat’s control system and to heat the E-Cat when it is not operating in self-sustain mode. The water produced by the fuel cell might be captured and reused as needed.

  • Wayne M.

    John said: “What he seems to be getting is how to run his business.”

    That may not be a bad idea.

    It eludes me why Rossi could not simply ask one of the Business Analysts or Managers at I.H. this elementary cost question. He brags about a “world class” engineering and management resources at I.H. Yet I.H. has not yet analyzed all the possible inputs to the E-cat, such as a battery?

    Either Rossi is just blowing off the questioner or it’s really a one man show over at I.H., where everyone walks on egg shells around Rossi, fearing losing their jobs if they piss off the mercurial big boss. You remember Rossi’s rant about a picture of his lab being released a few weeks ago?

    Is I.H. also a captive in the sense that they cannot advance E-cat technology without the presence of the volatile old man? If I am completely wrong about this, what other reason is there that I.H. allows Rossi to prattle on in the JONP about their business, yet they utter no communications. Who is in charge of whom?

    When you look at this kind of behavior at 20,000 feet, it does not help LENR’s public relations problem.

    BTW, $0.05 per kWh using an eestor capacitor.

  • Daniel Maris

    “They are about 6 times more expensive as traditional ways to generate electricity.” You’re living in the past my friend. The cost differential is much more marginal now. In many parts of the world already solar and wind deliver cheaper energy than can be had off the grid.

    The idea that wind turbines don’t produce electricity 80% of the time is absurd and of no relevance since it is the mass performance which is the issue. There are very few days in a year in a country like the UK when nearly all wind turbines are producing no electricity.

    I think you’ve got confused with percentage of capacity figures (wind turbines produce about 25-30% of their upper level capacity – that doesn’t mean they’re not working for 75% of the time!).

    If you view things from the vantage point of your national economy, there is also the positive impact on domestic employment to be considered.

    Also geothermal can and does produce electricity:

    • clovis ray

      I have worked to construct huge geothermal generators, for Mitsubishi, and toyato, in southern calf, and i can assure you they produce huge amounts of electricity for that area, you should do a little ground work, before making those kind of false statements.

  • Fortyniner

    With battery technology moving at this rate, Musk’s lithium batteries will be obsolete before they roll off the production lines. I hope that his factory is flexible enough to keep up.

    I suppose that there may be a more general lesson here about investment, that could play into the e-cat story with IH’s backers. Maybe that is one factor that is holding back mass production, or perhaps even limited series/batch production, i.e., they may wish to ‘keep their powder dry’ until they are sure that Rossi will not pull any more rabbits out of his hat.

    Another good reason why it is increasingly important that either a real competitor emerges, or (better) the technology escapes into the wild so that hundreds of thousands of minds can be brought to bear on the development of cold fusion.

  • Alain Samoun

    The E1 generates up to 25 kWe per 1,000 kWe engine (Diesel?)

  • psi2u2

    Very interesting, but uses up a lot of aluminum in this present iteration of the tech.

  • Allan Shura

    It should be noted that there is at least one percent more carbon dioxide in the
    in the last few decades not present in human history. There are also record breaking temperatures with increasing frequency. The 20th century must have
    been a darn cold one if you are right, having been in the arctic in the 1970s
    as since then the rate of receding ice has added 7% more water to the atmosphere.

    • bachcole

      Look back farther. Look at the Little Ice Age, the Medieval Warm Period, and even farther back.

      • Alain Samoun

        BACHCOLE I do not want to disturb too much your sleep but:

        About 19.64 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) are produced from burning a gallon of gasoline that does not contain ethanol. About 22.38 pounds of CO2 are produced by burning a gallon of diesel fuel.

        EIA estimates1 that U.S. gasoline and diesel fuel consumption for transportation in 2013 resulted in the emission of about 1,095 and 427 million metric tons of CO2 respectively, for a total of 1,522 million metric tons of CO2. This total was equivalent to 83% of total CO2 emissions by the U.S. transportation sector and 28% of total U.S. energy-related CO2emissions.
        1.5 billion of tons = 1,500,000,000,000 Kg You don’t think that it has an effect on the atmosphere?

  • GreenWin

    If the good doctor AR wants help with battery technology – he should talk with Elon Musk. He’s got his finger on storage tech transfer. And a 1MW E-Cat would make a great Tesla SuperCharger.

  • Alain Samoun

    Not for the E-Cat but a deal($$) for users of diesel generators.

  • Bernie777

    Alain Samoun, Allan Shura, The article below could be the reason why human caused climate change deniers do not react to scientific facts and why there are still well educated and affluent people still deniers.