Independent Referee Collects ‘Only Data Deemed Valid’ From 1MW E-Cat

Andrea Rossi has been making some comments about the data collection process that is taking place at the site where the 1 MW plant is in operation. Yesterday he explained that there were 1.5 million pieces of data per month being recorded from the performance of the plant.

He later clarified that this data was being collected by three parties:

  1. His own team
  2. The independent referee
  3. The customer who is using the energy produced from the plant


In response to a question about how frequently the data from the referee and his own team was being compared, Rossi made the following statement. Note that in this case ‘ERV’ means ”Expert Responsible for Validation”

Andrea Rossi
September 10th, 2015 at 2:34 PM
Italo R.:
The ERV data have not to be compared to any other data and will be the only one deemed valid, independently from any other data recorded by anybody.
The ERV delivers periodically reports about the data collected in the due period. Obviously we compare our data with the data communicated by the ERV.
I can say that, so far, the data recorded from us are substantially consistent with the data of the ERV and that the differences are within the error margin of the instrumentation. The Customer makes independently his measurements, because he is not interested to the ERV, he just wants to measure how much thermal energy we deliver ( he just reads his gauges) and at the end of each month he sends us a report with the indication of how many kWh have been delivered. Also in this case, the data so far are reasonably consistent, with small differences that can be attributable to the error margin of the instrumentation.
Warm Regards,

The interesting thing to me here is that the independent referee is considered by Rossi as the only person who is collecting valid data. What I think this means is that when the performance of the plant is released, it will come from the independent referee, and not from Leonardo/Industrial Heat.

This will most likely make the data more believable to outside observers and anyone interested in doing business with Leonardo/IH — especially if this referee is a respected and qualified party with a good track record in taking the kinds of measurements needed (as I understand it to be). So a great deal is going to rest on what this independent observer/recorder reports.

Of course, having a customer who reports significant energy savings would be important also, but I suppose people might assume that the customer and Rossi’s team could be conspiring to commit some grand deception — so it will be the word of the referee which will be of most weight when the results of the test are finally released.

  • Bob Greenyer


    • Ged

      It is rational, and how I would think it wise to set it up. I am wondering if the independent party is National Instruments, as they have been keen on the field and simply measuring it for years now. But yeah, just completely wishful speculation based on nothing.

      • HS61AF91

        My opinion: got to be NI

  • LION

    Andrea Rossi and Tom Darden are SMART people, the “ERV” is likely to be from National Instruments thus having the most CLOUT in the minds of customers, and with the Scientific community.-04-25-14-16.

    • ecatworld

      National Instruments generally provides hardware and software for testing purposes, and as far as I can tell does not provide testing certification services for industry of the type AR is referring to.

      • Jarea

        Then, who do you think it would be a good candidate for testing certification?

        • ecatworld

          There is a huge amount riding on this test, and the identity of this referee is probably the most important single aspect of this year long 1MW plant test. If the credentials of this referee are questionable, then the whole project could suffer real damage.

          I think that AR/IH will have tried to find someone who is independent, well-respected, competent and with a track record in the testing field.

          • Omega Z

            I believe all that is needed is that the “ERV” is independent & competent. I also think this data collection has more to do with pending or planned patent submissions then Business.

            As for Business, The combined data from Rossi & the customer will suffice. Everything else is legal contracts like any other product. If it doesn’t perform as stated, you have legal recourse.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      The prepatent days are behind us now. The skeptics can think what they want. This test isn’t for placating them. It’s for determining the performance of the machine.

      • psi2u2


        • theBuckWheat

          The effect is real, now what matters are the real-world issues: safety, reliability, dispatchability, life cycle costs, ability to be integrated into building, utility and industrial systems, support, environmental considerations of end of life decommissioning, etc.

          (BTW, I have never seen any wind power company being required to reserve sufficient assets for decommissioning of uneconomical wind turbines. There is a future government handout yet to be proposed to address the economic impact of LENR on the “sustainable power” industry.)

        • Private Citizen

          Is the EVR monitoring and inspecting the E-Cats for possible sources of external energy other than LENR? Would you trust Steron or Defkalion if they pulled a similar secret trial?

          Even if E-Cat is real, the level of opacity and secrecy involved in this test is far worse than Lugano, which skeptics and MSM wrote off just because of Rossi’s presence.

          Don’t count on any real impact before truly open, independent testing or replication.

          • psi2u2

            I see your point, but it depends on how you define “real impact.” Some of us think that even the previous tests, notwithstanding flaws, have had significant “real impact.”

          • William D. Fleming

            Rossi and IH are getting ready to start production. The current test is for their own use, and need not meet anyone else’s standards. You’ll see plenty of impact when ecats are on the market.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            They don’t need independent testing. Read my above post on purchasing
            12 eggs. (if you can grasp that concept, the you will grasp what is going on

            As for external power? Well, it is a container inside an
            existing customer’s plant. So I suppose they could “steal” a million watts from
            somewhere but doing that inside of a customer’s plant would be quite a feat of

            However as noted, this is all moot. When they sell such plants
            to customers they will promote and state the expected power savings. If they
            cannot deliver on such savings, then the customer will simply return the
            reactor. There no need for replication by others. Selling to the public will be the ONLY REAL true test and success of Rossi.

            In fact this WHOLE testing process by BOTH sides is as I
            noted the SAME process when you prchaisng 12 eggs (both sides count the eggs).

            This process is NOT for public consuming and never was.

            On the other hand if you cannot grasp this problem when you go to the store
            to purchase 12 eggs then all hope is lots here to grasp this arrangement between
            Rossi and the customer.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Brent Buckner

            This testing may have been useful in negotiations between Rossi and Cherokee/IH – much of their agreement may depend on the outcome. Further, customers don’t want to have their operations disrupted – it may be useful to show them that there’s little risk that they’ll end up returning a reactor. Finally, an independent test may help IH attract investment capital that would backstop any guarantees IH may offer customers.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, I much accept that some well-known independently lab or
            testing facility would help Rossi and IH in the area of raising money.

            However as I pointed out, the simple transaction of purchasing
            12 eggs requires simple verification by both sides to count the eggs, and so does the company to determine their power savings.

            So while such independent testing could certainly help
            Rossi obtain more funds, they cannot make any claims as to output and cost until such time they run the plant for a given amount of time anyway!

            And some independent lab may verify the COP, but not that
            actual cost of running and maintains such a plant. Consumer reports often will tell you how fast a kettle can boil water, but they can’t tell you how long the kettle will last.

            So real world testing in a real environment is really the
            only practical way to determine costs and performance of running a plant. Once they have such numbers, then that’s what they offer to the next customer. And ANY test with Rossi at the helm will NOT be deemed independent anyway! (no matter which company or lab conducts the test).

            More important that DURING this testing phase, they can
            try different ideas and improve the plant during such a test. An independent lab would not allow changes during the test and would NOT allow Rossi to tweak and change things. Not only would Rossi have to stay away, you ALSO would have a frozen design for a year.

            The current arrangement is FAR better since your design
            is not frozen. They are changing things and learning as they go along. With Rossi inside that plant then NO ONE will accept any results by ANY lab and such testing would not be independent at all.

            So perhaps after this test, they can give one to some lab
            AND ALSO not have Rossi running the plant.

            I think they will start to get serious above raising capital
            and increasing manufacturing ability of e-cats after another 2-3 customers (so next year, they likely could take on 2-3 more customers (given 3-4 months it takes to create + deliver one plant).

            So they are gathering performance numbers and they are
            doing R&D to find out what breaks, what wears out and even tweaking the software and controls as they go along.

            The simple issue is that Rossi/IH cannot make or state
            the power savings and cost to run such a plant without first running such a plant. So this is exactly what they are doing.

            You do NOT want to build 5 plants that all result in the
            SAME flaws and issues.

            So you run this one plant and tweak it and that’s the design
            the next 3-4 plants will be based on (those 3-4 plants will take a full year to deliver). So hopefully next year, they take on say 3-4 more customers, and from that they can then increase manufacturing rates for the e-cat.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • BillH

            I don’t understand why people are now saying this is a test, rather than a contract. AR has repeated several times the the customer expects to receive a continuous output of 1MWth steam presumable at a specific temperature, pressure and mass flow rate for at least 350 days over a 400 day production period. If that’s not met the customer could quite easily pocket the energy savings and return the plant to IH without penalty. Then
            IH would be quite entitled too keep their data, as it would be practically worthless to anyone else. Under the current circumstances AR/IH have virtually guaranteed to supply a set amount of energy without regard to what it might cost them, the risk is all theirs. Actually modifying the plant while it’s doing all this might jeopardise the end result, downtime is costly, perhaps to the customer, certainly to IH. From a contractual point of view
            everything is best left well alone, until something breaks and needs repair.
            It seems to me that AR is treating this set-up as a test without regard to the contractual implications. Let’s hope he can fulfil both.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Well, it is in effect a “test run” on a customer site. So we
            likely should get too twisted up in semantics here.

            So while this is a real working plant, it also a chance to
            find out what works and what does not.

            I suppose Rossi could have spent a few more years testing
            and THEN get one into the hands of willing customer (gini pig).

            So yes, they were confident about numbers they could
            deliver, likely signed some contract in terms of the amounts of energy they could deliver.

            However, they are also testing and learning as they go

            So perhaps a better term then test, would be this is
            their first working model at a customer site.

            This real world testing is not only invaluable, but EVERY
            SINGLE day that passes means Rossi is one more day ahead of the competition that WILL ALSO have to undergo such testing.

            Competition can throw money at their competing devices to
            the e-cat, but 1 year still takes one year of testing.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Private Citizen

            Even if the costumer is entirely beyond reproach and independent (you don’t know who the secret customer is and yet seem to have 100% faith in its determinations, a priori) , that customer might be fine counting and accepting a dozen eggs from Rossi.

            My point is that the for-profit customer with incentives to attract investors, etc. certainly will not be accepted as a reliable independent test by the public, especially if a distinguished team of scientists under laboratory conditions with full open reporting were dismissed simply because Rossi was present at one point. Can’t follow that reasoning? Very well, then. Time will test your egg science.

          • LuFong

            What about 12,000,000 eggs?

          • Omega Z

            That’s why they have minimum wage employees.
            Keeps them eggs affordable. 🙂

          • US_Citizen71

            Since in your world everyone is completely open about testing of products in development, can you please tell us what the specs and performance are for the Apple iPhone8 and the Ford 2018 F150? If you can’t then it is obvious that Apple and Ford must be scammers since they are not publishing such data to the public!

            See how ridiculous your assumption becomes when it is applied to other companies.

          • Private Citizen

            Apple and Ford both have a track record of independently proven products, so one gives them the benefit of doubt on incremental improvements to mundane products. However if Apple or Ford were to announce upcoming anit-gravity, time travel or warp drive technology, i for one would wait for proof, in my world.

            Faith has no place in science.

          • US_Citizen71

            Rossi doesn’t work for academia he works in the business world, so the rules of academic science do not truly apply. Businesses keep details vague until product launch. Academia had it’s chance to be in on it, but the leaders were to busy doing their best Lord Kelvin impressions, so now they get to wait just like his competitors.

          • Private Citizen

            So would you invest your life’s savings in Rossi based upon the pronouncement of the TBD umpire and a secret trial? I wouldn’t. Lots of other LENR businesses, as well as a raft of perpetual motion machines on PESwiki, claim to have independent verification too. Invest in those also, or reserve your faith for one savior?

            Faith has no place in business either.

          • US_Citizen71

            “So would you invest your life’s savings in Rossi based upon the pronouncement of the TBD umpire and a secret trial?”

            No and nor would any businessman, but I have seen enough that if I did have the capital to make a meaningful investment say 7 or 8 figures I would make contact and then do my own due diligence firsthand before committing it.

          • Jarea

            Yes you are right everything depends if we go to market. But what would happens if he cant?. You know there is his open F9 door. Another year here selling hope?

          • US_Citizen71

            If they do not launch a product during the first half of next year they risk losing their lead and I’m sure they know that. Knowledge builds on knowledge so if the anomalous heat effect is real and it appears to be, then every small public disclosure helps build on the base that is already known. Eventually someone else will have that eureka moment and things will progress even faster. A good businessman knows to stay ahead of that curve.

            New inventions take what they take to come to market. The white LED was discovered over 25 years ago and only became commercially viable about five years ago. The only faith needed is that progress and discovery will continue no matter what we believe, which it always has.

          • BarneyP

            Well, not so ridiculous.
            How many iPhoneSomething can you buy at a randomly selected Apple Store?
            How many E-CatSomething at a randomly selected Rossi shop?

            Can YOU operate an iPhone (I mean, today)?
            Can YOU operate an E-Cat (the same as above)?

            Rossi always told you “the market will decide”.
            Mr. Market is waiting Rossi’s products since 2011, he will be eager to decide, but…
            Something always happen to Mr. Rossi.
            Incidentally, nothing seem to happen to Apple production lines.

            Is this a coincidence?
            We believe NOT!

      • Daniel Maris

        We need some detail. This is part of the problem. If we find that – as in the first big test – there is a diesel engine on site generating the electricity, then all bets are off really aren’t they? We need to know the exact set up.

        So in my view it’s all down to IH to do. They can make it credible by providing a wealth of information about the set up.

  • Gerard McEk

    I believe AR has more often talked about this independant referee. I do hope they have chosen a really large and respectable independent company also in relation to LENR/CF. National Instruments would therefore not be my first choice but another company. That has two advantages: first that the LENR technology is shown to other and perhaps more critical engineers and secondly that it may be more convincing.

  • timycelyn

    Bob- in the last 4 liines something a little like a pathoskep slip is showing! His points as to why not are credible, well known, and you’ree looking more than a little disingenuous with this comment.

    Misrepresenttion by omission does not usually result in an argument or point of view being strenthened.

    In the unlikely event that you somehow missed it, he cannot report on the performance figures of the 1Mw unt due to contractual commitments with the customer. The new reactor (not really impressed with your snide naming, btw) is under Leonardo or possibly IH control at this point, and he has more freedom.


    • Jarea

      In my opinion he just seems healthy skeptic

      • Omega Z

        Actually, he & a couple others as of late sounds much like people who trolled here in the past under a different pseudonym.

        • Jarea

          He is just exposing what it has happenned in terms of commercialization. He has forgotten other great achievements of Rossi. But the reality is what he has exposed.

      • timycelyn


        Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

  • DocSiders

    At a COP of only 3, there would be over 20,000 MWHrs of excess heat. It is hard to miss seeing clear evidence of that amount of energy. If all three parties have data that agree to within only 50%, then it’s strictly a matter of the reputation of the parties.

    • wpj

      If you see the advert on the Australian site for the Mw plant, then it’s money back if it doesn’t achieve COP of 6.

      • DocSiders

        It would require room temperature superconducting wires to hide a covert energy source that could deliver these types of loads. And being able to pull something like that off would be worth almost as much as LENR.

  • psi2u2

    This morning’s NPR news predicts $20 barrell oil in 2016. Huh? How is that possible in today’s gluttonous world?

    Well, I think we, here, know the only answer that makes sense. Watch out for falling energy stocks.

    • Brent Buckner

      Not to dispute your larger point, but note that the futures markets for oil in 2016 are trading significantly over $20:

      • Alan DeAngelis

        They should also invest in slide rule companies.

        • radvar

          I was wondering where I left that.

      • Daniel Maris

        Quite – LENR won’t be affecting the current price. I think LENR may, along with other new energy technologies (like vastly improved and ever cheaper solar power), be exerting some downward pressure on price in the long term.

        • Omega Z

          Only Electric cars could have much impact on Oil and at present, Ev production isn’t even offsetting the increased car demand let alone cutting into traditional car sales.

  • If LENR works?
    Does the fact that there is in fact a working plant in existence.
    Do the doubters really think that this is all a hoax?.( silly question)
    Whether the EVR or Mr Rossi, Or the customer say it does,
    Is of no consequence LENR is out and will stay out.
    It is all about when not IF.

    • GreenWin

      Skeptics cling to negative outcomes with greater tenacity than believers in the positive do. Safety in group-think is the foundation of “consensus science.” Odd, isn’t it?

  • Brent Buckner

    Yes, and by having independent tests IH may improve its ability to attract investment to underwrite the guarantee.

  • Christina

    I can’t figure out how to jump through the “Discus” hoop as that stuff always causes problems for my computer, but I left a message which I hope says, “LENR will come.”


  • psi2u2

    Perhaps so, but that does not contradict the idea that one of the major drivers of the downward market trend is looming LENR.

  • radvar

    They don’t have to convince the world. They only have to convince the next set of customers.

    • Daniel Maris

      Very true. And that’s how we will know the tech is genuine – if the customer base expands exponentially.

  • GreenWin

    Private Citizen makes a point. Tests of technology shrouded in secrecy are fodder for the skeptic. Take for example the $59 BILLION taxpayer dollars swallowed by the U.S. “black” budget last year. How do taxpayers monitor this spending?

    The difference between Rossi/IH secrecy and U.S. black budget projects is – Rossi/IH spend their own money. Black budgets spend the taxpayer’s (i.e. the people’s) money. Which expenditure will better serve mankind?

  • Brent Buckner

    “Goldman’s base case — its most likely scenario — is that WTI oil prices are at $38 in one month and $45 in 12 months.” from

    • GreenWin

      Bill, ” AT&T, National Semiconductors, Bell Labs or Texas Instruments,” are all private corporations – none are standards labs. AT&T is currently the defendant in a class action lawsuit re domestic spying.

      Commercial ventures like E-Cat don’t give a fig about academic credibility. Academia has shot itself in the foot so many times over the last 50 years, they don’t have a leg to stand on.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    I not sure where or why people think that this company
    wanting to verify delivery of goods that they should pay for or need some kind
    of internal standards lab like SRI or Bell labs etc.?

    There is NEVER any suggesting that such verification of
    goods delivered is for public consumption or even for Rossi or for some kind of
    test that Rossi will release to the public.

    I mean if you are running a small sandwich or deli shop
    in the mall, and today you have a delivery for 4 hams, you don’t just blind
    accept that the delivery man sent you 4 hams (your employee or you will count
    the hams, and THEN sign off on the delivery order). That way you not paying for
    4 hams, but only receiving 2 hams.

    If a company expect 20 pipes that are 4 inches in diameter,
    and 50 feet long today, they don’t just let the truck driver drop off those pipes.
    They will have a man working in the delivery yard that COUNTS the pipes as they
    are pulled off the truck. And in MOST cases he will also MEASURE the length of
    the pipes. (especially if they are all different in length).

    In other words in any business transaction no company on
    the planet blinds accepts and pays for delivery of goods without some kind of FOLLOW
    UP or checking in place.

    This applies to the tiny sandwich shop in the mall or an industrial
    manufacture taking delving of pipe.

    And the reverse is true! The company making the delivery
    of the expensive pipe is NOT going to BLINDLY trust the customer in THEIR yard
    to count the pipes and state how much feet of pipe was delivered!

    The simple matter here is the customer is purchasing
    power and paying on those savings. They are NOT going to accept on face value
    the numbers from Rossi. And like a deli shop, or ANY business, they use their
    own employee to verity this.

    The above is called conducting business by the way!

    So I not sure why or where or for what reason anyone here
    thinks this ERV is for Rossi or for us the public? Nothing EVER suggested as

    Even the test results of this year run have NEVER been promised
    to be released by Rossi.

    And why?

    The simple matter is when Rossi has plants or energy for
    sale, they will simply state what your expected savings are going to be. They
    will likely offer a money back guarantee, and LITTLE risk to the customer in
    this regards will exists. In other words, simply return the plant after 30 days
    if you not realizing our claims of saving – there will be rather large line ups
    for such plants – ZERO problem exists to sell such savings.

    The idea that such data will be released to public or
    even provided to new customers is PLAIN silly. All they have to do is state
    what their claims of power savings are going to be. If the customer does not receive
    such power savings, they likely will be able to return the reactor.

    The idea that NEW customers will see or need to see these
    test relates is plain silly.

    All one has to grasp here is the process of a deli in the
    mall accepting delivery of 4 hams and everything else makes sense.

    So Rossi not going to blind accept claims by the company
    of how much energy they are saving, and the company not going to blind accept Rossi’s
    numbers either. This is QUITE MUCH how EVERY SINGLE business transaction on the
    plant has worked since the dawn of time.

    In other words, if 2000 years ago you are selling me 12
    eggs then you are going to count the 12 eggs, likely before my eyes as you
    place them into my sack. So I will verify the 12 eggs and so you will you.

    Of course if people here cannot grasp and deal with the intellectual
    problem of purchasing 12 eggs, then little hope exists for them to comment on
    that of Rossi’s nuclear reactor.

    I suppose some might suggest that when you go to the store
    to purchase 12 eggs you need some kind of government representative to help you verify and count the 12 eggs, but in general practice this is not required.

    The intellectual process of purchasing 12 eggs is NOT ANY
    different then what is occurring between Rossi and the customers.

    If one can grasp the concept of purchasing 12 eggs, then
    one can well grasp and understand how and why both Rossi and the customer are
    going to use their own people to verify the delivery of their goods.

    On the other hand, if people cannot handle the problem of
    purchasing 12 eggs, then I suspect some form of air or water pollution is occurring
    on a massive scale that has reduced the average IQ of people to the point in
    which they are challenged when purchasing 12 eggs.

    This is how near all business work when exchanging goods.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • HS61AF91

      Trust, but verify. Very true. Money back guarantee, Woop-di-Do!

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Well, without question shopping at a well-established retailer
        with a great return policy is VERY powerful in terms of selling a product. if you know the product, then you can shop anyplace and even purchase used without warranties etc.
        However, for a new product, then you need some kind of peace of mind.

        The simple matter is if after that 30 day trial you’re not happy and can return the product tis a HUGE selling point. However Rossi cannot make such an offer until they know what kind of offer they can make!

        I mean, when GM offers some 100,000 mile drive train warranty,
        I don’t think some paper on drive trains from MIT is going to put the consumer at
        ease – the guarantee of the service really is the bottom line, be it a power
        train warranty, or how much the e-cat will save you.

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • HS61AF91

    would add fear on Saudi’s part of LENR.

    • bachcole

      That reminds me. OPEC it a cartel, and freaking conspiracy. But that doesn’t work so well, does it?

  • Omega Z

    “depreciation allowances for equipment” The same allowance provided to all business. There’s variable ways to tax. Expenses usually fall under tangible(an asset) & non-tangible(non asset) costs.
    If you’re a delivery business, you deduct fuel costs(non-tangible) it’s a business expense, not a profit. Then there’s the vehicle, tangible(an asset) also a business expense, but an ongoing asset that is taxed under Capital gains.

    These assets are of the nature that they depreciate or eventually devalue to zero. Thus, the depreciation allowance. Note your employer deducts your wages as it’s an expense(non-tangible), not profit or asset. Subsidies are in the eye of the beholder. If your employer provides health insurance, that is part of your income. Did you pay Federal, State or local income tax on that. Yeah, NO… But note that some politicians are eyeballing. It’s a subsidy.

    Big Oil bids Million$ to lease on public land whether they find oil or not. If they find & produce oil on this land, The Government gets a clear 15% of gross sales. Even if the Oil company sells that oil at a loss. Many States also charge a Severance tax. Then there’s a depletion tax & if you have a Oil platform offshore where the oil is depleted, a State tax for dismantling/decommissioning said platform. Yes this is deductible from Federal tax. Not supposed to be taxed twice on the same money.

    The Question is Who subsidizes Who. The combined Government fees rake in over $150 billion a year from Oil. But you’re concerned about a conceived but largely unused 2 Billion$ subsidy. This is a subsidy aimed at small oil companies most of who can’t qualify. For Big oil, it costs more to obtain then what can be obtained.

    Big oil considers it a Lawyer’s subsidy. They Don’t use it. Notice the Politicians have quit threatening to eliminate this subsidy since Big oil said to get rid of it, their tired of being bashed with the nonsense. It is merely a subsidy in name. Unused & rolled over on the books every year.

    But here’s the bottom line. This all means nothing. Corporations & Business do NOT pay taxes. They collect taxes for the Government. It’s all included in the prices of products & services. It is all a business expense. And If I want a net 10% profit, it will be based on the higher product price that includes all those taxes.

    In essence, higher business taxes can mean more dollars in my pocket. Even if the profit margin stays the same. But you’re welcome to continue believing the Government propaganda.

  • Omega Z

    I fully Agree,
    Cut daily Oil production by 4 million barrels a day and the price will exceed $100 a barrel by next week.
    The only thing I consider on Oil is the lease contracts extending 20 years out. And there was quite a shuffle in them a while back. But that has no effect on today’s supply & demand.

  • Omega Z

    $20 oil would result from new storage capacity building not able to keep up with the surplus supply. When there is no where to store it, well prices will drop with some turning off the taps. It’s getting real tight already. Dozens of super tankers off shore with nowhere to unload.

  • builditnow

    MFMP power analyzer purchased:
    Thanks to all those who donated to MFMP / Alan Goldwater towards the purchase a power analyzer. $768 was received towards a Tektronix PA1000
    power analyzer on ebay for about $2200. This instrument enables the automation of glow stick and other experiments at Alan’s lab so that experiments can run more frequently, for longer periods and can be programmed ahead of time. If you wish to be involved in the automation projects, see

  • Albert D. Kallal

    Actually they do. They just don’t have to do it manually as
    the goods come off the truck. And in most cases the company making the delivery in NEAR ALL CASES will have some kind of tracking system to insure that the goods have been delivered anyway.

    And the receiving company cannot start manufacturing or make
    a sandwich or provide ANY KIND of service based on those delivered goods unless they know they have them! You cannot make a ham sandwich if you don’t have any hams on hand!

    So the company accepting the goods does not necessary
    count every piece coming off the truck but their accounting systems will match
    up services rendered and consumables (inventory) used to render that product or

    In effect the matching and checking is in place, and such
    checking with today modern information systems is certainly not limited to
    counting widgets as they come off the truck. However, that inventory and accounting of the widgets will occur. Without such information you cannot tell if a given product or service is making you money (or how much), and worse you can’t tell if product is going missing internal, or due to incorrect external delivery’s.

    And as noted, in many cases this is not an issue of dishonestly,
    but simply that of keeping track of things. I not aware of ANY company that
    does not track their use of goods delivered by suppliers. Tracking such use of
    goods from suppliers will occur at some point in time. So such checking is not
    limited nor will always occur at truck unloading time. However an accounting of
    those goods will occur.

    If such counting of those goods is not occurring then the
    business has no clue what they are doing. If you don’t track the input cost of proving that service, then you cannot figure out what part of your business is doing well, or even loosing money.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.