CGI Images of 1MW E-Cat Plant Posted on

On the website run by Hydro Fusion, a Leonardo Corp. licensee in Sweden, computer generated images have been posted of the latest version of the 1MW E-Cat plant that is currently being tested by Andrea Rossi and his team.

Rossi commented on the JONP: “Look well these artistic representations: you see the 4 “Tigers” one upon the other. It is the actual configuration of the 1 MW plant.”

Here’s one of the images; the rest can be seen at this link:


  • bachcole

    Wouldn’t the rising hot air raise the temperature of the tiger above? Wouldn’t this contribute to the problem of control? Shouldn’t the be “stacked” horizontally rather than vertically?

    • GordonDocherty

      The engineering problem is to fit the whole within a single shipping container – hence the stacking. After all, servers are stacked, and then need fans and other cooling systems to keep them cool. Providing the insulation is effective, the heat being radiated from the lower units can more than be compensated for by slight adjustments in the upper units. It is reasonable to expect the temperature in the container outside of the reactors is not too much higher than ambient, and certainly not into the hundreds of degrees when such issues of air temperature would start to be of concern.

      • Unreal.2K7

        Also, there seems to be an AC unit mounted on the outside (that i suppose gets detached during shipping), so the inside gets properly cooled.

  • Agaricus

    The blue boxes I assume contain mostly insulation and are not commoned heat exchange tanks, so the reactors are probably inserted into blind tubes through which water is circulated by a ‘dedicated’ metering pump at a rate determined by the control boxes hung on the side of the unit. This arrangement may make replacement of individual reactors relatively simple, and exchange is probably possible with just the affected 250kW reactor bank shut down for the duration.

    Interesting numbers:- What looks like 15 reactors per ‘tiger’, and 6 or 12 metering pumps per reactor bank (i.e., possibly 6 more on the opposite, unseen end of each ‘tiger’). I’m inclined to think the latter is most likely despite lack of any indication of this in the cgi rendering, i.e., 12 duty reactors of slightly over 20kW each, with 3 standby reactors per bank at any given time, one metering pump per reactor.

    Have I missed any other clues in the image?

    • Gerard McEk

      I am not sure if the 250kW units contain more than 1 Ecat. I thought AR said that it is only one Ecat, but I am not sure. The 15 or 16 side ‘things’ can also be temperature/flow metering access points.

      • Gerard McEk
        • Agaricus

          Thanks- that disposes of the ’12 pumps’ option then.

          • Gerard McEk

            I asked Andrea if the 250 kW unit contains 15 or 16 Ecats. He replied ‘wrong’. Interestingly, the fact that only 3 tigers are in operation, does not mean that less energy is being delivered or that the final test end date will move, so maybe the spare 1 MW unit has been switched on.

          • ecatworld

            He has said that each tiger is a single reactor, not made up of small E-Cats.

          • Agaricus

            That doesn’t appear to be consistent with the 6 metering pumps per module depicted in the rendered image. Six pumps means separate 6 flow streams, and its difficult to reconcile that with a single reactor. There are also the 15 or so caps along the side of each module enclosure, each supplied by two cables, so there appear to be 15 identical ‘somethings’ in each 250kW module. No other means of accessing a single core is apparent.

            Perhaps the ‘sub units’ are synchronised in some way so that Rossi considers them to operate as a single unit – although that would be stretching things a little.

          • US_Citizen71

            Mutiple pumps might mean more than one heat exchanger per reactor module.

          • Gerard McEk

            Maybe it is just to ensure a proper water flow in the internals and avoidance of hot spots. I guess the 15 or 16 ‘things’ at the side measure this in a kind of matrix like approach?

          • timycelyn

            Hi Peter, I have a different take on this. I reckon these graphics represent mainly the previous generation of technology (50-off units or whatever it was) which Rossi has told us many times is part of the 1MW test container, but purely as a back up if the tigers really go south. I have assumed that things have not go so bad yet that he has had to fall back on these, but I could be wrong.

            The tigers are so small you can miss them – we don’t actually see them in any of the pictures, but we DO see their feed pumps in 1 picture. I’ve attached a screen grab – look at the back wall of the container, 4 metering pumps one above the other.

            Could be totally wrong, of course…..

          • ecatworld

            I thought the same at first, Tim, and asked AR about it. He confirmed the four blue boxes are the four tigers:

            ” Look well these artistic representations: you see the 4 “Tigers” one upon the other. It is the actual configuration of the 1 MW plant.”

          • timycelyn

            Frank, mysteries and misdirection. My head hurts! I saw that comment and I agree your interpretation is perfectly valid, but I just read it another way.

            I applied the Rossi English correction factor and took him as saying “Look carefully at these artistic interpretations. you will see the 4 tigers one above the other…..” That made me go searching around the picture carefully and found 4 pumps one above the other.

            Also, remember the famous picture of him with a stetescope on a 6″ x 30″ (guessed sizes from memory) tube? I’m sure at the time we concluded that that was a Tiger…

            I give in – but trying to figure it out is very compulsive 🙂

          • ecatworld

            The pictures seem to square with the dimensions he gave of the tiger in May: m 2 x 0.3 x 0.7 (see my comment above)

          • timycelyn

            Wow Frank, congratualtions on the diligent digging!

            If you can get back to that point in the archive again, could you check if there anything in the associated question, or context, that makes it clear whether these comments related to a single Tiger (ie each tray in the rack we now see is a Tiger, to the dimesions above as you have deduced) or an array of four – ie the whole 1MW ‘Tiger plant’ was of these dimensions, presumably consisting of four of the ‘stethescope tubes’ racked up next to each other .

            Don’t trust my memory but I have a faint impression it was the latter.

            (“Tim: Must you flog that dead horse? It really won’t move you know…..” )

          • ecatworld

            Sorry Tim, I should have included the questions along with the answers:

            “Q: Thank you for the update-a 250 KW E-cat sounds very interesting. [1] Are the 250KW reactors low or high temperature E-cats? [2] How big are they? [3] Do you believe that there will be more favorable economics for the larger E-Cats because fixed costs like the controls, etc, are spread over a larger reactor?”

          • timycelyn

            Thanks Frank. Looks like I’ve been chasing rainbows!

            But in that case, what was he listening to with that Stethoscope in that famous picture.?!? Yet another sort of Cat?

            Terminally puzzled……

          • Agaricus

            Me too!

          • Stephen

            Didn’t He mention once the size of the 250 kW units? Or am I getting confused with the hot e-cat or e-cat x?

          • ecatworld

            Andrea Rossi
            May 19th, 2015 at 11:16 AM
            1- low temperature
            2- m 2 x 0.3 x 0.7
            3- tests on course
            Warm Regards,

          • Stephen

            Thanks, so if the shipping container is about 2.5m x 2.5m x 6m (I’m guessing the size there so I apologise if it is incorrect) I suppose it is about the right dimensions assuming the additional space for the frame and allowing for walking room around the device.

            I have to say it is a very neat smart design.

            Didn’t he mention he had an older version of the e-cat with smaller units in the same container though?

            Perhaps the container he is using in the lab is a little longer with one version behind the other.

            I wonder if the drawing represents the prototype or the to be marketed version containing just one version.

          • Agaricus

            Hi Tim. I think that must be the answer – the unit in foreground does seem to correspond to the original unit’s spec. Even the caption is possibly designed to mislead; “Interior view of first generation ECAT 1 MW Plant. Note the racks are built of ECAT 250 kW modules in parallell (sic).”

            And yes, now you point them out, the four red things on the rear wall do look like side-mounted metering pumps, possibly supplying the new 1MW version, which may be mounted directly between the in/out main pipes.

            Sneaky little hobbitses.

          • Agaricus

            I missed that – where did Rossi state that there are only three ‘tigers’ in operation currently? Of course, if my supposition that each module contains multiple reactors is correct, then the installation could cope with one module being down, by simply firing up two of the standby units in each of the remaining three modules.

          • ecatworld

            I don’t recall reading only three tigers, either.

          • Gerard McEk

            That’s what I read in the latest messages on, but perhaps I read it wrong. I thought it’s because of a disturbance.

          • ecatworld

            I think probably this, regarding the E-Cat X:

            Hi andrea,
            how many E-CAT X modules are in operation under test? only one or more?

            Alessandro Coppi:
            Three in parallel.
            Warm Regards,

          • AdrianAshfield

            That was when he had a problem. Four work normally

          • Gerard McEk

            Thanks Frank

      • Stephen

        I think else where he mentioned 56 thermocouples at different points in the device for the steam and and similarly 56 thermocouples for the inflow and 56 pressure sensors I wonder if these sensors grouped in these “side things” but if so it seems we have more than 14 per device. I wonder if 1 or 2 are spares.

  • Alex Rad

    Looks like the 1500Kg/h spec may be per module. Allowing for the max. 116 degC raise in temp, that’s more like 200KW per module vs the rated 250KW.

  • timycelyn

    Hi Donald – isn’t this producing steam? If you assume steam just over 100C then phase change (540 cal/gm from my schooldays) plus temperature rise gives you a number in the order of 1MW.

    • timycelyn

      Rossi has confirmed this is the case on JONP.

  • clovis ray

    wow, what a beautiful machine, i guess it’s just the gearhead in me, but still.

  • Stephen

    The technical data on the same site also looks interesting is that also new?

  • Jimr

    I am wondering if the view they are showing is only of the 64 backup units which Rossi stated earlier. The actual 4 larger units are located on the other side. Rossi did say this was a rendition of his actual plant which it could be.

  • GordonDocherty

    This way, the unit as a whole is self-contained – and emphasizes the inherent micro-generation nature of LENR. Of course, a mobile generator becomes one excellent use for such a system for emergencies, outdoor events / film units / anything “off the grid”. For the LENR vs. central generating model, think PC vs. mainframe. We still have mainframes (although even they now use much of the technology that powers the PC on your desk / tablet in your hand / smartphone in your pocket). The vast majority of computer power in this world, however, is now based on the ubiquitous processor, memory and controller / AC “chips” we all now take for granted:

    4004: 1971 (first commercial processor) – 2300 transistors
    8008: 1972
    8080: 1974
    6502: 1975
    Z80: 1976
    68000: 1979
    8086: 1979
    80286: 1982
    68020: 1984
    80386: 1985
    80486: 1989:
    P5 (Pentium): 1993 – 3,100,000 transistors
    Core: 2006
    Core 2 Quad: 2007
    Core i7: 2008 – around 1,500,000,000 transistors

    more details here:

    So, starting with around 2300 transistor in the Intel 4004 by 1993 that had reached 3.1 million in the Pentium – 15 years later, the i7 had around 1.5 transistors.

    With the LENR NAE sites being likewise small in nature, there is little reason not to also expect some form of performance improvement following the introduction of the basic “4004” equivalent: the rate of energy extraction will ultimately limit the density of NAE sites and hence LENR systems.

    So, to answer your question, because we are at the start of a process that will see LENR system volumes decrease for the same amount of power out, but a shipping container is as good a place as any to start…