Is Rossi Betting Against His 1MW E-Cat Plant?

Quite a lot of attention has been given to this exchange on the Journal of Nuclear Physics:

Mr “AR”:
At the end of your tests it will turn out that your plants do not work and are not reliableI bet 1000 Euros to win 3000Eyros if you fail. I bet you will fail.
…and I remain anonymous, so you can say you spammed “nobody”.

Andrea Rossi

As strange as it might seem, I think
maybe you will win your bet.
Warm Regards

So here we have Andrea Ross seemingly siding on the side of a negative outcome to the E-Cat test that has been going on for almost 10 months now.  What are we to make of this apparent pessimistic attitude regarding the test?

Personally, I’m not sure.

To me it seems obvious that the “Rossi Effect” is real. There are plenty of reasons for me to come to this conclusion, many of which I have listed in this post. The recent interview that Fulvio Fabiani gave with Mats Lewan ( is in my opinion the latest piece of evidence in favor of the reality of the Rossi effect.

What’s not obvious is if the E-Cat plant that Rossi has been running for the last 10 months or so is up to the task of being a commercial product. From what AR has reported, the plant has needed hundreds of repairs over the course of the test, and now we know that Rossi is moving onto a new E-Cat design with the E-Cat X, which he seems to think is superior to previous versions of his reactor. The E-Cat X, however, has only been running for a month, and Rossi reckons that it will need a 6 month test to see if it will be useful in commercial products.

I have wondered whether Rossi has considered ditching the current design being used in the 1MW plant in favor of using the E-Cat X in future low temperature plants. I asked him whether future low temperature plants would use the same design as the one he is currently testing, and he replied:

Andrea Rossi

Frank Acland:
The external design will be similar to the one published in the artistic 3D embodiment published on
The technological design will inherit the enormous experience we made during the tests and will take advice of all the shortcomings we experienced in this important test.
Warm Regards,

I later asked if he thought that future low temperature plants would incorporate E-Cat X units. His response:

Frank Acland:
It’s a possible option.
Warm Regards,

So I think Rossi might well be agreeing with “Anonymous” that his current plant is not reliable and would not be suitable to be put in the marketplace as it is right now — and that an improved design is needed. Does that mean the test results will be positive or negative? I guess that depends on the definition being used. They might be able to get the plant to limp across the finish wire having met the contractual requirements of the test, but that would not mean this design is suitable for the marketplace. In that respect the test could be considered positive in one sense, and negative in another.

I hope it will all be clearer early next year.

  • Gerard McEk

    I would assume that as long as AR makes the remark ‘it can be positive or negative’, it is still positive. In my view there is no need to wait untill the end to do a review of the performance and reliability. I am sure AR is doing that all the time. It would make hardly sense to continue the test if you have already decided that the design doesn’t work, unless it is for another reason. A high temperature device (E-cat X ~1400 C) might have a better performance, but in time I would expect it to be less reliable then the ~700 C version in the 1 MW plant now being tested.

    • Brokeeper

      The 1MW plant was deisigned more as a diagnostic (test) plant, to improve the E-Cat products, not to confirm any initial product. But to say it ran for a year is still a major milestone. A win win scenario.

      • Frechette

        My impression of AR’s remark is that he is humoring Anonymous,

      • Agaricus

        Yes, that is the purpose of a pilot plant. It is the first step towards a marketable product – there will probably be two or three more.

        I sincerely hope that Rossi will hand further refinement over to professional development engineers, rather than drop the current version while he tinkers with ‘e-cat x’ and derivatives. Hopefully that is what the F9 mantra is about – if positive, an investor will step in and undertake the rest of the process, with Rossi as adviser only.

        • Brokeeper

          That is a problem with perfectionists. They never want to end as long as another refinement is left to make. Hope AR comes to see the sweet spot of maximum returns soon.

        • Brent Buckner

          Given the rights that IH reportedly has, and the workspace far away from where Rossi is, I suspect that there’s already a parallel development process in play (though perhaps not fully running as yet).

  • Brokeeper

    Yes, I am also sure he will lose to “Nobody”.

  • Rossi is a total douche, given that he would say what he said at this point. I’m sorry, but it’s true…

    • mike wolf

      Yea, I mean why slap us like that? I thought he was better than Mills in that respect. Maybe he also doesn’t give a crap about his supporters. I just hope we haven’t become “useful idiots”.

      • Agaricus

        Its difficult to see how we might be useful…

    • radvar

      While that seems a little harsh, I appreciate the sentiment

      • Slightly Skeptic

        When Rossi continues to use his F9 key I sometimes find myself doubting the concept. But, I can always find peace of mind by looking at the Lugano report. The graph that displays the device COP, bottom of page 24, as a function of days/2 is an extremely strong indication of positive thermal feedback in operation.

        The quite rapid rise in COP that occurs during the transition between days/2 5 and days/2 6 is exactly what should be demonstrated once that feedback takes effect. It is also apparent that the magnitude of positive feedback present is intentionally limited, which results in a lower COP than Rossi specifies as typically being greater than 6.

        The presence of positive feedback is the only reasonable explanation for the rapid rise in COP so the Rossi effect must be taking place. Whether or not this particular design can hold up over time at the high temperatures is a different question, but someone, somewhere, is going to be able to make a reliable product one day soon. The die has been cast!

  • With two months to go, ten months of working inside a shipping container, he should know by now whether the results are positive or negative. If he fails at this then perhaps he should think of contributing his findings to the Cold Fusion collective from which he has deeply benefited.

    • SG

      I think he does know.
      Positive in the sense that the effect is real.
      Negative in the sense that the plant is not yet reliable enough for prime time.

      In the end, I think the results will be both positive and negative, as Frank alluded to above.

    • Well, Rossi has not changed the fuel charge of the E-Cats, so if anything went wrong it was the amount of downtime for repairs. If the E-Cats had stopped producing excess heat, he would have changed the charges. Before the Lugano test was complete, Rossi was “very worried” that they test would fail, but it turned out to be successful.

    • radvar

      Maybe Rossi was looking to make an easy 3000 EU.

    • Omega Z

      Barry, Rossi can have his opinions, but can’t provide an answer until it’s official from the 3rd party referee.

      • ecatworld


        December 17th, 2015 at 5:38 PM

        Dear Andrea,
        I cannot for myself understand what would compromise a negative conclusion to your test. Would it be possible for you to define what you would consider a negative outcome for us readers?
        Hopeful regards.

        Andrea Rossi

        December 17th, 2015 at 5:58 PM

        Many factors could turn negative and it is impossible to schedule the unknown.
        Let us complete our tests, then we will know.
        Warm Regards

  • MasterBlaster7

    I don’t think that exchange meant anything.

    I went back and read the exchanges on journal of nuclear physics. I think Rossi is just dancing around F9.

    Another exchange asked him about the possibilities of his jet engine becoming real. Answer: 50% Not 40% not 65% meaning that he is just giving a F9 response to everything where people are trying to glean extra information from him.

    His response to Anonymous:

    “As strange as it might seem, I think maybe you will win your bet.”

    Well…that is just saying that ‘F9’ there is a 50% chance that Anon will win his bet. That Rossi said ‘as strange’…is a good sign…meaning that Rossi is sitting on the positive side of 50%

    point being….nothing was really said here other than elaborate F9. Frank, don’t freak me out like that.

    • Observer

      Better is the bane of good enough.

      Best is the bane of better.

      All are time dependent states.

  • Nigel Appleton

    If I was an investor, I’d be on the phone demanding to know what the heck Rossi meant, and demanding reassurances.

    • mike wolf

      I hear that. Rossi seems to be playing games. Either that or his previous hype was over stated. It’s like he is setting things up in such a way that February will give us no answers. He has got a patent, why is he less revealing? I know if I was an investor, I would be nervous.

    • Omega Z

      Just a different perspective.
      If I were an Investor, I wouldn’t want Rossi publicly professing the test is positive before the test is concluded & analyzed by the referee.
      Perhaps as an Insider, I’d want to put more of my money into it before others are aware. Perhaps this statement is supported & pushed by the investors.

  • LuFong

    All Rossi is saying is that the results could be negative: ” I think maybe you will win your bet.” Slow news day?

    • Zephir

      It just illustrates, how fringe the reality of E-Cat actually is: given the actual volume of data we have, one shouldn’t be surprised with it. I for example don’t understand, why the temperature curves and data from E-Cat testing aren’t continuously presented at public. Such a data wouldn’t violate the know-how of A.Rossi at least a bit – but it would give us a clue about quality of experiments done so far.

      • LuFong

        Given that this is an industrial/commercial application I see no problem and am not surprised that the data is not released before the test is over. I do expect the data/report to be available shortly after the completion of the evaluation period, whether positive or negative. There are three sets of data: the independent body measuring performance, IH/Rossi, and probably the customer. Whether there is going to be a coordinated report or up to three separate reports remains to be seen.

  • bfast

    The real question, a question Rossi probably can’t answer, is how many down days he has had. I guess the possibility exists that the ECat-X is so much better that he/they feel that the original version is already obsolete — not worth putting into production.

    Man I hope this technology comes out from behind the wall in 2016!

  • Nietsnie

    I think you’ve made an excellent assessment, Frank. The test was never about whether excess energy can be produced, it was about whether it can be done reliably with the equipment setup they’re using. Potential failure during the test always included the plants reliability. The plant had to run, producing hot water for their customer, a certain number of days during the test for results to be considered positive. The test was about the potential of commercial success with that plant – not proving to the world that LENR is real. Many months into the test they’re still having problems with keeping it running – in spite of living in the shipping container. Maybe they’re close to the end of their slack.

    • Zephir

      I’ve permanent problem with inconspicuous glitch of official technical specification of 1 MW E-Cat power plant, which guarantees to produce the same amount of energy as its nominal electric input power, i.e. COP = 1 – not COP = 6. Just saying – maybe A. Rossi is really such an idiot, as S. Krivit occasionally paints him and he just cannot calculate well…

      I indeed hope, that it’s not true and that A. Rossi is a billionaire in disguise for eternal good of all of us – but as we all know, we are still waiting… The scientifically verified fact of cold fusion doesn’t imply, that A. Rossi already gained full control over it, despite his undeniable effort. The fully open thinking requires to consider all alternatives, including these negative ones.

      • Omega Z

        That would include a lot of people making measurement errors.
        At question is really about making the transition for Lab to to scaled up industrial use. Many technologies fall down at that point.

        Graphene has had a very hard time scaling to large size & OLED’s are another technology that has issues. At one time they thought OLED’s would be throw away cheap & only require a few 10’s of watts for a 7×10 foot wall display.

    • ecatworld

      Yes, even today AR writes that they have had to deal with leakages in the 1 MW plant.

      • Agaricus

        They have probably fitted a permanent drain in the floor of the container by now!

        I hope there are no carpets..

    • Edac

      Yes, I also agree with Frank’s assessment. It may well be that if it wasn’t for the contractual obligation they have with the customer, this test would have been stopped by now and they would have moved on to more productive activities. Repairing kit that is designed using materials that they now know are not optimum is not a fruitful or rewarding exercise. AR is doing the honourable thing and completing the contract.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    “As strange as it might seem” there is no way Rossi thinks his E-Car does not work. Might be very close to an announcement.

    • Hope you’re right Bernie.

    • giovanniontheweb

      to my understanding the “not work” result means simply that some more efficient ways may replace the previous one which from the industrial point of view won’t work and will have to be abandoned for the new one with further delay, in the same way the steam train works from the technological point of view it doesn’t work anymore for the use of it . Meanwhile that the test has been going new prototypes have been produced and for sure important details discovered, neglecting those it is like developing a steam train today hoping it will generate revenues tomorrow.

    • Omega Z

      Bernie, I’m reasonably certain (F9) refers to it being of Industrial use.
      A big difference Between a Lab setting & Industrial use.
      Not everything makes it out of the Lab. At least not without major issues to overcome.

  • SD

    Seems to me that a lot of you guys don’t realize that this is just another form of “the results could be positive or negative”.. Him saying “maybe you will win your bet” is equivalent to F9. So why is “everyone” freaking out when he says it in different words. Maybe people have been dulled by Rossi saying F9 and started ignoring it.

    But to me it is clear that Rossi is being cautious and doesn’t want to say that the 1 year test will be a success when it’s only been 9 or 10 months. I’m sure there’s a bunch of what if scenarios that play in his mind that prevent him from saying the plant is going to work all the way to March.

    As far as betting on his plant, don’t you think Rossi has bet enough? He’s committed 6500 hours of his time, his reputation, and his personal money to this project. Do you really want him to stress even more by adding a bet on top of that?

    • deleo77

      After reading his comments today it just seems like more of a case that Rossi doesn’t know what is in front of him. If this were a 4 quarter game, he would be going into the 4th quarter right now. Maybe Rossi feels like he is up by a few points but he could still lose in the 4th quarter. Perhaps the e-cat has a full breakdown in the coming weeks and can’t be repaired within the time window, so technically it fails the test.

      The thing that is hard to reconcile is the amount of time that has passed up to this point. If the e-cat has performed as advertised over the past 10 months, then I think just about everyone here would consider it a monumental breakthrough and a success, no matter what happens tomorrow. So it is difficult to see why so much weight has been put on this arbitrary 1 year time line, when an LENR device running successfully for 10 months would already be a world changing event. It would cause major companies to throw billions of dollars at it to solve whatever engineering challenges that remain.

      • US_Citizen71

        Maybe there’s a 100 million dollar or so investment contract to fund production riding on the outcome. The US government puts stipulations like that into defense R&D programs it is conceivable that a investment group might do the same.

        • Bob

          I have a new product that is possibly the biggest world changer since the atom bomb. Some large company comes to me as says… “I will give you a 100 million contract if this one test is positive. Only one test is required. Not multiple tests for my 100 million, but just this ONE. If it works I hand over the 100 million contract. BUT…. if this world changing technology runs one day short of the test parameter, I will pull my 100 million, walk away and never return. It will be a complete failure if it runs one day short or one week short or one month short of the test period. All or nothing!”
          Now almost everyone here would say that the above scenario is nonsense. If a company was going to invest 100 million, they would require A LOT more than one test. Even if it was a one year long test. They would ALSO require independent verification, (either internal or contracted out to a truly unrelated contractor) of those multiple tests. I have worked for companies where we have done this for contacts much less than 100 million!.
          Also, if the product shows huge potential, it is silly to say that if the first prototype does not perform to the standards of a mature product, that everything is a failure!
          Let look a the government and the NASA rocket replacement. Multiple companies participated. They had to prove their designs. Everyone of them had public failures of their rocket launches. Everyone of them had a rocket explode, utterly destroyed! Did this mean … “Crap, my first prototype failed so I am now out of the game? The test is F9 failure and my design is scrapped. ” No.
          It is totally reasonable and even likely that a proof of concept plant would need to be tested and tested for a long period. It is even more likely that multiple tests would be needed. It is just as likely that there would be issues on the first proof of concept test. Even multiple issues.
          But to say that the test is a failure because of some abstract number or parameter, especially if it is leaks or burn a coil out is just as silly as well. For the major company to pull out would be silly. After 10 months of operating, for Rossi to say that those betting against him may win or that he is not sure of his own product, is silly. Nothing wrong with saying improvements are needed or that some setbacks have occurred. To say that he cannot even confirm the “Rossi Effect” just fuels the naysayers.
          It is silly to have one post stating that “we can scale down to the watt level” and then have another post the same day stating that those betting against me may very well win! This does not paint a professional picture. I do not know what it paints, but it is not positive!
          Take a look at Dr. McKubre for example. Take a look at Brillioun. Compare how they present themselves to the public versus these kind of statements! Do they go to Congress and state “well… I have this device, but I cannot even state whether if works or not…. after 10 months of continuous testing…. I will not say that I have anything. While neither (Rossi’s approach or Brillioun’s approach) guarantees that either have a working product, one is much more palatable to being taken seriously. A similar situation between Tesla and Edison. Tesla was probably much more the “genius” than Edison. Yet during his live time and for a long time afterwards, Tesla was considered a flake, bordering the insane. Edison was considered a Rock Star. Edison saw many patents / inventions go to production. How many did Tesla see? Much of this was because people did not take Tesla seriously due to how he acted and communicated.
          Again, Rossi does not have to say anything at all. Sometimes I wish he would not say some of those things! I wish him well, I wish him is fortune, I wish him his fame. I wish he would stop making silly posts as well! 🙂
          As we continue to wait….

          • US_Citizen71

            Feel better?

          • GreenWin

            “I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make it shorter.” Pascal

          • The ultimate test is in the marketplace. If you shove all the propaganda aside, ask yourself can wind and solar power exist to any great significant extent in the marketplace without any subsidies or mandates? NO! They are monster children of governments gone wild. No one forced me to buy my solar power pocket calculator because that is an efficient and cost effective use of photovoltaics. I use the right tool for the right job. Wind is great for pumping water on a farm, not for producing electricity. India and Africa want fossil fuels, not solar and wind, because they are cheaper and reliable. The rich countries with money to burn spend huge amounts of money on wind and solar through strong arm tactics where the ignorant masses are forced to use them. Eliminate all subsidies and mandates across the board and wind and solar die a quick and deserving death. The marketplace is far smarter than politicians because it is based on the democracy of free choice; billions of people voting every day with their wallets for the best product at the lowest price.

          • sam

            HE says MAYBE you will win your bet.
            The same as he has been saying about the final result
            Maybe Positive Maybe Negative
            I wish you a merry Christmas and a good E CAT newyear

          • On a BTU or watt of energy basis, renewable energy sources are subsidised far more than fossil fuels. That said, my point is that all subsidies and mandates should be eliminated. People will still use fossil fuels because they work, but the renewable energy industry will go bankrupt. After all the hype and tax dollars wasted, solar energy provides only about .2% of US electricity, but looks how much money solar gets in subsidies.


            It’s all a con and a false hope. We have lots of windmills, but most of the time windmills are not producing sufficient amount of electricity to make them worthwhile, and the costs of fossil fuel back-up systems and long transmission lines makes it all an economic disaster.

          • jousterusa

            Mayve they are doing it with the e-cat tech at the new industrial park we’ve heard about!

          • Bob

            Actually yes! 🙂
            It is always good to have open and honest discussion. Note that I was not disparaging. I did not “make up” things about Rossi but tried to use his statements to avoid false pretense. I simply expressed honest thoughts without trying to be insulting nor abrasive.
            It is interesting how “group think” goes. Read the interesting list of posts on Vortex-L about climate change to see what I mean.
            “Group think” can be like what is on “the other ECAT site”, where almost everyone is full of vile, outright contempt and to anyone who opposes them, rude and indignant. It is was so bad there that I stopped visiting that site years ago. The “Group think” pendulum can also swing the other way too! Where everything must be “Rosie” (pun intended) and no doubt or question discussed. Only religious admiration is accepted and everything else is apostasy.
            Somewhere in the middle is reality. One should be balanced in all things. Positive but not blind in faith or opinion. Questioning but not rude nor intolerant. One should give credit where credit is due and as long as one is courteous and respectful, asking valid questions or pointing out inconsistencies is not bad either.
            I never trash someone for being “overly positive”. I may make a post why I see something different, but I would never trash someone who is honest about their beliefs.
            So as we are approaching this holiday of “Peace on Earth, good will to men”, I wish everyone peace and good will. (The realist in me thinks we sadly will not have peace in the world though) But we can have peace and respectful different opinions here on e-catworld! I for one wish everyone good will here, especially Dr. Rossi and friends!
            It is nightfall and I continue to wait……

          • Brent Buckner

            As you state, Rossi does not have to write anything at all; if it distresses you to read his writings I suggest that you don’t and leave the rest of us to read them, even the ones you deem silly.

            As for being taken seriously – well, Darden and Woodford and associates have taken Rossi seriously enough to put up tens of millions of dollars. Brilliouin is the group looking to Congress for money, having burned through private investors’ cash to the extent that apparently there’s not enough left to be tapped to reach their next milestone to spur more private investment.

          • Omega Z

            It is funny you bring up this scenario. “but just this ONE.”
            That is the exact scenario that played out when Rossi presented a test to Tom Darden. Had that test failed, there would be no Industrial heat & Tom Darden in the picture.

            It’s also funny that “Risk Oriented” Venture Capital is becoming very adverse to risk. So much so that should it go a little farther, the inventor or creator will soon be able to say- If I provide what you want before you provide funding, then why do I even need you.

            Venture Capital is also becoming impatient. Was a time they looked 10, 20 years down the road. Now they demand results in 1 to 5 years or they aren’t interested.

            Note: Brillouin’s Robert Godes has a 20 Million dollar commitment to transition a Coal plant to a Brillouin reactor. There is a stipulation involved. Before he gets 1 cent of that, he 1st needs to build a scaled up Reactor for that purpose. Until then, No Money. And they know that the Brillouin reactor works. At small scale.

            Thus, That Rossi would be looking at a similar situation isn’t any different.
            A stipulation to Build a 1MW E-cat that works dependably & then you get the funding. That small individual reactors work means very little. The Big money returns are in the big projects.

            Maybe what you fail to see is that all these LENR entities, Not just Rossi, are being pushed towards Government or Industrial/Commercial use. It’s where the low hanging fruit & huge profits lie.

            The lowly individual consumer uses only 21% of the energy & it’s spread out. Industrial use is concentrated. One installation may involve 1000’s of reactors. You only need a couple.

  • nietsnie

    LOL! Or – here’s another take:

    Dear obnoxious troll –
    What a great wager you have made. Perhaps you should bet more against the E-cat. Best wishes.

    • malkom700

      The IH will be forced to bring a product to market as it can easily happen that another competitor overtake them in this historical situation.

      • Omega Z

        “IH will be forced to bring a product to market”

        But this can’t happen until you have a product that’s ready.
        It’s why Rossi spends 16 hour days in the container.
        Also, the threat of competition does not make a 1 year test go faster. The duration is the same.

  • Jonnyb

    R&D can take many years, many failure and some successes. A product as complex and ground breaking as this will have many iterations, but in the end you have to run with one. This first commercial product will probably be a Monster, but in time it will become an Angel. Take the motor car, over 100 years and it’s still developing.

  • Billy Jackson

    I give all credit to Rossi and all due respect for what he’s invented and accomplished so far. I have stated in the past that Rossi may not be the engineer that gives us the best version of the E-CAT. while it may not seem like it. having an awesome invention and then bringing it to fruition as a commercial product is not always easy.. both require a different set of skills and knowledge.

    I personally believe the e-cat and LENR is real. I just dont expect that Rossi will be the one that leads the way in the end. He may start as a forerunner but it will be someone else that makes it main stream for john q public.

    I have not lost my faith in Mr. Rossi. i just think there is a world of difference between lab experiments and commercial operations.

    • ecatworld

      Maybe he needs people like Fulvio Fabiani who said this:

      “Rossi doesn’t like standard reasoning. He is not a linear researcher. I find myself arguing with Andrea because his views are not compatible with other points of view in a way so you can exchange information. I am lucky that after three years I now have a certain confidence, and this confidence allows me to do things in my own way regarding the power supply system, because what he thinks is not feasible for standard and linear technicians. I’m acting almost as an interpreter from his ideas to the standard world.

      • Billy Jackson

        you are more than likely correct. but that also shows the level of difficulty in working with genius. their way of thinking is what makes them the way they are. It does not always translate over to easy to get along with or even understand.

    • Brokeeper

      I’m right there with you Billy.
      Just to add, this is not just another lab experiment. It is a whole new science he’s been dealing with and with no prior knowledge except P&F‘s near clueless experiments. Rossi is reinventing fire no one previously believed existed. Most rules in this new
      scientific LENR concept are being discovered and written by him alone.

      Most of the laws of electromagnetism and electricity had already existed before Edison tenaciously applied it to a working light bulb and generator. Rossi has not had that luxury in this bleeding edge frontier of nuclear physics all previously have deemed impossible.

      I can’t understand the impatience and consternation so many have towards a person that has given 100% of his waking hours to singly catapult the world into a new age. I would not want to be one who had bad-mouthed AR after his debut to a wakened world.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Bro
        well said, and i totally agree.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi has answered many questions, but most don’t hear.
      People will ask a specific question about how Rossi will deal with something & Rossi will respond, That does not depend on me.

      Tomorrow, People will ask the same specific question about how Rossi will deal with something. So until Rossi says who it depends on, WE, will see these same questions Adnauseam.

      Neither Rossi or Darden are going to provide these details until it’s time. Providing such details prematurely creates many issues for those who it depends on.

      What I do know is Venture Capital comes with serious strings attached. None of us know how much this has cost Rossi. It is the few who retain majority control of their IP when the VC’s come in. Note Rossi’s next patent is to be issued to Industrial heat & Rossi is merely 1 of 2 inventors listed.

      As to Rossi/Darden/Industrial heat/Leonardo’s longevity? (F9)
      We are just as clueless as to who all is involved or who will be in the future.
      Doesn’t matter. Even large Entities are known to bail out of an Industry.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Rossi bet the troll, that the troll would get his wish and remain an anonymous nobody.

    Trolls are notoriously dim witted creatures. He probably thought that Rossi was betting against himself.

    No doubt the dim witted troll set about posting that reply all over the internet like a statement of victory!

    Hahhahahahahahahahahahah ha ha

  • Gerald

    Doesn’t mean Lern isn’t real. Maybe it’s financial not ready yet and Rossi is getting tirred fighting. We will know in 15 weeks. Rossi opened pandora’s box, we will see it the coming years.

  • GreenWin

    “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” B. Russell

    • Zephir

      It’s still futile effort and drain of money: the stellarator W7X reaches ten-times lower temperature, than the best tokamaks – so it’s delayed by thirty years after tokamak research.

      • That is my point. The real fusion research is being done with private funds, companies like Lockheed Martin with their simplified hot fusion technology based on microwaves instead of lasers. A LENR reactor can be built in a day, not 19 years. I wish Industrial Heat would partner with Toyota, the experts at making products reliable. We need more brains working on LENR. The total amount of money spent on LENR to date is relatively tiny worldwide. The year long test will be a success if it proves LENR works beyond doubt. They don’t have to get all the bugs out of the system for it to be a success and spur investment and research.

  • Axil Axil

    The improvements that Rossi has discovered in the E-Cat X has given him inverters remorse. He now sees his 1 MW plant as a technically inferior plant just like a model T is inferior to today’s cars.

    He cannot improve the 1 MW plant because of the constraints of the long test. Rossi is never satisfied with his invention and he is insecure in his existing product when he now knows he can now do a lot better.

    • Omega Z


      I do not see an issue here. Rossi can go ahead with the 1mW design as the E-cat X is not even proven yet. When it is, it can be integrated with the next low temp model should it apply in an economical sense.

      Most businesses do this by design. Do you think Microsoft hasn’t held back software improvements on purpose to be included in the next release. Or that Apple hasn’t done the same in the I-Phone versions.

      Things to consider would be how it effects the product to the consumer. If it makes little or no improvements for the consumer, but doubles it’s cost & consumer price, this would be bad business & you would not make this change.

      Note if the current test is positive, there are already improvements that will be implemented from things learned during this 1 year test.

    • Gerard McEk

      Axil, I agree that engineers have a tendency to continuously improve their creation. They should be project managed to bring something into fruitation however ‘inferior’ it seems to them. I would very much hope that in case of negative, AR does not continue to test an E-cat X plant for another year, that would very much damage his reputation. Instead, I would, if I were AR, licence his invention to other comanies and make competition and paralleled development enhance the product development. Obviously, he can still compete with these licenced companies in trying to develop his own line.

      • Charles

        Gerard, I once had one of my engineers say to me: “that’s for working on, it’s not for finishing!”.

      • Brent Buckner

        I suspect that AR’s deal with IH has effectively done that already.

    • Jimr

      I agree with what you say, however no one can expect a device with failures nearly every day ( 170 in 240 ) days , to be successful or ready for market. We hope Rossi has other improved 250kw units being tested at their site, still far greater reliability is needed.

  • John Schut

    Frank, why don’t you ask him straightforward to explain his surprising answer?

    • Omega Z

      Rossi has explained this many times.
      Until the test is completed & the data analyzed & evaluated, the test could be positive or negative. Rossi is just emphasizing this fact. It also leaves anonymous with no where to go with the conversation.

    • Anon2012_2014

      Rossi speaks in riddles unfortunately.

      In scientific terms JONP = noise.

      Nothing to see here until a report is published and replicated. I wish Rossi and the IH team luck, but sifting through his social media blog called “Journal of Nuclear Physics” tells us nothing. I find it annoying.

  • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

    They don’t require storage breakthroughs really, not until they are producing 40-50% of power. Much of the power we use is in the daytime anyway. Molten salt solar storage allows for 24 hour power generation, although in practice they typically only store power for 3-6 hours to cover the peak usage period.

  • Observer

    A major investment needs to be put in place to bring up mass production. The newer, better, untested technology has totally different fabrication requirements than the older, thoroughly tested technology. The newer technology will make the entire manufacturing facility for the older technology obsolete. You are the investor. Where (and when) do you invest your money?

  • Observer

    In my opinion, small scale production of the low temperature 1MW plants should be used to provide products to lease, with the prospect of up grading at a later date. This will maintain momentum while testing of the e-cat x technology establishes a robust and cost effective product. Mass production should be reserved for the e-cat x technology. Just my opinion.

    • Omega Z


      There are over 600,000 Industrial low grade heat operations in the U.S. alone. That operations. Not the number of devices needed which would be a factor of X.

      There are various economic factors to take into account when choosing between a Low temp system & a High temp system. High temperatures have a devastating effect on hardware. Also keep in mind a 1 size fits all isn’t always a good thing. It usually requires trade offs.

  • Plus Clovis, If you read Rossi’s updates via Frank, he reports overall stability for the last 10 months including this December.

    Maybe Anonymous caught him on a bad day.