Some Financial Projections for Rossi's E-Cat X Vision

Andrea Rossi was asked on the Journal of Nuclear Physics about some ballpark figures of what it would cost to implement Rossi’s ‘dream’ which he posted on January 1st — basically a plan to use E-Cat to light, heat and power residential neighborhoods with E-Cat X technology.

Here’s Rossi’s reply:

Andrea Rossi
January 3rd, 2016 at 8:27 AM
Richard Wade:
Here are “ballpark” figures, to be worked upon:

Cost of the E-Cat X/kW: 50 $, payback time 90 days

Cost of the fuel per year: 10 $, payback time 10 days

Cost of the water piping to distribute the heat in an urban neighborhood: average 200 $/kW, payback time 1 year

Cost of the light 10 $/kW, payback time 10 days

Cost of the cabling to distribute the electric energy 200 $/kW, payback time 1 year

Total cost of the “network system” : 2 years and 4 months, let’s say 2 years, 6 months with maintainance costs

Expected lifespan of the system: 15 years

Potential market, considering to serve 1 billion people: 3 billion kWh/h

Potential E-Cat market, limited to this sector of employment: 1.5 trillions of $

Now, let’s wake uo, shake off the dreams and put down to work.
Warm Regards,

It’s certainly a broad vision, he reckons that this system could serve 1 billion people, which is approximately 15 per cent of the world’s population, and this would mostly be applicable to industrialized urban communities. You’d certainly need to get buy in from others (especially governmental bodies) to make this dream a reality.

Eernie1 on the JONP recommended that Rossi and Industrial Heat work with a land developer to put together a demonstration community powered by the E-Cat X this technology, similar to how the 1893 World Fair in Chicago was powered by electricity generated by an on-site power plant built to show the world the potential for electricity in society.

Rossi responded: “Very intelligent. Thank you for the suggestion.”

  • artefact

    The numbers suggest that the price for energy will become so low that
    only hardware and work done by humans will be really relevant.
    Over time the hardware costs will also decrease as the energy is chap to make
    them (the network system etc.). Robots and automation will further
    decrease costs at some time in the future.

    • Brent Buckner

      Approximately $0.0014 in fuel costs per kWh.

    • LilyLover

      And then there will be folks – with allergy to E-Cat energy with only cure being “Money-for-tolerating/not sabotaging E-Cat infrastructure” ….. and that’s why modularity will be eventuality.

  • PappyYokum

    The focus appears to be direct residential consumption of energy rather than the use
    of the energy in production – running factories or green houses or
    facilities that create things for markets – like what his secret pilot
    plant is supposed to be doing now.
    After actually seeing an
    unambiguous demonstration of the technology operating, I would like to
    see it used in transportation. Even if it still has to be connected to
    the grid to operate, it could still be used to run light rail or
    trolleys. Ocean ships and submarines could use power plants that only
    need to be refueled once a year and were not fission reactor driven.

  • SG

    I wish Rossi would focus less on erecting yet another grid and more on providing energy independence.

    • LilyLover

      His development of E-Cat X shows that he’s not a griddy looter. Once you have a few “civilian projects” for a few towns, the regulatory coercion will vanish, then … who cares, begone the lamp-posts, isolated car-mounted E-Cats to drive the car and power the home will take its place.
      The lamp-posts will simply bend the immoral enemies of the (almost) free-energy to the public will thereby getting all the certifications as he wants and needs.
      Also the street lamps eliminate costly forms and consent paperwork etc. In the early days, opening up randomly, making whatever changes etc. – all can be done by Rossi’s people without raising any questions. Think – with Home E-Cat X, there is an opportunity to improvise only if someone calls for fixing a problem. You won’t want an IH representative show up as at your door as they please and ask you to collect some data, unless of-course, they employ the strippers-partly-rehabilitated into meaningful economy.

  • Private Citizen

    A complex urban mixed use mini-grid would probably not be the first, best nor easiest application of E-Cat technology. Get the tech out there and the applications will take care of themselves.

    You have a patent already. Please license it immediately and help developers replicate.

  • LilyLover

    External power is needed for “safety certification” reasons.

    • Paul Smith

      Italo R.
      January 3rd, 2016 at 12:01 PM
      Dear dr. Rossi, is it possible to use the electricity supplied by E-Cat-X to charge batteries? I think it is possible without problems.
      If so, it should be also possible use these batteries to power back the same E-Cat-X or other E-Cats, after the appropriate necessary electric conversion.
      Having always a charged battery, the security should be ensured. Or not?
      Kind Regards
      Italo R.

      Andrea Rossi
      January 3rd, 2016 at 12:24 PM
      Italo R.:
      Certification issues are not that simple.
      Of course you can charge batteries, though.
      Warm Regards

  • Brent Buckner

    Perhaps not way too optimistic – the 2013 slideshow from Industrial Heat had a “conservative” estimate of levelized cost for that reactor of 3 cents per kWh (“could be as low as 1.5 cents per kWh”).

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Gerard McEk January 3rd, 2016 at 12:21 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    First of all the best wishes for the new year. May the New Fire enlighten your work!
    Just a few questions about your Dream:
    1. Can you explain why you do not consider a home unit able to supply light, heat and electricity? To me that seems the most obvious choice for the Ecat X.
    2. What colour light does the Ecat X produce (e.g. 2700 K is warm white, 6000 K is blue).
    3. What percentage of the energy would be visible light?
    4. How often is refueling required and did you include that in your cost calculation?
    Thanks and kind regards,

    Andrea Rossi January 3rd, 2016 at 3:21 PM
    Gerard Mc Ek:
    1- I never said that
    2- the data of temperature will be given after the completion of the preliminar tests
    3- same as in 2
    4- 12 months and yes.
    Warm Regards,

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Why isn’t Dr. Rossi answering any questions about Industrial Heat?

      • Bob

        An even bigger question / concern… is why Industrial Heat is not making any statements or releases about Rossi or the eCat. We see SRI / McKubre making public appearances with Brillouin and confirmations about Brillouin claims. But nothing from IH on the eCat or Rossis. We see Page making statements about LENR and giving a public release but nothing from Darden.
        It is also concerning that Lugano testers remain silent.
        However, absence of evidence is not evidence that something is absent! Sometimes one
        has to wait for the entire picture to be drawn and the play to unfold…. with that in mind… I continue to wait for significant information other than JONP posts…..

        • Darden is not silent.
          He talk in his local news (triangle news…)
          he have made presentation in China for baishishan technology park
          he talk to ICCF19, saying he does not look for publicity…

          however you are right the testers are silent.
          It is not even sure they screwup on the emissivity, as not even the skeptic theories are coherent with the results.

          • Bob Greenyer

            They did not get the emissivity right – that is the most certain thing about the Lugano report. They

            – did not follow the clear instructions in the Optris PI160 manual
            – they did not used the value stated for Alumina in the manual
            – they used a calibration technique not suitable for the high temperatures claimed
            – they did not correctly use the band emissivity as per the bolometer in the PI160
            – their sampling was done at low temperatures
            – they used old literature values from before the existence of PI160
            – they extrapolated

            We used special modern high temperature high emissivity paint as recommended in the Optris manual at its operating temperature. We used the most respected spot pyrometer in the business, a dual band Williamson IR. We used K-type and B-type thermocouples in contact with the groves.

            The Thermo-couples, Williamson IR and the Optris PI160 confirmed that the real emissivity needed to represent the actual temperature matched that as recommended in the Optris manual.

            Bob Higgins additionally worked with a leading scientist conducting the most modern research in this field and their testing and the theory aligns with our exhaustive empirical testing.

          • Bob Greenyer

            In the attached image, which was grabbed from the live test.

            B-Type (small bead TC sitting tight in groove) extremely close to Optris @0.95 emissivity.

            K-Type (larger bead sitting high, near the fin tops) – fits closely with sampled groove/fin tip temperature variance – therefore in -line with Optris

            For 890W in

            Optris set to 0.95 – 919ºC, close match to B-Type

            Optris emissivity set slightly lower – Zone 5 – 959ºC

            Optris set in deliberate error to @0.7 – Zone 7 – 1277ºC

            Optris set in deliberate error to @0.4 – “Test” – 1524ºC (bottom right)

          • thanks, this seems clear.
            There is just something to connect the TC calibrated low temp of Lugano with 0.95 emissivity at 450C (which is coherent with public data on IR emissivity in the IR range) instead of IR 0.95, even if total emissivity is probably around 0.7.
            Maybe the subtleties (why Lugano estimation matched Tc calibration at low temp) is solved by integrating multizone.

            After the temperature is corrected, applying the average 0.7->0.4 curve of total emissivity should give a “possible range”.

            did you estimate if the dependency between estimated/biased temp from bad emissivity and real is simple?
            My quick estimate from integrating blackbody laws was that is was nearly affine (temperature is nearly affine of received energy, and emissivity just multiply that energy).

            It seems from single zone estimation that COP>1.5, but anyway the test seems screwed.

            Ferrara seems much better done.

          • Bob Greenyer

            They messed up, and they know it.

          • EEStorFanFibb

            Interesting. That might explain the silence. Too difficult to face the fact that they partially blew it. Thanks for letting us know in detail about this.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Our work is to seek the truth.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            To be fair we should not forget that they had originally planned a calibration run over the whole temperature range. But that was not possible since they were told that the device could be damaged by sending a higher current through the coils.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            With a proper calibration, all the complicated calculations involving emissivity and other parameters would have been superfluous. Same reading of the camera = same temperature = same output energy (under comparable conditions). In order to determine the COP you would not need to know what exactly the temperature is.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I think they would have found that the bolometer determined “temps” would have exceeded the melting point of Alumina – and this would have been a red flag. Given that they apparently had 3 reactors – they should have done a book-end calibration on one of them at the end of the run, as we do regularly, with one of the others to test the methodology – why they did not do that is beyond me.

          • Bob

            I see it a little differently. To some extent, Darden has talked about his China dealings. He has not talked about Rossi. Darden has made mention of a new research facility, but he has not mentioned the eCat. Darden did make a speech at ICCF19, but he did not mention either Rossi or the eCat. Even during an interview and direct questioning, I believe his comments on Rossi was guarded at best and this was almost a year ago now.
            Since he stated is main objective was to reduce pollution, not make a huge profit, one would think that he would be pushing the LENR revolution. He recently made a joint proposal for electric cars, but no mention of LENR or Rossi.
            Carl Page (see thread) talked very openly about LENR and it’s huge potential.
            In truth, I do not know what the relationship between Darden and Rossi now is. Most likely, neither does anyone else on this list. It is of concern however, when neither party mentions the other. If Darden truly is more concerned at reducing pollution, he would be proclaiming this new energy source. After all, he felt having VW have more electric cars was worth a public announcement. That is small potatoes versus what the eCat could do.
            We continue to wait….

          • Omega Z

            Darden didn’t mention Rossi, but the documents signed in China specifically spoke of the E-cat 1MW plant.

        • Omega Z


          Brillouin, Robert Godes needs the exposure. He is fishing for funding.
          He has little left to bargain with. He retains only 5% of the rights to the Brillouin technology. He has already bartered away the other 95%.

          Rossi on the other hand has a full financial backer who is in it for the long haul. Not a 1 time cash infusion.

          • That was last September. Will be interesting to see what he says in 1 mo 24 days.
            Rossi seem to be looking beyond the reactor at this point.

        • US_Citizen71

          “why Industrial Heat is not making any statements or releases about Rossi or the eCat” – Easy Darden stated in his last interview that no big announcements are going to be done until he can pass the Carl Sagan test, “Extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim”. If done right the one year test may give him that.

          • Omega Z

            E-cats are not a good candidate for drop in replacement of fossil fuel plants. E-cats are more like a fuel rod. Not a jetted flame. They would in fact be better suited for drop in replacement in Nuclear power plants. But these Nuke plants would not be very efficient, as they are built with maximum safety in mind which includes low temps & pressure. And of course they are contaminated as would be anything you fitted to it.

            Current fossil plants are located according to certain criteria-, where rail & pipelines converge becoming centralized becoming Large and requiring plenty of water. Huge power plants are more expensive to build per kilowatt simply because the larger the turbine the more precision they must be. You don’t want a 100 tons of steel spinning at 1000’s of RPM being out of balance. They tend to fly apart and break things.

            E-cats reach temperatures that make them as efficient as the largest centralized plants, but with the capability to do it at a much smaller scale. E-cat plants also don’t need to meet such criteria such as continious fuel supply lines or storage of said fuels.

            A purpose built E-cat power plant would be cheaper & more efficient & located at point of energy needs. Turbines would be smaller and, cheaper per kilowatt output. Being much smaller in scale, they merely need cooling towers. Being localized, some of this dissipated heat can be utilized and not wasted. Access to large bodies of water aren’t needed. All while, eliminating the cost of the massive grid system.

            That said, A micro- or localized grid still provides economy over a stand alone off grid system. This is due to how we use energy and the minimum/peak demand periods. This is true even if the E-cats can produce electricity directly or not. Probably we will have a split system. E-cat heaters in the home & still depend on the local grid for electricity.

            But First, we need to see a product actually available on the market. A pilot plant is of no use to the masses. Until then, everything is speculation.

    • Anon2012_2014

      Anybody on hypothesis for how Ecat-X can produce direct lighting?

      Can it be simply very hot with light going out as a hot black body?

      Hot black bodies are mostly IR with a bit of visible and UV.

      We’ve seen the Hot-Cats glowing in the visible and IR, so one could imagine with better materials the machine could run hotter. Hotter machines might also be more efficient for the Seebeck effect if one side can be kept cold so as to have a high gradient. if the Hot metal is literally nickel or better a high electrical conductivity low thermal conductivity material. and the cold side is some other high electrical/low thermal material, maybe it can be more than 8% efficient. Light might be a byproduct of what leaks out.

      Other hypotheses???

    • Bob

      True, I guess his words were not expressly stating home units, but he did state :
      “I think that in remote areas there are other technologies more fit.” when asked about using the eCatX in remote rural areas. This in course, would strongly indicate that stand alone home units are not a good fit either.
      So what would be the difference between a stand alone home unit and a stand alone unit in a remote rural area?
      After about a week after discovering his direct electrical production from his reactor that he states he cannot confirm his LENR effect exists in, he is giving approximate financial paybacks / ROI !?! And how long the charge will last?.
      I guess for some on the list, it is fun to speculate, dream and get excited about announcements that have nothing substantiated. It does no harm on this list, but I fear it does do harm to LENR / Cold Fusion in general.
      We all want LENR to be taken seriously by the public and by science in general, namely to:
      1) Give F&P and other CF researchers the due respect and credit they deserve.
      2) To get mass support to LENR / CF research so it can be brought to wide spread use and benefit people world wide in an expedient manner.
      3) To reduce pollution
      4) and lastly, possibly kick economic growth in gear so poorer peoples standard of living can improve.
      Successful confirmation and implementation of LENR / CF should have a very positive impact on 1 through 3 and possibly assist greatly with #4.
      Rossi is currently not doing anything to help with the above with his many “controversial” posts and lack of professional public relations. I feel there is no doubt that if Brillouin had the technology that Rossi states he has, their management team with the support of respected SRI / McKubre would have brought this field magnitudes further in achieving the above goals.
      Rossi seems to read this site. Perhaps we should all encourage him to stay focused and present data not dreams. It is becoming more and more difficult in separating his dream world from what he thinks is real!
      I continue to wait….

  • Max Aricim

    “network system” here is not the “public grid” but only an “in house network”.
    Also this example could apply to a family house in industrial country … or anywhere on earth, like the indian government has already asked for many small poor villages.

  • Owen Geiger

    Japan is developing a system that uses electric vehicles to help power homes. Rossi’s reactors in EVs could continue running 24/7 to power vehicles and homes.

    Search YouTube for Japan: Smart Green Homes on the Horizon

  • Omega Z

    An automatic disconnect is required should the grid go down.
    This is a safety matter. You don’t want to electrocute the technician trying to bring the grid back up.

  • Omega Z

    Gas powered cars became successful for another more ironic reason.
    The electric motor.

    Gas powered vehicles were dangerous. Broken arms, arm sockets ripped apart, being tossed like a rag doll & even deaths. The electric starter replaced the old hand crank. Gasoline also greatly extend the range because of it’s energy density.

    LENR is the 1st energy source that may exceed fossil energy. Of course, harnessing it is yet to be determined. I highly doubt steam will be the answer. Possibly a criticle CO2 cycle engine is possible. To soon to know.

    Of course there’s also the 24/7 nature of LENR to deal with. With planes, trains, and ships on the other hand, many issues disappear.

  • Omega Z

    “deurbanisation of humanity” NO. It wont happen.

    Nearly 9 million people in New York city. Nearly all of them live there by choice.
    The same poeple who complain about the overcrowding, the crime per capita, the dirty air, They look at you like you’re nuts if you suggest moving to a more rural area.

    It’s also not about the jobs even tho they indicate that. Offer the same opportunities in smaller cities & they’re not interested. Point out that it’s less crowded with less crime & they complain there’s to few people.

    People are crazy.
    I don’t like these cloths.
    So put on something else.
    NO. I want to wear these.

    OK, Good bye. See ya… Wouldn’t want to be you…

  • Omega Z

    Certification is a legitimate concern, However, If Rossi would just focused on developing various devices optimized for different task, others could worry about deploying the technology who are already well versed in the certification process.

  • Omega Z

    Give me electricity. I will have light that I can turn on/off at will.
    I find it hard to sleep with the lights on.

    • clovis ray

      Yep, I can hear it now, parent tells his child, you get right back in there and turn that light (back on), you know power is free. lol,

  • Omega Z

    How much electricity do the remote areas need?

    Have you seen many shanty’s that have wiring or occupants who have or even can afford electrical appliances. Probably those people can get by with a battery & small solar panel at this time. Even that would need to be donated.

  • Guru Khalsa

    I don’t know why people aren’t talking about possible uses of the EcatX as power packs for robotics, Seems ideal, if the electrical COP is high enough. Less noise than an ICE. It seems to me DARPA would fast track the acceptance of this technology.

    • Omega Z

      Robo-Cop will be here soon enough.

  • Jonnyb

    Cheers very interesting.

  • Owen Geiger

    These kind of developments are more than just exciting. They also boost the likelihood that Rossi has what he says he has due to the similarity of many of these ideas.

  • Brent Buckner

    See the 2013 Industrial Heat slideshow for levelized cost of electicity projection for reactor then under consideration:

  • Roland

    There are aspects of the ‘ballpark’ numbers that suggest that, whatever the other merits are from a regulatory perspective, this concept’s usefulness might lie in the broad generalities rather than the specifics.

    First there is the spacing of public lighting vs the demand requirements of the attendant dwellings/commercial spaces; 500W, 450W deliverable, per public fixture isn’t nearly enough to service a single home with heat and electricity much less the usual ratio of several homes to each public lamp standard.

    Secondly the cost of connection of a single lamp standard of 500W to an existing dwelling by buried insulated water lines and electrical wiring will cost several thousand dollars, and emphatically not $200.00, not to mention modifications to the lamp standard itself to accommodate this use.

    The concept of sharing an appropriately scaled E-catX installation, that is professionally maintained to avoid regulatory hurdles, between several dwellings makes more sense when this is planned for in the development phase of a neighbourhood where there are no sunk costs yet. Even then this would probably call for a fairly large development so that an average demand load could be reasonably calculated and some degree of scheduling of larger load requirements, such as clothes dryers and kitchen ranges, might be needed in the absence of a storage mechanism to meet peak loads.

    It is helpful that the E-catX ‘throttles’ up and down rapidly, as electrical demand is mostly non-linear in any specific dwelling, and it would be even more helpful if it were possible to shut down and restart individual reactors in a short time frame. The near term solution will probably require batteries to meet peak loads; or a connection to a larger grid, which is somewhat self defeating unless that too is LENR powered.

    In many regards, given the current state of the art, the E-cat is still best suited to industrial applications where there is a fairly consistent known load to which the installation can be scaled, and where the savings over existing systems are so compelling that even sunk costs can be ignored, until such time as single dwelling base load systems that tap into existing electrical and heating schemes have regulatory approval or large scale systems can meet a utility company’s requirements for proven reliability and safety.

    In many ways I find the notion of providing heat and electricity to people in the third world, who often have neither, both morally compelling and as a potential road to establishing the safety and reliability of small scale LENR to more rigidly regulated jurisdictions and insurance companies. Such a path would, however, present other challenges such as maintaining control over IP and getting paid, though to be fair impoverished third worlders are very good at paying their bills in similar situations (micro credit, lease to own small scale solar plus batteries).