Rossi: Domestic E-Cat Can Generate at least 300-500 W of Electricity

We’ve finally got a number from Andrea Rossi about what he thinks the E-Cat X can generate. For a long time he has been rather vague about what kind of electricity production we are looking at.

Here’s an exchange from the Journal of Nuclear Physics Today:

February 16, 2016 at 4:14 AM
Domestic X-CAT can generate enought energy to power circulation water PUMP (300-500W) ?

Andrea Rossi
February 16, 2016 at 7:22 AM
Warm Regards,

This does not give us the full picture of course. Rossi has also said that the E-Cat X produces both heat and electricity, but has not given a ratio, but he has said the ratio can be adjusted. So along with the electricity he is talking about here would be quite a lot of heat as well.

Remember, he is talking about a domestic E-Cat here — not an industrial size one — and 300-500 W of electricity can be very useful in a household. Most homes that I know of don’t use a pump to circulate water, but 300-500 W can power a good many useful appliances in most homes.

Let’s hope the certification process doesn’t drag on for too long.

  • Billy Jackson

    the devil is in the details. without them its hard to put into context how useful this information is. Rossi will give answers with no explanations sometimes and then not correct us on our assumptions.

    300-500 watts sound great.. unless it takes 800 watts to run the device. because we don’t know the upper limit (this thing could run at 2000 watts or greater but he only told us it could power a water pump) or without the average output vs the average input its leaves us scratching our heads wanting more information.

  • So is he talking about a one kilowatt cigarette sized E-Cat X cell with 30% to 50% electricity output efficiency? Obviously, a “domestic E-Cat” could and will be made in various sizes with multiple E-Cat X cells and maybe different cell sizes. So, the conversation does not mean much as we do not know exactly what he is talking about. What is needed is 10 kilowatts of electricity and heat for space heating, hot water heating, and air conditioning all from one affordable unit.

  • fritz194

    [email protected] is 12kWh/day
    Thats enough to power a house – but would need some storage for peeks.

    • Ged

      A tesla powerwall perhaps?

    • Gerard McEk

      Yes, that would already be tremendous, but not enough for the (Tesla) car.

    • And just what would you be peeking at 😉

    • 500watts is enough to power an electric battery car for 150 miles daily.
      with air con thrown in for free.

      • passerby

        One of my electric bikes uses 500W. You could run it continuously with no battery at all, indefinitely, just from one E-cat. That would be a huge game changer for the hundreds of millions of ebikes out there (way more than electric cars fwiw)

        • Unfortunately you’d probably need to fit a big fan radiator somewhere, to dump the heat component.

          • passerby

            Maybe not. Lately the community has made some interesting developments with magnetic ferrofluid that could prove useful. If you took that e-cat cylinder and built it into the wheel axle it would spin much like a typical ebike hub motor. Ferrofluid wicks away heat remarkably well in this use case. Course the question is how it would be impacted by the fields generated by the e-cat.

          • That would be the air-con component.

          • US_Citizen71

            That could be quite a feature for winter riders! It wouldn’t likely take much more than a couple square feet of surface area worth of finned radiator panels to dump the heat, there would be moving air. That would fit over the rear wheel as a shield without much problem. It would be good if it could be moved to the front for winter riding.

        • DrD

          On the contrry, we know what input he expects to use and are all very interested in the final proof in about 40 days.
          He already said the COP is averaging 6 for the existing (older cats) and the cat x is better (not necessarily > COP but I assumee is unlikely to be worse). So the answer is 83 Watts plus a negligible amount of consumed fuel to produce the 500W.
          However, unless it is a 500W e-cat, there will also be additional electric and heat output upto the amount you chose. He said the ratio of which you can also chose but not 100% electric. That will also be 6 times the extra input power. Of course the input power will come from the output. So self sustaining. In about 50 days we look forward to the results of the 356 day trial to qauntify the historical COP from a single charge of fuel in the 1MW plant.

    • giovanniontheweb

      storage could be the power network as it already operate for spare sun power

  • Jonnyb

    Lets hope it can produce more. 500W to help circulate the hot water would be useful, but even more useful would be 80%+ electricity as Christopher said around 10kW.

    • nietsnie

      The light bulb in the mogul base lamp standing next to me pulls 300W all by itself.

      • US_Citizen71

        If I turn every light in my house on they use less than 200W combined, all are LEDs. I never liked the yellow-orange of incandescents, I prefer the bluer daylight rated 6500K or so bulbs. My entertainment system on the other hand uses near 1000W combined.

        • nietsnie

          This lamp is ridiculous. It’s hard to find mogul base lamp parts or bulbs now. But, my mother made it and my father cut the wood for the little shelf that sits in its middle. So, I have a soft spot for it.

  • Gerard McEk

    I hope for more than 50% so 10 -15 kW per 20 kW unit of a thermically insulated E-cat X. That would immediately herald the paradigm change!

    • That matches well with what we have heard before (a cigarette package), assuming 50% efficiency for electricity:
      Q: “Dear Mr Rossi, what would be the weight and the volume (perhaps liters) of a 20 kw e-cat x reactor Thank you.”
      A: “Ballpark numbers: like a 20 cigarette packet, while the weight could be 300-400 grams, plus the apparatus to use the energy, that is different depending on the use, the fluid, etc. – Warm Regards, A.R.”

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi February 16, 2016 at 10:07 AM
    Italo R.:
    The certifications for the industrial products have been obtained.
    Warm Regards,

    • mcloki

      That’s really great news.

      • I’m sure it is, but the significance rather depends on exactly what has been certified, by whom, to what standard(s), and for what purpose(s).

  • Bob Matulis

    Is 300-500 W enough to power the Ecat system? SSM would be most desirable.

    The power could feed a UPS and that would clean up the recovered electricity that would power the Ecat.

    • Interesting thought. Rossi rules out ‘looping’ using some kind of generator running on the e-cat heat, but a separate e-cat (or several) supplying power would be another matter. Surplus heat would just be dumped into the coolant flow, adding to the total output.

      • DrD

        I am sure he only rules it out because why would you use a carnot ccyle with its renowned efficiency loss when you already have the electric available directly from the cat x itself. Unless of course the max e output is too low — he says hasn’t determined the figure for the max % yet but he seems very encouraged and I think he knows it will be good. If it is too low then your idea works (we need it in fact).

        • Overall efficiency needn’t be low if, say, a stirling cycle engine has as its heat source a reactor before cooling, and as its ‘cold’ end the return coolant or condensate. Heat dumped at the cool end would then re-enter the system as a ‘pre-heating’ input that would be included in the overall thermal output to the coolant.

          But supplying a 1MW LT plant using ecat-x units and UPS is a much more interesting idea.

  • giovanniontheweb

    it sounds already exceptional performance for a pilot installation

  • mcloki

    These units are small I can see a bank of them running with a battery storage option.

  • William D. Fleming

    I wonder if the 300-500 watts is just the electric part of the output. That would be more than enough power to pump the heat portion through your house, and run some lights too.

    • nietsnie

      Yes, that’s how I read it.

      • psi2u2

        Me too.

  • Hi all

    Rossi has merely answered that: X-CAT can output a minimum of 300-400 watts.

    Do some semantic analysis people.

    Kind Regards walker

  • There is no contradiction because 20 kW > 300-500 W and, consequently, 20 kW is enough for driving a 300-500 watt pump even if only 2,5% of the power is in the form of electricity.

    • BillH

      Then this is nothing new really, You will always be able to turn steam into electricity albeit at low efficiency. Even at a pessimistic efficiency of 10% you could turn 20KW of steam into 2KW of electricity. For most applications therefore the greater problem would be in dumping all that excess heat, especially during the Summer months. Now if you could get 500W of electricity from something the size of a cigarette pack with minimal additional heat then for domestic use it’s simply a matter of scaling it up. It’s unclear at this stage exactly what AR is claiming from an E-Cat X.

      • psi2u2

        The proposed mechanism has, if I have been following the case correctly, nothing at all to do with turning steam into electricity.

      • The point is we do not know the electricity/heat output ratio of the E-Cat X. I just wanted to say that Rossi’s simple answer “Yes” means that the ratio must be somewhere between 2.5 % to 100 % for a 20 kW E-Cat X as an example (the cigarette box).

  • JDM

    I guess Rossi’s customer will be using the 1MW plant for another year, eh?

  • If the E-catX is as good as Mr Rossi intimated
    Then anything we surmise.
    Will never compete with what actual comes to pass.

    • Job001

      Wind, solar, your wood all have low to zero marginal cost that can better $0.05/KwHr. The point is, it depends upon local economics, the rate of rental, capital, and introduction.

      • You can not burn wood In space.

  • fritz194

    Well, this was my very personal figure without heating, including electrical boiler, 12kWh electric, 90kWh thermal on a cold winter day.
    Thats 3.75kW thermal and 0.5kW electric average.
    If you add a solar system for warmwater heating – 2kW peek electric buffered from a 2kWh Accumulator might be useful. If you have an electric car – that peek supply can be done from this accumulator.
    If we think about decent commuting with an electric car – further 10kWhrs per day would be interesting…

  • US_Citizen71

    Early on in the development of motorized vehicles almost every scientist was in agreement that vehicles carrying humans would never be able to go over 60 mph because the air would be sucked out and the passengers would suffocate. Guess what new data came in and it turns out they were wrong. 2011 was before the Hot Cat and definitely before the E-Cat X, new data and new reactions changes everything.

    • psi2u2

      Of course, the skeptics object that the source of this information is Rossi. That is why how one assesses Rossi’s credibility is still a critical factor in evaluating “where we are.” Personally I am still very willing to extend him the benefit of the doubt. A great deal of “social” evidence points to his essential credibility. As has been pointed out, there has not been a single instance of someone really close to Rossi and his work coming out to support the skeptics. On the contrary, even the Defkalion fiasco (which it remains in 2015, regardless of what Defkalion had or did not have, until they demonstrate some working product or more independent and comprehensive test results) rebounds in Rossi’s favor. Although Rossi (along with Stremmenos) had no problem communicating his dislike of how things had fallen out, Defkalion has always remained deferential to Rossi’s authority and never questioned the soundness of his scientific methods or results. Rossi additionally has long term support from highly qualified technology insiders who would have severed their connection with him at the slightest sign of real fraud.

      All these things lead me to the conclusion that Rossi is, essentially, telling us the truth in his updates. Yes, early on in particular he made certain overly optimistic predictions about the pace of manufacture of the e-cat. However, when you place these statements within the larger context their significance is imho greatly reduced. Rossi still gets my vote as essentially believable in most of the things he says. That doesn’t mean he understands the underlying science perfectly – I’m not sure anyone does. But Rossi is imho not primarily a theoretician, but rather a first rate experimentalist. They are different skill sets.

  • psi2u2

    Ok, agreed. I should perhaps have said that it seems highly unlikely that the carnot cycle is involved in this type of generation of electricity. But know one really knows for sure what the proposed mechanism is. At least no one who’s saying….

  • Paul Maher

    Sometimes I just don’t know what the hell to think. So what would it mean to a homeowner to have 300-500 watts of continuous power generation available to charge batteries? What would it to do an EV’s range? Like I said I am not a physicist. Would someone talk about the nuts and bolts of it?