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:

Umbi
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
Umbi:
yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.

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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

    • MorganMck

      Well said. When the technology is mature enough the we can talk about energy density and life cycle costs, it will be worth discussing in some detail. For now I think we can assume that E-Cat X could be produced in any configuration that meets the market’s demand. Focusing on whether 300W-500W is large enough for some domestic uses seems a little silly at this point.

  • bfast

    This is a somewhat strange interpretation of what Eng. Rossi said. He confidently confirmed somebody else’s words. The way he expressed it, the thing may produce significantly more than 500 w and still get the same response.

    • bachcole

      It is as clear as a bell that bfast is thinking exactly the same as I am on this one. No upper limit was stated or implied.

    • Piero

      Absolutely. Let’s not draw too many conclusions from a simple “yes”. Patience, patience…

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      Assuming that device has a high COP, 500 watt is a nice figure. However I agree with you Bfast, that the thing may just as easy be capable of 5000 watts. We just don’t know what the device is at last capable off.

  • 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. http://www.ebikes.ca/news/statorade-experiment/

          • 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

  • fritz194

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

    • not enough electricity, even on average, but 10kWth is not enough for heating a house.

      for a house, 20kWth/1kWe,avg/6kWe,pk is typical

      anyway he just said, “enough”.
      note that from what I see, average electric consumption is not meaningful, as storing energy would be more expensive than increasing the LENr e-cat capacity.

      I only see an annoying cost to manage, it is the cooling.
      if E-cat is used to heat a house, it is OK, but if you need electricity while no heat is required, you need wasteheat dissipation… water cooling and faned radiators like for AC may be OK, but this is plumbing, screwing, facade change…

      • nietsnie

        Maybe an insulated chimney is all that is needed.

      • purplepartyguy

        The heat is a free byproduct of the ecat and electricity is the resource that has value. When its cold the heat warms your house and heats your water, when you don’t need the heat it is just wasted to the environment. The size of the ecat you will purchase will be based on electricity load, ie if you have a 240v 200 amp panel you make sure your ecat can output 48KW. Use whatever electricity you want and sell the excess to the grid….as long as there is a grid. I think skid mounted generators that are placed on a concrete pad in your yard is the way to go…

      • 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…

    • Ged

      A tesla powerwall perhaps?

      • nietsnie

        That’s what I’m thinking. You’d need more than 500W charging it but if it was going in continuously you would only need, what… three of them?

    • Gerard McEk

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

    • And just what would you be peeking at 😉

    • 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.

  • 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.

  • wizkid

    A bundle of 50 E-Cat X’s would cost $2500? and put out enough electricity to power an electric car, and your home in its spare time … or a personal airplane, or a
    http://www.sonexaircraft.com/subsonex/
    with increased range to 100,000 miles without refueling? he he he (but true!)

  • Angry SQUIRREL!!

    That’s enough to power my gaming computer as it draws a max of 450 watts. Might very well get my hands on this if it’s true. My computer is the #1 expense on my electric bill.

  • 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.”

  • 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.”

  • Edac

    In the UK at least 95% of homes use a circulation pump for central heating. Forty/fifty years ago some of the early installations used gravity feed system, but not anymore. Some modern pumps (using DC motors) now use as little as 10 to 35 watts; standard AC pumps are often around 100 watts.

  • 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,
    A.R.”

    • 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).

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi February 16, 2016 at 10:10 AM
    Frank Acland:
    We are having a decrease, now the charges I think are losing efficiency. But it was expected.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

    • clovis ray

      aha, too bad, but by changing the amount of fuel or secret sauce, i would think one could vary, the time it would run,

      • giovanniontheweb

        it sounds already exceptional performance for a pilot installation

  • 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,
    A.R.”

    • clovis ray

      Thanks buddy,
      Wow’ the good and great news just keeps coming,’ gentlemen’ start your reactors,’.

    • 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).

  • Mike

    The input to circulation pumps for single family houses is less than 50 W. Old single stage ineffective pumps have higher input. In some operation conditions the necessary input may be as low as below 10 W if properly combined with the boiler/burner. 300-500 W must be circulation pumps for multi family houses.

  • Frechette

    If one has a residential hot water heating system a circulator pump is generally a necessity.

    • These tend to consume around 30-90W depending on settings and heating demand. 300-500W would be typical of a small industrial circulating or supply pump.

  • Ophelia Rump

    For domestic use you would optimize by throttling the heat generation to electricity when hot water is not needed, and sell the electricity which is not used back to the grid. You heat the hot water tank, then go electric and circulate the water or sell the power.

    • bachcole

      Hi, OR. I managed to sneak in a plug for LENR while debating those fellows about the importance of the confirmation of gravity waves. (:->)

    • LarryJ

      Once this comes to pass it is hard to imagine power utilities being willing to pay much if anything for excess generated electricity. Who would they resell it to.

  • 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. http://www.amazon.com/APC-BR1300G-Back-UPS-10-outlet-Uninterruptible/dp/B0038ZU2FC/ref=lp_764572_1_17?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1455648976&sr=1-17

    • 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.

  • 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. http://www.amazon.com/APC-BR1300G-Back-UPS-10-outlet-Uninterruptible/dp/B0038ZU2FC/ref=lp_764572_1_17?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1455648976&sr=1-17

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

  • 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. http://www.ebikes.ca/news/statorade-experiment/

        • 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.

  • theBuckWheat

    500 watts continuous is 12kwh/day. Not shabby. Enough for basic non-heating household needs like refrigeration. Maybe LENR will revive absorption air conditioning for homes and small business.

    • SG

      Combine it with a power wall and potentially say good bye to the grid.

    • DrD

      The 500 watts is only the power used to drive a big water pump (heating circulator). The Total power out can be what ever you chose, 10kW, 20kw depends only on the size of the units he makes and you buy. That wasn’t in the question he was asked.

  • 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.

  • mcloki

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

  • roseland67

    500 watts out vs. how much in?
    How came nobody ever completes this exercise?

    • Because we don’t have the data. But if you are attempting to infer that Rossi is putting 500W in to get 500W out, I’m afraid you are wasting your time on this forum.

      • roseland67

        So,
        Without the data to prove it, you simply believe that energy out > energy in?
        By what reasoning would Rossi only include energy out data?
        Does he not know? Does he chose not to share it? Was it more or less Than expected or previously witnessed?

        I am not suggesting anything, I just want to KNOW,
        Not be given bits and pieces and parts of disparate data
        and left to draw my own conclusions.

        Sent from my iPad

        • “Without the data to prove it, you simply believe that energy out > energy in?”

          There wouldn’t be much point in inventing an ‘energy source’ in which that was not the case. For the moment I choose to believe that Rossi has one, based on my interpretation of evidence and intuition derived from my personal ‘knowledge pile’. If the balance of circumstantial evidence changes, so will my belief, but either way it is of no importance to anyone except myself.

          “By what reasoning would Rossi only include energy out data?”

          Your second option I would think, which probably also covers the third.

          • roseland67

            Agaricus,

            “For the moment, I choose to believe”

            I guess I can understand that,
            Hope you’re right

        • DrD

          Because, as usual, he gave a simple (correct answer) to a simple (not very complete) question. Now, some people are jumping to completely the wrong conclusions by reading into it what is clearly (to many of us) not there. The quetion you’ve asked is not the one he was asked (here).

    • 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. That is if we trust his estimates.
      However, unless it is only 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 extra output 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.

    • enantiomer2000

      500 watts out, 2,000 watts in…

  • numbskull

    it’s graphene…..Converting thermal energy into electric currents and vice versa is notoriously hard with ordinary materials,” said Lucas. “But in principle, with a clean sample of graphene there may be no limit to how good a device you could make.”

    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-02-metal.html#jCp

  • 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.

  • 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

  • Hi all

    Rossi has merely answered that: X-CAT can output a minimum of 300-500 watts.

    Do some semantic analysis people.

    Kind Regards walker

    • BillH

      It’s really not telling us anything useful them? A minimum is a value, not a range of values. Again AR used a closed question to give an ambiguous answer. The question might have been what is the average electrical output of the E-Cat X over a 24hr period? Likely answer, “That’s confidential”

  • Steven Irizarry

    this contradicts the alleged power of ECATX which is 20 kilowatts in something the size of a cigarette box

    • 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.

          • BillH

            I believe you are correct but I’m not 100% sure. No one has yet explained how you would extract electrical energy directly from the apparatus as detailed in the most recently approved Patent, which AR claims will cover this new development. Very early on, around 2011(yes it has been that long) AR suggested that an E-Cat would not be able to generate electricity directly and that converting the steam output to electricity would simple negate the COP advantage.

          • 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, who has not provided sufficient proof for fully independent third part verification. He could be saying anything just to keep the “charade” (as these skeptics see it) going.

            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, mostly between 2009-2011, he made certain overly optimistic predictions about the pace of manufacture of the e-cat and perhaps reported sales of the 1 MW original reactor that were still pending as if they were finalized (we don’t know, but it seems more like 1-2 units were actually sold, not 13 – although that could be because of high secrecy around this question).

            However, when we place these questionable 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. He has theoretical conceptions of the process but these are probably still incomplete and imperfect. Indeed, as some have argued, it seems likely that what Rossi, along with Pons and Fleischmann and all the other researches in this field, have discovered, is not a singular phenomenon, but an entire new branch of physics involving multiple possible pathways of energy-gain reactions.

          • 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….

        • 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).

  • 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).

  • bachcole

    I am completely at a loss why anyone here would be confused. Rossi did NOT limit the E-Cat X to 500 Watts. Some people need to brush up on their elementary logic. He said that the E-Cat X could handle 500 Watts. It is anyone’s guess if that is the upper limit or if 3141.6 Watts is the upper limit or what.

  • PappyYokum

    Speaking of pictures, when do we get to see one of the E-Cat X?

  • JDM

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

  • JDM

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

    • E-gatto

      BTW: What is the status of the first 1MW plant? The one shipped to the military customer 4 years ago. Is it still in operation? How often did they have to renew the charge? Did Rossi reveal anything about the performance of this plant?

  • 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.

  • 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.

        • enantiomer2000

          True, but the vast majority of humans have not and will never enter space. They want something cheap and practical. Rossi needs to compete economically or he can just go home.

          • barwick11

            He’s talking about a first prototype… come on. 1 freaking watt of excess energy produced by fusion is a breakthrough beyond anything these idiot scientists around the world have blown countless billions on trying to recreate the sun.

  • Sanjeev

    Etiam has published some pictures of their reactor.
    No results shown in this part.
    http://etiam.fi/files/Report_part1.pdf
    Thanks to John Littlemist for communicating this news.

    • artefact

      It says: “End of Part 1.”
      Hope to see some results in part 2.

  • 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?

  • 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?