The Different E-Cat Approaches of Leonardo and Industrial Heat

We may be getting close to some important revelations about what cold fusion (in the form of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat) can do, but it’s a time of increasingly high tension as we wait for the report of the 1MW E-Cat Plant to be delivered. Yesterday the countdown clock I had running on the site ran out and I’m not going to try to make another guess!

Andrea Rossi insists that there is nothing that will prevent the ERV (Expert responsible for validation in the 1-year 1MW E-Cat plant test) delivering its report. The big question is: what happens when that report is delivered?
If the report shows that the E-Cat can clearly and safely produce copious amounts of energy while consuming very little input energy and small amounts of inexpensive fuel over a period of one year, then that will be very significant news which would have important implications for the world.

If the report is delivered to Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat, then they will have to make a decision about what to do next. Here are some possible options:

Andrea Rossi has said that there will have to be agreement between all parties involved about what is released from the test. These parties, I would assume are the Rossi/Leonardo, Industrial Heat, the customer who was using the energy produced in the test, and the ERV.

1. Release the report in full. This will give the public and potential customers the most information about the potential of this technology.

2. Release the report in part. Andrea Rossi has suggested that there will likely be confidential information in the report, but that non-confidential information will be published on the Ecat.com website. In this case the nature of the content removed will be of great importance. For example, it’s possible the the customer will not want to be identified, since they could be subject to a great deal of unwanted scrutiny. It’s also possible that the ERV will not want to be identified for similar reasons. If the ERV is not named and does not publicly sign off on the document, then its effect will be much less dramatic. With no third party coming forward publicly to verify the report, it will not be seen as being very credible.

3. Not release the report publicly at all. It’s possible that the report will be considered by all parties to be confidential in total, and perhaps only available to potential customers under NDA. This would help Leonardo/IH continue to operate largely out of the public eye and away from the gaze of competitors, but it would also leave the general public in the dark about what cold fusion can do.

Of the options above, I would consider number 2 the most likely outcome, but probably there will be negotiations between the parties about exactly what is contained in the report, and when and how it will be released.

As important as this report is, I would contend that the whole of the future of cold fusion does not depend on it alone. Andrea Rossi in recent days has been emphasizing that he is planning to give an important news conference in Sweden in June. It’s significant, I think, that this conference will be in Sweden because this is Leonardo Corp’s territory. Andrea Rossi yesterday confirmed that Industrial Heat has the exclusive licence for the E-Cat in the USA (where Rossi works), and it seems that Rossi could not give a press conference on his own in the USA without the agreement of Industrial Heat.

What will the press conference be about? My guess is that he will be announcing something to do with the first industrial E-Cat X plant, and I am thinking that the first customer will be Hydro Fusion with whom Andrea Rossi has been collaborating closely of late. (A few weeks ago, Rossi said that the first E-Cat customer is based in the UK; interestingly while Hydro Fusion operates in Sweden, and the principles are Swedes, the company is registered in the UK).

The Leonardo/IH approaches seem to be very different. While Industrial Heat has issued a few very carefully crafted and understated statements regarding their activities in the LENR field (barely mentioning Rossi and the E-Cat), and the potential of this technology, Andrea Rossi blogs daily about his work in progress has been very clear about his desire to massively deploy his E-Cats around the world and bring about an energy revolution.

What could account for these different approaches? Probably there are lots of reasons that we are not privy to, but I think we can see that the personality and ambition of Andrea Rossi accounts in part for his approach. Rossi does not want to be just an inventor — he sees himself as both an inventor and (more importantly in his eyes) an industrialist who can realize the dream of Nikola Tesla of making infinite energy available for all. Industrial Heat, on the other hand, seem to be focusing on using LENR to solve the problem of pollution — they have never made any statement about making infinite amounts of energy available, or even in making energy much less expensive.

I would like to thank Torkel Nyberg of Sifferkoll.com for publishing the map at this link which shows the different E-Cat licensing territories. One thing I find interesting is that Industrial Heat has licenses for the parts of the globe which are the biggest fossil fuel producers: North/South America, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. This might suggest that they are concerned about treading very carefully when it comes to upsetting the powers in government and industry which are dependent upon traditional energy sources for power and revenue.

How things will play out is impossible to know right now, but it does seem to me that there is some divergence in approaches on the parts of Rossi and Industrial Heat here. I’m not sure what IH thinks about Rossi’s approach (or vice versa), but I don’t expect Rossi to slow down in pushing for speedy production of his E-Cat X’s, and it will be interesting to see what he announces if the press conference in Sweden as it goes ahead as planned.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Frank, That was excellent.

    • If the test report is very positive, meaning a COP above 10, then they may be testing the spent fuel to look for isotopic changes that can only be explained by some form of nuclear reaction. As in the Lugano test, they will use multiple outside laboratories for that, which is very time consuming. That would explain both the delay and at least part of Industrial Heat’s latest message.

  • AdrianAshfield

    Industrial Heat’s careful statement said they were presently evaluating the data to guide future progress.
    Rossi has just said a 1 MW E-Cat quark X might be contained in a cubic meter. He has also said this is the future.
    So it may well be that even if the 1 MW E-Cat plant ( 4 x 250kW) was a great success, developments may have overtaken it and it may be dropped. I know there will be those that say production should be started with what we have, but that is only true for incremental improvements.
    If Rossi manages to install a 1 MW E-Cat quark X plant in April the delay would not be that long. Multiple testing of the 100 Watt units would be easy and not take a year..

    • wpj

      IH is, just as its name states, supplying heat. If it can construct the megawatt units at reasonable price with good reliability (from what they have learned from this year) then there is no reason for them to delay. They are selling the power to the company, not the unit. If their goal is really reduction in fossil fuel usage and they can make a decent profit on these, it should be full steam ahead!

      • As you say, the viability of building some improved versions of the LT e-cat depends on cost and reliability, relative to that of developing e-cat X (or even ‘quarks’) to the point where they are competitive with the older type in both respects.

        Perhaps the best course would be to devise a ‘test bed’ plant design that allows reactors of different type to be interchanged as easily as possible, even if that isn’t the simplest or cheapest design available. By adopting a leasing business model (selling heat, as you suggest) rather than outright sales, they would then be able to offer ‘upgrades’ by substitution at mininmal cost to IH, avoiding commitment to any fixed reactor type.

  • peter gluck

    Thank Frank, bright analysis just not very encouraging.
    Why should the world still wait to know the esssence – positive or negative? I think negative means still not perfectly ready for commercialization on great scale- normal possibility.
    Being focused on keeping potential competitors sleeping as I wrote in Ego Out, yesterday- si bad for everybody, for the cause of LENR and even for IH itself.

    Peter

  • Mats002

    “the future of cold fusion does not depend on it alone. Andrea Rossi in recent days has been emphasizing that he is planning to give an important news conference in Sweden in June.”

    Sorry can’t agree here, without the ERV publicly in short time, there will most likely be no conference in Sweden in June. ‘Rossi says’ without backup from other trustworthy organisations will be just that: ‘Rossi says’, and ‘Rossi says’ will loose the magic sauce it used to have.

    But I do agree CF not only depends on ERV/IH/Leonardo/Secret customer – hundreds of replications might be the road ahead, leaving the secret businesses in the shadows behind.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Good summary of the state of play – however, I have to agree with Mats002, no ERV – then no NEWS

      • Ophelia Rump

        As if anyone would begin reporting anyway. They do not need news, they need product.
        I have been waiting years I would gladly accept delivery of my home Industrial Ecat-X units and help get things rolling.

        • Omega Z

          Sorry to burst your bubble, but, An ever dwindling value-
          at 14 cents per kwh
          at 10 cents per kwh
          at 5 cents per kwh
          at 1 cents per kwh
          It’s like if it transmuted fuel to gold. As more people have them, the value of gold plummets as everyone has plenty.

      • Omega Z

        A different perspective. There was an ERV paid for by Industrial heat.

        An expert neutral 3rd party to confirm exactly what the E-cat does unbiased by a hopeful investor or inventors point of view.

    • AdrianAshfield

      Why the gloom in the comments? I expect we will see a Bowdlerized ERV report that confirms the 1 MW plant works but gives few technical details.
      It is not in IH or Rossi’s interest to say more until he has manufacturing set up.
      It won’t be long if Rossi thinks he can have a 1 MW plant installed in April.
      As I said in my earlier post it may be that the E-Cat X is so much better the old E-Cat is dropped.
      Rossi also recently confirmed IH have the license to manufacture and sell E-Cats in the US. I would be surprised if they were left out of it with the E-Cat X which development they funded.

      • Gerard McEk

        E-cat X is part of IH’s licence. But AR may be tempted to produce only the E-cat X Quark or what follows after that as a real engineer, never stopping improving. 😉

      • LuFong

        I don’t think one can claim that IH funded the development of the E-Cat X. And unless Rossi signed some form of agreement he most likely controls the IP for the E-Cat X and quarks. We’ll have to see whose names are on the patents and/or the nature of the licensing agreements with IH. This could even be a source of future contention between IH and Leonardo.

        • Rossi (or actually his proxy) was at at pains recently to point out that ALL ‘e-cat’ IP is the property of Leonardo. The fact that he did so seems to indicate some strain in the relationship, as does IH’s comment that only ‘official’ statements originating from IH should be taken as the truth, and the rest (meaning Rossi?) was speculation.

          Rossi:
          https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/09/ih-international-holdings-limited-a-tom-darden-directed-company-in-the-uk/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwjym97BvM3LAhWL83IKHakUCAcQFggFMAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNEWHXo8wJZiGmcZpGInNoOIdFaFBQ

          IH:
          http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/10/industrial-heat-makes-statement-regarding-lenr-industry-developments/

          • Brent Buckner

            You wrote: “I’m not sure that any statement has been made by Rossi regarding licensing of anything other than the ‘LT’ technology employed in the pilot plant”

            Rossi claimed that the E-cat X technology was licensed to IH:
            http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/21/industrial-heat-the-only-remaining-e-cat-licensee/

            You even commented on that post! Clearly, a lot of water under the bridge since then….

          • LuFong

            Thank you — that was what I was looking for. It does appear to me then that IH has the exclusive license to sell the E-cat X in the US.

          • Thanks for the reminder! Perhaps it’s the ‘quark’ IP that’s a bone of contention, or something else entirely, but the statements being issued don’t suggest to me that everything is perfect between IH and Leonardo.

            That would be entirely normal in any business relationship, and the stakes involved here make tensions inevitable. Other unknown parties may also be breathing down their necks as well, which probably won’t help.

          • LuFong

            Pretty much agree with you on everything you’ve said but it does seem that IH has licensing agreements in the US for the E-cat X. Hopefully in the next few months things will get crystal clear here (but somehow I doubt it).

          • Omega Z

            Rossi specifically said on JONP that Industrial heat also has license to the E-cat X in their licensed territories.

            Read : Consortium
            http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/consortium.asp#ixzz42kdnjNIo

            In addition, When Rossi talks about the Board of Directors, he includes all licensees and others that are financially involved including Darden. It’s my opinion that those in the consortium continue to Fund Rossi work.

        • jimbo92107

          A retired acquaintance of mine, John, has a friend that plans to install thousands of dollars of solar panels on the roof of his house.

          I told John, based on Frank’s countdown timer, that his friend should hold off on installing those solar panels for at least a month.

          Next time I see John, I have no idea what to tell him.

          • Frank Acland

            Yes, no one should make decisions based on my timers — they have proven to be unreliable. I think I’m done with them.

          • jimbo92107

            Just from all the speculation here, it’s clear there are far too many unclear variables to attempt putting precise time frames on this stuff.

            Maybe in April Rossi or IH will announce something positive. Don’t anybody hold their breath, for any of it. Too many players, too much money at stake.

        • AdrianAshfield

          Rossi does own the IP but as far as is known IH has the exclusive license to make and sell it in selected countries.
          Rossi was employed as Chief Scientist by IH if I recall and IH may have paid his staff.
          Without details of the contract little is known for sure.

      • LarryJ

        IH are Leonardo’s licensee and as such it would be surprising if they were limited only to technology current when the agreement was signed. It is apparent to just about everyone how quickly technology changes so I think it is safe to say that IH were aware that the ecat was not the end of the line and that they can handle any of Leonardo’s products going forward. The IP is Leonardo’s and licensing fees will apply on all products of course.

        Other speculations that there are difficulties between IH and Leonardo also appear completely unfounded. Rossi has gone so far as to refer to the people starting these rumours as imbeciles seeking an audience.

  • Gerard McEk

    A very bright analysis, Frank.
    Just a question. Why do you think it is ‘much less dramatic’ that the ERV’s name is not identified in comparison to the ‘customers’ name? (Point2)
    Anyway.
    I would think that the ERV contract would demand that the results would be published and signed by them, whatever the results are.
    I would also think that it is in the interest of both the Leonardo Corp. and IH that maximum publicity would be given to a positive report. However, politics and economical politics may force them to do this carefully. The question is how desirable that is for these companies. Now they are far ahead of their compitition. If they really want to profit, than now is the moment, not a few years later.
    Maybe it is as you say: IH and AR do have a different approach for taking this to the market. I think that it is also possible that IH may be forced by the US government to do it slowly. AR wants to do it as quick as possible for business reasons and the Sweedish government will not hold him.

    • Frank Acland

      What I mean is that the customer might be considered to not be an independent party in the affair. I would expect that if the customer came forward and said about all the energy savings it had made over the course of the test, people could say they were being paid to say that by IH/Leonardo. If the ERV really is an independent and qualified party, it would be harder to accuse them of being complicit in some kind of scam.

      • Gerard McEk

        Yes, but if the ‘customer’ would be lying, that would be very bad for their business. Nevertheless, the signature of a creditable ERV is definitely better, I agree.

    • In Sweden we have a pretty stupid and weak government; probably some kind of record in the western world … Which is actually a good thing 🙂

      They might be influenced by US pressure though, like in the Assange case etc, and the officials like free trips to New York and Washington. But they are more or less clueless only worrying about migration at the moment.

      • I think that the UK government must claim the prize for stupidity, particularly in financial affairs, but I will concede weakness (although the Swedish government has a lot of competition in the EU in this respect).

    • f sedei

      Very observant and wise deductions. And, you know the US Government will have (continue to have?) influence-positive or negative.

    • Frank Acland

      To add: by “much less dramatic” I mean the report will be less dramatic: if the ERV is not identified and does not sign off on the report, the effect of the results will be much less powerful.

      • Gerard McEk

        But the result effect is negligible, no value of that report whatsoever, I would say. Than it is again ‘Rossi says’ or ‘IH says’, just as far as we are now.

    • clovis ray

      Hi, Gerard, you know President Obama, is to meet with the leaders of most all of the Scandinavian country’s this week, wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall at that conference.

  • gdaigle

    The credentials of the ERV are essential to building confidence in the report. It must also be made clear that the ERV would be paid regardless of the outcome. We have seen numerous results in other scientific research where the impartiality of the researchers is called into question based upon who paid them and the control over their conclusions. After that, the methodologies must be explicit, even if there are a few minor gaps for confidentiality sake. Finally, the analysis of the ash must be beyond reproach. The customer and location are secondary to widespread acceptance of the conclusions of the report.

    However, if it is a big success then they would benefit by a media blitz. History is full of successful inventions and inventors who ultimately were superseded by more savvy businesses using the same or similar IP. Opening the customer, location and the shipping container to the media would be a good play. Just like Enterprise, the first space shuttle test vehicle that went to the Smithsonian, the original E-Cat container should be preserved for posterity.

  • EEStorFanFibb

    waiting for LENR to make a big splash in the market is just like waiting for eestor to announce a JV deal, which I’ve been doing for years now, so I’m well practiced in the waiting arts. just enjoy this time of being on the edge of your seat waiting for validation of world changing tech.

    yeah it will gnaw at your soul but try to distract yourself with productive work. Don’t let it consume you. remember, some think anticipation is the best part.

    • jimbo92107

      I don’t mind the anticipation… I just can’t stand all the waiting!

  • LuFong

    I don’t think we’ll see much if any part of the report. At best we’ll see a generic statement from Rossi or IH to the effect that the test has been concluded and generally positive, both positive/negative, or in a cursory way negative. Further information will be provided in the product specifications if and when that occurs. Even Rossi has said he doesn’t think the report will be published.

    IH, if they say anything, will state something positive but that the technologies in their portfolio are still being thoroughly evaluated but things are looking good. It’s not clear what IP they have rights to but it’s possible that even if the test was generally successful they may pursue other technologies or refinements than what was employed in the 1MW test. To me IH’s actions still are the most important regarding the results of the 1MW plant test even if they are very close mouthed.

    For me Rossi’s focus on the E-cat X and its ‘quark’ embodiment is very interesting. This technology may supplant the 1MW E-Cat technology so well that the 1MW test results are interesting but essentially useless (other than certifications). This of course is just one spin on further extension of being in the dark about the E-Cat.

    I also think that IH and Leonardo are only cooperating within the agreement they have (which I feel is very limited) and that they may actually be competitors at some level. It’s difficult even to speculate about any of this given the paucity of information from Rossi and IH.

    • deleo77

      It’s just difficult to see any kind of a meaningful press conference with Rossi unless some positive data points are released before then. If there is no positive ERV report, would anyone show up to the press conference?

      I think the press conference has been announced under the assumption that something positive is going to come out over the next month or two. The question is, will IH put their name on it, and how specific will the report be on the e-cat’s performance? I do think that Rossi wants to bring the e-cat x into his June press conference and show it to everyone, so the press conference will be all about that. But I just don’t see how this press conference even happens unless it is under the backdrop of a positive ERV report.

      • LuFong

        Rossi seems to me to be in a hurry to develop and commercialize the E-Cat. I would imagine his announcement will be a formal announcement of his plans. I don’t think the announcement will mention IH at all. I think if the information from the ERV report will be negative, not positive, or limited that means Rossi will probably be more encouraged to disclose information about the E-Cat X and/or quark.

    • EEStorFanFibb

      this is a somewhat off topic observation that I would like to make.

      the paranoia in some of the LENR community is palpable.

      Many here (understandably) hate that corporations and the “powers that be” control the traditional energy markets. What I find uncanny is that at the same time some of these people seem to hate environmentalists even more.

      the most absurd notion that I’ve seen is that commercialized LENR will face staunch opposition from “all the greenies”.

      I, OTOH, think 90%+ of environmentalists will back LENR technologies provided they are clearly demonstrated to be safe and as cost effective as renewables. Tom Darden is a good example.

      and here’s what I find to be the funniest part. they think environmentalists will be against LENR because it will put them out of work.

      is paranoia one of the 7 deadly sins or whatever? … cause it should be.

      Anyway, I think managing the role out of LENR is a good thing. why destroy trillions of wealth overnight if you don’t have to? doing it over the course of 5 years would be much better.

      • Robert Ellefson

        When the wealth you speak of preserving comes at the expense of the lives that would be saved and the suffering that would be alleviated by the rapid and widespread adoption of LENR, then the answer to your question is “compassion for humanity”.

      • Björn

        Oh, the environmentalists will do everything to stop ecat power If it proves real.
        Green is the new red. The environmentalists, and I mean the climate kind, are anti capitalusm, anti technology and mostly anti production. Basically the agw crowd is anti energy, since energy equals production. So, free energy is the greenies worst nightmare.
        The top of the climate movement are banks and governments etc who will be insanely rich from taxes and carbontrading, activists dont understand this. Ecat can save us from the climate communists, the bankers and traders and governments. Please let this be it, please.

        • Anthony Richards

          Yep, you got that spot-on, Bjorn !

      • psi2u2

        “I, OTOH, think 90%+ of environmentalists will back LENR technologies provided they are clearly demonstrated to be safe and as cost effective as renewables. Tom Darden is a good example.”

        I agree, although I can also see that there may be some conflicts of interest from within the green movement, specifically from those involved in solar, wind, or other “alternative” energies.

        • As always; you only need to follow the money. The “greens” in the NGO/political sense are financed by taxes/contributions. This financing is conditioned by public opinion. If the climate problem as they advertise it, is suddenly solved, there will be absolutely zero need for them anymore.

          Is it only me that see hypocrisy when all the hot shots fly private jets to Davos and discuss possible future problems with CO2 emissions, when today this problem is absolutely dwarfed by all the people dying from air pollution (the C in CO2) and cooking food on open fire indoors. Could it be, that it is because it requires action now locally, not talk about global taxes and future lobby financing.

          • As you say – follow the money. The money from ‘carbon taxes’ in the case you cite. There’s no money in helping poor people who are forced to cook over open fires in their houses, or to breathe the filthy air created by unregulated industry.

      • LarryJ

        Every technology is a double edged sword. Cold Fusion will solve some problems and without doubt will create new ones. Because it is a paradigm shift it is hard to predict what those new problems might be but it is not hard to imagine that cheap energy would promote consumerism and allow the entire world population to join in. That in turn will create a very strong economy and demand for commodities. Once the energy problem is solved I think the next bottleneck will be commodities and all the problems associated with their extraction.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          True. But with cheap energy, one could use e.g. aluminium, silicon and glass as building materials, instead of for example steel. For example ordinary granite is composed of 72% SiO2, 14% Al2O3, 4% K2O, 4% Na2O, 2% CaO, 2% FeO, 1% Fe2O3, 1% MgO, 0.3% TiO2. No longer ordinary mining, but instead “kill” some rocks and use everything. As what nomads did with animals; very green.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Looked a bit further into this. If one takes, instead of granite, 100% of average Earth crust (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth's_crust ), one gets approximately the following products:
            – 66.7% of steel reinforced concrete and glass
            – 7.3% of aluminium alloys
            – 2.4% of magnesium alloys
            – 0.6% of titanium alloys
            – 7% solid waste, mainly Na and K oxides
            – 16% of gaseous oxygen waste

            Should invent some use for the residual Na and K, but overall it looks good: If one has clean and cheap energy, one can take ordinary soil and turn its almost entire mass into buildings (steel reinforced concrete) and vehicles (Al,Mg,Ti,steel), plus leftover oxygen vented into atmosphere.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Nice idea, but I guess that the extraction would produce a lot of waste heat. Perhaps too much to be released without side effects.

          • artefact

            there could be quarks to use the wast heat and generate electricity. Maybe.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            The energy required is not huge. Melting stuff at high temp in principle requires no more energy, because the heat can in theory be recovered when the material cools. Chemical processing by electrolysis etc of course need at least the net chemical energy.

            In any case, one could increase the present energy consumption about 30-fold before waste heat issue starts to raise its head (in the climate sense, if that was(?) what you are worried about).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            My concern was not primarily about global warming, but more about local overheating which is known to cause unfavourable effects, especially over big cities or industrial areas.

            With regard to melting and solidification, if you produce the energy by nuclear reactions the heat will not be recovered. If it is out, it is out. But of course, any potential problems in this regard could be handled by doing the math (easy), and making the right decisions (difficult).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I probably misunderstood what you meant by „recovering“. Surely, the heat could be used for other proposes, as artefact wrote below. What I actually meant was that the nuclear reactions are not reversible. For chemical reactions, inversion seems to be possible to a certain extent: Plants convert the CO2 which is produced by combustion back into organic material, and for that purpose they withdraw energy from the environment. However, this takes time and is certainly only a drop in the bucket .

          • Pekka Janhunen

            Yes, correct.

            Assume some process needs high temp, say 3000 K. One puts a stream of material through a reactor which has that temp. It takes a lot of energy to heat the stream up to 3000 K, but one can recover most of it when the hot stream exist the reactor. In essence, one would have heat exchangers where the outcoming hot material heats the ingoing cold one. Similar principle as in machinery based HVAC nowadays. One could also use heat pumps to extract heat from the outcoming stream and pump it to the ingoing stream. Heat pumps need electric power, but they are efficient when (T1-T2)/T1 is small.

            I’m thinking of a conceptual “hotpot” reactor which basically just melts the feedstock and separates elements. The same “pot” could be used to recycle wastes, fresh ones and from old junkyards and such.

      • Omega Z

        EEStorFanFibb

        >LENR will face staunch opposition from “all the greenies”.<
        A blanket statement that we're all guilty of including myself on occasion. What's meant is the leaders of those organizations will be resistant because it threatens their well paid lifestyle.

        Traveling and palling around with Government leaders, Corporate management, and celebrities in 1st class accommodations all on donor paid expenses accounts. Many of the rank and file volunteer members will blindly follow.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        This December 50,000 people on the taxpayer’s
        dime all flew to Paris for the climate summit (50,000 people – that is a MASSIVE
        number). They all joined hands to proclaim that global warming is the MOST
        urgent problem of our day. They had conferences on how global warming can enslave
        women, and conferences on every imaginable subject.

        But clearly LENR is the solution to the
        above. So WHY NOT ONE PEEP on LENR at that conference? Well, rather simple: if
        ANY ONE of the 50,000 delegates attending the big party spoke or stated ONE
        peep about LENR, then the REASON for having the party in France would NOT
        exist! And let’s not forget the BILLIONS pledged to stop global warming. And
        yet this socialist gang hiding under the environmental umbrella fails to
        mention LENR?

        Keep in mind that funding of global warming
        now equals that of cancer research. More than 20% – of NASA’s budget
        goes to promoting this warming scam. Anyone of these institutions or government originations
        mentions LENR, and its game over for these folks!

        So yes, LENR means we take away the NUMBER
        ONE guilt trip that environmental movement uses for funding and that of making
        you feel guilty for industrializing your country or driving your car (and if
        you feel guilty, then you are MUCH more
        willing to pay a CO2 tax). Adopting LENR means they give up their big stick of
        CO2 and guilt.

        So while some environmentalists will
        support LENR, the major institutions and governments pushing global warming
        have EVERYTHING to lose with LENR – that of removing the guilt trip of you
        paying for your sins with CO2 tax. Remember, Germany is closing down their nuclear
        plants and building coal plants. This results in two things:

        Lots of money for government by the CO2
        tax.

        And trading of carbon credits by the
        financial industry (a great way to fleece more out of your pocket).

        And I should not that Japan is ALSO
        going to coal as they shut down all their nuclear (again, the government sees the
        tax potential for such coal plants, and the financial industry also lobbies for
        no nuclear since nuclear means NO carbon tax, and no carbon credits to trade.

        The above EASY explains why the vast
        majority of the environmental movement is dead set against LENR – since it threatens
        their very existence and their sources of funding.

        Regards,
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • EEStorFanFibb

    Despite how much we crave validation for our belief in LENR, I don’t think anyone is going to announce anything that doesn’t serve their short/medium term business interests. Like it or not this LENR thing is going to market for many purposes, not the least of which is to make investors a profit.

    I’m not fussed about it being about profit. If the technology is real it will still do a tremendous amount of good towards reducing carbon pollution and raising the standard of living/health of billions of people while it makes billions for investors. It could easily end up being a win, win, win, win…

    But I do really like that Leonardo/Hydrofusion can apparently decide to do their own thing, separate from IH’s reveal plan, whatever it is. From what Rossi has said recently, it looks like if IH does go quiet (which is something we’ll just have to accept) Leonardo/Hydrofusion will at least announce something interesting this June.

  • sam

    A.R. has said he is going to try to have parties agree to EVR release.
    Announcing the news conference in June also progress.
    Anyone following the story must have the feeling that its time to have
    someone to take the Bull by the Horns.
    Roger Green or someone like him.

  • MorganMck

    If the public does not see the report and neither the ERV or customer is identified, what was the point of the exercise? Maybe Rossi/IH learned some things but I thought the whole point was to prove the E-Cat in an industrial setting which Rossi said was the only way it could be done as opposed to experimental setups which would always be questioned. I feel a little betrayed watching this thing for so long when at the end of the day, we may have nothing more than Rossi’s second hand report on the results.

    • Frank Acland

      Like I said above in scenario 3, It’s possible report could be made available to interested parties under NDA. Not sure that is the plan, but I see it as a possibility. Rossi has said that data will be made public, without confidential matters disclosed. We’ll have to see.

      • Omega Z

        They have a different goal then informing us. This test was paid for by Industrial heat as well as a neutral outside expert(SGS maybe?)

        This is for them(IH & Investors) as well as potential customers. Rigorous testing to be certain it works and not fooling themselves as well as any safety concerns. This is a point that we tend to overlook.

    • Brent Buckner

      You wrote: “If the public does not see the report and neither the ERV or customer is identified, what was the point of the exercise?”

      In addition to Frank’s comment below about NDA, it may have been a condition of a contract amongst Rossi/Leonardo/IH.

    • LarryJ

      I believe the main purpose of the industrial test was to convince the investors that it was worthy of the hundreds of millions or possibly billions of dollars that will be required for the massive production necessary to bring it to fruition. They will certainly get to see it. The test was also designed to ensure that the reactor met the contractual terms with the customer so the customer will see that small portion of it.

      Rossi has long stated that the only proof of his technology will be products in the market. This is a paradigm shift and any test, no matter how reputable or long will be hotly disputed and written off as wishful thinking. A total waste of time. If the ERV is kept entirely confidential beyond “Rossi says” It Succeeded it will not make one iota of difference to the development of the technology. The people that need to see it will see it and products will appear as soon as is possible.

  • Hi all

    There are a lot of political considerations as well as business. See Sifferkoll’s reports on the factors affecting business and some of the consequent political considerations. Also consider the APCO Worldwide have the Clintons as their customers, I still think an October Surprise might be the way APCO want to play it.

    As I keep saying look at actions not words. See what organisations and nations are doing and you will see their real agenda

    Russia and the US no longer seem interested in the Middle East. Though those still attached to oil and out of the loop still think it relevant. Russia is pulling out of Syria. The US has said to Israel and Saudi Arabia, hey look it is your problem, and is just as friendly with Iran as with Saudi Arabia or Israel.

    If LENR is real then the Middle East is irrelevant, the super power contested region becomes the New Frontier; Space.

    Russia has already said they will be running an atomic powered spaceship to Mars in 2018. I think both Russian and Chinese elements will try to beat the US to announcing working LENR for political and technological gain. If Rossi’s reactor is positive, those nations know, and the space race is on full bore.

    Kind Regards walker

    • Isn’t Russia’s space reactor an old fashioned fission reactor?

      • cashmemorz

        If Russia knows anything it also knows about LENR and how to utilize it in space propulsion/energy.

      • Hi all

        I have no idea what power unit they will use. They have said they will use a nuclear powered spacecraft to get to Mars. That is all.

        As I keep saying look at actions not words. See what organisations and nations are doing and you will see their real agenda.

        If Nation States know LENR is real then the race to claim bits of space is on. It will all be about sphere’s of influence. Think of Spain, Portugal, the UK, France and Holland in the 15th to 19th centuries.

        Particularly in relation to the Americas and Asian trade routes.

        Kind Regards walker

    • http://www.rosatom.ru/en/ – This is the company.

      http://www.sciencealert.com/russia-has-a-crazy-plan-to-fly-to-mars-in-45-days-using-nukes – This is the news story.

      The Russian rocket is a fission design used to heat up hydrogen gas to expel through rocket engines to create thrust. The hydrogen is just heated, not burned, so there is no need for liquid oxygen which saves space and weight. The spacecraft would probably be put into space with heavy lifting chemical rockets and then the nuclear rocket turned on when in space. The USA has had nuclear powered rockets for decades and flew them around the USA. In a famous incident, one landed on a roadway and made everything radioactive, so the roadway had to be replaced and at least one bystander suffered radiation burns. The top secret program was cancelled because of the difficulty of containing the radiation expelled out the rocket engine.

  • Roland

    Follow Matts Lewan’s blog as what leakage is occurring from the activities at IH only achieve public currency, i.e. reaches our screens, through very limited channels.

    If IH insiders are talking to their spouses, or the folks at the bowling alley, how exactly would that find its way here?

    Contrary to popular opinion the Manhattan Project leaked significantly at the local level, and was thoroughly compromised at an espionage level, all without the general public becoming any the wiser till the big reveal.

    Leakage, deliberate or otherwise, is occurring but at the end of the day it presents us with exactly the same issues as parsing Rossi’s Delphic utterances, you can take them at face value, or not, depending on your predispositions.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    The E-Cat isn’t a new type of hula hoop. It will take some time to compile the report.

  • psi2u2

    “Rossi does not want to be just an inventor — he sees himself as both an inventor and (more importantly in his eyes) an industrialist who can realize the dream of Nikola Tesla of making infinite energy available for all.”

    Ah, indeed. I think this is quite correct and explains quite a bit about Rossi’s personality and actions as he has negotiated his way, both in the lab, and in the eyes of potential supporters via the internet and other means, to the place where he has now established himself as the inventor everyone’s getting ready to talk about.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      He cut the Gordian Knot when he created the JONP.

  • jimbo92107

    Yeah, you’re right. I got overly optimistic about the time frame for tech adoption. It’s always a matter of years, not months.

    On the other hand, if Rossi starts cranking out his little Quark units, we might start seeing demo models within a year.

  • kenko1

    The clock is ticking. The core patent has been issued. Any improvements should have claims wrt that patent. Everything will be built on top of that patent. And everyone will be able to use it in 15 years. Not so long a wait. I’ve been watching this drama for 5+ years beginning with Steorn in what? 2007? I may not benefit from it much, but my kids and grandkids should. For free!

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yeah, and unlike politicians who foist themselves upon people
      who don’t want them, it will spread on its own.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi’s patent was extended by 600+ days to the filing date due to delays caused by the patent office. Best figure 18 years. Not 15…

      • wpj

        If it really does become important, then there will be lots of challenges with so much money at stake. As he says, they have to just make it so cheap that the competition can’t compete.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      I have the same feelings. I’ve been watching
      this drama for 27 years (Wednesday is the 27 year anniversary of the F&P
      March 23, 1989 press conference). Even if I become landfill before it’s fully
      implemented, I’m happy knowing that it can’t be stopped now.

  • LarryJ

    This is why no end of reports, long term, reputable or otherwise is going to change anything on the ground and people clamoring for Rossi to publicize and prove what he has will serve no purpose. You cannot calculate an ROI or plan any sort of real world project based on a test report. You can only do that with products you can buy.

    I think products will be available in the near future but your guess is as good as mine and nobody can see the future.

    • Owen Geiger

      But a very positive report by a well known ERV can attract boatloads of cash.

      • LarryJ

        I agree completely and I think that is its primary purpose but that does not imply any need for the public to see the report or know the identity of the ERV.

      • Omega Z

        I don’t think attracting boatloads of cash are any longer an issue.

        • Owen Geiger

          I agree with LarryJ that the primary purpose of the ERV report is to increase investments — presumably for a major commercialization roll out in the next 1-2 years. You say attracting cash is no longer an issue.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “MARK Jansen March 19, 2016 at 8:46 PM
    Hi Andrea
    Please don’t let some big companies buy your IP. They will sit on it for 10-15 years and humanity will suffer. A minute they delay this technology, there will be some more poor kids who die. They can manipulate public opinion by using best law firm.

    Andrea Rossi March 19, 2016 at 9:37 PM
    Mark Jansen:
    Do not worry: my IP will always remain property of Leonardo Corporation. Maybe you are right, but we are ready to fight; by the way, when a guy passes through what I had to in my life and survives….
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

  • Owen Geiger

    It seems like Rossi’s new quark design could become the main competition for IH unless they have a license to produce/sell this version. I could see Rossi keeping the quark design completely separate (no agreement with IH) in order to ‘light a fire’ under them to move ahead with the E-Cat as fast as possible.

    • First part agreed, but I’m less sure about the motive you ascribe to AR. I think there may be trouble ahead.

    • LarryJ

      IH would be well aware that the ecat technology would not stand still. No technology stands still, in fact they improve exponentially. IH are Leonardo’s licensee and they will surely be licensed to sell any of Leonardo’s products including those that are developed a decade from now. Licensing fees will apply.

      • Owen Geiger

        Seems to me that Rossi is racing ahead 10 times faster than IH. Just my opinion of course. Rossi may very well do a several month long quark pilot project this summer. That would put huge pressure on IH to proceed with development at full speed.

    • Gerard McEk

      Rossi has said that E-cat X is part of the license with IH. The Quark is just a mini E-cat X, so I assume it will also be included in the licence, but maybe we must ask.
      It can be that other Quarks positioned around a Quark in operation and generating heat, can produce so much electrical power, that nearly 100% electrical efficiency is reached. That new development may not be in the licence (if it exists).

      • Owen Geiger

        It sounds like Rossi is going to roll out the quark reactors faster than IH. He is a man on a mission. He’s highly driven.

      • artefact

        On JONP:

        “Dan C. March 20, 2016 at 7:16 AM
        Dear Andrea,
        There is some discussion and confusion on the blogs.
        For clarity, is Industrial Heat licensed for ALL E-cat products including E-catX and the E-cat Quark should they be F9>0.
        It’s your serve on the court
        Warm regards, Dan C.

        AR: yes”

        • Gerard McEk

          Thanks Artefact, so the constant tendency of this community (including me) to assume a situation that AR and IH are not in agreement seems to be build on loose sand over and over again. Maybe we should explore the situation in a positive direction!

          • artefact

            the disagreement can still be in the time of the roleout.

          • Brent Buckner

            Sure. The geographic rights allow for such a disagreement, with IH and Leonardo proceeding in their own ways in their own territories.

            There might be friction (e.g. IH controlling the results of the 1MW test with Leonardo wanting them released sooner than IH wants) but I expect that neither IH nor Leonardo gets to block or dictate to the other in its rollout in its territory.

          • Omega Z

            Gerard,

            It would also stand to reason that IH is still funding the research.
            I think the problem is that there has never been any clarity on what the relationship/partnership consists of between the different parties involved.
            I determined sometime ago that it is a consortium of sorts.
            ———————————————————————–
            What is a ‘Consortium’

            A consortium is a group made up of two or more individuals, companies or governments that work together toward achieving a chosen objective. Each entity within the consortium is only responsible to the group in respect to the obligations that are set out in the consortium’s contract. Therefore, every entity that is under the consortium remains independent in his or her normal business operations and has no say over another member’s operations that are not related to the consortium.
            ———————————————————————–
            This fits everything we’ve witnessed and read since Industrial heat has become involved with Rossi. They are “1” but seperate entities. Details are in the contract.

            When Rossi speaks of the Leonardo Board of Directors, You will find members of all the various entities involved including Darden and many others. And as Rossi has stated, he serves as the CEO of Leonardo as long as the Board of Directors support him in that position.

          • Gerard McEk

            Interesting thought Omega Z. As long as the ‘money-leg’ of the consortium pays for the rest, we should assume everything is in good order. Let us hope they keep it that way.

          • “Details are in the contract.”

            A potential problem with all such business arrangements is that it isn’t always possible to foresee where research/R&D will lead. For example, in this case it would be very unlikely that a direct electricity-producing e-cat might have been foreseen when the contract was written.

            However, now this device has emerged, Rossi might see it as sufficiently different from previous versions to constitute a new invention not subject to the contract between the parties, while IH might argue that it is simply a derivative of the work that they funded, and that they therefore automatically have licensing rights to it.

            If this – or similar – is the case, then naturally there will be tension until the matter is resolved. But both parties will be aware that a split would be potentially very damaging, so they know that the issue MUST be resolved relatively amicably, even if a few human emotions are expressed in the process. Such things aren’t either ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ – they are just a part of life.

          • Omega Z

            I don’t think there is a problem with IH/Leonardo/Rossi.
            I think people read to much between the lines in Industrial heats E-mail.

            Note the prior multiple rumors of a report circulating and positive results mentioned in posts here at ECW. Recall the interview of Fulvio Fabiani who said they follow the blogs. Considering ECW’s status, it would be the primary blog they follow and those rumors that were of concern..

            I believe Industrial heat was just preemptively saying not to believe PREMATURE statements of success(Rumors).. Only trust reports that come from Industrial heat. I’d also bet dollars to donuts that Industrial heat is well represented on Leonardo’s board of directors and that No report will be released without their say so.. So should Rossi make any statements, it will be only with IH’s approval and probably of a very limited nature.

  • LarryJ

    Someone said that incredulity is the biggest contributor to the secrecy of incredible secrets. Even if there were leaks nobody but us would believe them. Probably the rank and file at the customer’s site have been told that they are testing a new high efficiency electrical boiler. Even if an employee figured out what they were testing, most of us here who have tried to tell others what is coming are well aware that it takes a certain level of courage to face the rolling eyes turning your way. This is a secret that has no problem keeping itself.

    • ilk

      It was Marshall Mcluhan : “Only the small secrets need to be protected.
      The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity.”
      Good point.

  • georgehants

    Just wanted to put up the 100th comment.
    Little things please little minds.

  • georgehants
  • Zeddicus23

    Regarding Leonardo Corporation, I’ve always assumed (but may well be wrong) that the board of directors included the principals from Ampenergo although apparently Ampenergo no longer exists or has rights to North America – instead IH does. See: http://energycatalyzer3.com/news/more-details-about-ampenergo-deal-available Note that principals of Ampernergo include a number of individuals with strong ties to U.S. government and defense department. Can anyone comment in more detail on the BOD of Leonardo corporation? Perhaps someone could ask Rossi this.

    • Omega Z

      Ampenergo still on going. Follow this thread which lists those involved with IH-

      IH International Holdings Limited — A Tom Darden Directed Company Registered
      http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/09/ih-international-holdings-limited-a-tom-darden-directed-company-in-the-uk/

    • Brokeeper

      Great find Zeddicus. If true, from what I read from Rossi’s recent comment: IH is “licensed for ALL E-cat products including E-catX and the E-cat Quark” and this latest Ampenergo/LC deal revelation then either IH does not have ‘exclusive’ rights to market (sell) the E-Cat X (only to manufacture), or Ampenergo is another member in the BOD or growing spawning pool within Leonardo Corp. along with IH.
      LTI: http://www.lti-global.com/

      • Brokeeper

        I just found this older JoNP comment:

        A.R. Warm regards, [email protected] For any info about LTI, please coontact them directly: commercial license of Leonardo Corp. in the Americas and Caribeans. (Leonardo Technology Inc.) is the company with the exclusive 3- The reactors are manufactured by Leonardo Corporation, while LTI issue. Our NON-Customers have no reason to know anything at all about this factories, they are not interested about the manufacturing sites. our reactors. Our Customers will receive the reactors in their 2- there is no reason why I have to disclose where we manufacture operation in the market manufacturing the reactors which in october will start their 1- I am absolutely not interested to the skepticism, since we are Dear Mr Charlie Zimmerman: May 23rd, 2011 at 2:40 PM Andrea Rossi

        Notice the mailto: address above.

        • sam

          Rossi The Multi Man
          A Scientist, Engineer, Businessman,
          and salesman.

        • Omega Z

          I would bet IH has members on the Board of Directors. It’s simple logic. Would you invest millions in a company without representation. It’s no different then having a large percentage of shares of stocks in a Corporation. You get to put people on their board of directors. That’s how they monitor their investment. As to Rossi, he will get royalties on every E-cat sold regardless who manufactures them. Anywhere from 2% to 5% of the wholesale price.

      • Frank Acland

        I think the Cherokee connections started taking place in 2012; maybe Ampenergo sold its license to IH.

        • Brokeeper

          That could be before AR agreed to sell additional license and become chief scientist for IH.
          Over 15 years ago LTI’s co-founded Andrea Rossi sold his interest in the company with the exclusive commercial license of Leonardo Corp. Apparently in 2009 LTI branched off to create Ampenergo (with Craig Cassarino and his connection with DOD and DOE).
          Published on May 17, 2011 by Hank Mills in PESN article: http://pesn.com/2011/05/17/9501827_Ampenergo_Amps_Up_Rossis_Energy_Catalyzer_in_America.

        • billH

          Wasn’t IH formed in 2013 with an initial investment of $11.5M, for the express purpose of funding LENR development and in particular E-Cat?
          I would characterise this as a shell company as they only have two named executives, 8 unnamed investors and a website with no real updates or information. The real investment comes from Cherokee and it’s investors and it can easily be wound up if the research proves unfruitful without any damage to Cherokee’s credibility. That’s the way big business works.

  • US_Citizen71

    I think it is simply a pincer attack. You have Rossi/LC flanking left, IH flanking right and us the members of the lunatic fringe holding the line. If/When the big reveal happens how does the PTB defend against attacks from three directions? The one year test may likely be the data that is needed to support the consumer grade heater as well as proving the concept of industrial level use. When you have industrialists, consumers and enthusiasts all screaming for LENR’s release and approval how do you say no? The opposition will be facing the death of a million paper-cuts from the consumers as well as the machete of industry it will be far better to join the other side than hold ground.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Pardon me. I just wanted to get a little off topic thought down before I forget it while we’re waiting:

    Maybe the reaction could be followed by following the disappearance of lithium-7 hydride by infrared emission spectroscopy. The
    remaining lithium-6 hydride (that would be slightly blue shifted from the lithium-7 hydride) could be the internal standard. Maybe (a lot of maybes here) some sort of window that is transparent to these IR regions could be put into an E-Cat X quark.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13750414_Far-_and_Mid-Infrared_Emission_Spectroscopy_of_LiH_and_LiD

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Well, I’m thinking about the full analytical package that has to be compiled. The mass spectral analysis of the ash.

  • Zeddicus23

    I know it was published in 2011 but assumed that people could read that for themselves. The point was to inform those who may have started following the Rossi saga after 2011 and so may not have been familiar with Ampenergo, as well as to remind those who may have forgotten, some of the other possible key players since I have not seen these names mentioned recently in the constant discussions about Industrial Heat. Any updated information would certainly be of interest but it seems evident from Brokeeper’s response that some of the names mentioned are still involved, although we still don’t know all of the details.

  • clovis ray

    true bill, but we don’t know what was in the agreement-contract, he may have obtained the rights to anything found, while working on it, i know i would have if possible, they may have just thought they had the rights, to the x-cat, and like all good vc’s tried to take advantage. and was set strait about who owned what. you better believe I/H will not lose their hold on what they have, that being a hand on the golden goose, and you better believe that Dr. Rossi knows who owns that goose.

  • Ted-X

    The positions of IH and Leonardo Corp. may fall down like a house of cards at any moment, as soon as somebody (most likely in the so called Third World) will quietly solve the issue of the pre-treatment of Nickel and will declare Rossi’s patent invalid as not providing sufficient information to reproduce the invention, Gentlemen, a patent not providing sufficient information to reproduce the invention is invalid. Every patent attorney knows that. The unsuccessful replications confirm the lack of validity of Rossi’s patent. Sorry, but the things may develop this way.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      And if you have a perfect patent you run the risk of it being sequestered.
      https://ecatsite.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/belgian-lanr-patents/

    • Omega Z

      A patent must provide sufficient info that those skilled in the art can replicate. Several have already obtained excess heat. Should someone skilled enough to make it work merely proves enough info “was” provided that someone skilled in the art was able to do just that. They just validated the patent.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        yeah, like the first transistors.

      • Bruce__H

        A patent is a guarantee of protection in exchange for making a process or invention public. Rossi must divulge the secret “additives” in his fuel so that someone skilled in the art can replicate the effect using the same materials and procedures. I don’t think he has done that has he?

        Rossi can’t maintain that certain parts of his process are secret and at the same time patent them.

        • DrD

          I think that only means that those parts aren’t protected. Patent law is a minefleld, it keeps the lawyers employed and comfortable.

        • Omega Z

          Bruce,

          If 1 skilled in the art can obtain excess heat, that is all that is needed.
          Rossi makes no claims that you will obtain the same results he does nor is he required to do so. As to Rossi’s patent, read it and determine exactly what was patented. Everyone focuses on the fuel…

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Rossi’s answer to Frank’s question about number in Rossi lab is very discouraging “3 and pretty good too”, is very discouraging. The unlimited resources from IH are gone.

          • Frank Acland

            I guess it depends on who the team members are. Three bright heads could do a lot.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            I still believe Rossi is far ahead with LENR research, I just think it discouraging that more research resources are not flowing to him.

          • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

            I think you will be surprised who comes out of the woodwork when LENR finally goes mainstream. There are a lot of big companies that have surreptitiously filed LENR patents in recent years, so i suspect that Boeing/Toyota/etc have teams working on LENR in secret but won’t come forward until after it becomes mainstream.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            I hope you are right.

          • Brent Buckner

            Perhaps Leonardo is in line for a payday based upon the ERV report and thereafter Rossi might increase staffing.

          • Ged

            Not necessarily. I work with group of people, but only 3 are part of my lab. So if you asked me the number of people in my lab, I’d have to answer 3 to be accurate, instead of the many dozens whom I actually work with in collaborating labs/departments/etc. There are different payrolls for Leonardo and IH, more than likely, and Leonardo could be considered having had a grant from IH to collaborate on the technology (since IH bought some of the IP). Apparently, IH can now produce their own E-cats as a consequence of this collaboration, but the people directly under Rossi’s payroll and Leonardo’s roster may still just be 3 (as it has been for a long while, I believe).

          • Omega Z

            I believe Ross had 5 at 1 time, but the 1MW plant required more to build it. It also needed 24/7 monitoring for the test.

          • deleo77

            I agree on it being discouraging. Yes, sometimes small teams are more effective. But 3 people (I assume Rossi includes himself in that number) is eye-catching. It makes me think that IH is putting the bulk of its resources in other places.

          • Omega Z

            IH has always had a minimum number of people involved with the core technology. Only 5 or 6 involved directly with the 1MW plant that was under 24/7 test for a year. The more people involved at that level, the more chance of people leaking criticle info. But overall, there are a couple dozen involved making future plans and arrangements.

          • Omega Z

            Bernie, This is a new team for the E-cat X. This has actually been indirectly stated on JONP by Rossi prior to the completion of the1 year test.

            Rossi’s previous team(Which was larger) is likely still involved with the Lt 1MW plant making improvements that probably do not require Rossi’s direct involvment anymore. It would only involve engineering improvments.

            The E-cat X will not require as big a team as the 1MW plant did as it is based on prior technology and does not require 24/7 monitoring.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Sorry, but I see no continued connection between Rossi and the IH 1MW plant used in the year test, and there is no indication Rossi is involved in the IH lab in North Carolina. If I missed something Rossi said that disagrees with above please tell me.

          • Omega Z

            There is nothing left to do with the pilot plant that requires Rossi’s attention at this time They await the ERV report. Thus Rossi can focus on the Quark.

            Andrea Rossi, March 23, 2016
            Frank Acland,
            The low temperature E-Cat too has been evolved during the 352 days of test, due to all the problems we had to resolve, but in a less revolutionary measure, due to the fact that we had to stay within restricted risk limits not to compromise the results, while with the Hot Cat we arrived to the E-Cat QuarkX thanks to our freedom of risk.
            Warm Regards,
            A.R.

          • DrD

            that’s very interesting because I felt sure he emphasized how all production would be based on quarks which conflicted with other statements. I suppose ALL doesn’t mean ALL.

          • Brent Buckner

            I’m sure that Rossi was only writing for Leonardo in that statement about production, not for IH.

          • DrD

            Except he keeps saying there will be no more E-Cat.
            All are now made from E-CatX (quark) which I take to mean also the 1MW plants. Which I agree is a little hard to comprehend. For example the last time he said it:

            Shan Tokley

            March 22, 2016 at 4:33 PM

            Dr Andrea Rossi

            I understand, from what you say, that the E-Cat QuarkX is the E-Cat X further modified and the E-Cat QuarkX is the same, further modified, in a continuous evolution process: am I correct? This means that Hot Cat, E-Cay X will no more be produced in the original form, because what will be massively produced will be the final result of the evolution process: am I correct?
            Godspeed,

            Shan

            Andrea Rossi

            March 22, 2016 at 8:03 PM

            Shan Tokley:

            Yes, you got it all.

            Warm Regards,

            A.R.

          • Omega Z

            There is still the Low temp E-cat.
            It is the Hot cat that has evolved to the E-cat X to the Ecat quark.
            Similar technology optimized for different tasks.

          • if there is a secret recipe to obtain more energy, then anyone discovering it later can claim a patent on it.

            if you believe in patents, you have to patent all, asap, basic process, improved process, alternative process.

            anyway patents today mostly slowdown innovation, and damage even the owner.

          • Omega Z

            Alain, Did you notice that Rossi’s granted patent wasn’t published until just a few weeks before it was granted. It was kept in the dark by Rossi paying an additional fee. The patent period was also extend by over 600 days due to delays by the patent office.

            Even tho not public, his IP was still protected, but there is a trade off. Anyone who used his IP during that time can’t be punished for infringement. However, they are required to cease and desist upon it being published or they can be charged with infringement and possibly to the original filing date. Also, Rossi has said over 60 patents have been filed. Probably also in the dark.

            As to secret recipe. Like others, you focus on the fuel which was almost like a footnote in the patent. The patent wasn’t about the fuel, but the device. The E_cat Reactor design…

      • Ted-X

        I think that there is also a condition for the invention to be commercially useful. A 2% excess heat is not really commercially useful, although, I agree, it can be debatable.
        —————————-
        In my opinion, there is no secret catalyst, it is just the pre-processing of nickel which makes the difference. Presence of traces of carbon (for surface carbonylation and perhaps the formation of a small fraction of volatile nickel carbonyls) and the cryogenic pre-treatment of nickel (combined with mechanical “pounding” of the particles; compare the papers by Carpinelli in Italy for some clues) might be what makes that difference. The temperature needs to oscillate to create nickel nano-particles “in-statu nascendi”. My friend with his crystal ball confirmed it 🙂 He is right in 95% of the cases 🙂
        ———————————————————–
        The chemical processes at the conditions of LENR are governed by the kinetic and phase-equilibrium, with very simple chemistry. Complex catalysts are excluded at these temperatures. Aspen or ChemCAD modeling would be very useful to analyze the interconversions/interactions, although alloying transitions might not be in the Aspen software as yet.
        ——————————-
        Somebody just needs to do that pre-treatment. Commercial cryogenic services are available at a very low cost; they are used by the mechanical shops to change the structure of alloy-based and carbon steel tools, to make them harder than from the tempering process.

        • Omega Z

          You’ll find many patented items that have no commercial value. Further more, If your spending millions a year for electrically produced heat, 2% can be the difference of make or break for many businesses. 2% is commercially viable

          As to Rossi’s patent, if you can obtain any excess heat, it’s good to go. He is not required to show you how to optimise it. But note, even if you replicate Rossi’s fuel precisely, you will not get the same results. Because like most, you are blind and can not see.

          Have you read the patent. If not, you should. Then determine what was actually patented. Here’s a clue. It was not the fuel composition…

        • DrD

          There is no requirement for a patent to be commercially useful. I have quite a few and that issue never arises So 2% It is not debatable.
          Where did you get 2%.
          It’s atleast 600% according to his specification and in reality, the newer E-catx may soon have an infinite COP, supplying all it’s own input energy so the terms “excess heat” and “COP” become a bit meaningless.

        • psi2u2

          “I think that there is also a condition for the invention to be commercially useful.”

          To get a patent. I’m not an expert, but based on what I *have* read this is just not so.

  • Brokeeper

    Some may not be old to all.

  • Omega Z

    In the 1 year test, Rossi was not compensated as he was compensated with the original agreement. Running the test was part of that agreement.

    Those working with Rossi(His Team) and the materials was financed by Industrial heat as they are funding “ALL” the R&D including the Ecat X/Quark.

    As to the IP, It belongs to Leonardo/Rossi. Not my opinion, just facts based on additional Patents submitted info. Submitted by Industrial heat- Inventor Andrea Rossi- Patent “Assignee is Andrea Rossi”.

    In return for the R&D Funding, Industrial heat holds both manufacturing and distribution rights for their designated market area. Rossi and additional licensees through various agreements hold manufacturing and marketing rights to all other areas.

  • Omega Z

    The granted patent which is about the reactor design. There are at least 2 other patents in process submitted by Industrial heat with Rossi listed as inventor and assignee. However, I can’t locate 1 of them at the moment.

    As to the fuel components, you will find them listed in patent applications of Many other LENR players. Most seem to list half the element table.
    If there is a recipe for the fuel, probably one would need to look under copyrights.