Rossi Thinking About Using QuarkX for Charging EVs for Almost Infinite Range

Here’s another one word answer from Andrea Rossi, but it maybe gives a clue about what might be involved in the ‘surprise’ he referred to in connection with the E-Cat recently on the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Italo R.
May 4, 2016 at 1:09 AM
Dear Dr. Rossi, I was thinking about electric cars. In this period there is much talk of Tesla and other electric cars. That’s where the E-Cat QuarkX might be useful. Putting on board a pack of E-Cat QuarkX used to always keep charging batteries, you would have a virtually infinite range.
This would be a market with enormous possibilities. Are you also thinking about this during your R&D?
My Best Regards,
Italo R.

Andrea Rossi
May 4, 2016 at 8:03
Italo R.:
Warm Regards,

Rossi says that the E-Cat QuarkX can produce heat, light and electricity. If it does all three then it’s a very versatile technology, especially if it operates at a high COP. Right now GM’s Chevrolet Volt has an onboard gasoline generator that is used to charge the car’s battery and extend the driving range. Conceivably the same principle could be employed if you could get the QuarkX to be safe and reliable in a portable situation like in a vehicle.

Rossi has always said that for safety of operations the E-Cats need to have an external source of energy to drive them, so in an EV there would have to be some external electrical source on board with the QuarkX. But if the QuarkX produces electricity in large enough amounts to charge an EV’s battery it would seem to be a trivial thing to have some extra electricity left over to provide the needed input for the QuarkX. This does make me wonder about the ‘surprise’ Rossi has mentioned. What if Rossi has figured out a way to have the QuarkX self-sustain permanently and safely using the electricity it produces to power itself?

  • fritz194

    …That would make lots of sense. Especially in colder regions where the heat can be used for heating……

  • MLWerner

    I haven’t checked lately, but the gasoline engine in an original Chevy Volt drives the wheels and does not charge the battery. I think it was an odd choice by GM but that isn’t the first time they made an odd decision.

    • peacelovewoodstock

      MLWerner, I believe you are mistaken; the gasoline engine in the original (and current generation, not to make a pun) Volt operated in two modes, primarily to power a generator when needed, and at times (determined by onboard computer), to also supply additional motive power directly to the drive train.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        I thought the Volt engine only drove a generator…….and there was no mechanical linkage between the engine and the drivetrain.

  • DrD

    Frank, that puzzled me about him not wanting to power an E-CATx from it’s own electric via a battery for safety reasons. WHY? I could only think that some thing catastrophic will happen if for some reason the power (via the battery) fails, meaning he needs a guaranteed supply but even mains (grid) isn’t that. It seems hard to believe.

    • Rene

      A few years back Rossi said (yeah I know ‘said’) that it took frequencies to start SSM, and that it took energy (undisclosed which/how) to quench a runaway reaction. This is why an external source of power is needed. But, recently he said that he could achieve high COP (via SSM) and also stay away from runaway reactions. Maybe that is what he learned while living in the container. And, maybe that it what he did not give IH.
      In any case, it is long past time to show the world something that works, not hear-say but something people can try. Looking forward to that day. Until then, this is remains speculative entertainment.

      • DrD

        I see AR adressed that very issue last night, together with my other point about recharging, makes me wonder if Giuseppe is alias AR.

  • Observer

    In order to avoid the E-Cat being considered part of the drive train (and subject to government regulation), 2 batteries would be required: One only connected to the E-Cat Quark X(s) for recharging and one only connected to the car. The batteries would switch their connections when the one powering the car got too low.

    • DrD

      It’s a good chance it might work as a “work around” but at the end of the day we need proper certification and I’m sure AR sees it as a major hurdle to overcome. He’s said (for certification) Industrialisation will be easier and once it’s in widespread use in industry it will help us with home or auto use. Shame about the impact on timescales though. It never was going to be a “walk over”, thanks to the Skeptics and those with vested intersts in blocking it of which I think we see not a few posting here.

  • Jonnyb

    Let us hope it is someone of this stature.

  • Bob Matulis

    I think it is premature to be talking about applications. Rossi needs to demonstrate what it is and that it works first. If his claims are true it would be very easy to create a “black box” type of demonstration that could unambiguously show that no power is going into it yet its SSM is providing the energy. Anything else and I consider his claims “to good to be true”.

  • I am waiting.
    I am still waiting.
    I am waiting some more.
    Is it Christmass yet?
    Yes I know two s’s.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Q, “Putting on board [an electric car] a pack of E-Cat QuarkX used to always keep charging batteries, you would have a virtually infinite range. This would be a market with enormous possibilities. Are you also thinking about this during your R&D?”

    A. “Yes” (Duh!!)

    These _leading_ questions with obvious answers that Rossi only needs to answer with one or two words are like leading the witness. The concept of putting an LENR electric generator in an electric car is obvious, i.e. not novel or patentable to anyone. The question is an apparent positive setup by someone friendly looking to help Rossi.

    I know we are in a news vacuum due to this unfortunate legal dispute between two parties. From this reader’s perspective, both think they are legally and morally right. Only one will win unfortunately — what a sad state of affairs for all concerned except the lawyers. However, in this observer’s opinion, reporting on Rossi setup questions with obvious answers doesn’t really do anything for us.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      I much agree.
      The announcements by Rossi these days much seem like posturing or showmanship. While all fun and games, I actually commend the lighter and perhaps more skeptical attitude I seen rise up since the lawsuit. Such answers from Rossi really amounts to nothing for LENR.

      However, Rossi credibility has been damaged.
      In other words, as that old commercial sated – where’s the beef?

      Announcements about flying cars, electric ecats etc. is all fun and games at this point in time.

      Rossi has to get a product into the marketplace and all these announcements are rather hollow and simply a magic trick to misdirect the public away from the recent setbacks.

      If the pubic posting on Rossi site stopped this clown show, and all readers and posts pushed Rossi for say allow MMFP to test a device, Rossi could regain much needed credibility.

      As long as the posters on Rossi site entertain and go “oh” and “ah” over flying cars etc., the longer this side show will continue.

      The people posting and who entertain Rossi will get in return from Rossi EXACTLY how they behave and what they demand!

      At the end of the day, Rossi does not owe the public some validation of his ecat, the market will eventually ferret this issue out. For me, Rossi is on a short rope these days.
      it now becomes a question of what kind of ride we want from now to
      the point that the market can validate the ecat.

      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • Anon2012_2014

        “it now becomes a question of what kind of ride we want from now to
        the point that the market can validate the ecat.”

        What kind of “ride we [I] want”:

        I want full public validation yesterday (i.e. ASAP).

        It doesn’t have to be MFMP. It could be any reputable university or commercial lab. But I want all the technology for the replication to be made public so that multiple university and commercial labs could prove it. I don’t buy the “competition” reason for not publicly testing and publicly giving all information needed to replicate by labs. If there is secret sauce, file a provisional patent now (takes 2 days) and then go public in three days. There is way too much “wait and see” until the next test, secret customer, etc… for me.

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          An early adopter neighbor would satisfy my curiosity.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            I don’t think Rossi will recover from the current situation until such time a customer or credible test occurs.

          • clovis ray

            NOPE, The only thing he will show, will be to his new associates,-partners, producers, and with the use of 3d printers there is virtually nothing that can’t be reproduced, quickly and by the masses, and the folks are not penny ante, like, I/H heat, as for i can see I/H was never a team player, the only time we seen darden was at a conference in europe , absolutely no communications with our group at all, and i know he was contacted many times, but nothing.

          • passerby

            Why wouldn’t it work, there is nothing fundamentally different between the ecat and many of the other successful LENR tests over the years.

      • Omega Z

        A lot of people are going to be disappointed about Flying Cars.
        They imagine jumping in and flying across town to a friends or the grocery store etc. Not going to happen. The reason we don’t have flying cars today has nothing to do with energy and such. We have helicopters which indicates flying cars should be easy. It’s about practicality and (Many issues) of safety along with cost.

        Should they ever overcome the safety issues and cost, one will still need to arrive and depart from airports and follow all aviation rules & regulations.

        • SG

          Dream a little. The electric powered self-flying personal drones are the future of personal flight. Battery life is a limiting factor. QuarkX would do wonders. Sure, there will still need to be designated landing areas/pads, but with the right mix of technologies, nothing like the airports required today.

          • Omega Z

            I have no doubt that there will be, “personal onboard flying drones” in the future. Along with designated areas of use similar to hang gliding and such. A hobby.

            Large volumes of inducted air, whirling blades, large amounts of flying debris, dust and sand over private airspace… These are just a few of the reasons flying cars are designed with the intent of driving to the airport to fly. They will require a pilot license and follow FFA rules just like regular airplanes. Most of the laws and regulations already exist that prohibit what you and others envision.

            Some places in the U.S. have already passed laws against flying over private property. Only 2 legal questions that haven’t been answered yet is how high my personal airspace extends and does it apply to government as well as individuals.

          • SG

            You make some good points, but bear in mind, paradigms can and do change with the advancement of technology. If future personal electric-powered drones prove to have built-in redundancies making them far safer than helicopters and other flying vehicles, then public sentiment and policy will adapt. People really hate traffic and the dreaded commute. Also, NASA is already developing the “rules of the sky” in anticipation that the skies of today will be the highways of tomorrow.

            Such “sky highways” could route around heavily populated areas, and perhaps even have a 1-to-1 correspondence with present major roads and highways. With already-existent GPS technology and autonomous drone intelligence, you can imagine that much of the “expertise” of flying will be taken out, and the ability for the masses to navigate the skies can potentially take hold. Will a license be required? Yes, probably, just like driving a car. I think a more interesting question is will licenses be required to ride in a self-driving car in the relatively distant future (maybe 20 years from now)? If not, will licenses be required to ride in a self-flying drone? Interesting to ponder.

          • Omega Z

            Note, I’m not against them, I just see to many issues that can’t be avoided.
            Besides, When they fall out of the Sky, It’s gonna hurt when they land on you.

            Why would they fall out of the Sky.

            Like road rage, you’ll have sky rage.

            I personally want shields, lasers and phaser’s at the ready.
            Maybe some photon torpedoes and a rail gun. as well

    • Omega Z

      ->”Rossi setup questions” Conspiracy Much?


      This is merely a long time Rossi follower asking a question on JONP similar to many others and “Yes”, it has an obvious simple answer. be it Yes or No.

      Also, the “not novel or patentable to anyone” doesn’t matter. Rossi would merely sell them energy cells. In addition, there would be patents on various industry techniques or designs used to incorporate them into the vehicles. And this would obviously not stop other vehicle manufactures of utilizing this. Only that they would need to develop their own techique or design.

      Anyway, as Alex points out below, it will take years even if Quark technology was in production at this moment. Lots of tests and Government required R&D and regulations.

      • Anon2012_2014

        ‘Really? This is merely a long time Rossi follower asking a question on JONP similar to many others and “Yes”, it has an obvious simple answer.’ [Yes]

        Really. The question is rhetorical and is not news. So why does it get a headline. This is not news.

        News is the recent post about H + Li7 -> Be8 on both JONP and (see the section “the Rossi effect”). That’s a worthy discussion thread. Attaboy high five setup questions on Xcats for Telsas — are “Really” not worthy of an entire discussion thread. It is simply not news.

    • LilyLover

      This trial is more about whether the US justice system is completely bought up and paid for by the fear or whether there exists an iota of decency about care to pretend to be moral.
      That is what’s on trial, not Dr. Rossi. Businessmen are afraid – that is a give. Cowards lie. History teaches us that. So, no surprises there.
      This is a battle between bias for brighter future vs preservation of top tier hegemony.
      We’ll see.
      Regardless of the outcome, E-Cat will propel cars into perpetuity, soon enough.

      • DrD

        Well hopefully the Jury will be strustworthy but I suppose even that’s not to be taken forgranted

      • LarryJ

        It’s just a patent war. I think you are reading too much into it. The court case is a sideshow and it won’t have any effect on IH and Leonardo bringing competitive products to market. Patent wars run for years.

    • DrD

      It does make one wonder if Giuseppe is an alias for AR, along with Jacky.
      After all, I and others did post both those questions here yesterday.

  • Rossi Fan

    Orbo EV!

  • jimbo92107

    Edison would have cooked an elephant by now.

  • Jarea

    I want to know when will start the massive production of LENR 1MW plants. Stop discussing the future and procrastinating the execution of the ecat plant. I want to focus on the news of the 1MW massive execution first.

    • LarryJ

      Massive production is a subjective term and it is unrealistic to expect it overnight. Right now they are hand building reactors. Once they get a large enough order they can start to automate which will speed up production, but to really ramp it up they will need many more automated manufacturing facilities. None of this happens overnight. You are unlikely to ever be able to focus on the massive execution first because it will be an evolution, not an event.

  • Steve Swatman

    Is there a way to ignore certain posters and commenter’s?

    That would really make reading the thread much easier and far less irritating.

    • Frank Acland

      No, there isn’t in Disqus. You can minimize a comment though by clicking on the minimize (minus sign) on the top right of a comment.

      • Omega Z

        I find myself much in agreement with you post. Especially the governmental regulations and so on. It will take years. Even Rossi is aware of this and has stated such much to the chagrin of his followers.

        • roseland67

          Not delusional, just an engineer that wants to “KNOW” not be told.
          Same mindset I have had for as along as I can remember.
          Hope this works as stated, but as usual, my “spider sense is still tingling” and it has been since January 2011

          • clovis ray

            Come on fellow, so would you say that his product is better now or not based on what you think you know, back in 2011,
            Like all good scientist he wants full knowledge of his discovery and bring out it secrets and for it to be the best it can be, and will last a long time, and he will sale you a little cartridge once a year and also to develop it into many other wonderful things still unknown. i feel had he choose a different path, with lots of people involved, we would not be this far ahead of the game, i personally am very pleased with his demeanor,
            and insight on how this very important, God sent, should be distributed to the masses, we all count, and so does our world, saving it will be one of the most satisfying, thing of all….for now,,,smile.

  • interstellar hobo

    the horse will be covered in solid black eproxy to protect its innards or the 9v battery.

  • Just to irritate.
    My crystal cells give me 1.5volt at 10milli amp continually.
    I have got three in series driving 4, 1.8mm led’s.
    They have been running now for 3 months night and day.

    • artefact

      On JONP:

      “Frank Acland
      May 4, 2016 at 6:37 PM
      Dear Andrea,
      Why do you think the revelation of the E-Cat QuarkX will be such a surprise?
      Many thanks, Frank Acland

      Andrea Rossi
      May 4, 2016 at 8:25 PM
      Frank Acland:
      If you put this question, you have imagined a hint of it.
      Warm Regards, A.R.”

      • kdk

        Rossi has a much better track record than those people. For the most part, “Rossi says” has more or less panned out over time.

        • Евгений Максимов

          We were told what communism:
          1. The robots will work in the factories. Humanity will have a rest.
          2. Mankind will be occupied by art and space travel.
          3.Money is canceled. All products in the shops are free.
          4.Anyone will do only what he wants.

          Now look what says A.Rossi 🙂
          People who lived in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union no longer believe in communism. And people who live in Western Europe and the United States believe in communism. Strange?

          • kdk

            It will be a monumental failure, or at least a long and protracted mess, if the technology on the way stays in all the same hands, we agree on that. 🙂 I will say however, mainstream media aside, it’s been good that the internet started in the States, even if they do read everything we write, as the bulk of the internet can be protected under the first amendment. It’s actually kind of surprising that the Republic has lasted as well as it has through its Empire phase. It’s hard for any powerful institution to survive a plague of jerks at the helm.

        • Jarea

          We want the product.

          • kdk

            So do I, now we have to wait for the legal fight with IH, in the States. It will hit Europe first, unless similar issues arise. Hopefully, the UK/European partner isn’t invested in fossil fuels.

  • Observer

    Both sets of batteries and the E-CAT QuarkX(s) are in the car. Switching occurs automatically.

    Otherwise, expect a decade of red tape.

  • Observer

    Having gasoline in a container in your trunk is considered transporting hazardous material, but having gasoline in the gas tank of your car is not. What you are transporting is not part of the car.

  • In my understanding, from any electric to thermal COP > 7 we can make a loop to increase the stock of energy in a battery. With a COP > 50 the flow of energy in the loop become marginal compared to the instant produced energy. And the battery become small compared to the main produce power, and the size of applicative motors.

    But the patent is about a multiplicator of energy. Also the need to control the power without an explosive hazard forbidden to include the battery in the device for certification. Also the high temperature in the E-CAT is not compatible with the battery.

    Then Rossi can only include the E-CAT in another device including a battery, to produce energy in any form, in a car or a house, or anywhere, in a desert, in the space or under seas.

    But this all-in-one device can be enough small if the high temperature E-CAT core is enough small and isolated. The isolation is limited by the flux of heat needed to convert in electricity.

  • Private Citizen

    No one is claiming to have a secret, but patented, high COP hot fusion device, but if so claimed people sensibly would clamor for verification and suspend belief until such time as proven.

    In science, “Distrust yet verify.”

  • Albert D. Kallal

    I mostly agree. Skeptics will remain skeptics. And yes many a mainstream scientist will remain as such.

    SRI would be far better for a test if the science community is the intended audience.

    However, a test run by MMFP would hold much credibility for the public that is following this issue. And magazines like Popular Science and journalists like Matts Lewan would thus have a great piece of beef to chew on, and a GREAT story to bring to the public.

    Even a good test from SRI will NOT convince scientist until such time devices are purchased and tested by universities.

    However, a test from MMFP showing a clear 3+ COP would most certainly help the overall community in terms of credibility.

    Rossi has a credibility issue right now.

    We simply don’t know how well what Rossi has works.

    Rossi may well dig himself out of this hole, but until such time, speculative performance means speculative and spotty support of Rossi’s work.

    This is just the way things are! I only the messenger here, but Rossi lost tons of support, and such support will not be re-gained by talking about flying cars, or some new next gen ecat.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • Omega Z

    Rossi consults with an engineer who is studying the possibilty of jet engine applications of the “Quark”. ( The engineer has some indirect connection to aircraft manufacturing. ) Rossi himself has stated that jet engines are not in his forte.

    The only thing that would be unrealistic is if no one was looking at the possibilties. Regardless whether the Quark is as advertised.

    The above is reasonably accurate, but bears no resemblance to what you read on the blogs. Kind of like the 1MW test “Average” COP>50 is well known on the blogs, but has no real source. Not from Rossi or what was partially revealed in the law suit.

    • DrD

      What makes you discount that the law suit revealed an average COP>50?

      • psi2u2

        I would say at this point in time it cannot be counted or “discounted.” There is a claim of 50, and a counterclaim of 1. I’d like to believe the 50 and hope it is true. As for compelling evidence either way, not so much.

        • Frank Acland

          I don’t think IH is disputing that the ERV report states that the 1MW plant had a COP of around 50.

          • Omega Z


            I have no issues of claiming periods of COP>50.
            I object to those who infer the word “Average” quite often. Rossi has not claimed an “Average” COP>50.

            This is a perfect setting for a backlash. Should it latter be found that the “Average” COP=22 or whatever, then it will be claimed Rossi lied, therefore, why should we believe “Average” COP=22.

            To my knowledge, Rossi has allowed speculation by others on info provided by others, but has always stuck by his original claim COP>6.

          • Frank Acland

            Rossi’s court complaint does not say that it was just periods of COP >50:

            “71. … By all accounts, the amount of energy produced by the E-Cat Unit during the Guaranteed Performance Test was substantially greater than fifty (50) times the amount of energy consumed by the E-Cat Unit during the same period”


          • SG

            There is some ambiguity with that statement. It might mean average, but it might also mean that it reached COP > 50 at certain points in time during the “same period.”

  • gdaigle

    LeEco is another electric car firm that wants to leverage its smart phone technology into creating smart vehicles. They would be ripe for a way to extend their driving distance using a QuarkX. Here is an article:

  • Private Citizen

    Why, is this site only for the faithful? Is hard eveidence never offered here, like MFMP and other replication attempts?

    But, maybe you can find an echo chamber somewhere where no one is allowed to question the faith. Try Rossi’s JONP.

    • Andrew

      It’s not about faith, dreaming or believing. It’s about evidence and right now the only evidence for or against is circumstantial. All that is portrayed by Frank is the current happenings and any tidbit he can dredge up. Take the information and do what you will. If you have a problem with what “Rossi says” take it up with Rossi.

      You can go to any website and say what you said here and it would have a ring of truth because frankly many of the scam and fraud criers have an extremely strong faith towards that. Even krivits site has only soft evidence, very well written to sound like something solid but when read carefully you realize that it’s mostly opinion.

  • Guests

    Most people elsewhere are losing interest in Rossi says _ no product to show

    He should keep it quiet ……and not exaggerate and F8 and F9 lol WTF….

    • DrD

      Won’t be long now before there’ll be a lot of humble pie to eat and it won’t go down well.

      • E-gatto

        Humble pie for whom? For the sceptic or the believer?

        • DrD

          Not long to wait to find out.

    • LarryJ

      Rossi is the only one who says anything so if he keeps quiet we might as well fold up our tents and go back to whatever it was we were doing before he started talking.

      What makes you think he’s exaggerating?

      • DrD

        Good point. F8,F9 is the very opposite to exaggeration.
        So in the same phrase he’s accused of exaggeration and conservatism. Hmmm poor man can’t win.

  • Andrew

    From what I have read, Rossi pulled out and filed a lawsuit for breach of contract not IH. Normally a fraudster/scammer wants to stay as far away from court as possible. By this time Rossi has already collected $11.5M, more than enough to live the rest of his live on a boat loaded with cocane and hookers. Why risk a legal battle with your “fake machine”?

    Rossi is either insanely delusional along with Penon or he has the goods.

  • LilyLover

    “What if Rossi has figured out a way to have the QuarkX self-sustain
    permanently and safely using the electricity it produces to power
    He has.
    Just like everything everywhere, Rossi’s going with Everything E-Cat Everywhere.
    Why do you think the painstaking efforts were put to make pencilish QuarkX?
    For Laptops, Tablets, Movie Theatres, Phones with strong antennae, Cars, heaters … batteries that never need replacement with energy density more than anything else.
    Too ambitious? I say too Rossi!!

    External redundancy has vaporized.
    The R&D has been too good to need any peripheral “support” energy.

    The least immoral/stupid nation will adopt E-Cat-cars first.
    Now, we simply have to see who that is!!

    • Omega Z

      “Phones with strong antennae”

      If you’re implying more power for longer range and stronger signal, The transmitting power of cell phones is limited by law. It is a safety issue.

      If you’re just implying the phone wont run out of battery power, then ignore this post.

  • DrD

    Curious but good news:

    Begin quote

    May 4, 2016 at 12:44 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    do a single 100W QuarckX module can be activated and controlled by a small battery, for example a Smart Phone battery?

    On the E-Cat, if i remember, the charge duration is about one year, on
    the QuarckX is possible to do a recharge or will be better change
    directly the single module?

    Best Regards, Giuseppe

    Andrea Rossi
    May 4, 2016 at 1:19 PM
    1- could be an idea to develope
    2- better change the module
    Warm Regards,

    End quote (empty lines removed).

    This answers both puzzles I posted here yesterday (below).
    So if I read it correctly, he now says:
    1) “YES” it could be possible to operate Quarks from a (rechargeable) battery.
    He previously said “NO” due to safety issues.
    BUT needs development so he hasn’t (yet) built that possibility into the QuarkX.
    Obviously, this is essentially self-sustain.

    2) To refuel he thinks to swap out the whole module.
    We still don’t know how much would constitute a “module” for example, does it include all or part of the heat exchanger or controls.

    I wonder; who is Giuseppe?

    • Omega Z

      Giuseppe is someone who has followed and posted on JONP for a long time. Rossi has many supporters from Italy that post on JONP…

      • DrD

        Thanks for that, I am reassured. I feel bad now, harbouring such suspicions. However, in defence, when discussing LENR and IH/AR we can’t take every thing at face value.

  • LarryJ

    The only thing that has happened is the start of the industrialization phase. Rossi promised that if the 1 year test was successful then the industrialization phase would begin and so it has, right on schedule. Patent wars are part of the industrialization phase. We now know from the ERV report (published or not) that IH can make a cop 50 low temperature reactor, they had a full year to refine it and you can bet they are building more of them.

    Why would you want Rossi to stop making announcements. He has exciting news and he is the one suing IH, not the other way around. He has done nothing to hang his head in shame for. He is bringing us a miracle. This is what day 1 of the exciting new adventure looks like. Both Leonardo and IH are now busy building and selling reactors under NDA until such time as they have the production capability to go public. The cold fusion market will be starting out with two major contenders. The business savvy IH against the creative genius of Rossi’s Leonardo. They will battle each other to try and gain as large a share as possible of the biggest market in history. It should be quite a show. Irritating? Some people are just too hard to please.

    • adriano

      The industrialization phase has happened??? Really? Where? When? How many people are involved? Who work there? Who did it? What kind of product they make? How many pieces they made this year? And how many they will made next year? 2, 3, 100, 10000? Maybe Defkalion just did so???

      Yes Im defenetly hard to please (especially about Rossi), but to be honest, I think some people should stop for a second and start using their brain without the “Rossi said” in their mind.

      • kdk

        He probably would have done that for you, if you paid him enough and were able to be his business partner and trusted that you wouldn’t run off to the nearest magnate to sell your soul.

      • DrD

        Perhaps you should read his announcements.

      • Jas

        Rossi has said the customer is ordering more ecats. Rossi will be building them this year. It was 3 I think. The robot factory is not ready so these cats will be built by hand. He has 30 people so far who work for Leonardo. This was announced a few weeks ago.
        Perhaps you missed it? Whether you choise to believe it is another matter.

        • adriano

          I dont know what to say… Rossi stated a lot of more then incredible things over the years. I dont understand why people belive in what he say even without proofs. Once he say something is already acquired as a fact…

  • LarryJ

    The ERV report sounded pretty concrete to me unless you believe a phd nuclear physicist specializing in nuclear power plant certifications couldn’t tell you if his teapot was boiling.

  • LarryJ

    There is a huge need for this tech and it is a bonafide paradigm shift. As a result I think the focus will be so intense and the human resources brought to bear so great that many of your concerns will be fast tracked. Any country that allows themselves to be held back by bureaucracy will concede this extremely important market to the competition.

  • DrD

    Why not?
    It’s a no brainer.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “LookMoo May 4, 2016 at 7:28 PM
    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    The market for a LENR invention is almost immeasurable for the first
    10-15 years (or even 30 years).. work for everybody. Just assume a
    majority of the close to 100 million vehicles entering the market every
    year can use a LENR based powertrain design. To that figure add all
    other applications that probably cripple the vehicle comparison. 1
    Billion eCat devices would be needed every year to keep phase with the
    market needs for clean, abundant energy.
    1000 factories with a 1 million output/year will have to run 24/7.
    How many factories do you think is operating within.. lets say 5 years.

    Andrea Rossi May 4, 2016 at 8:22 PM
    We have now the force necessary to start the first massive production factory.
    After that, it will be the diffusion of the products to finance the exponential growth of our concern.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

    • Jarea

      Thanks artefact for that question to Rossi on execution of the ecat production. I think execution is more important that discussing the next ecatx. We have to crawl before we walk.
      Rossi states they are prepared for one massive production factory. This is again good news. Besides, it makes sense to start with one and then use the money to build more afterwards.
      Unfortunately, the comment of Rossi to be ready “to start the first massive production factory” is a very vague sentence regarding planing and production this year.

  • Mike Henderson

    “I’m sure I’ll take you with pleasure!” the Queen said. “Two pence a week, and jam every other day.”

    Alice couldn’t help laughing, as she said, “I don’t want you to hire me – and I don’t care for jam.”

    “It’s very good jam,” said the Queen.

    “Well, I don’t want any to-day, at any rate.”

    “You couldn’t have it if you did want it,” the Queen said. “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.”

    “It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day’,” Alice objected.

    “No, it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know.”

    “I don’t understand you,” said Alice. “It’s dreadfully confusing!”

  • US_Citizen71

    Shows how little you’ve been paying attention, just got the assignment? The QuarkX outputs DC which charges batteries quite well.

    • DrD

      EXACTLY and he’d also have known it’s DC

      • Jarea

        Your premise is that he has something. Until we have the product as he says, we cannot do these comparations.

        • Omega Z

          The dinosaur gear heads sell a lot of cars pandering to those who want more HP. In fact, that’s where nearly all of the profits come from.

          • one of the reason why Tesla’s vehicles are so well received is the no-pause, ludicrously powerful acceleration provided by the electric drive train.

  • Gerard McEk

    Attention everybody!!
    Did you read this:

    May 5, 2016 at 4:19 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    To me, and I mean no malice by saying this, the biggest surprise would be to actually see the E-Cat X being demonstrated.
    Best Regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    May 5, 2016 at 7:38 AM
    You are right. When it will be ready, it will be demonstrated.
    Warm Regards,

    And WITHIN MONTH!!! ,according to another JONP comment.
    All my (sceptical and cynical) comments lately have been heard (maybe).
    Finally we will see a demo of it when it’s unheard details are being revealed.
    I hope that Andrea does everything to allow sceptic to prove it does not work.
    If he hasn’t got time for that I volunteer.

    • LarryJ

      I think by ‘ready’ he means products in the market. Rossi has no time to waste on pointless demos that nobody will believe. We are not going to see products this year but maybe by next if he can get certification for domestic use.

      • sam

        I think A.R said he had a test run with a customer in June.
        Would that be what he meant.

        • LarryJ

          The June demo is intended for a new customer and Rossi has said that demo will be private. Rossi has implied that demo will be the end of the preliminary R&D and we will learn more about the quarkx but we will still not see much until he has a product.

      • Winebuff67

        Breath being held…

    • Frank Acland

      Within months, I think he said (you said month above)

    • clovis ray

      Hi, guys.
      The way i read this is, only the customer will see it next, then when they Leo.corp, can fill a order, they will demonstrate, the QUARK, to the world, but it would be kinda silly to start advertising something, and can’t produce it for market,
      I promise , with big thinkers and big bucks, 3D printers and the like, it could be that robo line, are already created, and have been building something similar for a long time and only has to be reprogramed, with moderate,changes, could be put to work now, as leo.corp. has not been setting on their hands these past years, because Dr. Rossi knows the truth and working as hard and fast as humanly possible to get it to a place where we can have our own, Leo, corp. is our best and fastest choice, trying to stand in his way is doing our world a disservice., and will not be forgotten when things are going great later.

      • Pweet

        He has also said the demo he is speaking about is for a “partner”, which I take to mean he is trying to find someone to replace IH.
        That would be consistent with the previous Lugano demonstration which as it turned out was for the purpose of drawing IH into a partnership arrangement. I recall he often spoke at that time about IH as a customer when he said he had sold the original 1MW plant to a customer in the USA.
        It would be highly unlikely he would be demonstrating the new device to just an ordinary customer.

    • SG

      I’m less interested in demos, and more interested in products available for purchase. Mr. Rossi has done demos–many of them.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      I read nothing that gives any kind of firm date for any kind of public demo.

      A demo for a customer is not public, nor is it implied as such. So when Rossi is ready to demo to public, Rossi may well do as such. However, when Rossi is “ready” to demo to the public is a spectacular different statement then saying he going to demo for a customer, or in a month a public demo is going to occur.
      Nothing I read so far from Rossi can be assumed or implied or suggested to be any kind of firm date of a public ecat-X demo. And a demo for a customer does not suggest nor imply that Rossi is “ready” to demo to the public. So when Rossi is “ready” to demo to the public may well occur, but that could be any time frame from now.

      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Gerard McEk

      Oh dear, I was finally coming over my LENR depression and seeing the new New Fire at the horizon again and now you all are trying to get me back into the sceptic an cynical mode again.
      Stay connected, I’ll ask AR…

      • SG

        Best to keep a balanced view of the situation. Pseudo-skepticism should be eschewed, as should blind belief.

      • Gerard McEk

        This was AR’s answer (I am half happy):
        Gerard McEk
        May 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM
        Dear Andrea,

        Recently you said the QuarkX will be demonstrated when it is ‘ready’, which you hope is within months.
        It will underpin the details of the ‘Tremendous Surprise’ that will be revealed then.
        Some questions if I may:
        1. To whom will it be demonstrated? (I hope it will be open to public or us, you followers).
        2. Where will it be demonstrated? (I assume Europe, Sweden?)
        3. Is it right to assume that ‘ready’ means ready for sales, so the QuarkX factory is ready and fully equipped, and test runs were successfull?
        Thanks for answering our questions.
        Kind regards, Gerard

        Andrea Rossi
        May 5, 2016 at 2:29 PM
        Gerard McEk:
        1- to our partners in a first stage, to the public in a second
        2- Europe
        3- not yet, but close
        Warm Regards,

    • LarryJ

      Rossi will not do a demo for rhe public until he is ready to introduce his product to the market. He has been clear on this. It is very unlikely he can make that happen in 2016.

  • georgehants

    If it is done on purpose or by ignorant design it is certainly time a few people learnt the difference between Communism, Dictatorship and what everybody concerned with sharing and caring on page means —— True Democracy.

    • LarryJ

      Good luck with that. lol

      • LarryJ

        I was blown away by Lugano report and the ERV report showing a cop>50. I guess I am just too easy to please.

      • Owen Geiger

        Maybe GH’s real intention is to bog down this excellent forum with thousands of repetitive posts.

  • Jarea

    Is there any info about the massive production of the 1MW plant ecats?. We are loosing the focus on the “next” thing when the basic ECAT product is still not on the market.

    • DrD

      He told us that all future E-Cats will be QuarkX which was a little confusing as he is clearly still building non E-CatX’s but the explanation seems to be that these are only bridging the gap until the QuarkX is ready (F8).
      Frustrating but the merits are worth the wait (provided this is the last improvement delay).
      EDIT: So I think there will not be a mass production of anything but QuarkX’s and hopefully, very soon.

    • LarryJ

      I would bet that IH are already ramping up production of the low temp 1MW plants and selling them under NDA until they have the production capacity to go public. Just like Leonardo is doing.

      They built the 1 year test reactor.
      The ERV claims it worked very well
      They had a full year to work out the kinks
      They are disputing the IP
      They have a science partner in Brillouin
      Brillouin signed a deal with Koreans last year
      They are well financed

  • Jas

    Would you prefer Rossi to stop making comments on JONP?
    He could instead release some information every 6 months like other companies do who are in R&D phase.
    At least it gives us something to talk about.
    I’m happy with his daily Q&A’s.

  • Alex Fenrick

    What exactly are you implying here Clovis? I have said over and over countless times that I am open to the possibility of LENR, but I no longer trust Rossi at this point for many reasons that have been discussed at length. Please be clear of what you are accusing me of when you say “you know exactly what you think your doing, but your way obvious”. I believe I have made my perspective on matters here quite clear.

  • These companies will have no choice but to abandon the ICE. It will be gone in about ten years. ICE’s are the film in film cameras when electric motors are the CCDs that are already proven and available for sale.

  • DrD

    Perhaps his amazon crystal ball finally arrived.

  • DrD

    1980? I think you mean 1918?

  • US_Citizen71

    I made no claim of ‘high volume DC’ do not stick words in my mouth, I am not here to be your strawman. The need to constantly put words in others mouths shows that you have no case or debate skills. I require citation of where I made a claim of high volume DC!

  • Lux Terrea

    Frankly, hot fusion, like the price of rice in China, is pretty irrelevant in the discussion of Rossi’s claims for LENR and the e-cat.

  • Owen Geiger

    So you think he is a nut who’s talking gibberish and yet you keep reading and spending time on this? What does that say about you?

  • Owen Geiger

    It’s a work in progress. Give them time to finish the job.

  • Owen Geiger

    What if the new customer turns out to be like IH? They talk the talk but later stab him in the back? A big lawsuit in Europe (in addition to the one in the US) would greatly reduce Rossi’s ability to get E-Cats in the market. This could be part of a larger plan by industry insiders to block this technology. Rossi needs a perfect contract to prevent more problems.

    • psi2u2

      A lot is unclear, but what seems reasonably certain is that IH is not the customer. Rossi has said the customer is based in the UK and has worldwide operations.

    • Paul Maher

      The thought of an on board charging device such as the Quark-X must have Elon Musk and Nicolas Chauvin champing at the bit. Brave new world coming to you soon.

  • Tannenbaum

    Oh, Lord please just show us. Then we can all do thought experiments about electric cars to our hearts’ content.

  • LarryJ

    IH may be disputing Rossi’s tech but I believe it is just posturing. It is hard for me to believe that Penon got it so wrong