More Details About the 1MW Plant Setup

After reading Mats Lewan’s very interesting article published on his An Impossible Invention website yesterday I followed up with Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics yesterday with some more questions. Here are my questions and Rossi’s responses.
3- Darden and his investors met the Customer in the meeting rom of the offices, that is separated from the production area

Dear Andrea
I read with great interest the article published by Mats Lewan regarding your visit to Sweden and your report of some of the details of the 1 year E-Cat test. I wonder if you could clarify a couple of points:

1. From what I have read the customer’s work took place inside a sealed enclosure, maybe a shipping container also?

1- it took place inside a plant about 20 meters long, 3 meters high, 3 meters wide, obviously closed

2. Was the customer’s production facility positioned next to the plant in the same building?

2- it was in a separate area of the same building

3. Mats wrote that “IH never had access to the customer’s area”, however you mentioned yesterday that Tom Darden and his investors spoke with the customer in his factory. Can you explain what Mats meant?

3- Darden and his investors met the Customer in the meeting rom of the offices, that is separated from the production area

4. Did you buy the building you looked at in Sweden for your factory?

4- we are in the process to find an agreement

5. Mats said the 100 W QuarkX is the size of a pen — does each QuarkX include its own control system built in, or is that separate?

5- the control system is separate

This all helps give me a clearer picture of what the setup in the building was. It seems like the output of the 1MW plant was piped directly into the customer’s enclosed plant which was within the same warehouse space. At one point I was thinking that the customer’s plant was in the next door building.

It does sound like the industrial process that JM Products was doing was quite secretive, since even Tom Darden was apparently not permitted to be inside the production facility. The only information we have been given of what was inside the plant was when Mats Lewan quoted a witness as looking inside the unit when the door was open and saw what he thought was some kind of production taking place.

According to Mats’ article yesterday, the water used in the process was recycled — which I assume would mean that the steam the heat piped into the customer’s unit condensed in the production process and was then sent back into the E-Cat Plant where it was heated again. In a post on the JONP to Oystein Lande, Rossi goes into some more detail explaining how the heat produced by the 1MW plant dissipated:

Andrea Rossi
May 17, 2016 at 7:32 AM
Oystein Lande:
1. the container itself was not insulated, because this would have been useless, since all the hot bodies inside the container were thermally insulated
2. The doors were open during the operation and there was a ventilation system that sent the warm air through the exhaust windows of the roof of the factory
Besides: you correctly write that if the 1% of the heat produced was lost through the insulation, 10 thermal kW were emitted.
As you well know, just to give an example that explains which amount of energy we are talking of and as any household knows, 10 kW of power are barely enough to maintain during a mild winter a temperature of 25 °C in a two rooms apartment with close windows.
A 2 rooms apartment has a volume of about 200 cubic meters.
We were in a factory with windows in the roof always open; by the way, as you know, warm air goes naturally toward the top being lighter than air colder than it; the volume of the factory is 6 000 cubic meters which means about 30 times the volume of a two rooms apartment.
Now: if 10 kW of power are able to hold a 2 rooms apartment of 200 cubic meters at 22°C with closed windows, how much are able the same to heat a factory of 6 000 cubic meters with open windows on the roof and a ventilation system to exhaust it ? Obviously the temperature was warmer inside the reactors container, in fact I told you that there were about 40 °C, but, due to the fact that the doors of the container were open and that also inside the container there was a ventilation system, the internal temperature of the reactors container never is gone above the 40 °C.
Warm Regards,

  • Brokeeper

    Appearantly the production/load is a mobile shipping container (20x3x3 meters) like that of the 1MW plant brought in from the parent company located in UK. So it leaves little consequence for the company not having the 1MW plant working in Miami. Just pack and play. It was as much a test for the company as it was for E-Cat to confirm whether three more plants would be ordered from the European

    • US_Citizen71

      There are things that could use 1MW of heat in the space describe a steam absorption chiller or a 900lb capacity commercial washing machine and matching capacity dryer along with water heater to name two.

  • Stephen Taylor

    This is a very important point you have made. Dr. Rossi’s credibility regarding the commercial usefulness of his supposed technology is hanging by a thread in a hurricane.

  • wpj

    Well, who knew that Johnson Matthew were very big in manufacturing batteries for electric vehicles?

    • US_Citizen71

      I have a great ‘What If’ for everyone. From my comment below to radvar.

      “What if the customer makes absorption chiller walk in refrigerators? You could fit that into a container. The company’s business is the production of cold ultimately. So the Rossi saying of they use the steam for the production of their product would be true. To test the E-Cat as a viable economic heat source to power an absorption chiller walk in refrigerator, all you would need to do is move barrels of water in and out of the walk in. You let the barrels warm up in the warm warehouse dissipating the cold. The heat energy is used to produce cold water, so there would be no crematorium syndrome like Jed has proposed, the process would be endothermic.”

      I don’t see any thermodynamic problems. Am I missing something?

      • sam

        I am thinking that differences and mistrust between A.R
        and T.D developed with no good mechanism
        to solve them.Not fraud or stealing technology.
        If this is the case then it is sad because they
        both deserve better.

        • Yes. A culture clash. A twice-burned paranoid inventor protecting his interests and VCs doing what VCs always do.

  • LuFong

    This from Dewey Weaver on LENR-forum:

    “Rossi and his attorney/President of JM Products rep’d and warranted that JM Products was/is part of a UK-based company and that heat was needed for real work. We’ll see how effective they are in explaining that guarantee to the judge. Rossi had a key that allowed him to walk thru the door in the “customer” wall. He made IH and their visitors go around to the front door and would never allow a glimpse of anything outside of the front entrance, office areas and conference room. One interesting nugget – once IH advised Rossi that the 1MW container was going to be padlocked on inspection day, the IH engineer reminded Rossi that he should advise his “customer” of this state change. Rossi got out the key, walked right thru the “customer” door, came back shortly afterwards and said “not a problem” along with some additional conflicting comments (with letters to back them up) that are preserved for the courts.”

    If true it is simply amazing that IH would put this much trust ($89M) into this kind of arraignment. Not sure which is harder to believe, that this is true or that IH would accomodate Rossi in such a way.

    • Dr. Mike

      Very interesting! If this is true, any data provided by the customer would be fairly useless in the lawsuit. However, it does make sense that if Rossi could not find a real customer, he would create his own. This does mean that the scientific community will have to approve of the method used to take the data for computing the reactor output power. My guess is that the data for the input water flow rate and temperature will be easily accepted, but the measurement of the output “steam” will probably be questioned.
      Dr. Mike

      • LuFong

        If the “customer” can show that they were doing 1MWh/h work 24/7 except when the 1MW plant was down that would bolster Rossi’s claim.

        I agree with you that based on what we know the steam flow data is pretty useless but the temperature should be OK. But given a temperature of 100C° out from the E-Cat and 60C° into the E-Cat, 36 m^3/day would still mean a COP of 3.5 for a 20kW electrical input (I’m going on someone else’s calcs) . This would mean I think Rossi should collect something and a COP of 3.5 is great!.

        We need to see the ERV report and some actual data for sanity checking plus whatever IH has to contribute.

        • Ged

          Sadly it seems we’ve run every scrap of info we currently have into the ground (other than finding out stuff from Rontan next door). We really need some more official info.

          What are all those lawyers waiting for? Paid by the hour perhaps?

  • US_Citizen71

    The barrels of water would be nothing but a test thermal load to test. The entire container would be the walk in. Yes it is a bit Rube Goldberg but the thermodynamics work. They could even be making ice for mojitos, it is Miami after all and ice is within the temperature range of operation.

    • US_Citizen71

      The reported output of the 1MW fits within the operating parameters for a chiller.

      • Thomas Kaminski

        I recently toured the Charter Street plant at the university of Wisconsin. It produces about 500,000 pounds of steam per hour and has several steam-driven chillers. What you don’t see is the large evaporative chillers on the roof of the building to reject the hot-side heat from the chillers. I believe that the chillers are actually scroll compressor refrigerant-based chillers that are steam turbine driven. They are more efficient than the absorption chillers.

        Absorption chillers are used when there is a source of waste heat that must be rejected. The Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District has absorption chillers for their operation building that are driven from the methane that comes off of the anerobic waste digesters. The methane is burned in boilers to both heat the digester sewerage and to drive the absorption chillers. They also use the methane in internal combustion engines used to drive blowers for waster stream aeration and for electrical generation.

        Don’t get me wrong — I think LENR heat can be used for absorption chillers. I just don’t think the facility shown here has the appropriate heat rejection equipment to support absorption chillers.

        • US_Citizen71

          Absorption chillers work great with steam input and they need constant input because they are an endothermic process. If they created more heat than they use you could self loop it. The process unfortunately uses the heat energy to run so no perpetual motion possible with it.

          • Stephen

            Yup but my main point is why all the noise? Why do that?

            It does not look professional it looks messy. It does not look good either if someone seems to to do this to just get some kind of pleasure at playing games with people for no purpose, it looks vengeful in a way but like attacking the bystanders because they are easy targets rather than the opposition. Even if it serves some purpose like to get information of distract people it looks like dirty practice. Any Judge would also immediately see straight through this kind of behaviour, this is normal daily work for them. Thats what i struggle to understand.

            Like most here I had high hopes for IH. Even though another VC company might exploit green issues for benefit my initial and strong impression of Darden was that he was genuine. I still would like to think that he is but it does not seem square with the above behaviour.

            If they had a case and they kept quiet i would understand more. If they won the case I would think its real and trustworthy because no dirty tactics were involved. Even if they lost the case I could understand they may have other conflicts of interests that might explain it like maybe they wanted to coordinate their release with other projects or something.

            It makes more sense to me if Dewey and Jed were acting independently wit out the agreement of IH, but then i cant understand why they were not asked to be kept quiet.

            Dewey has all represented them i understand at conferences, which seems to imply they trust him and are happy with his statements.

            Its a total puzzle for me but not all people think like me so maybe its normal

          • Roland

            1. This is a trial by jury so re-enforcing the prevalent meme that ‘cold fusion’ is a fraud and that, by implication, Rossi is also a fraud has direct relevance for the jury selection phase of the trial.

            2. IH hired APCO to manage the PR aspects of the dispute between IH and Leonardo Corp. APCO invented ‘manufactured doubt’ as a PR tactic in their work for the tobacco companies starting in the late 1950s to discredit research that proved that smoking is injurious to human health; as a direct consequence f their efforts millions of smokers died of cancers and heart failures that could have been prevented had the evidence of harm been allowed to, properly, prevail.

            3. APCO further refined the ‘manufactured doubt’ PR mechanism on the climate file at the behest of the coal and O&G industries, this ongoing effort employs the same methodology; use any means to undermine the data accumulated by real scientists to sway public opinion in favour of the client, real world consequences be damned.

            4. APCO long ago refined the mechanisms for getting the ill informed (their much beloved poorly educated) to make judgements on the issues of APCO clients from an emotional basis rather than from an examination of the available data. The ideal audience, from APCO’s perspective, has already abandoned rationality in favour of ideological or theological positions that are impossible from any evidence based teleology. For example a person who is convinced that the earth is 6,000 years old is a perfect candidate for swallowing the APCO narrative, on any particular file, whole.

            5. APCO long ago recognized the power of having plausible appearing ‘spokespersons’ front for their clients views, no real expertise is needed as the primary task is to lie convincingly on camera and in print; as such just about any reasonably intelligent sociopath or ‘useful idiot’ will do.

            6. APCO has already represented the industries most directly threatened, by functional LENR, for decades by leading the propaganda war to deny the impact of green house gases on climate; APCO is the natural enemy of rationality and LENR.

            7. APCO is used to manipulating stupid people so their efforts will appear clumsy and transparent to the majority of educated LENR observers.

            8. The APCO campaign against Rossi and LENR has a primary goal of keeping corporations who would benefit from E-cats from taking this technology seriously as this would immeasurably strengthen Rossi’s hand and hasten the demise of APCO’s (actual) important clients in the carbon biz, IH is one small chip in a much larger game.

            In short Stephen, this was never intended to make sense to you or any other thoughtful person.

          • Robert Dorr

            He worked in a separate smaller container where the 3 kw air conditioner was located and there he kept the doors shut. He said that they left the doors open on the reactor container.

          • Omega Z

            As to #1, this assumes people pay attention to any of this.
            The jury has never heard of LENR or Rossi before court.

          • SG

            Sadly, you are correct. 99.99% of people have no idea what is going on in the LENR space today–even some of my most intelligent and informed friends, have not even one inkling. One of the biggest stories of the centuries is virtually hidden right here in the open, waiting to be discovered by anyone with even a smidgen of curiosity. When will this all change? When there are working products in the marketplace available for purchase by anyone. That is when the information becomes well-known and the paradigm begins to shift. Until then, it is almost a waste of effort to spread the news, although I keep trying.

          • radvar

            Nicely written.

            Put me down for the the “shell company / fake factory” scenario. I’m trying to reserve judgment on Rossi. However, I’m highly doubtful that there was any “real” commercial operation taking place.

            BTW, you had me going at the start with the “couldn’t find a customer”. That was entirely plausible.

            But what seems even more unreal is IH accepting Rossi’s terms of not fully knowing the customer setup. They must have really tranced out on “my precious”.

          • Karl Venter

            Very Good questions raised BOB

            Woodford did a 2.5 year due diligence — Either the most complete due diligence or the most stupid venture capitalist ever in the history of venture capitalism

            IH could not find a customer after spending 10 million?

            Would have been cheaper to just boil water for a year?

            ” today we boiled x litres/gallon of water” ?

          • IH didnt even need to find a customer, only a place in Raleigh to put it to perform the test. The customer is not important to the contract, only the ERV. The test was supposed to start right after the plant arrived in US (2013), but IH did not want the test to be performed (for obvious reasons), so they have delayed as much as they can. They only want to slow everything down.

          • Axil Axil

            The Customer was required by IH. Rossi had a hard time meeting this requirement. IH might have used the customer issue to torpedo the test. Rossi did not let that happen.

          • Carl Wilson

            Or perhaps Rossi found a way to “fudge” on the customer issue. Make it look like he had a customer because his major goal was complete the E-Cat. I use this hypothesis of an Incomplete E-Cat to explain away a lot of the confusing aspects of the E-Cat drama.

          • Robert Dorr

            Why is everyone so hung up on the manufacturer? It doesn’t make a bit of difference if “anything” was being manufactured when it comes to determining whether or not the 1MW plant was functioning as required. As long as the sensors (temperature, pressure and water flow rate) were positioned properly and the readings were being logged properly, that is all that is required to confirm performance. Something being made with the heat is just not needed unless it somehow makes you feel better. I fell just fine with the science if done properly, I guess that’s what we will find out in court.

          • “Why is everyone so hung up on the manufacturer?” I think this simply because Rossi put up the story of an independent ‘customer’ who was buying power to run a production line of some sort. Although the story now seems to be full of holes, accepting that AR might mislead people would introduce doubts about other parts of Rossi’s claims. Some readers are not yet ready to go down that route, preferring instead to try to rationalise away the inconsistencies.

            However if it can be accepted that Rossi sometimes misleads, perhaps through personality quirks, or maybe sometimes for tactical reasons, but that his core claims remain true, then it’s easier to apply filters to ‘rossisays’ and to accept that some of his claims are exaggerations or ‘future projections’ transposed to the present.

          • Not according to the license agreement and 2nd amendment. They however agreed on it being performed and acceped it. Those documents are filed. Only the ERV report is important according to the agreement. The customer is a bonus for Rossi since IH accepted the customer paying $1000/day for the heat produced.

          • Carl Wilson

            Perhaps they thought they had it sufficiently slowed down but further developments leading to QuarkX blew that away.

          • Omega Z

            Sadder yet,
            You can merely say they are working on any new energy technology without implying it will work and get the eye roll.
            The don’t know, don’t want to know & don’t care.
            What time does “keeping up with the Kardashians” come on.

          • My feeling is that this scenario is probably about 70-80% correct and Rossi is guilty of posting misinformation, but that incorporating suggestions from unreliable sources that the 1MW e-cat didn’t work is not necessary to untangle the clues. However, Bob does a good job of exposing the holes in the ‘production’ story, which does seem completely untenable to me. We await further information from sources that are more trustworthy than the likes of Weaver and Rothwell, that may help in refining a likely narrative.

          • Robert Dorr

            I agree. There are several I.H. supporters that appear to have a vehement, visceral opposition to anything that Rossi, or anyone says, that is positive and sometimes even just neutral, regarding the e-cat or his 1MW reactor. It is as if you were saying something horrible against mankind. It appears they think that Rossi is an affront to the natural order of the universe and they must set it right with religious ferver. I have rarely seen anyone attacked with so many ad hominems. Everything they say is gospel, yet they offer no substance or proof that what they are saying is true, just a lot of “I’ve seen the data but I can’t tell you how I got to see it”, “believe me”, “just wait and see”, “be careful what you say”, blah, blah, blah.

    • Omega Z


      That’s Crazy Talk. How would you get rid of that much chilling power.
      In that small of building, Everyone would freeze to death.

  • US_Citizen71

    How do you know the picture isn’t the 7.65MW unit? You don’t.

    I don’t think the the customer is building walk in refrigerators, it is merely a thought exercise. I am simply pointing out that it is possible to use up heat energy of the 1MW plant using common industrial equipment without cooking everyone.

  • John

    This is very interesting. Apparently Woodford is feeling the ‘heat’ too!

    • After saying they have no comment to make on the court case, the Woodford spokesman says “‘Industrial Heat is currently working with numerous scientists to build a diverse portfolio of innovative technology, such as low energy nuclear reactions, in the quest to eliminate pollution.”

      This sounds to me like they aren’t panicking about their investment yet as IH is still promising results from their ‘numerous scientists’ – presumably Godes et al. – who they think have enough information to catch up with Rossi. Rather like handling stolen goods, if that’s the case, but viewed objectively – the more the merrier.

  • Owen Geiger

    Let’s hope he makes a court appearance and settles this issue once and for all. (highly unlikely of course, but fun to contemplate)

  • pg

    This is going to make a trilogy to say the least.
    The lord of the ecat, the fellowship of the ecat.
    The lord of the ecat, the two snakes
    The lord of the ecat, the return of the ecat king.

  • DrD

    Yes, I assume it is one of the next steps that most of us here are waiting for, not to forget the June private customer demo, the domestic certification and the Quark factory start-up. Hopefully, all this year???.
    The litigation is still important because without a decision in AR’s favour he might have lost ALL his IP for areas covered by the license. That might even include the QuarkX IP. I think that’s what it all about and possibly IH didn’t have the full $89M, which played into Rossi’s hands. If true, the fact that early on IH tried to “buy off” the trial for a reduced sum rather supports that.

  • US_Citizen71

    Sure it is you lose energy due to phase change for one. It has to be endothermic otherwise it would produce energy as the driving and input energy is heat. Are you claiming that absorption chillers are an energy source?

    • Thomas Kaminski

      An absorption chiller is a heat pump, pumping heat “uphill” from a lower temperature to a higher temperature. You have to reject the hot end heat somehow. Because of less than perfect efficiency, the hot end heat rejection is always more than the cold end heat input. I don’t see how this helps reject heat from the 1MW heat source.

      • US_Citizen71

        Absorption is an endothermic process. It can be a little difficult to get your head around.

        • Albert Nilsson

          Absorption is, but an absorption chiller has a cycle of: evaporation – absorption – vaporisation – condensation. And you have to take everything into account, which gives the result that Kaminsky has stated.

        • Tom Kaminski is correct. You can’t change heat energy into ‘work’ – it can only be stored as a hot mass, kinetic energy, chemical bond changes, and so on. Absorption refrigerators don’t store any energy – they are just a means of transferring heat from one place (the fridge interior) to another (air or water heat sink). All exothermic and endothermic stages in the system must balance out, and additional energy input by steam or other heat source will simply be added to the energy rejected to the heat sink.

          • Analysis of the Lugano ash conclusively proved — PROVED — that nuclear reactions took place inside the E-Cat…

            …assuming that the Lugano ash that was analyzed was actually the ash removed from the reactor. This result reduces our complex situation down to two wonderfully simple possibilities: E-Cats catalyze nuclear reactions or Rossi is a fraud (because he switched or contaminated the ash sample).

            How anyone would not consider that hugely significant I can’t imagine.

          • You seem to be coming from a rather different direction from myself, but as I’ve said much the same thing in rather less detail, then I must agree with your comment. Rossi seems to have been involved in something of a charade for his own reasons, and the most likely explanation IMHO is that the ‘customer’ was entirely imaginary and the load attached to the reactors for the 1 year test (which I am happy to accept was real) was in fact a heat exchanger with measurement and logging systems.

            The HE possibly supplied a test load of some kind, such as a drying oven, but whatever the nature of the load, it was probably located in a third container on the other side of the temporary partition, and was quickly removed at the end of the test. If this is the case, the question (apart from the exact nature of the load) is who supplied it, and who met the costs of doing all this. About the only thing I’m confident of is that there was no ‘production’ taking place at the test location.

          • Owen Geiger

            Why did Rossi start talking publicly about the Quark X before getting paid for the 1 year test? Seems to me this will complicate things for him in court as far as whether or not he transferred the full IP.

          • He seems to feel a need to share good news. A very human trait that seems to be absent in many of those he has dealings with. In business terms, he should probably have been much more cautious.

          • DrD

            I believe it was because by this time AR had realised that he had unwittingly signed away his IP including improvements, giving IH the right to use it AND pass it on to others. The E-CatX (later the Quark) was his way of saying to the world:
            “LOOK I have a new and completely different LENR device”.
            This may have been in the hope of avoiding IH’s expectation that it was just an improvement to the E-Cat. He may or may not get away with that, it’s for the Jury to decide.
            In this respect, IH played into his hands by not paying (or not being able to pay) the $89M balance, evidenced by the speed with which he subitted the law suit.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Admittedly, I have no idea about the legal aspects, but I could imagine that there is no transferable „IP“ as long as the device is under R&D. But that would certainly change as soon as AR starts production and sales. At this point, the QuarkX might become an issue, provided that it is not based on an independent technology (see DrD’s comment below).

          • Carl Wilson

            “as soon as AR starts [QuarkX] production and sales”
            If such production starts seems IH likely will get IP and make a lot of money (if the contract doesn’t break) but they will have lost control of the rate of LENR++ coming to market. Control, not money, is the big game.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Does anyone know how the “before” fuel was tested and the “after” fuel? I don’t recall how the original fuel sample was obtained as a comparison to the final fuel sample.

      • US_Citizen71

        What you are describing is the compression cooling cycle like which is used with freon. The cycle for absorption chilling is different.

        “Both absorption and compressor refrigerators use a refrigerant with a very low boiling point (less than 0 °F (−18 °C)). In both types, when this refrigerant evaporates (boils), it takes some heat away with it, providing the cooling effect. The main difference between the two systems is the way the refrigerant is changed from a gas back into a liquid so that the cycle can repeat. An absorption refrigerator changes the gas back into a liquid using a method that needs only heat, and has no moving parts other than the refrigerant itself.

        The absorption cooling cycle can be described in three phases:

        Evaporation: A liquid refrigerant evaporates in a low partial pressure environment, thus extracting heat from its surroundings (e.g. the refrigerator’s compartment). Because of the low partial pressure, the temperature needed for evaporation is also low.

        Absorption: The now gaseous refrigerant is absorbed by another liquid (e.g. a salt solution).

        Regeneration: The refrigerant-saturated liquid is heated, causing the refrigerant to evaporate out. The hot gaseous refrigerant passes through a heat exchanger, transferring its heat outside the system (such as to surrounding ambient-temperature air), and condenses. The condensed (liquid) refrigerant supplies the evaporation phase.

        In comparison, a compressor refrigerator uses an electrically powered compressor to increase the pressure on the gaseous refrigerant, the resulting hot high pressure gas is condensed to a liquid form by cooling in a heat exchanger with the external environment (usually air in the room). The condensed refrigerant now at a temperature near to that of the external environment, then passes through an orifice or a throttle valve into the evaporator section. The orifice or throttle valve creates a pressure drop between the high pressure condenser section and the low pressure evaporator section. The lower pressure in the evaporator section allows the liquid refrigerant to evaporate more easily and in the process of evaporating, absorb heat from the refrigerator food compartment. The vaporized refrigerant then goes back into the compressor to repeat the cycle.

        Another difference between the two types is the refrigerant used. Compressor refrigerators typically use an HCFC or HFC, while absorption refrigerators typically use ammonia or water.” –

        • Albert Nilsson

          The cycle is different, the end result is the same.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          I am sorry, but you are not understanding the fact that the absorption cycle is a heat pump, unless is is chemically driven, like the cooling packs for sprains. It pumps heat from cold to hot. All the heat pumped plus inefficiencies appears as heat at the hot end.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I just found this free software for the simulation of heat transfer in buildings:

    At the moment my time is limited, but maybe somebody else wants to have a look at it.

  • DrD
    • Hinkley Point C seems to be nearly ready to fall off its perch. ‘Plan B’ (renewables) is emerging rapidly:

    • If this copy/paste atrocity actually happened then it would have almost zero effect on the outcome of the test, changing only a small fraction of the measured energy balance.

      What it tells me is that Industrial Heat’s lawyers scoured the document looking for discrepancies in an attempt to paint the whole thing as false in the eyes of the judge or jury. It appears they might have found an error and are parlaying that into accusations of fraud and doctoring of the whole report.

      But the raw data is the raw data and if Rossi can be believed on this point there is a whole lot of it, recorded automatically. Perhaps Dewey’s next trial balloon will be to assert that not only is the report wrong due to cut and paste but the raw data has been tampered with as well. Because the raw data is going to slaughter them if it reflects what Rossi says it does.

      Still just Dewey’s word though. I am getting the feeling that IH is using Dewey not so much as a PR vector, but to flesh out the arguments that they might need to respond to in court. I don’t mind participating in this, as Rossi and Leonardo should be ready for anything. If I’m the judge, so far IH is losing badly. They agreed to an ERV, the ERV’s report is unambiguous and according to Mats there’s not much wiggle room provided in the report for interpretation. So they are resorting to claims of falsified data, impugning the character of Penon. If I were Penon I’d be readying a suit for slander; he’s got a huge target on his back.

      Damn, I wish Penon had a blog and the need to chat like Rossi. We’d know a whole lot more.

      • Stephen

        That’s an interesting possibility, I was struggling to understand their reasons for these postings but that might well explain it.

      • kdk

        Yeah, I don’t envy Penon. He’s going to get dragged through the mud on this one. Hopefully, he understands this and has prepared some iron-clad stuff for the trial. I would imagine so, since Rossi and his lawyer don’t really seem surprised by the barrage on them.

        • Penon has been involved for at least 4 years, has performed multiple validations, knows with 100% certainty whether the tech is real and he has not run for the hills nor slinked away with his cut.

          He is either an inexplicably steadfast compatriot to Rossi, following him doggedly to sure personal destruction, or he’s just calling them like he sees them.

          Given his education and career my money is on door number 2.

          • Omega Z

            LENR G

            Here’s how it works.
            4 of Worlds best calorimetry experts & equipment. check/
            4 of Worlds best energy input experts & equipment. check/
            4 of Worlds best steam quality analysis experts & equipment. check/
            4 of Worlds best data analysis experts. check/

            We are going to get to the bottom of this.
            Final Report. We have found that the E-cat works as claimed with huge excess heat.

            They are obviously not qualified.
            Not a damned one 1 of them experts knows what he is doing.

          • : )

          • Engineer48

            Doing what the ERV did is not rocket science. Now to do the measurements, what sensors to use & where to place them is long established steam industry practice.

      • DFarwell

        I believe if the copy/paste atrocity actually happened it would be completely crushing to Rossi’s defense. Going on the premise it truly was a copy/paste operation and not a possible database corruption or document corruption or whatever mechanism they are using for data storage/reporting, I would look at it as a smoking gun of intent for fraud. While you are correct that just changing one portion would most likely not change the outcome, forensically what it tells us is that this is just one indicator of fraudulent behavior within the whole saga. If you find one occurrence of fraud in a project or business deal, there is a logical expectation of high probability you will find others. Forensics 101……but again this is just off Dewey’s word, not an official word from IH.

        • I suppose intent would matter. If there is willful manipulation of the data then I’m with you. If there are mistakes that in the end don’t really amount to much then, meh.

          • Axil Axil

            Note from above:

            3- Darden and his investors met the Customer in the meeting rom of the offices, that is separated from the production area

            If no customer existed, that’s fraud.

  • More from Dewey. Summary: ERV report contains manufactured data (indicating fraud), IH knows more about the customer situation now and it’s not good for Rossi. Another entity has joined the fray and circles Rossi like a shark. Darden is awesome.


    “The ERV took data from Rossi and simply cut and pasted data into his report. How do we know that – because the same data appeared unchanged on the “ERV” interim and final reports, even when Rossi reported that the system was down. How does a machine stay dead nuts steady state when the operator reports that it was down?

    Please be my guest and continue to believe what Rossi force feeds you. Rossi’s data is a complete mess but you’re not going to be able to accept that from me. Rossi gets to continue sweating this out. He gets to wonder how and when IH will respond. The nerves are frayed on P.R.(in deference to the moderators). And IH is not his biggest problem.”


    there is a chance that Rossi’s litigation gets partially or completely thrown out by the judge but don’t fret, IH doesn’t plan to stop there.

    Others are now involved thanks to the attention that Rossi has drawn with his PR war against IH.

    Rossi made it clear up front that the “customer” production area was confidential and off limits.

    We have since found out why he needed to take that position.


    I’m a shareholder in IH and I’ve known Darden for 16 years. I will spend all the time needed to get the truth out in the face of Team Rossi’s PR war onslaught. Darden is a good man with a great vision, the passion for cleaning up the mess we’ve collectively have made with our environment and the guts/vision to put capital to work in an attempt to find high impact solutions. Do you have a problem with any of that?

    • Barbierir

      If IH were right the lawsuit will soon turn into criminal charges of fraud against Rossi, Penon and others. And it will be over soon.

      • Ged

        As I said from the start, if Rossi was doing fraud his lawsuit is suicide as it’ll quickly turn back on him into criminal charges. Shouldn’t take long if so.

        Problem is, even if that is so, IH failed due diligence to say the least as there was every and very easy opportunities to verify (in the smaller tests and any time during the 1 year). So they could be in big trouble with investors.

        • Billy Jackson

          all that falls apart right when you show they made one themselves without Rossi’s help then filed a patent claiming a COP of 11+.. of everything they have done or said.. IH has to explain that one more than any other part of the lawsuit.

          All the magic just goes up in smoke when you are taught the magic trick…

          • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

            …so the theory of out-of-court negotiation seems likely?

      • There is a serious logical improbability in the line of reasoning that Dewey asserts in proxy for IH, which is that Rossi/Penon doctored the data and sheltered the customer because there was no real excess heat being used and fraud in progress.

        It is basically this: for us to get to this point in the fraud scenario it requires Rossi to be a world-class magician and mentalist with at least Penon as his sidekick and likely Levi too. Witness the conning of Focardi. Releasing some fake gammas to get Celani’s attention. The slight of hand required at the Lugano ash switch. Guiding the Lugano team to use IR measurement and then slipping them the wrong Aluminium emissivity graph. Fooling Fabiani and West for months (or are they in on it too?). On and on, those are just the ones off the top of my head. Just a brilliant con man to keep it alive this long, even the skeptics would agree.

        But then this brilliant con man and his team are supposed to be stupid enough to doctor the data that will net them $89 M but forget to match the data up with events on camera or in the record? And they wouldn’t set up a fake customer that would at least appear authentic?

        Makes little sense. Are they brilliant narcissists out to prove they are the best magic team ever, money be damned, or just bumblers committing fraud but too stupid to make it look real? Which is it? Can’t be both.

        • Owen Geiger

          Let’s hope you are chosen for the jury.

    • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

      Well. The fraud point of view is the only way IH can win this case. It is clear that striking Rossi’s credibility may point him s suspect due to his past, but right now for me the credibility on IH is lower because they didnt fill the suit (Rossi did) and the two bankrupcies we have record of on February on IH side. So they dont seem the best choice to be the ones to be trusted.

      Also, they could answer the suit right now but they didnt. Even that may be to collect some info, this also may be to delay the process.

      So it is unclear at this point at the moment.
      When the suit gets the answer, we would know better about this issue.

      • Stephen

        One thing I wonder about. All this talk talk of PR War. I wonder how many comments come from Jed and Dewey as compared to Andrea Rossi? It seems to me Andrea is very occasionally responding to jibes and taunts from Dewey
        and occasional comments of concern from the public. From Dewy and Jed we have a tidal wave. I don’t see a PR war from Andra Rossi just a court case and some very few responses. Mostly he seems to be relaxed getting on with his work and waiting.

        If the facts are there it’s enough to wait and see what is happening with out needing to try to stir up the LENR community. That just seems strange to me.

        Of course I suppose IH can always deny DW and Jed represent their views.

        • sam

          When they invested nobody not
          even Rossi knew whether they
          could make the Rossi effect work.
          There business plan should have been to work with him
          and maybe was.
          It is still I.H that has got A.R
          this far when there was not
          not any lineup to back A.R.
          Bankruptcy does not make
          you rich.Maybe not quite as

    • Adam Lepczak

      if you suspect a fraud why not do a proper due diligence and shut down the operation right away? Everything was going “on course” until the very end. Makes no sense

      • It turns out very smart and ethical business people who are excellent at calorimetry need at least 4 years and an $89M bill to figure out if something is a fraud.

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          Yes. And the last info about the two bankrupcy from IH doesnt help them at all.

          It feels like they are the ones who like to get money from other people and live on these expenses.

          • Omega Z

            Two bankruptcies is the tip of the iceberg. There are others.
            In the long game, Cherokee comes out financially ahead.
            Others get stuck holding the bag of losses.

    • Billy Jackson

      3 different people having the same set of data does not equal a conspiracy of fraud.. it just means they were using the same equipment to get their readings from. I am pretty sure that if i sit in a container for a year that i am going to get to know the other guys and just maybe a few points of conversation about something interesting that all 3 of you see. just might make it into all 3 reports… why.. because it was interesting enough that all 3 noted it.

      this didn’t prove anything and seems more like an emotional plea turn character assassination on Rossi.

      Last i seen it wasn’t Rossi that hired the PR firm…

    • f sedei

      You being a shareholder and all, I can almost understand your seemingly biased opinion. Take a break and do a more objective and analytical examination of the information presented so far,and what you may finally come up will probably surprise you. No offense intended. Just a suggestion.

      • Dude. I’m not a shareholder. I was quoting Dewey on another forum. Click the link.

        • f sedei

          Thank you for clarifying. But, my suggestion stands.

          • f sedei, “objective and analytical examination of the information presented” is my bread and butter.

        • Omega Z

          It was clear to me, but misunderstanding will happen when those following come from the international community.

          There’s languge that start with the subject followed by discription and discription followed by subject. Those who read left to right and those who read right to left or top to bottom by column. No wonder we have trouble communicating.

      • timycelyn

        Methinks we need bigger quotation marks – time for a primer on simple HTML codes, perhaps. LENR G was actually quoting Weaver (IH’s disreputable mouthpiece).

        Personally, I wouldn’t now trust Weaver’s account of the weather outside my door. I have no doubt he’d with utter sincerity tell me it was brilliant sunshine and he had incontrovertible proof, when three steps would probably expose me to a monsoon.

        • Wasn’t that hard to follow. I said more from Dewey. Summarized what he said and then presented the three quotes from the LENR Forum followed by a direct link to those quotes.

          People just need to read better.

          • timycelyn

            True enough. Problem is that as this has hotted up so much, there is a lot to keep up with and people are getting strong views, and often only skimming.

            To my shame I made the same mistake, but only for about 15 seconds… 😉

          • I edited to make it clearer. There is indeed a lot to keep up with and clarity is helpful.

      • Robert Dorr

        For all we know the “customer” could have been a quality assurance company checking the quality of the heat produced by a new technology (Rossi’s reactor). That, in my eye’s is indeed a “customer”, just as much a customer as one that produces widgets.

      • georgehants

        The only way to show conclusively if Mr. Rossi has discovered a method of Cold Fusion is to have his technology openly available for replication, this court case can prove nothing beyond if the terms of an agreement where adhered to or not.
        If Mr. Rossi wins then the abilities of the tester etc. will still be questioned.
        Only if independent “experts” are employed to check everything from the customer to the coffee machine, it is still not as clear and easy as a honest independent opertunity to test the device.
        Even the Orbo has been passed to ECW for testing, with unclear results I think, but at least it happened.
        We know nothing about the June demonstration etc. or if there is the slightest chance it will confirm his talk.
        Maybe we will just have to wait for his new factory, away from the US, to start producing units before we will know.
        Either way, I will ask again as I have asked many times, I would appreciate some kind of rational explanation of why this man would not put one of his basic units up for open testing by trustworthy people.
        That at least would give us something factual to discuss instead of pages of speculation and opinion.

        • Slad

          The “only way”???

          I think not.

          • georgehants

            Slad, I many times get strange replies to simple statements, please expand your reply.

          • Slad

            George, many times I read your comments and think ‘WTF’.

            You said: “The only way to show conclusively if Mr. Rossi has discovered a method of Cold Fusion is to have his technology openly available for replication”

            Which is an utterly ridiculous statement. Complete nonsense in fact. It doesn’t deserve more than a pithy response… even this is too much.

          • georgehants

            Slad, a very strange reply, it may help if you where to give some examples of other ways of confirming his claims.

          • Slad

            Measure outputs (properly).

            Measure inputs (properly).

          • georgehants

            Slad a very strange reply.
            Who is going to do those measurements?

          • DrD

            YOU, after you bought one. Then pass it on to those in need. I would assume you need to start up a charitable fund as I doubt you can raise the purchase price.
            Please don’t expect AR to give them away free (at this stage — later he might).
            I’m being serious btw!

          • georgehants

            DrD, such reply’s are not helpful or clever.
            I am asking for reasons not unqualified statements, please give a reason why one cannot expect Mr. Rossi to pass on his discoveries to help save and improve lives.

          • Engineer48


            He passes them on my selling product.

            Are you ready to buy?

          • georgehants

            DrD your reply are becoming more obtuse, what are you saying, no product has been “sold” that we are able to establish works as claimed.

          • Robert Dorr

            I think there is a very vague possibility that “georgehants” is a sub-sentient computer program used to confirm a poorly written “Turing Test”.

          • DrD

            George, I WAS being serious!
            That last question’s also been answered already, many ways but you don’t seem to understand the answers so I give up on this one

          • georgehants

            DrD more obscurity, please give your answer as to why Mr. Rossi is justified in keeping secret a technology that could save and improve many lives.

          • Engineer48


            Rossi’s 1MW 105C steam plants are FOR SALE!!!!!!!!!!

            My clients are sitting it out until the court case is settled. Can’t blame them as I would do the same thing.

            However Rossi was ready to engage the ordering and money escrow process for 10 x 1MW at least 105C steam plants with 6 months delivery. Hard to believe he would do that and have nothing to deliver as he would burn a VERY large owner and operator of thermal power plants.

          • georgehants

            Engineer48, so your “clients” have not the slightest idea if the 1MW units are available or work as claimed.
            About five years ago Mr. Rossi took thousands of orders for e-cats none of which have been delivered or even confirmed to work.
            I fail to understand the logical reasoning you are using in this conversation.

          • Engineer48

            What I said and maybe you failed to read was:

            Rossi was ready to engage the ordering and money escrow process for 10 x 1MW at least 105C steam plants with 6 months delivery.

          • georgehants

            Engineer48, I am ready to “engage the ordering and money escrow process for 10” Star-trek, warp-factor ten star ships, would you like to order some.

          • Engineer48

            Now you just left the discussion with statements like that.

            Please understand if I no longer reply to your trolling.

          • georgehants

            Engineer48, my point is simple, you nor anybody on page can confirm at this time with clear repeatable confidence that Rossi is genuine.
            Your abuse will not make you right, you are in error, if you reply to my clear Facts or not is entirely your choice.

          • Engineer48

            I will leave you with one final post, which I have shared before.

            Rossi stated an engineering team from the customer, including myself, would be able to visit a working 1MW ECat steam plant prior to signing the purchase contract and we would be able to do our own testing. Remember these guys are very experienced engineers who run and maintain steam powered thermal power plants. Expect they know more about steam than Rossi.

          • georgehants

            Engineer48, what World do you live in, you say ——-
            “Rossi stated an engineering team from the customer, including myself, would be able to visit a working 1MW E Cat steam plant prior to signing the purchase contract and we would be able to do our own testing. ——-
            You seem to not be aware of what you write, the big words you are seemingly ignoring are “would be able”.
            You do not seem to be able to agree the most simple point no matter how long you go on trying to change what I say.
            I am saying, you nor anybody on page can confirm that Mr. Rossi is genuine NOW.
            I am not a psychic and will not speculate on what could happen in the future.

          • Engineer48

            Our discussion are over.

            Enjoy trolling someone else.


          • georgehants

            Engineer48, thank you for chat and displaying your thinking for all to see.
            I will look up in my dictionary and see if talking Facts is defined as trolling.

          • DrD

            Sorry to hear that, — your client is waiting, as it could go on a long time, but it’s good to hear both parties are otherwise agrreable.

          • Engineer48

            Power system engineers are very conservative as their balls are literally on the line to keep the grid up and running. Thus they can wait to avoid future testicular pain.

            The 10 x 1MW 105C steam plants were not to generate electricity but to see how well they react to load changes and what their reliability, recharge and general maintenance is like.

          • Not quite literally I hope, or I’ll start wincing in sympathy each time I flip the kettle switch.

          • psi2u2

            If I were in your position, I would work to persuade them to purchase one plant immediately for a test. It seems to me that if they have deep pockets it would be in their advantage to do so, because if they confirmed the plant’s specs as advertised they would then be in a position to jump to the head of the line by ordering and deploying as many more units as they wanted. Presumably the plant is covered by some kind of warranty?

          • Engineer48



            Rossi made it very clear to me that all monies are placed into escrow until the mutually agreed handover specifications are met.

          • Stephen

            Actually that’s not a bad idea. The charitable fund I mean, I guess it costs a lot though? There would be no conflicts if interest testing such a device if it’s for charity not business and when it’s ready what better way to use it than for those in need. Water purification comes to mind.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          Certainly if the patent application is valid, someone “skilled in the art” could replicate the technology. However, the result might take a long time to effectively replicate. Rossi can be commercially successful by selling a device manufactured with and/or containing “trade secrets” that do not have to be divulged, but could not patent it. An example might be the method of fuel production.

          Even if Rossi is successful, there will still be a lot of controversy over what is actually happening until a plausible theory is advanced and tested. The theory I feel is much more important than the discovery, for it will allow the technology to advance in ways that the inventor did not even think of.

          Even if your statement is true, Rossi is under no obligation to do so based on his patent. Only a suit on the validity of the patent could force him to reveal the “secret sauce”.

          • georgehants

            Thomas, many thanks, helpful but does not address why Mr. Rossi finds it so important not to give a unit for testing without revealing any of the “secret sauce” etc.
            I do not find at this stage any need for a theory as only its utility is important, later it could be very helpful as long as it is not just a Dogma believed by the clever scientists that again delay Research for many years.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            To answer that question you need to dive deep into the inventor’s mind. I suspect that based on his life’ trials (and his being screwed and put in jail), his motivations are complex. I am willing to wait until a product is offered for sale. At that time, the technology can be examined in great detail.

            To me, a more important question is, “Why has not the US or other countries made it a part of their research budgets to investigate LENR?” When I talk to power systems people, fusion researchers and nuclear engineers, they usually have not heard of LENR. I think researchers have now definitely shown F&P’s results to be replicable. That should have unleashed monies for advancing the research. Alas, no money trickles out.

          • georgehants

            Thomas, so many questions, so few answers.

          • Engineer48


            1MW 105C steam ECats are available now. Rossi is interested to sell the plants as I have engaged the process.

            Engage Rossi to buy one or more and then use them to provide relief to those you feel can benefit from 1MW or more of 105C steam.

          • georgehants

            Engineer48, I think it is you that has been posting on page that your associates are trying to purchase said 1MW units.
            Please advise page when they are delivered and working efficiently. 🙂

          • Engineer48


            As I disclosed, they need 600C steam, which means they need to wait for QuarkX. Then they came back and started discussion on purchasing 10 x 1MW 105C steam plants but have decided to wait until the court case is decided. Rossi did give a delivery timeframe.

            So it was my clients that decided to go slow, not Rossi.

            Besides what does this have to do with you you wanting ECats to help people in 3rd world countries? Maybe explain how you went when you engaged Rossi to buy a few 1MW ECat plants to do this job? I mean you have asked him when he can deliver?

          • georgehants

            Engineer, I have not asked when he can deliver, I simply make the point that after 5+ bloody years neither you or anybody outside of his immediate enviroment know if his claims are genuine.
            If you think you can prove they are please give that proof here and now.

          • Engineer48

            Rossi has said many time, the only proof he will offering is to his customers.

            So if you want proof, become a customer.

          • georgehants

            You are trying to get your “clients” to become a “customer” and have so far failed, it is impossible to work out any logic from your replies.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            it is impossible to work out any logic from your replies.

            The logic is perfectly clear.

            Rossi has stated the only proof of his products will be from real customers.

            So the logic here is if you want the truth about the ecat, then become a customer

            You are trying to get your “clients” to become a “customer” and have so far failed

            A better term would be product not yet delivered. And read close – they held off on the ecat because they NEED AND WANT the higher temp ecat-x and thus have to wait.

            So the logic is perfectly clear. Quite much means Rossi opinion and statements are his proof of the ecat will be real customers and thus logically Rossi goal to prove the ecat will be when he starts delivering such products to customers.
            Rossi simply not yet ready and thus we have to wait for that proof.

            The above logic is crystal clear for anyone with a logical mind.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, good to see you again, another long rambling reply that misses the point.
            If you consider that any part of Mr. Rossi discovery from 5+ years ago is repeatably and openly provable by replication generally, please give that information now or agree he has shown no such proof.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Rossi has not given solid proof and we have little to go on.

            In fact Rossi has given us little reliable information on the ecat. In fact this is why Rossi is so controversial.

            So no, we don’t know how solid Rossi’s claims are and we don’t have much if anything in the way of replications of the ecat. This is certainly the most troubling aspect of Rossi’s claims.

            However, there is ample papers and documents on LENR and excess heat. And many replications of LENR have occurred. However we don’t have much in
            terms of Rossi and the ecat.

            I doubt any of the above is any kind of revelation to any of the readers here.

            However none of the above changes the simple and CLEAR logic of of Engineer48 and what he stated.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Thank you for confirming my Facts, a shame that you spoilt it by as you say —–
            “However none of the above changes the simple and CLEAR logic of of Engineer48 and what he stated.”
            He has been responding to exactly the same Facts from me as you have just answered.
            You cannot logically confirm a Fact and then not confirm it in the next sentence.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            No, the logic and reason point is if you want solid proof of the ecat then become a customer.

            Until such time then you not have that solid proof. A perfectly clear logical statement.

            The above in changes nothing in terms of Rossi not having proved his product and that we have little if anything to go on.

            However, becoming a customer would certainly be the best proof anyone could obtain, would it not?

            However at this point in time, we don’t have sold proof and we don’t have customers. But real customers certainly will be the best proof.

            Rossi has stated that customers are the best proof, so has Engineer48.

            I not sure what part of this you cannot grasp?

            And until such time that we have customers then anyone reading say posts on ECW (including Engineer48) will not have that proof, will they?

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, O well back to your old ever expanding circles.
            You have answered my clear Factual statement, Rossi has given no generally repeatable proof that any of his discoveries are genuine, now you want to go on and on trying to give some justification to something that has nothing whatever to do with my clear point.
            I now wish to do something more worthwhile and cut my toenails so will be away for awhile.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, I not only agreeing with you, but so is Egineer48.

            I think most here are well aware that we have little to go on other than Rossi’s word.

            We both have stated that if you want proof, become a customer.

            If you saying that we have little if anything to go on now? Yes that most certainly the case and that’s the view of any person trained in reason.

            I now wish to do
            something more worthwhile and cut my toenails so will be away for awhile.

            Right, so why you posting here then when it been perfectly clear to you all along that Rossi not given sold proof? I see this, Engineer48 sees this, and I think most readers see this. We always had little to go on.

            Or are you admitting it taken you this long to determine this?

            So if you were perfectly aware of this issue, then why you been posting here all this time then? (Perhaps to spew out your political agenda here). And if not been aware of this issue, then why are you so slow to mentally reason and figure out what is obvious to any person with reason?

            Don’t you love logic, since either answer has ramifications – that’s why liberals hate the truth – by answering questions it reviles their own weakness of their positions!

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, sorry still here to chuckle at your continuing attempts to cover up having to just stand-up clearly and say George you are perfectly correct with your Factual statement.
            Now you are into politics etc.
            I have been circumcised does that help you muddy the waters.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            I think 2 = 2, and it not some big revelation to anyone here.

            And I rather assumed that readers here all long ago realised 2 = 2 and that Rossi has little solid proof.

            I trying to grasp why what is so dead obvious to most is somehow a big deal to you?

            You actually are looking for validation from me to admit we have little solid proof about the ecat? You that weak in believing your own reasoning?
            I cannot imagine that this position is a surprise to most.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, thank you for agreeing with my Facts again.
            Would you like to add anything else?

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Well, how about you answer my question then?

            Did you just figure that you have little solid proof (and this thus shows your inability to grasp what is obvious).

            Or did you figure his out long ago and thus admit you been wasting your time here, or have another agenda here?

            Inquiring minds ant to know!

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • psi2u2

            I “liked” this, as I almost always like Albert’s clearly reasoned posts, even with the political potshot, a classic overgeneralization.

          • Robert Dorr


            If you are so concerned whether or not Rossi’s e-cat works or not why don’t you buy one and let us all know. He is ready right now to build one for you. Why should we be the ones proving it to you, prove it to yourself. Take a chance and put your money where your mouth is.

          • georgehants

            Robert, thank you I suggest you read the thread before jumping in with irrelevant comments.
            To help, my point is that Mr. Rossi has given no generals available information or demonstration at this time to allow a replication of his work.
            Do you agree or disagree>

          • Robert Dorr

            I’m sorry to admit that I did indeed read this entire thread. Regarding Rossi, I strongly disagree. You seem to be very concerned about the direction
            humanity is moving. If you were the one to buy one of Rossi’s 1MW
            thermal plants and confirmed that it worked as stated, you would be
            remembered as one that had a major role in the saving of mankind. Think
            of the adulation you would receive.

          • georgehants

            Robert, a very nice speech that completely avoided answering my very simple point.
            Would you like to try again.

          • Robert Dorr

            Please take your time and reread my response and you will see my answer, but this has grown tiresome, I must now go and cut my toenails.

          • georgehants

            Robert, a not so nice speech that completely avoided answering my very simple point.
            Would you like to try again.

          • Robert Dorr

            Snip, snip, ‘clipping toenails’, snip, snip.

          • georgehants

            Robert, a not so nice speech that completely avoided answering my very simple point.
            Would you like to try again.
            It is very easy for you to say that you are unable or unwilling to answer such a simple question but I never lose amazement at the thinking of some on page.

          • DrD

            I was being serious because he wants to help the poor and substantiate it. I DON’T (the latter)! This might give him the satisfaction he yearns. I would be willing to contribute except I’m sure the £M isn’t achievable. Agree with your last comment too.

          • psi2u2

            Nonsense. Engineer48’s posts are routinely among the clearest, most technically informed, and consistent in this discussion.

          • Thomas Kaminski


            I think we should all collectively ask the USA to add a Rossi E-Cat 105C unit in their proposed 2017 budget for Fusion Research, totaling $US 398Billion. See the chart attached, or for some great reading, read the proposed budget:


            Hint: There is a bit of cash for ITER….

    • psi2u2

      Thanks for the posting, LENR G.

      • Omega Z

        One would be a fool to argue with Jed Rothwell about what documents are in the LENR library or what they say. Jed should stick with what he’s good at.

        Beyond that, Jed is out of his environment. His statements about the 1MW cooking everyone is ridiculous. As well as his statement that Any “HVAC” tech could do the calorimetry.

        Seriously, YOU do not want to KNOW!!!

        There are HVAC techs that are quite good, but the vast majority are monkey taught (see then do). Example, at a given ambient temperature, you should have a certain pressure at the inlet and a certain pressure at the outlet. If these pressure readings don’t fit the situation, most have no idea how to deal with it. Must be broke. Buy a new one.

        In a somewhat defense of Jed Rothwell,

        Jed knows Rossi can be hard to get along with and in the past has excepted that. However, Jed has his opinion on how Rossi should proceed with and initially apply this technology.

        Unsurprisingly, Rossi’s way is not Jed’s way and I think over time Jed has allowed this to impact his views and opinions.

        Guess what. I don’t like the way most Research is carried out.

        Tough Noogies. I should have went into research myself. Then I could do it the way “I” Think it should be done. As I didn’t do this, I have ceded the right to others to do their research as they see fit.
        Either Lead or stay out of the way.

        • BillH

          There is something strange here though. The whole idea is that the 1MWth steam is used as efficiently as possible to do as much work in the process it is supplying as possible. Inevitably though there will be some heat loss to the surrounding environment as most processes are nowhere near 100% efficient. Talk of chiller for example doesn’t make any sense, why go to the trouble of heating something up just in order to cool it down?

          • Omega Z

            First, 1MW in manufacturing is peanuts.

            Two heat treating batch furnaces about 6 ft W, 8 ft L, 5 ft H // 900`C rated 0.5 megawatt each side by side. You can stand between them and never be cooked. Now imagine a 15K sq ft building with 30MW plus with only passive heat dissipation. People work in these conditions everyday.

            HVAC- Heating and Cooling
            Heat absorbtion Chillers are expensive but efficient, and economical at commercial scale. Surprise, conventional home refrigerator also uses heat in order to work…

          • cashmemorz

            As a by product. It starts with compression by using a pump.

          • Omega Z

            It’s more complex,

            Heat is the product…

        • kdk

          You’d have ended up in Academia’s dust bin in short order, if you were too independently minded.

          • Omega Z

            Or I could work in my own shop. but you know what I meant.

            Also, Many scientists do their own R&D on the side at many Universities and Government labs even if not officially sanctioned.

    • sam

      6 hours ago
      Dewey Weaver wrote:
      We have since found out why he needed to take that position.

      Rossi was operating a robotocized factory and making Fluid Heaters or Quarks with the heat?

      • Dewey didn’t post that last sentence. That came from someone else.

    • SG

      Well, Mr. Rossi has stated multiple times that his own-gathered data was consistent with what the ERV gathered, and so building some kind of fraud argument out of consistent data seems like grasping for straws. The assertion that Mr. Rossi reported the plant was “down” would need some corroboration: reported where, in real time?, at a later date?, etc. We know the plant was down on occasion, as also allowed for in the contract, but this just comes across as Mr. Weaver trying to string some stuff together, throw it at the wall, and see what sticks. Sorry for the cliches, but just seems very dubious.

  • I’m not a shareholder. I was quoting Dewey. Follow the link to see the original postings.

  • Stephen

    In the interest of clarity. Does anyone know if the same people are fully responsible for the decision making process regarding contracts in IH now as there were when the contract with LC was originally made?

    I suppose originally it was just Darden and Vaughn is this the case? And is that still the case now or are other people now involved?

  • Omega Z

    One also needs to interpret what down is. On multiple occasions Rossi reported when individual reactors were having mechanical issues. Is this reported as down even while the other 3 are operating normally.

    It is highly probable those 3 remaining reactors can carry the load for those short periods. No one builds a system that operates at it’s limit 24/7. There built with excess capacity.

    • Eyedoc

      Yes Omega, that’s exactly what I was going to say (but you said it better and quicker 😉 The entire system was never down

  • Rene

    While all mull about on the “whodunit” aspects, I keep thinking back to this exchange:

    “5. Mats said the 100 W QuarkX is the size of a pen — does each QuarkX include its own control system built in, or is that separate?
    5- the control system is separate”
    The control system is separate. I am beginning to suspect that the important part of the IP is less about the fuel mix or even its preparation. What may be the important part of the IP is the control system: how to excite a strong LENR reaction and how to keep it from going nonlinear once a high enough reaction rate ensues.

    • Carl Wilson

      I suspect that the control system was the last part that fell into place — so in a sense the important part — and that solving it was tied up with the direct production of electricity. Think of the E-Cat in terms of parts: a furnace, a fuel, a control. That would probably mean that the furnace & fuel are integrated in that “size of a pen”. That might mean the QuarkX E-Cat was safer in the sense that it couldn’t be played around with. You couldn’t play around by putting different fuels or changing furnace characteristics to get something more dangerous. With the “pen” part fixed, one could run the E-Cat through the various control possibilities showing there were no dangers. All this assuming you’ve got something that works.

      • Axil Axil

        Rossi stated in his blog that the Quark had an IP protection mechanism that protests the design of the Quark from industrial espionage.

        • Carl Wilson

          That’s different from the safety issue of course.

    • Specifically – in the case of ‘quark X’ – the waveforms and voltage of modulated DC applied to the device. It seems very likely that Rossi may have kept this information to himself, and at best, IH have only the physical construction IP (they probably had the prototypes built and sent to Rossi). However AR could have applied some simple mods while he was stuck at the test site, so they may not even have the complete picture of these.

      • Carl Wilson

        Or more than simple mods. A new level understanding what’s going on electrically. I employing what I term as the Incomplete E-Cat hypothesis. My picture is of Rossi not “stuck” at the test site but furiously working away there at completing the E-Cat, cracking remaining control problems. Leading to the QuarkX.

        • Yes, possibly – but the facilities available to him there seem limited unless he installed his own lab (perhaps in some of the offices) at the test site.

          • Carl Wilson

            Where & when was the QuarkX brewed up? One version of my idea is that the insights for it (at least) came out of working on the year long test.

          • In which case on-site (or at least close by) prototype manufacturing and testing facilities would have been essential to Rossi – which would shine an entirely different light on the purpose of whole 1-year test affair. A very interesting suggestion which opens a number of possibilities (not least, of AR running rings around Darden and Vaughn).

          • DrD

            I think AR did actually say that — that he was working on the E-CatX while monitoring the 1MW plant. BUT bythis time I think he was playing his cards even closer to his chest, maybe even Fabiani wasn’t being used so much or being kept well informed.

          • Ged

            It was; Clarke is just making an erroneous leap in logic based on it not being used to calculate the official COP to make that result more conservative.

          • artefact

            Rossi said the place where he works on the x-cat was not far away from the 1MW plant. So maybe in an office of that building.

        • Axil Axil

          According to Mats’ article:

          However, like everyone else in this story, IH underestimated Rossi—thinking that he was just another of those confused and not-so-business-and-competition-prepared inventors out there, when he was instead extremely focused, persistent (being an former long distance runner), competitive, intelligent, intuitive, far-aiming and hardened by tough experiences in a fairly corrupt power game country like Italy; Rossi managed to find a location and a customer for the one-year test, and also completed the test (which IH maybe didn’t expect), furthermore with exceptionally good results—a COP (Coefficient of Performance) above 50, far beyond the requirement in the License Agreement for full payment, a COP>6.

          • Of course, this is not verified. It’s a narrative I find possible, based partly on the claims in the lawsuit.

          • Domenico Canino

            hi mats,
            my first question is not about tech, but iabout the man; how did you find Andrea Rossi last week in Sweden; good, tired, worry? And what about hydrofusion partners, are they ready do go or are always in stand by? What about he role of Sikkerfoll? Thanks if you can answer.

          • Domenico, I found Rossi obviously older than when I met him last, 3-4 years ago, but with no apparent health problem. Also inspired and optimistic as usual, although well aware of challenges and difficulties.

            The Hydrofusion team seems very dedicated and active in supporting Rossi.

            Sifferkoll is one individual – Torkel Nyberg – who acts on his own, analysing information he finds, and he is not connected to Rossi in any other way.

          • Domenico Canino

            thanks for your answer

          • I can add though, that I had the pleasure to meet Rossi in person for the first time last week, when he was visiting Stockholm

    • DrD

      Except the control system was developed by his Engineer (Fabiani) who just happens to be employed by IH. Fabiani said of Rossi: ” he doesn’t know much about electrical engineering and electronics.”
      However, the electronics will only be a means to implement what AR discovered/invented (his “magic soup” if you wish). The point is though, Fabiani (now IH’s Engineer) must know the details.

      • I wonder, do we have any info that suggests that Fabiani was also involved with developing ‘Quark X’? If AR smuggled some Leonardo engineers into the test site, or leased premises nearby (see discussion with Carl Wilson below) then Fabiani’s involvement may not have been required, and IH would only have the IP for the 1 Yr test prototypes.

        • DrD

          Good question, in fact I just posted exactly that below.

          • Robert Dorr

            I understand what you are saying, but the 1MW reactor either worked or it didn’t and I guess that will be discovered in court, when hopefully we will all get a chance to look at the pertinent data (flow rates,pressures and temperature deltas) instead of a lot of superfluous information that makes no difference as to whether the reactor worked or not.

          • The worrying thing is that even assuming that Rossi can prove that the 1MW reactor works brilliantly, the court may decide that the IP for this belongs to IH, and was paid for by the $11.5M transferred to AR.

            This then leaves the rights to the only currently working reactor design in the hands of Cherokee, who have shown no inclination to manufacture them, and every inclination to delay and obfuscate. Assuming that ‘Quark’ IP remains with Rossi, and that it will take a few years to develop this technology to the point where a viable industrial design can be tested (say, another 6 months min) then we are in effect set back to somewhere around the beginning of 2014 in terms of how long it will be before a commercial product becomes available.

            It could be argued that if some party or parties have set out to delay the introduction of CF for years, that things are working out just fine.

      • Carl Wilson

        “Fabiani (now IH’s Engineer)” He is? I really can’t figure out how he fits in. To what extent can we trust what he says? What did he develop of the control system? Possibly Rossi said “here’s what I need, you figure out how to do it”. Fabini says “that doesn’t make any sense”. But they work it out.

        • DrD

          I’m sure you’re correct. That’s how it works and bouncing ideas off one another often leads to innovations. I’m pretty sure I read that Fabiani was now employed by IH (and was during the trial) but can’t be 100% certain. I hope some one will correct that if wrong.

          • Carl Wilson

            I realize I’ve relied too much on the model of Rossi as a loner. Rossi had many words of praise for his team. I looked at controlling the Rossi effect as the missing piece. But I also assumed that the QuarkX combined the fuel and furnace parts. That may have been more important and that may have relied heavily on other members of the team.
            All much too complicated with too little information for me to get any reasonable picture.
            And then there are the patent issues. What does Piantelli’s patent do to IH’s patent & licensing position?

          • Fabiani initially began working for Rossi circa 2012, then became an Industrial Heat employee. Supposedly the initial connection was made through Levi (dun dun DUUUUN, conspiracy theorists rejoice!).

            We can assume he still is, but I’m not aware of any solid info on his status since October 2015. When the **** hit the fan in the Spring, he became the Most Interesting Man in the World, with feet in both camps.

            Maybe IH sent him off on a rocket to Mars.

          • Omega Z

            ->”Maybe IH sent him off on a rocket to Mars.”

            So the E-cat is even more advanced then any of us thought.?

          • timycelyn

            I’ve spent some time studying his LinkedIn profile. If anyone else wants to look, you search his name, and the hit you want is: CEO, USQL LLC Embedded Engineering R&D. Florida based.

            There’s not a huge amount on the profile, and he does not provide a current employer – there is nothing more recent than a couple of activities ending in 2012. The whole thing is thin.

            The citation/recommendation by other LI people is a little interesting. Firstly in that it seems from our perspective as being quite lightweight and relating to non LENR things, with one glaring exception. All his skills are endorsed by a certain Giuseppe Levi (Which validates one has the right Fabiani).

            Now I use LI a bit and the way the skills area works (if you are using a browser like Chrome) is that when people attest to someone’s skill, their picture turns up on the left hand end of the bar for that skill. So the bar is a timeline of your supporters, oldest to th right, newest to the left.

            I have inferred a few things from studying this – although health warning about reading too much into one scrap of information apply!!

            1.Levi turns up very near the right (the beginning) of most of the bars, suggesting that this (pretty thin) LI profile started either after he got onto LENR or at the same time.
            2. He is the only obviously LENR connected entry. The others relate to his gambling machinery expertise, which seems to run pretty deep.
            3. There are a couple of bars near the bottom where it looks like Levi has come back more recently and endorsed him – as judged by the position of other people in the bar.

            The summary seems to be:

            1. All his expertise is not in the area of the physics, just the control system where he seems to be a guru, admittedly from a different industry.
            2. The only reference to his LENR involvement on the whole entry is the presence of Levi. Is this because of NDAs, or has he moved on?
            3. He has an ongoing base as a freestanding consultant, so it is not clear from here whether he is an IH employee or contractor.

            I’m mulling an e-mail via LinkedIn, maybe just asking if he is still with IH…..

          • Josh G

            He is no longer working for IH. After the 1MW test, he set up an engineering consulting firm (with Rossi’s lawyer). My guess is that Leonardo is contracting with Fabiani’s firm for his services.

          • DrD

            Thanks for that Josh!
            Very pleased to hear it. I liked the way he spoke and didn’t like to think he wasn’t with Rossi anymore, or worse. I can well believe he is a valuable resource to the LENR R&D.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Rene makes a good point and you do too DrD.

      • The customer’s narrative is one worth exploring. I can come up with alternatives that lead to much less head scratching.

        Instead of doing that I challenge you to construct narratives for Rossi, Focardi, Levi, Penon, Fabiani and Darden that are all coherent and don’t require massive conspiracies or incompetence.

  • wpj

    What a load of made up BS!

    There was a gas supply which we know was available as back up.

    It may have been a European company, but where does it say that materials were shipped from Europe?

    If they were genuinely making sponge metal catalysts, it only requires a few tanks plus reactor vessel.

    There was supposedly 24/7 video monitoring; we do not know if this was also in the production area.

    One of Mats L’s contacts saw into the area when the door was open and saw production going on.

    • Carl Wilson

      “What a load of made up BS!” And self contradictory BS which I think I can show but it requires wading around in it more than it’s worth. Still there’s room for suspecting something fishy about the “customer”.

  • georgehants

    All very interesting but to anybody that cares about Cold Fusion and the benefits it could bring, the only question that needs answering is, HAS ROSSI DEVELOPED A COLD FUSION DEVICE THAT IS GIVING A EXCESS ENERGY USABLE FOR SOCIAL ADVANCEMENT.
    5+ bloody years and we do not have a repeatable conformation that he can produce a COP above 1.
    What is wrong with the man, send a device of the crudest design to MFMP and end this insanity.
    Money, IP, power, ego, etc. crap, DOES THE BLOODY THING WORK.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We offered through a trusted third party to ensure a plausible E-CatX live broadcast test, our offer was declined.

      • georgehants

        Bob, yes it is crazy, give people something to talk and speculate about like this crazy court case and they go round and round in circles until they disappear up their own backsides.
        Does Rossi have a device that can produce excess usable energy is all that matters.
        While you guys struggle to find the basic answer, this man sits on his bum confirming nothing, he will be telling us next that he has found the answer to the purpose of life but the gods have told him to keep it secret.

        • Owen Geiger

          We’re trying to understand the greatest invention in the world, while you repeatedly bash the inventor for not working for free. That’s how it seems to me. Maybe Frank will block your endless repetitive messages that bog down the fascinating viewpoints presented by others?

          • georgehants

            Owen, do you take that view with everybody that does not agree with your opinion?
            You may be happier living in a dictatorship with no free speech.
            Getting back to my comment, would you like to give a sane explanation as to why a man would keep secret a discovery that could save and improve millions of lives?

          • Roland

            You are perfectly immune to sane opinions; just as you’re too deliberately obtuse and obstructive to read, by your own admission, the extant literature or watch any of the video documentaries that clearly demonstrate the LENR was conclusively proven over a decade ago well before anyone was aware that Rossi was even working on LENR.

            A significant number of posters have repeatedly tried to convey a few simple economic, political and scientific truths to you without visible effect so why should any of us waste anymore time on you George?

            P.S. I confess to being fascinated by how your level of literacy shifts from time to time, one day you can barely compose a comprehensible sentence, the next words flow from your keyboard with exemplary clarity.

            Do you suffer from some subtle form of multiple personality disorder?

          • georgehants

            Roland, thank you for your attempt to cover the Truth with cheap innuendo and Ad hominem attacks.
            Facts always show up the people unable to respond outside of their limited intellect.
            You say ——
            “just as you’re too deliberately obtuse and obstructive to read, by your own admission, the extant literature or watch any of the video documentaries that clearly demonstrate the LENR was conclusively proven over a decade ago well before anyone was aware that Rossi was even working on LENR.”
            Now if you would like to read my comment again, I at no time say that Cold Fusion is not proven, I at no time say that Mr. Rossi is not genuine.
            I state the Truth clearly ——-
            “5+ bloody years and we do not have a repeatable conformation that he can produce a COP above 1.”
            Perhaps your inability to read things correctly and respond accurately is answered by,
            “Do you suffer from some subtle form of multiple personality disorder?”

      • Karl Venter

        I would be very happy and believe if Bob and his band of merry men do the test and report
        I think that they would be criticized as all are but Rossi credibility would go up
        Does he ( Rossi) care about his credibility from us? – not really
        Most of us still want to believe it exists because we know what it will do to humanities future as Georgehants so elegantly puts it

    • Carl Wilson

      You assume that a determination by MFMP would settle the matter. I share enough of what others have called Rossi’s paranoia to suspect that the result might be a campaign to bring down MFMP. I have a darker outlook than you on there being forces in opposition to the “social advancement” both you and I desire.
      You say below “Does Rossi have a device that can produce excess usable energy is all that matters.” I do not know how close to such a device he is. I do think that such a device is possible. But is it acceptable in our current world? Rossi has decided that the way to bring it to acceptance is through a commercial product. He is not likely to be swayed from that course. The MFMP folk choose the path of science properly done. I believe Rossi, if he does not fall, will get there sooner. If he does fail, MFMP’s more certain path seems to me our next best hope.

      • IH’s tame researchers, armed with partial knowledge of Rossi’s reactors are probably much closer to success than MFMP at the moment. What Darden decides to do with this advantage is anyone’s guess however, and this probably depends on the wishes of others.

        I share your concerns about those who would not welcome the mass manufacture and unrestricted distribution of a novel, clean power source, and worry about the amount of time to plan mischief that they are being handed. The obvious bottleneck is safety certification for industrial usage, but particularly of domestic devices, and this process (I believe) will almost certainly be subject to great interference using all measures available.

        George expresses his impatience for seeing social benefits from this technology. While I fully share his view, I believe there are other good reasons for wanting to see the information necessary to build any viable O/U CF reactor, no matter how imperfect, distributed widely and freely and as quickly as possible.

        • cashmemorz

          I see taxation as another strong hindrance. This would keep Rossi’s tech out of the hands of those he most wants to get it.

          • Yes, taxation will be a factor. The potential loss of tax revenue from existing energy infrastructure is likely to make politicians of all colours extremely ‘sympathetic’ to the desire of corporate interests to get a legislated monopoly on CF in place.

    • GiveADogABone

      Well, the ERV test report of the 1MW plant is not going to provide the answer if it follows this test protocol :-
      61821914- E-Cat World…/R_123621412_3.pdf
      The steam is collected in the two tubes of the steam line. The steam is then conveyed to the outside of the reactor shelter housing the water pump and flowmeter.

      This protocol assumes full evaporation with nothing to justify that assumption. ‘ steam is collected in the two tubes of the steam line’ is not a steam drum that separates water and steam and importantly RECIRCULATES THE WATER. No recirculation means the water fraction goes out in the so-called steam line.

      This issue has already been rehearsed five years ago :-
      Rossi Responds to Scrutiny of his Claims | – E-Cat World
      18 Jun 2011 – In the report he questions whether there has been conclusive proof that the steam produced by the E-Cat is completely free of suspended water …

      Why the Announced Test at Uppsala Should Show if Rossi’s E-Cat ……/why-the-announced-e-cat-test-at-uppsala-should...
      19 Sep 2011 – In the announced test for the first time there will be made use of a heat exchanger which transfers the energy of the steam output into a …

      It is profoundly disappointing that no progress has been made. It may well be that IH realised this at a late stage in the one-year test. The proof for a CoP of 50 (and therefore the proof for the court case) hangs by a very slender thread. Rossi has to prove what the dryness fraction of the steam really was.

    • Robert Dorr

      I think the answer to your question is that Rossi doesn’t share your world view or your production schedule. I think he is most interested in maintaining control of his inventions and their distribution. He doesn’t have any shareholders so he doesn’t feel any reason to reveal his plans for the e-cats final release.

    • Observer

      If MFMP performed a positive verification for the performance of Rossi’s E-Cat, They would be subject to character assassination just like the authors of the Lugano report and the ERV in the most recent test.

      • Skip

        Speaking only for myself, as an occasional volunteer to MFMP, I say bring it on.
        (assuming I have been convinced to my own satisfaction that our ducks are in a row and we have seen and reported positive results)

        • radvar

          And what about the $1000/day payments? That either happened or did not. Hard to “mis-interpret” that. “Follow the money…”

      • DFarwell

        I disagree. If MFMP was to use completely transparent standard metering and analysis, this would be HUGE even for us skeptics. I just see this as an excuse.

    • It does.

      • Engineer48

        georgehaunts shouted:

        Mats Lewan wrote:
        “It does.”

        Mats please expand. What have you uncovered to allow you to make such a positive statement?

        • Maybe a bit hasty. But let’s say that on top of the considerations made here on the MW measurements (with T Clarke forgetting that the minimum required COP was 6, easily obtained also with wet steam, and as far as I know the output temp was well above 100 degrees), I get various testimonials that add up to something making it very hard to believe that the E-Cat doesn’t work. Looking forward to see more of the Quark X, if Rossi gets ready to show it.

  • Well that’s the gist of it isn’t it? There’s a camp that believes the fraud scenario much more likely and there’s a camp that believes the opposite. I am in the latter camp but I still allow for the possibility of fraud.

  • Robert Dorr

    I know of only 1 maybe 2 people on this and a few other boards that actively over the top for Rossi but a good 8 to 10 possibly more that are over the top for I.H. As far as I can see is that Rossi speaks for himself with people then repeating what he has said, but evidence for I.H comes from a convoluted group of “sources” that no one can reveal, but are only backed up with “just wait and see”. Doesn’t hold water.

  • sam

    A comment from Lenr forum.
    Thomas Clarke
    User Avatar
    Monday, 5:23pm+1
    —“The water heated by the MW plant was circulating in a closed loop, and since the return temperature was varying, due to different load in the process of the customer, Rossi insisted that the energy corresponding to heating the inflowing cooled water (at about 60˚C) to boiling temperature would not be taken into account for calculating the thermal power produced by the MW plant. The ERV accepted.”

    “The average flow of water was 36 cubic meters per day.”

    Rossi’s prints all over this.
    C = water spec hat cap = 4kJ/kgK
    D = density liquid water = 1000kg/m^3
    So: we have around 36 * 40C * 4 * 1000 kJ/day = 5760MJ/day added to customer heat but not counted (70kW).

    But, that assumes the return water is 60C. Since it is not counted we will not know what that is. We also do not know whether this heating is included in the input power budget. There are two ways this could go:
    (Heating not included in input budget) customer gets 70kW on top of what Rossi’s device produces, enough to do something.
    (heating included in input budget) return water is neat to 100C. The 70kW could be as low as 1kW!

    I can’t say which way Rossi plays this from info so far.

    The liquid phase equation is roughly 2kW/K of temperature increase.
    If Rossi assumes dry steam output (as he has done in the past) he would have an extra 2257kJ/kg – the equivalent of 550C liquid phase temperature rise or about 1MW power, from the heat of vaporisation.

    So he has scaled this plant so that the nominal output is the same as the steam heat of vaporisation.

    My guess? He will have measured steam output at about 101C. He will claim this is dry. Actually (due to pressure) it will be very wet.

    The COP spoofing from this method would depend on the output temperature. For 101C he has 2kW needed to raise water from 100C to 101C, and up to 1MW output, or COP=500. Depending on steam wetness that can obviously go down to any value.

    What we can be sure from this is that he is including the latent heat of vaporisation in this analysis. It will be fascinating to see what evidence he has of dry steam…

    As always, Mats accepts technical half-truths without question, putting a positive spin on something that is still half-baked.

    • So now we’re accusing Rossi of fraud on the basis of Thomas Clarke’s heavily biased assumptions, and figures that he pulls from thin air and then duly processes as if they are actual data from AR. Desperate barely begins to cover it.

      • Ged

        Clarke amusingly leaves off the energy calculation for vaporizing 36 cubic meters of water per day, which comes to ~0.941 MW (so the plant is actually designed for 1 MW including return loop heating of ~70 kW and vaporization, contrary to his assumption it is scaled just to vaporization). Since the plant was using a max of 20 kW, it would only be capable of ~2% vaporization on its own Not including return loop heating.

        Pretty easy to measure the temp of the return loop, and the difference in pressure between 100% and 2% steam! IH people could check that any time.

        Also, just cause return loop isn’t in the calculation, does not mean it wasn’t measured and tracked, since that would be vital for the running of the plant. We’ll have to see when we get the report.

      • timycelyn

        Yep, he’s definitely starting to remind me of someone. All we need now is a clutch of different identities (Maybe even a Tracey Chambers one) and the awful truth will come out.

        Hodyism is contagious!!! Run for the hills everyone…… Barricade the doors …..


    • Slad

      “As happens sometimes, Thomas provides technical half-truths without understanding, putting a negative spin on something that is still half-baked.”

      Another waste of pixels from TC…

      What Clarke doesn’t realise is that most commercial boilers (at least those not spinning turbines) are designed to produce wet steam.

      Wet steam (a.k.a. saturated steam) can transfer it’s heat more efficiently than dry steam. Dry steam is actually an insulator.

      Every person who works with steam knows this, and is quite able to work out the energy content wet steam.

      Modern saturated steam meters are even able to calculate the energy directly, no sums involved.

    • Robert Dorr

      They may not have used it in the calculations but to me it’s obvious that the actual temperature of the return water was continuously logged. If there was a major variance form the agreed to 60 degrees Celsius they would not have stuck with the agreed to temperature stipulation.

    • Dr. Mike

      Here is a simple question for a “steam engineer” to answer. Assume I have an input water flow rate of 36m3/day and an input temperature of 60C. I run that water through a 1MW heater. If the output temperature is 101C, what is the pressure in the output pipe for a fixed diameter pipe (assume 3 inch diameter pipe for the calculation). (My basic question is: can the output pressure be used to determine the “wetness” of the steam and therefore how much heat was actually added to the input water?)
      I assume that the output temperature of Rossi’s 1MW plant will be included in the ERV report. Will there be data for the output pressure and the output pipe diameter?

      • Slad

        You can’t work out the pressure from temperature and pipe area alone. You have to measure it. See ‘pitot-static tube’.

        Yes wetness can be determined if you know the velocity, pressure, temperature and density.

        A ‘steam quality meter’ measures dryness directly. It lowers the flow pressure and measures the temperature increase (technically the degree of superheat).

        Or you can just measure the dryness with a modern ‘steam meter’. These work either by knowing how dryness affects vortex formation (the method used to measure flow velocity), or they have the ability to measure density directly.

        A modern steam meter will also be programmed with ‘saturated steam tables’ this saves the engineer having to look up book values. These meters will generally record/display steam enthaply (a.k.a. energy) directly.

        • Dr. Mike

          Thanks to the above respondents. I can see why you would also need the velocity and density data. It looks like Rossi’s ERV report will need to have the data from a “modern steam meter” to verify that the reactor output was really about 1MW.

          • Slad

            Didn’t want to overly complicate my post above, but you can infer the density using an old fashioned steam meter.

            The pitot-static tube measures stagnation pressure at its tip, if you subtract the static pressure (it also measures this), you are left with the dynamic pressure. The dynamic pressure is proportional to density and velocity (it’s the gas equivalent of kinetic energy).

            But you know the velocity (because your old fashioned steam meter likely includes a vortex meter), allowing you to calculate density anyway….

            But in reality… There’s so many ways of measuring steam enthalpy, and lots of different steam meters. You need to look at the meter’s spec before making too many suppositions.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Rossi has described the instrumentation as follows:

    “Andrea Rossi
    April 3rd, 2015 at 7:44 PM

    The measurement system of the 1 MW E-Cat is made by:

    56 thermocouples to measure the temperature of the water steam in different positions

    56 thermocouples to measure the temperature of the liquid water that flows toward the reactors in different positions

    1 PCE 830 to measure the consumption of electric power, which has been installed between the container of the reactors and the electric power source of the Customer’s Factory, plus
    the Wattmeter of the Customer’s factory installed by the electric energy provider

    56 pressure gauges to measure the pressure of the steam in different positions

    All the data are taken by the certified registration system made by the referee, who has placed the certified gauges to calculate the COP, and collected in his computer. All the referee’s gauges are certified and sealed.
    Besides all this, there is the master Gauge, which is the manufacturing plant of the Customer, which needs 1 MWh/h of thermal energy carried by steam: if they receive this energy they pay for the plant, provided we give the granted COP, otherwise they do not pay. They measure with their instrumentation the amount and quality of the steam, but most of everything, they check the amount and the quality of their production and compare their costs using the E-Cat VS their costs with the traditional heaters. Their plant is the universal gauge and is, under a commercial point of view, the only one that really counts. So far the Customer is satisfied. Nevertheless, I have to add that it is soon to assume final considerations and we are aware of the fact that within the end of the year the results could be positive, but also negative.

    Warm Regards,

    Maybe for the 4×250 kW setup they used a different configuration, but I would not expect that there have been principal changes. It seems that AR forgot the flowmeter (perhaps the most critical part), but it was mentioned it the latest interview by Mats Lewan.

    • Am I correct that there were 4 x 250 kW main cats plus the original 52 kittens? That would be 56 cats.

      Which would indicate one thermocouple measuring temp of water in and one thermocouple measuring temp of steam (or water) out of each cat.

      Then probably one pressure gauge per cat.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        That would make sense.

        • It does mean though that there are only 8 thermocouples that really matter and 4 pressure sensors. The way he initially phrased it made it sound like they were everywhere and would be providing redundant data checks.

          Not the case if it’s one per. Too bad.

    • Stephen

      I guess if he mentioned this in April 2015 he was already referring to the 4 x 250kW units. Measuring these parameters in “different positions” (on the same units) may make more sense in this context than if they were in different units.

  • artefact

    Wild Speculation:

    Rossis second secret is how to produce cheaply certain NI isotopes (he said to have found a way to do that) which Rossi said are necessary. He partnered with JM Chemicals to teach them to do that as he will need lots of that stuff when he goes into production. That is why Rossi knows and trusts them.
    He gave his e-cat IP to IH but without cheap NI isotopes they are still dependent on Rossi.
    Rossi knew he will spend lots of time at the one year e-cat test so he brought the created company in to produce the isotopes right at the test site. IH knew they are missing IP (isotope production) which they want to have and Rossi thinks that IP does not belong directly to the e-cat IP. IH now wants to know in detail what the “customer” did in the container to find out how to produce the isotopes cheaply.

    • Stephen

      May be wild but also very interesting if it turns out to be true.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    Actually, a whole production line was not moved. From what we read + heard, they were using the heated water to wash metal sponges. So only the process of washing these metal sponges
    (which we assume are for catalytic converters).

    Because the company been cleaning such metal parts with heated water for years they have very good data as to the amount of energy consumed for a given amount of parts washed.

    So it would be rather “surprising” if some manufacturing plant spring out of thin air, but
    from what we know only one process and one step of production occurred for this

    Perhaps the word “factory” is a poor choice of words, but only the washing process occurred at this test site – not some full production line.

    So the above is the explain we been given, but regardless, the secrecy of this customer and the
    actual industrial process having to be kept secret does not help Rossi’s case.

    It is thus quite easy to explain that some huge manufacturing plant was not created or moved for this test – only washing of metal parts.

    And as for the ERV – You can spin this either way, and Rossi simply choose someone he knew and could trust – IH obviously went along with this choice. When I have extra contract work etc., it is friends and people I know that get the first call from me.

    Having said the above, the lack of independence when attempting to verify the e-cat is Rossi’s largest problem and issue of credibility.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Bob

      True, they may have been performing a small operation such as washing. That would still require significant receiving of the material (manufactured over seas and shipped to Florida?) They still then would have had to do shipping of the product back out. While I agree with you that this might not have been a complete factory move, it was not some simple little project either.

      If catalytic converters (we do not know), there is a good chance these would need degreasing and require material waste (solvents etc.) to be handled, removed and disposed.

      And the volume requiring 1 mw per hour would still be very large. So I do understand you points that this facility need not me some major manufacturing facility. It is not. Is quite small.

      I actually stated below, that IH would not have had any reason to not accept Penon, although a local organization would have made more sense.

      As I stated and more so below, this was just one possible scenario based upon the “Rossi says” that we get. It is not fact. I do not think it is an unreasonable conjecture either.

      Thank you for your thoughts. They were valid, well taken and given in a polite and professional manner. I wish others would take note! :0

  • Am I reading too much into Rossi getting really quiet and Dewey hinting that a formidable entity had joined the fight against Rossi?

    • cashmemorz

      Who to trust. I have the same problem. Have to study each commentators history to figure out this.

      • Engineer48

        Mats has shared info from those he talked to that did visit the plant & saw production through an open door. Neither would seem to have financial interest in sharing false information.

        Weaver, who is the only person I know of that is claiming no customer & no production, being an IH shareholder, has 89m reasons to make statements to avoid IH paying Rossi the $89m.

        Maybe follow the money who has the most to gain?

    • Buck

      Probably . . . IMHO, sometimes it is just necessary to recognize that we are looking into the unknown with a whole host of potential players. We just have to wait to see the future unfold presenting new valued information such as Mat Lewan’s interview with Rossi.

      Between the moments of excitement, we wait.

    • Stephen

      He does like to stir things up taunt his perceived “opponents” and hint at things that maybe half or incomplete truths. Let’s wait and see.

      • LuFong

        “We know the main “customer” personnel. They all get to visit with the judge soon. Big fake everything that was rep’d and warranted by Rossi and Johnson. I wonder what happens to a lawyer’s bar license when he signs a fake agreement like that then guarantees it?” — Dewey Weaver

        If true, this would be big. But to to me Weaver is a lot like Rossi, lots of talk but only some elements of truth to be gleaned.

        • kdk

          Lies and innuendo threats reveal the quality of character. Watch him operate and think about what it means as to how he views the world and what other sorts of things he might get up to.

          • Robert Dorr

            I hope nothing delays the start of the court case, because as soon has it starts, I think people like Dewey Weaver will no longer be making the rounds of the forums, although I will be very surprised if there aren’t many delays before we see anyone in court. I personally think that I.H. would like to drag it on as long as possible, possibly years.

          • Roland

            Projection is the last refuge of an unconsciously lived life; they just can’t stop doing it even though they are baring every dark thing they think about themselves to any eyes that can see them through this simple truth.

            They may not even be able to read the above sentence for reasons they can’t understand; and having been told this they are still none the wiser.

          • On the other hand, those who perceive the underlying hatred and viciousness of people like Weaver either consciously or subconsciously (the majority) are immediately repelled by the messenger and the message he carries. If Weaver thinks he is helping IH’s cause with his bile, he is rather sadly mistaken.

          • kdk

            Yeah, they’ve banned my internet from the New York Times, because I would probably get up to a bunch 9/11 truth telling mischief, and I might get some New Yorkers riled up.

          • georgehants

            kdk, ha yes, censorship is alive and well on such subjects.

          • Well done kdk – a mark of distinction! A couple of my avatars have been banned from ‘before it’s news’ for trying to shoot down some of the more extreme lunacy, but that’s too easy to count as distinction.

          • georgehants

            Morning Peter, all well I hope, the saga rolls on into a realm well beyond Lewis Carrol.

          • Morning George. Yes, indeed. Although the particular turn of events was unforseeable, it’s always been inevitable that wheels would fall off (or be removed) somewhere between invention and production. Worse to come the closer AR claims to be to production I suspect (probably involving doors being kicked in at some unsociable hour).

          • georgehants

            I hope you are wrong but in our society all to possible.
            Have you an answer as to why he does not simply pass on a unit to test with say MFMP to show conclusively the practical reality of Cold Fusion for others to work on, while he faces up to all the obstacles thrown in his path.

          • I just don’t think he sees an advantage at this time – MFMP is a niche group and has no wide public credibility, so the pathos could easily smother such a test in doubt, disinformation and ridicule as usual. He may see the court case as an arena for publicity but who knows – the whole thing is hard to understand beyond the various speculations here. Truly a rabbit hole, as you infer.

            One ray of hope as far as I’m concerned: – if Rossi finds is life becoming complicated in direct proportion to how close he gets to production, he might just publicly release the IP for the 1MW technology. Not much loss to him if ‘Quark’ works as well as claimed, immediate obliteration of IH and associates, proof positive that LENR is real and works, immediate engagement of tens of thousands of developers and manufacturers who would want to buy Quark power generators or licenses to make them – so very far from all bad.

            Are you reading this Mr Rossi?

          • kdk

            Yes, it would basically be just asking people if they thought their propane grill could melt concrete and fuse it with a gun (and that’s not even original to me):


          • Fascinating. I didn’t know about that one. The concrete debris would have to have been spalled off larger masses by exposure to a sustained temp of 1200C+ before the gun could have become embedded in a pile of spalling. The mass could have re-set afterwards when exposed to water.

            Jet fuel is essentially kerosene/paraffin – not even as hot burning as propane.

          • kdk

            Exactly. Debris has been filmed from various angles disintegrating in mid-air (at least one piece before it hit the ground), meaning that it reached it’s boiling temperature, that’s also what is trailing behind the steel as it is ejected outward, streaming trails of itself as it evaporates from extreme heat… probably the same energy source responsible for launching all the other steel beams outward 50-70 mph.

            When was the last time your grill turned into dust and blew into your neighbors yard and increased his risk of getting cancer by some huge margin? To the best of my knowledge, a spray-on coat of thermite (nano or otherwise) doesn’t disintegrate a steel beam.

          • psi2u2

            I think we should also remember that Weaver predicted that Rossi would “play the health card” soon. To me, of all the things I have read from Weaver, this is the one, especially in context, that leads me to conclude that he is (or at least is behaving like) an arrant thug, to coin a Shakespearean phrase. There is no excuse for that kind of talk in public.

        • Robert Dorr

          I also much prefer well thought out ideas and arguments. There are many very active supporters of both camps, on this board and others, with very strong feelings. I consider you and several other skeptics on this board, wise to bring up questions that you find deserve answers and I have no problem with that and find it very constructive.

    • Oystein Lande

      In theory e-cat could produce pressurised saturated steam. If that pressurised steam (say at 10barg) where depressurised thorugh a control valve (to say 1 barg) , you would produce superheated steam 😉

    • DFarwell

      I noticed the same thing when scrolling down rossilivecat lately. To be honest, I am completely baffled by why Rossi gives out so much detailed information hourly before his lawsuit goes to court. A good lawyer will tell even a person who is 100% innocent to be careful what you say in the public before court. Rossi must really give his lawyer a serious headache daily lol.

    • Robert Dorr

      He does have a court date coming up. I think if I were him I be spending a bit of time going over the details and of course he’s been in Europe. Busy guy.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi is always mostly silent. For the most part, Rossi only responds to questions on JONP. As those posting on JONP ask less questions and make less statements, it would only appear Rossi is more silent.

      So by that measure, I don’t see Rossi getting really quiet. Only less questions asked of him on JONP.

  • sad

  • Robert Dorr

    I think he is damn proud of what he has accomplished and doesn’t mind talking about it. I know that there is skepticism as to exactly what he has discovered and or invented but I think within 30 to 45 days we will know quite a bit more.

  • wpj

    I see that AR has chosen to remove/ignore/avoid my question of whether there was also 24h video monitoring in the production area.

    • Engineer48


      That is not his business. If he supplied me steam, I would not agree to my steam provider videoing my production. Can’t imagine any customer agreeing to that.

      He has said there are numerous 24 hour videos of the 1MW plant and surrounds, including who visited, where and what.

      • wpj

        Easy to say yes or no.

        Clearly, a “yes” would give a lot of evidence to refute the claims of IH that there was no production (even though one of Mats L’s contacts says that they observed production).

        A “no” just leaves things as they are.

        • Engineer48

          I would believe Mat’s contacts before any statement by Weaver as he is the only one saying no customer, no production and as a self proclaimed IH shareholder, he has 89m vested reasons / interests in IH not paying Rossi $89m.

          • wpj


        • Omega Z

          There are several manufacturers where I live.

          On rare occasions, they allow a few select people a tour of their facilities. However, you are not allowed any kind of video equipment or to take pictures. Which to most people seems quite strange as their competitors use very similar if not the exact same machinery.

          There all of the opinion that their particular layout/arranged process may provide them a competitive advantage. Many border on the verge of paranoia about Industrial espionage.

          That considered, No one would want a competitor to have the slightest clue they were involved with a LENR test. The fewer people aware of them having any involvement with this technology, the better.

  • BillH

    In order for the ERV report to say that the average COP over the whole period of the test was about 50 the 1MW plant would have had to be performing at well over expectation from the very start of the test, I can see no way IH would have allowed the test to continue for even a few days if the initial results had been well below those expected in the contract. If IH allowed such a test to run for a whole year they would be equally culpable. The only conclusion therefore is that IH saw positive results for almost the entire duration of the 1 year test. The interesting thing is that IH are not the ones bringing the court case, if they had been deceived surely they would sue to get their investment back?

    It would appear that IH were unable to built working plant to Rossi’s specification, or Rossi withheld a vital piece of information for which IH were not willing to hand over $89M till it was provided. Either way it’s a wasted year to Rossi, with no way of launching product into many of the most lucrative markets.

  • Robert Dorr

    I asked Rossi the question and his response was that he thought the reactor was completely off line during the test for a total of somewhere between 4 and 5 days. He didn’t indicate what the longest contiguous period of time he was off line during the accumulated 4 to 5 day shutdown, but I would think that if it was at most a few hours, the reactor would continue to generate a considerable amount of heat just from the latent heat contained in the mass of the reactor, so it certainly wouldn’t drop to room temperature and indeed may continue to boil water for quite some time.

  • Engineer48

    Using modern steam monitoring sensors, such as the unit linked below, measuring, monitoring and recording stream data is made simple as it measures temperature, pressure and flow in one unit.

    While I’m not saying the ERV used this unit, there are others like it. Point being today it is not hard to do good steam measuring.

    • GiveADogABone
      … Throughout the test the pressure of the steam has always been equal to atmospheric pressure. …

      … Throughout the test the temperature of the outlet steam has always been significantly higher than 100C.

      That can only mean one thing: the E-cat superheats. It is the superheat margin that guarantees that the steam is dry (fully evaporated) and does transfer the required enthalpy. The superheating is carried out by the fins on top of the reactor box; it is a very neat trick. It also requires a water level control loop for the E-cat.

      For the purposes of the contract and ERV report, if Rossi gives away the enthalpy gain from heating the inlet water up to 100C and also the enthalpy gain from superheating the outlet steam, the temperature measurement of the inlet water is not needed and the temperature measurement of the outlet temperature is only used to demonstrate that the steam is dry at 1bar pressure and as a correction factor for the flowmeter that is also measuring dry steam. That seems to me to produce a simple, robust data set for calculating the enthalpy transfer, in accordance with the contract.

  • Sam

    An apartment in Sweden would be much better isolated than an apartment in southern Europe. Nevertheless his calculations was a bit optimistic 🙂

  • Albert D. Kallal

    Well, the context of the question is important. I mean, I am quite much agreeing that current proof has holes and is not solid.

    So I not suggesting that someone has to purchase any product or say a lunar lander to accept that we landed on the moon. How silly is that?

    However, in the context of Rossi – then yes, I think this is really quite a reasonable and logical response. So I certainly not suggesting that proof of things in life requires one to purchase that proof.

    However, in the case of Rossi and the ecat? Sure, the only real proof one will get from Rossi is a satisfied customer using such a device. And the reason for this is that we don’t have much of a choice with the given information. To me, this is no larger of a revelation then 2 = 2.

    So, I don’t see my position as childlike at all. In fact I think it is the only reasonable adult response. The problem is people not wanting to take their OWN responsibility for their views, and then be shocked when they told such a view is reasonable! Of course if it’s taken them forever to conclude what is reasonable and obvious, then they should have the gumption to admit as such in place of blaming everyone else for their shortcomings.

    So yes, as a general life rule suggesting that one must purchase something for proof is childlike and silly! And I never suggested this is some reasonable life rule.

    However, in this context, purchasing an ecat and testimony by satisfied customers is likely the best course of action and by any logic would be the best proof one could obtain at this point in time. (unless some other test or something else comes along that we don’t know about or expect).

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada
    [email protected]

    • DFarwell

      If we were to remove the huge piece of the puzzle, being that Rossi has laid this all out in the court of public opinion on an hourly basis as well as making promises to a community he obviously is concerned about, then I would agree with you. Those two issues are too significant in the current situation in my opinion though. Too many promises for too many years with zero substantiation.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    From JoNP:

    “Andrea Rossi
    May 22, 2016 at 1:00 PM
    No, the value of 100.1 has been invented by the usual clowns.
    I repeat that I cannot disclose the data of the Report of the ERV before it is disclosed in Court.
    Warm Regards,

    „Andrea Rossi
    May 22, 2016 at 4:31 PM
    Oystein Lande:
    It’s ok, thanks for your comprehension.
    The circuit was complex, but yes, the steam was superheated.
    Warm Regards,

    • Engineer48

      This is a very MAJOR reveal!

  • Engineer48

    VERY MAJOR REVEAL when question and answer are read together:

    Oystein Lande
    May 22, 2016 at 2:36 PM
    Dear Mr Rossi,

    I’m sorry. Was just curious of what principles were used. We will wait for later then.
    About your answer to Sebastian:
    Does this imply that heating was done in stages?
    I mean one core was boiling water and the next was superheating the steam from boiler section?

    Andrea Rossi
    May 22, 2016 at 4:31 PM
    Oystein Lande:

    It’s ok, thanks for your comprehension.
    The circuit was complex, but yes, the steam was superheated.

    Warm Regards,

    • Stanny Demesmaker

      Can you tell us why this a a major reveal ?

      • Engineer48

        Rossi is claiming the steam is superheated, which means it was dry steam that requires the highest energy input to obtain, which means the plant did achieve the claimed 1MW of superheated steam output.

        “To produce superheated steam in a power plant or for processes (such as drying paper) the saturated steam drawn from a boiler is passed through a separate heating device (a superheater) which transfers additional heat to the steam by contact or by radiation.”