QuarkX News Watch Thread (Update: Rossi to Write Report Monday, Publish Tuesday)

Andrea Rossi has repeated today that on Monday, June 13, 2016 he will be providing news about the testing of the E-Cat QuarkX reactors he has been testing. Rossi has reported that today (Sunday) is the last day of the testing he has been conducting with a potential customer/partner.

When asked about details concerning the QuarkX reactor, Rossi has repeatedly said that they would be provided when the preliminary testing was completed. I asked Rossi today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics whether the conclusion of this period of testing signaled the ending of the preliminary R&D testong for the QuarkX reactor and he responded “Yes.”

So tomorrow might be a significant day in the E-Cat story. I don’t know what kind of details we can expect to be provided, but I’ll certainly be paying attention. Rossi also said today: “Will be Interesting.”

UPDATE: (Jun 12, 2016)

Andrea Rossi just posted this on the JONP:

Andrea Rossi
June 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM
Robert Dorr:
I will. The test is finished right now.
Tomorrow we will make a short report. The day after tomorrow it will be published.
Thank you for your kind words.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • My stocking is hanging from the mantel shelf.
    It is long and grey, the heel hole is patched.
    The hope is for more than oranges and apples or nuts, in the morning.
    The longing is a more useful present.
    The hope is for a brighter future.

    • Mats002

      Think I heard a distant ho-ho-ho above the roof. Strange, it is far from december…

      • Gerard McEk

        I think he lost the way. Northpole ice has melted, it’s time for the New Fire!

    • clovis ray

      How the cat got out of the bag

      at a time on mother earth,
      On oil we depended,
      It supplied our need for power,
      It took our money by the hour.
      For when at last the oil ran out.
      We thought we were doomed
      without a doubt
      When from Italy came,
      The news to set us all aflame.
      Dr. Rossi came forth and said for true.
      We have, he said the solution too.
      The energy we all need now.
      Just climb on board,we’ll tell you how.
      So a few believed and some did not
      That Rossi claims were ought but rot.
      As time went by and slowly we formed the e-cat world forum
      We tested, and learned and debated it true.
      Till Leonardo corp.and Rossi at last came through,
      With subtle hints flung far and Wide,
      We raised our examples with fierce pride.
      The test proved out to be ‘ right on ‘,
      The final Proof—The lights came on.
      Now in 2016 it is a simple tone.
      E-CATnow is set in stone.

      A final note i leave with thee,
      my grandkids are at my knee.
      I tell them stories of the the E-cat you see.
      And with wonderful eyes they look at me
      for this old man has played a part,
      That set the world on a new start,
      Now, the future is coming so fast.
      The E-CAT is now world class.

      This was composed by a late great friend of mine, who was a great inventor in his own time.— Blake walston, i am sure he would be pleased.

  • Andy Kumar

    I think the announcement will be about the discovery and confirmation of a new Quark-X particle (see other article here on ECW).I had asked Rossi some weeks ago, why he is calling his new gadget Quark-X. As quarks come in pairs, I asked him if he is looking for Quark-Y. He said, “not yet.” It will be a great theoretical advance, but may or may not help with commercialization. It is just plain amazing that Rossi keeps beating the main stream physicists with billion dollar budgets at their own game.

    • clovis ray

      Hey, Andy. i agree. and a new particle seems to be on course, x,y, and even z particle, it needs a great new name, i put forth, the Rossi radiation, or the R&R particle, i prefer the later.

  • Mats002

    Think I heard a distant ho-ho-ho above the roof. Strange, it is far from december…

    • Gerard McEk

      I think he lost the way. Northpole ice has melted, it’s time for the New Fire!

  • CambriaJohn

    Perhaps the lawsuit will be like the Miracle on 34th Street – prove the LENR is real in a court of law.

  • CambriaJohn

    Perhaps the lawsuit will be like the Miracle on 34th Street – prove the LENR is real in a court of law.

  • fusionrudy

    Should we call Monday 13 June: BIG BANG 2?

    • MasterBlaster7

      no

    • Michael W Wolf

      Let the event happen, then name it.

  • fusionrudy

    Should we call Monday 13 June: BIG BANG 2?

    • MasterBlaster7

      no

    • Michael W Wolf

      Let the event happen, then name it.

  • MasterBlaster7

    In addition to the information we already expect tomorrow…I want 2 things.

    1. A picture of the QuarkX

    2. Time table on mass production (in Europe, or where distribution is not legally contested)

    • Steve Swatman

      I have the feeling that you might go on wanting for a while, this is business, you do not tell the opposition what you are doing and post real photos of your product, you keep all the opposition guessing for as long as possible. This way you keep an edge on the market, on the profits and on the future.

      • sam

        Samec
        June 12, 2016 at 11:06 AM
        Dear Dr. Rossi,
        please some (at least) symbolic/illustrative photo from test
        (for our blogs). As always, please give all to us for free, no copyright on them !
        Best Regards Samec

        Andrea Rossi
        June 12, 2016 at 12:34 PM
        Samec:
        I will see what I can do…
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.

        • Steve Swatman

          That is what my mom used to say too us kids… in reality it means, “I will see what I can do” it is not a promise to do what you ask.

      • clovis ray

        There is nothing, that can stop , e-cat now, what competition,

        • roseland67

          Clovis,
          You’re Putting a lot of faith in a person you have never met, a phenomenon you can’t explain, a product You have never seen and a process that you have never witnessed?
          Must be a very religious person.
          Not me, I’ll just wait until I can see, touch, smell, hear etc etc, just like 5 years ago.

          Oh well, there’s always next year.

          • clovis ray

            Sorry, you feel that way, what you say has a ring of truth, but that only our opinion if i had to write down all the things that points to the truth, i would be here for awhile , firstly I am a christian, and the hundreds ifnot thousands, of data points, hundreds of eyewitnesses, and not one has said that it was not credible, I don’t know how it works, it a NEW thing.
            I have seen credible photos,of the device,as well as a LOT of credible able people. i have seen video of the very first experiment, quite impressive, so is Dr. Rossi.

          • Steve Swatman

            I smiled overly long at that, well done you sir!

        • Steve Swatman

          Hi Clovis, I believe the E-cat is a dead horse now, it was a great proof of concept and may still have a market, but the QuarkX is the future, the “opposition” is in every aspect of business, market strategy, bottom line, power to manufacturing ratio, whoever has the edge on power/manufacturing ratio has the edge on the market, autonomous robotics, the lsit is mind boggling, any field that you can of in manufacturing, if you can lower the power costs you can lower the market cost and raise the bottom line.

  • MasterBlaster7

    In addition to the information we already expect tomorrow…I want 2 things.

    1. A picture of the QuarkX

    2. Time table on mass production (in Europe, or where distribution is not legally contested)

    • clovis ray

      I concur , and will bet, the good doctor will please us with a full report on his new kitty.

    • Steve Swatman

      I have the feeling that you might go on wanting for a while, this is business, you do not tell the opposition what you are doing and post real photos of your product, you keep all the opposition guessing for as long as possible. This way you keep an edge on the market, on the profits and on the future.

      • sam

        Samec
        June 12, 2016 at 11:06 AM
        Dear Dr. Rossi,
        please some (at least) symbolic/illustrative photo from test
        (for our blogs). As always, please give all to us for free, no copyright on them !
        Best Regards Samec

        Andrea Rossi
        June 12, 2016 at 12:34 PM
        Samec:
        I will see what I can do…
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.

        • Steve Swatman

          That is what my mom used to say too us kids… in reality it means, “I will see what I can do” it is not a promise to do what you ask.

      • clovis ray

        There is nothing, that can stop , e-cat now, what competition,

        • roseland67

          Clovis,
          You’re Putting a lot of faith in a person you have never met, a phenomenon you can’t explain, a product You have never seen and a process that you have never witnessed?
          Must be a very religious person.
          Not me, I’ll just wait until I can see, touch, smell, hear etc etc, just like 5 years ago.

          Oh well, there’s always next year.

          • clovis ray

            Sorry, you feel that way, what you say has a ring of truth, but that’s only our opinion if i had to write down all the things that points to the truth, i would be here for awhile , firstly I am a christian, and the hundreds if not thousands, of data points, hundreds of eyewitnesses, and not one has said that it was not credible, I don’t know how it works, it a NEW thing.
            I have seen credible photos,of the device,as well as a LOT of credible able people. i have seen video of the very first experiment, quite impressive, so is Dr. Rossi.

            So for the record you also believe it’s a dead horse as well.

          • roseland67

            No,
            There have been way to many apparently unrelated experiments that have had some success at measuring some amount of excess heat for me to think there is “nothing there”.
            Would like to see each and every one of them replicated by each and every one of the scientists.
            I want to see it, experience it and evaluate it myself, not just be told to believe it is is true by someone on the internet.
            As far as Rossi goes, I think he is delusional and I do not expect to see a sale able product from him in the next 5-10 years.
            Hope I’m wrong and I’ll be the first to say I was wrong, but I said that in January 2011

        • Steve Swatman

          Hi Clovis, I believe the E-cat is a dead horse now, it was a great proof of concept and may still have a market, but the QuarkX is the future, the “opposition” is in every aspect of business, market strategy, bottom line, power to manufacturing ratio, whoever has the edge on power/manufacturing ratio has the edge on the market, autonomous robotics, the lsit is mind boggling, any field that you can of in manufacturing, if you can lower the power costs you can lower the market cost and raise the bottom line.

  • disqus_Wytyu1fa2J

    What to expect? Inconclusive infos, lots of NDAs, no named customer. So nothing disappointing.

  • sam

    Maybe we will get the news that AR.finaly
    won a game of tennis playing with his wife.

  • WaltC

    It’s Monday already in Australia. Not yet in Sweden.

  • SD

    Rossi on Monday: “The results were positive.” – I don’t really expect to learn more than that.

    • Gerard McEk

      He already said so, that’s not very interesting.

  • SD

    Rossi on Monday: “The results were positive.” – I don’t really expect to learn more than that.

    • Gerard McEk

      He already said so, that’s not very interesting.

      • disqus_Wytyu1fa2J

        what more do you expect?

  • Gerard McEk

    What do you think, would the customer/partner (c/p) and Andrea have finally decided to use a company to qualify the QuarkX? Maybe the c/p is a company specialized in doing this kind of qualification/testing. In both cases it will strongly help being very persuasive for the general recognition and acceptation that LENR works and it will also help with the trial and to convince judges.

    • Buck

      Gerard,

      In light of what we are hoping for Rossi’s Monday sharing of QuarkX preliminary R&D testing results, your questions provoke a line of speculation for me.

      I like that Rossi has repeatedly spoken of ABB as a partner in automation . . . there is no confusion about the fact that the door between Rossi and ABB is OPEN. Also, as has been shared here extensively ABB has other divisions focused upon the energy production & distribution industries with annual revenue and cash flow streams measured in the 10’s of $Billions.

      As part of this speculation, I want to believe that ABB (the most senior executives up) is far more strategic about their direct contact with Rossi as compared to the apparent raid by IH on Rossi’s IP; that ABB would recognize $100M as being simply pennies compared to what Rossi appears to have achieved, and that ABB would recognize Rossi, given his ultimate choices regarding Defkalion and IH, is not to be underestimated or trifled with. Therefore, the lead ABB Automation liaison is something of a diplomat keeping the constructive conversation between Rossi and the SMEs of ABB Power going towards a goal of partnership.

      ABB has the inside track because Rossi is already an ABB Automation customer.
      http://new.abb.com/about

      • Gerard McEk

        Buck, ABB is indeed a company which I speculated for myself that could be involved. I hope they are and that this test will be convincing enough to partner with AR, without requiring IP release. Wouldn’t it be marvelous when AR/Leonardo Comp focusing on LENR and ABB on apparatus containing the QuarkX, a combination like Intel and Microsoft. Beneficial cooperation for both world wide.

        • Buck

          Gerard,
          we also know that Rossi has had the benefit of working with a jet engine manufacturer. I prefer to think of the larger companies (GE, Rolls-Royce, Pratt & Witney etc.). I think we would agree that the same logic of mutual interests described as with ABB would hold true here as well.

          In the end, I enjoy watching the progression of this wild “Shakespearean” drama from the peanut gallery.

        • kdk

          IH isn’t in that sort of business, as it turns out.

  • akupaku

    Hmm, maybe now is the right time before Monday comes to review the advantages of being a pessimist that I outlined in a previous post:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/rossi_1_week_e_cat_quarkx_test_to_start_at_end_of_may_with_potential_cutomerpartner/#comment-2718254542

    ;o)

    • Andy Kumar

      Fortunately for us, Rossi is what I call a “congenital optimist.” He keeps trying. He deserves a Teddy.
      .
      “It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, who comes up short again and again … who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.”
      –TEDDY ROOSEVELT
      .
      http://time.com/4144130/the-teddy-awards-2015/
      .

      • Michael W Wolf

        Amen.

      • Chapman

        OH, Well done Sir, Very well indeed!

    • cashmemorz

      Unfortunately for me, the ordinary man in the street(actually I’m behind a desk on my desktop computer) I very much need to save money on my bills. Electricity is the biggy the last few years. So all I want is some one, whether Rossi or anyone else, to prove hoew LENR works and if it is safe enough to use at home. Sounding positive is nice but, I can’t take that to the bank. If it is proven, both ways then the market forguys like me will be open. Just when could it be?

  • artefact

    Rossis answers sound positive. I look forward to tomorrow.

    • kenko1

      It will be ‘entertainment’ nontheless. Or :’Yawn….snort….harrumph….cough…cough…’

      • Ged

        Hey, free entertainment, who can complain about that?

  • artefact

    Rossis answers sound positive. I look forward to tomorrow.

    • kenko1

      It will be ‘entertainment’ nontheless. Or :’Yawn….snort….harrumph….cough…cough…’

      • Ged

        Hey, free entertainment, who can complain about that?

  • Alan DeAngelis

    No big deal. Just erase the left side of this chart and replace it with QuarkXs.
    http://static1.techinsider.io/image/56129918bd86ef20008bf405-1200-800/energy_2011_world.png

  • Alan DeAngelis

    No big deal. Just erase the left side of this chart and replace it with QuarkXs.
    http://static1.techinsider.io/image/56129918bd86ef20008bf405-1200-800/energy_2011_world.png

  • Bernard Pierrat

    New test ending…
    In the shadow of the 1 MW year test, Andrea Rossi has now the opportunity to reveal the performance of the Cats without disclosing the ERV report .
    Very clever

  • orsobubu

    I copied Tom Conover idea hehe

    • Buck

      IMHO, a picture of Jefferson or Lincoln or Gandhi would have been better than Lenin. Lenin’s history as an authoritarian and willing executioner puts him in a different class compared to those others who brought about revolutionary changes with different motivations and techniques.

      • cashmemorz

        This montage implies a break with north american business style and also shows more current personality of the european ties and power of the politics that were and still linger all rolled into one powerful impact statement that is on a par with what AR has achieved (Conditional on we are not being had). SUre no one is perfect, its just an apt montagte nevertheless.

        • Buck

          ????

          I think correlating Lenin with “sure no one is perfect” and “more current personality of european ties and power” is a bit of a stretch.

          Please know that I think the theme of the message is otherwise excellent.

      • Skeptik

        Well , capitalists really hate Lenin as founder of first socialist state. Yes, sure 8 hours working day, state paid healthcare and education, legal equity of man and women is serious reason to hate. And first decree of Lenin government was stopping war with Germany.

        And if I remember , there was occupation of “far east” part of Russia by USA military in 1919, until they have been kicked out . So much for peace loving capitalism.

        • BadgerWI

          I don’t think it’s the Health care and 8 hour days people have a problem with. It’s men women and children he had put up against the wall that give people pause…

      • sam

        Special relativity: Albert Einstein, 1905
        In some ways special relativity was not so revolutionary, because it preserved a lot of classical physics. But come on. It merged space with time, matter with energy, made atomic bombs possible and lets you age slower during spaceflight. How revolutionary do you want to get?

        • Buck

          Excellent point.

          And, I think Albert would be very excited about the peaceful nature of LENR versus fission science. I recall he did not like the atom bomb . . . a consequence of his work.

          • sam

            To be honest it was somebody else’s remark I
            found on the Internet.
            I think it is a good point to.

  • orsobubu

    I copied Tom Conover idea hehe

    • Buck

      Orsobubu,

      IMHO, a picture of Jefferson or Lincoln or Gandhi would have been better than Lenin.

      Lenin’s history as an authoritarian and willing executioner puts him in a different class compared to those others who brought about revolutionary changes with different motivations, techniques, and results.

      I simply do not equate Andrea Rossi with hate, fear, and violence.

      • cashmemorz

        This montage implies a break with north american business style and also shows more current personality of the european ties and power(to the people) of the politics that were and still linger all rolled into one powerful impact statement that is on a par with what AR has achieved (Conditional on we are not being had). SUre no one is perfect, its just an apt montagte nevertheless.

        • Buck

          ????

          I think correlating Lenin with “sure no one is perfect” and “more current personality of european ties and power” is a bit of a stretch.

          Please know that I think the theme of the message is otherwise excellent.

          • Michael W Wolf

            Why people still aspire to the dreams of the likes of Lenin is beyond me. I guess 100,000,000 murders isn’t quite enough to douse their aspirations.

          • clovis ray

            i totally agree, the same way i see evil, just as something to avoid, kinda like a big steaming pile of ‘well’ anything revolting,

      • Skeptik

        Well , capitalists really hate Lenin as founder of first socialist state. Yes, sure 8 hours working day, state paid healthcare and education, legal equity of man and women is serious reason to hate. And first decree of Lenin government was stopping war with Germany.

        And if I remember , there was occupation of “far east” part of Russia by USA military in 1919, until they have been kicked out . So much for peace loving capitalism.

        • BadgerWI

          I don’t think it’s the Health care and 8 hour days people have a problem with. It’s men women and children he had put up against the wall that give people pause…

      • sam

        Special relativity: Albert Einstein, 1905
        In some ways special relativity was not so revolutionary, because it preserved a lot of classical physics. But come on. It merged space with time, matter with energy, made atomic bombs possible and lets you age slower during spaceflight. How revolutionary do you want to get?

        • Buck

          Excellent point.

          And, I think Albert would be very excited about the peaceful nature of LENR versus fission science. I recall he did not like the atom bomb . . . a consequence of his work.

          • sam

            To be honest it was somebody else’s remark I
            found on the Internet.
            I think it is a good point to.

  • disqus_Wytyu1fa2J

    An ABB Speaker was announced for Mats Lewans planned event in Stockholm, do we know, whether and how this person was asked or interviewed about his view of the aktual situation so far?

  • disqus_Wytyu1fa2J

    An ABB Speaker was announced for Mats Lewans planned event in Stockholm, do we know, whether and how this person was asked or interviewed about his view of the aktual situation so far?

  • jaman73

    Populus qua arx sumus.

    People are the focal point.

  • jaman73

    Populus qua arx sumus.

    People are the focal point.

  • Frank Acland

    Looks like we’ll see the report on Tuesday — see the update above.

    • invient

      I’ve learned to not tell others about these announcements/reports as they tend to end up being less than my mind inflated them to be… so, here is hoping it is the big one.

    • Buck

      Frank,

      I am guessing that Rossi and his lawyer want to see IH’s legal filing as response to Rossi’s original complaint. If memory serves me, Monday is the first day Rossi/lawyer gains access. I think it reasonable to guess that Rossi doesn’t want to show his cards before then.

      • Axil Axil

        The 1 MW plant is 2 generations behind the Quark. It is still based on powder. They are only connected by the Patent. Rossi cannot allow this legal matter to slow him down. He got out from under IH so that he could speed things up.

        • Buck

          I think your point is valid . . . however if one is talking about the shift of a day or two to honor legal counsel, then your point is not diminished and the legal case may arguably be improved.

          • Roland

            We would be remise to ignore timing, as a relevant factor, when unleashing a broadside against opposing galleons.

          • Chapman

            Arrrr, matey! That be true.

            And don’t touch off the fuses till the deck levels out! Then, GIVE ‘EM HELL, BOYS!!!

        • Tom59

          Still I am hopeful for the 1 MW plant. A COP of 50, 1 yr between refueling at fuel costs of pennies – cannot be beaten.

          • help_lenr

            my impression is that the 1MW has maintenance problems. In other words the overhead for the operation contributes to the cost of heat production more than anything else.

            Rossi eatimated the fuel cost 1 cents per kilowatt and the mantenance cost 4 cents per kilowatt.

          • clovis ray

            nope,

        • Alain Samoun

          “1 MW It is still based on powder”
          What makes you think that the Quark is not?

    • Pweet

      My thinking is the report will only be a very generalized description of how things went and the way the reactor worked as Mr Rossi expected. I very much doubt there will be any detailed analysis given as to the actual performance figures of anything.
      One thing I am hoping for is an indication of who or what the ‘customer’ might be.
      Also it would help a lot if we can find out whether the customer has indicated any immediate commitment to establish a partnership or buy into the technology.
      None of that would be proof of the technology but if the customer is a well resourced and reputable company with a strong technical background it will at least indicate that the demonstration was interesting and believable.
      If it turns out the customer was just another venture capitalist with little or no technical expertise, the whole thing will mean nothing.
      We’ve been down that road before and the bus is still sitting at the end of the road facing a “WRONG WAY – GO BACK” sign.

  • Roland

    The bulk of the speculation here about ABB as the potential customer/manufacturing partner testing the Quark has centred on ABB’s power generation division while overlooking the implications for another ABB division that is also a world leader in its field.

    The robotics division of ABB has the largest installed base of industrial robots on the planet and has consistently led the industry, through innovation, for over 40 years. The latest generation, the YuMi line, breaks fresh ground on a number of fronts;

    YuMis are heuristic (self learning/self programming) small scale assembly robots that can interact directly with humans in a production setting, i.e. a human can actually manually guide the robot ‘arms’ through procedures to help the robot ‘learn’ tasks.

    YuMis are situationally aware, industrial robots have typically been caged off the prevent accidents as these previous generations will stay on task even though they just completely crushed a human being. YuMis don’t require caging as they have sensors and programming that allow the robot to know exactly where a human is located relative to the robot with such sensitivity that the robot will modify its movements in real time to avoid injuring the human.

    Capital and programming costs for the YuMi line are 75% lower than any other industrial robot of similar capacity.

    Why is this germane, other than for manufacturing Quarks?

    Anyone who has tracked the DARPA sponsored research into autonomously powered robots should be having an ah ha moment right about now, it’s the current holy grail of robotics.

    Coincidentally the robotics division of ABB is the baby of the Swedish half of ABB, known as ASEN prior to the 1988 merger.

  • Roland

    The bulk of the speculation here about ABB as the potential customer/manufacturing partner testing the Quark has centred on ABB’s power generation division while overlooking the implications for another ABB division that is also a world leader in its field.

    The robotics division of ABB has the largest installed base of industrial robots on the planet and has consistently led the industry, through innovation, for over 40 years. The latest generation, the YuMi line, breaks fresh ground on a number of fronts;

    YuMis are heuristic (self learning/self programming) small scale assembly robots that can interact directly with humans in a production setting, i.e. a human can actually manually guide the robot ‘arms’ through procedures to help the robot ‘learn’ tasks.

    YuMis are situationally aware, industrial robots have typically been caged off the prevent accidents as these previous generations will stay on task even though they just completely crushed a human being. YuMis don’t require caging as they have sensors and programming that allow the robot to know exactly where a human is located relative to the robot with such sensitivity that the robot will modify its movements in real time to avoid injuring the human.

    Capital and programming costs for the YuMi line are 75% lower than any other industrial robot of similar capacity.

    Why is this germane, other than for manufacturing Quarks?

    Anyone who has tracked the DARPA sponsored research into autonomously powered robots should be having an ah ha moment right about now, it’s the current holy grail of robotics.

    Coincidentally the robotics division of ABB is the baby of the Swedish half of ABB, known as ASEN prior to the 1988 merger.

    • very informative and interesting. thanks Roland

    • Branivoj

      Actualy it was ASEA and not ASEN. And ASEA was wery well known in power production plants and power distributions industry.

  • Barbierir

    My two cents:
    1. It would be very unwise to bet that there is no real customer or test. Rossi has always said the truth in this regard, sooner or later we’ll get to know his Identity.
    2. If Rossi himself writes the report it will probably be substandard, both because he is sloppy and/or hides details. Please don’t raise your expectations. At least with it and many follow up questions on Jonp we’ll get a much better picture of the QuarkX.
    3. It will be important to know if the customer continues to work with Rossi or it doesn’t. It certainly knows the controversies and the lawsuit, if the collaboration continues it’s a good sign that Rossi has the real McCoy.

  • Barbierir

    My two cents:
    1. It would be very unwise to bet that there is no real customer or test. Rossi has always said the truth in this regard, sooner or later we’ll get to know his Identity.
    2. If Rossi himself writes the report it will probably be substandard, both because he is sloppy and/or hides details. Please don’t raise your expectations. At least with it and many follow up questions on Jonp we’ll get a much better picture of the QuarkX.
    3. It will be important to know if the customer continues to work with Rossi or it doesn’t. It certainly knows the controversies and the lawsuit, if the collaboration continues it’s a good sign that Rossi has the real McCoy.

  • artefact

    On JONP:
    “Hank Mills June 12, 2016 at 7:31 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    I have a request.
    When you compile the report, please publish a graph showing power input vs. temperature for the duration of the tests with the repeated, extended periods of self sustain (for example 30 minutes or longer) in which there was no input power clearly marked. … .. …

    Andrea Rossi June 12, 2016 at 9:19 PM
    Hank Mills:
    It will not be that kind of report.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

  • A straw in the wind…?

    Swedish Radio: “A cross-party energy deal has been reached between the government and three opposition parties. Sweden will have 100 percent renewable energy by 2040, but there is not yet a deadline for the phase out of nuclear power.”…. “The deal also means the so-called “effect tax” – an extra tax on nuclear energy – will be phased out in just a few years. The Swedish energy giant Vattenfall has lobbied vocally for the removal of the tax. But the deal also increases the penalties related to nuclear waste.” (Emboldening mine)

    http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6451006

    If you wanted to change national energy policy in a way that penalised nuclear fission but left the doors wide open for non-fission ‘nuclear’ power which creates no waste – this deal would be about perfect. Grasping at straws perhaps – but if it is assumed that senior Swedish politicians were made aware that such an energy source was likely to be available in the near future (perhaps following briefings/lobbying by wholly State owned Vattenfall about its plans) this new cross-party energy policy would be a logical outcome – at least in a country in which politicians seem less influenced by inimical corporate interests than elsewhere.

  • georgehants

    When one has a sensible scientific open-mind on every subject, speculation and opinion is fun and time passing, just like trying to pick a winner in a horse race, none of those speculations or opinions are scientifically worthwhile until the winner is known.
    Only Facts and solid Evidence are of any value.
    Fact, in the five+ years of the e-cat 5000 children have died daily from drinking dirty, contaminated water, multiply that by 365 X 5.5 and you have the lives that possibly, if Rossi’s Cold Fusion is genuine, could have been saved by the technology being freely advanced by scientists Worldwide, not counting the millions that could be saved from the suffering of such diseases.
    What Facts and solid Evidence will come today, tomorrow or next week, only time will tell and us serious followers looking for the technology to be used for humanitarian purposes as a priority can only continue to HOPE.
    ———
    Dirty water kills 5,000 children a day
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2006/nov/10/water.environment

    • Michael W Wolf

      I hear people say, If God is good, why does he let children starve. I say to them. God isn’t letting them starve, we are. So George if you really mean what you say, you should be dedicating your life to it. If you spend one dime more then you need to survive, then you are just as responsible for what you describe above. Fact is, we want to get credit for caring, but very few of us put our money where are mouths are. Me included.

      • georgehants

        Michael, we all can do what we can do if we wish, there are no conditions, it is not for us to judge only put up Facts for others to react to how they see fit.
        Or maybe our opinion on what may be best for all, for conversation.
        Best

        • Steve Swatman

          “it is not for us to judge” I agree, however George, you do appear to be judging Mr Rossi and placing the weight of blame and responsibility firmly upon his shoulders, which kinda makes your comments a bit, well, a bit hypocritical really.

          Mr Rossi is not to blame for the problems of the world, and the e-cat and Quarkx will not save the world and probably will not save many children, the poor cannot afford an e-cat, nor quarkx’s, and the governments and corporations of the world will not pay for them to have e-cats or quarkx’s either, just as they will not pay for the poor to have clean drinking water today.

          Why on earth you insist on laying the responsibility on mr Rossi’s doorstep I do not understand.

          • georgehants

            Steve, as I wrote above, it is and I hope you agree, the choice of everybody how they react to our selfish, greedy society’s.
            Mr. Rossi only has a responsibility to himself how he chooses to act, I do no more than to state my belief that Cold Fusion etc. belongs to everybody not just the rich and powerful and those in privileged countries etc.
            That as I clearly mark is my opinion and you and all are perfectly free to disagree, but it is a Fact that we each choose the direction in which we think and that is our own responsibility as members of the human race.
            It is also a Fact that had Mr. Rossi released his secrets five and a half years ago it is possible that people like MFMP or thousands of other researchers who work only for free science, could by now be offering Cold Fusion powered water filters or bore holes to those in most need.
            I believe that society should reward those working for society and that selfish capitalism is outdated and badly needs replacing. (that is my opinion)

    • Bear1145

      George if you are truly concerned which,I belive you are, in your humanitarian concerns, there are many organizations seeking volunteers . My church twice a year sends a large number of its members to Hunduras. They build water facilities, housing, and garden and farming areas for small villages. The volunteers love and spend approximately 4 weeks each visit. This you can do right now. It is a great feeling helping others,saving those who do not have the means or the knowledge to do itthemselves. It beats setting at your computer telling everyone else how to save the misfortunant in the world.

      • georgehants

        Bear, thank you for reply and I agree, but you seem to be assuming that we do not do voluntary or financing work of our own, especialy concerning clean water.
        Long time followers will be aware that my wife travels yearly to Ghana where we supply water filters, we also support a clinic, school and orphanage where extra donations are always needed.
        This of course does not effect my clear point regarding the benefits that hopefully will be gained by the free release of usable Cold Fusion (if genuine).
        All personal voluntary efforts are included in my above link showing that still 5000 children a day die from contaminated water.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      So the governments of the world screwed up by pledging 100+ billion at the Paris climate summit, and that money is 100% a waste of time (since not even a mathematical relation exists between our output of CO2 and that of warming). And in fact the numbers are looking now
      towards a cooling trend.

      We don’t know what Rossi has, but we do have water filters and we do have solar panels. And solar panels are relative low cost today. So that 100+ billion could solve the clean drinking water problem likely for 99% of the world and SUCH TECHNOLOGY EXISTS now!

      So clearly such technology exists, and the governments of the world are spending massive sums on trying to tax CO2 while those 5000 people die?

      So how come your socialist governments are not responsible for the above when they just tossed away 100+ billion on trying to tax and control CO2?

      So if a technology like low cost solar panels to drive a water purification system exists (they do), then those governments are guilty right now, are they not? I mean the technology exists, and in fact such systems are likely BETTER the LENR at this point in time.

      Inquiring minds want to know! The cost of a small pump and some solar panels is NOW less than some e-cat. So viable technology exists now.

      Why wait for some magic LENR box when solutions exist today that for some time will be EASY on par with using LENR.

      So why not put the blame on your socialist foe NOW for dropping the ball for failing to use technology to provide clean water for these poor people.

      The issue is not you waiting for some nefarious LENR technology. The MAIN issue is you blaming and stating that LENR needs to be released to prevent those starving children.

      The simple matter is LOTS of existing technology exists today. In fact even with LENR, the cost of some solar panels and pumps will remains LESS cost than LENR for MANY years to come. And better is the LENR device has to be re-fueled (like an ink-jet cartridge in your printer). This means that 3rd world locals will be competing with western middle class incomes that will adopt LENR first. We can afford to pay for the re-fueling cartridges in those LENR devices for MANY years to come at a FAR HIGHER price than those poor countries can afford. It the same reason why we can pay for fuel in a car.

      With solar, then the cost of fuel is NOT a limiting factor. In fact the cost of fuel is NON existent once the device is obtained. This is NOT the case with LENR.

      So solar will remain LESS cost than LENR. This is especially the case if we want to convert LENR into electricity for that water purification. One can consider heat to distill water but that
      creates even a more costly device.

      So low cost solar panels and the technology exists right now to provide that drinking water – and the solution ELIMINATES the need for those poor locations to compete with the fuel systems that LENR requires to run.

      If you attempting to blame delays in LENR for children not having drinking water, you are barking up the wrong tree. But worse is you trying to blame the capitalist system when in fact your socialist foe have solutions now. However your socialist few choose to crap billions down
      the flusher on scams like CO2 taxing and wealth re-distribution.

      We spending 20 billion a year on global warming (the same now as on cancer research). Take one year of that wasted spending and you solve the drinking water problem for nearly everyone. And existing solar solutions are likely a better match and fit then is LENR for water purification
      in those poor locale that can’t afford a decent centralized water system (which would benefit from LENR).

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • georgehants

        Albert, your usual long rambling reply has no bearing on the Facts and Evidence I have shown above, please put up you own comment if you wish to digress from mine.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Oh please do tell the readers here what it is you disagree with in my statement, or are you having a bad day due to me pointing out the ill logic of your statement? Trying to state that some big responsivity exists on Rossi to release LENR when by clear thought and reason I showed this NOT to the be case has to be rather humbling for you.

          I am all ears that you address any of my points and why you are pinning the donkey of Rossi and LENR on children not having drinking water when I showed LENR is not the only solution. In fact as I pointed out LENR likely not to compete or be more appropriate than existing solar technologies.

          Those who choose to avoid logic and reason thus can only response that such reason and logic is rambling since they choose to avoid reason and logic.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, only two simple Facts in my comment for you to answer.
            1, Factually show that my link is false.
            2, Factually show that Cold Fusion could not be in a much advanced position if Mr. Rossi had released his secret long ago.
            Not your opinion that is worthless against Facts, but Facts to prove your case.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            >1, Factually show that my link is
            false.

            Never argued your link is false. Might as well provide a link to your pet dog/ Why deflect and bring up something I NEVER disagreed with? What kind of silly logic and reasoning is this? You asking me if I agree with some link out of the blue that has ZERO relevance to my points I made.

            I most certainly am pointing out your reason and logic is flawed and don’t make sense.

            Who on earth is disagreeing with children needing drinking water? Are we 5 years old here? You asking me if I agree with the link is like asking me do I agree 2 = 2?

            I am however MOST certainly disagreeing that due to delays by Rossi or some other private individual doing LENR research that is the “big moral” wrong and reason why such children don’t have clean water. So it this ridiculous point
            you are making here and is the one I am asking you to address.

            I also pointing out that existing technologies exist today to provide that drinking water. In fact in these “smaller” locale your speak of those existing technologies are likely JUST as good as a fit as LENR (if not better). So I simply pointing out how silly it is to attempt to blame LENR for children not having drinking water. I am also pointing that as a result, some big moral pontification by you and attempting to state that LENR being delayed is the reason why such children don’t have drinking water is a silly conclusion.

            I also pointing out that some big moral obligation does not fall on Rossi when such viable alternatives exist right now. So I am just blasting your logic and conclusions that are without merit.

            So I am not disagreeing with the first link, but am pointing out the silly concluding and logic you have in regards to blaming delays in LENR as to why children don’t have drinking water.

            >2, Factually show that Cold Fusion
            could not be in a much advanced position

            You can’t factuality show the reverse either. I not the one trying to make the case that Rossi is holding back LENR, you are!!!

            So the onus falls on you to prove your point of view, not the other way around. Once again like all socialists, you blame everyone else, but when the mirror is held up against you, you squeal like a pig and attempt to deflect. You the one making this point and thus you need to prove that Rossi is holding back LENR. You simply don’t know that. And if the patents etc. were released, then it’s very possible no investment would occur into LENR for a very long time.

            You are the one that has to show that Rossi is holding back LENR when I think he done the opposite. A simple fact is this web site would not exist if not for Rossi and you would not be pontificating your socialist views here. And quite
            sure that pressure on the house armed services to re-open and look at
            LENR again is the result of the “news” and excitement that Rossi has created.

            So this web site is one big whopper of an actual fact that people are discussing and learning about LENR. I think it rater reasonable to concluding this web site would not exist if not for Rossi.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

            Regards,

            Albert D. Kallal

            Edmonton, Alberta Canadakallal@msn.com

          • georgehants

            Another long rambling reply where you say for example —-
            ” I am however MOST certainly disagreeing …”
            Your disagreement is not required, you need to give clear Evidence to prove wrong the two Facts I put in my original comment, this you continue to avoid and assume that your opinion has any worth.
            Please continue as usual to go on believing that your expert opinion in any way is going to change the Facts I have put forward.
            If you would like to go on writing for the rest of the day you could give your opinion on the (supposed) 95% of so called qualified scientists whose opinion is that Cold Fusion is not possible
            Goodbye

          • Albert D. Kallal

            I not disagreeing with your link. I not disagreeing with your link about children need water. So what on earth are you rambling on about? I 100% agree with your link.

            So why do I have to provide evidence to show what is wrong with your link provided when in fact I AGREE with the link. Why on earth would I need to prove some fact you posted when I told you several times I agree with the links.

            The issue not children needing drinking water (duh!!).

            The issue is Rossi responsible for those children not having drinking water – and that the issue you failed to show or provide.

            So never did disagree with the links you provided. Why would I spend time trying to disprove some linked you provided when I agree with the links? What kind of silly logic is that? I flat out stated I agree with those links.

            The links you provided has ZERO proof or facts that Rossi is at some fault that children don’t have drinking water because of what Rossi did or did not do in regards to LENR.

            The issue is not that links – I agree with them. The issue is you attempting blame Rossi for children not having drinking water.

            Regards
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Engineer48

      George,

      Simple to solve with a few solar panels, a pump, solar still and filtration. No need of LENR.

      Now ask yourself why all those dying children don’t have access to the gear above? Very low cost, simple to set up and operate.

      The reason is the corrupt politicians and big business in their countries.

    • Rene

      http://swiftconsortium.org/portfolio/from-solar-panels-to-fireflies-and-water-atms-an-update-from-oxfam-in-kenya/
      Many other links of OXFAM creating solar powered water systems. They can use the funding to set up many more.

  • The stocking on the mantel still hangs.
    The darning done, on the heel stands proud.
    Limp it hangs, grey empty limp.
    For expectations of the night.
    The day did not bring.

  • tlp

    Monday morning, no more F8:
    javier cartier
    June 12, 2016 at 11:56 PM
    Mr Andrea Rossi:
    after the completion of the preliminar R&D phase, as you call it, will the QuarkX be put in operation in a real context, to test its validity in the real world ?
    Thanks,
    JC

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 6:16 AM
    Javier Cartier:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Sounds like a successful week-long test.

  • tlp

    Monday morning, no more F8:
    javier cartier
    June 12, 2016 at 11:56 PM
    Mr Andrea Rossi:
    after the completion of the preliminar R&D phase, as you call it, will the QuarkX be put in operation in a real context, to test its validity in the real world ?
    Thanks,
    JC

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 6:16 AM
    Javier Cartier:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Sounds like a successful week-long test.

  • oldrolledgold

    The ‘Big News’ will be a joint press conference with Rossi,The CEO and the Chief Technical Officer of the client/partner imo.

    • You’re confusing what we all wish would happen with what usually happens — which would be a sloppy report that raises more questions than it answers and no immediate corroboration from the ‘other’ party.

      But I hope you’re right this time!

      • oldrolledgold

        I should have added ‘when it happens.’

  • oldrolledgold

    The ‘Big News’ will be a joint press conference with Rossi,The CEO and the Chief Technical Officer of the client/partner imo.

    • You’re confusing what we all wish would happen with what usually happens — which would be a sloppy report that raises more questions than it answers and no immediate corroboration from the ‘other’ party.

      But I hope you’re right this time!

      • oldrolledgold

        I should have added ‘when it happens.’

  • Frank Acland

    Hector Farlin
    June 13, 2016 at 12:44 AM
    Dear r Andrea Rossi,
    Is confirmed for today the publication of the report by today ?
    Cheers,
    Hector

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 6:15 AM
    Hector Farlin:
    Probably yes, at the latest will be by tomorrow, after we will have collected the approval of our Partner.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Ged

      Hmmm. Needs partner approval? Perhaps the partnership will be mentioned and named then like Ivan hopes for above [Edit: and oldrolledgold below]. That would be very awesome. Took IH years to come out of the shadows.

    • Gerard McEk

      Yes! Andrea says he’s got a ‘Partner’ so the partner seems content with the tests. Interesting.

      • clovis ray

        VERY

      • Pweet had a comment about Rossi being a genius (the evil variety) that got removed. I still wanted to get my reply in:

        But a genius working toward what end (if you discount the scenario that he’s got working E-Cats)?

        Money? No. He could have easily stopped at $11.5M and never needed another dime his whole life.

        Pied Piper? To spur the cold fusion field, perhaps under direction of some other entity? Seems overly conspiratorial.

        Sport? Because he can? It amuses his narcissistic self to no end and is worth basically living in a shipping for a year and risking imprisonment? A dangerous six year prank for jollies? I can’t wrap my head around that one.

        Madness? He really thinks it works but it doesn’t? More than six years of bad measurements supported by others? There would have to be something really really wrong with him but it doesn’t manifest itself any other way that I can tell.

        What? I mean what is the reasonable alternative scenario. I’d sincerely like to hear it.

        • Pweet

          The purpose of my comment was not to imply any degree of evil.
          I really do think the ability of Mr Rossi to put on a very convincing demonstration is amazing. The fact that his demonstrations managed to convince so many well educated people that there was five kilowatts of lenr happening in a small copper tube, right in front of their eyes, is truly an achievement to the level of genius. Not many people could do that.
          But Pweet does tend to be a little repetitive. Sorry sir.

  • Ivan Idso

    I am hoping for a joint press release with Rossi and his partner announcing the product and the beginning of manufacturing.

    • Ivan Idso

      2 comments on JONP lead me to think this. Rossi’s response to Hank that it “isn’t that kind of report” and another that indicated they are still planning to begin manufacturing after the testing is complete. Obviously the staff from the partner are still there since the testing just ended last night. We shall see!

  • I’m afraid that we here expect too much again.

    I guess this “report” will contain very little information and is by Rossi himself (maybe just a few numbers on the JoNP comment section), not official or anything with substance.

    I hope it is more and with the name of the hopefully very big partner. But the past shew us often the opposite.

    • Ged

      Could very well just be Hydrofusion afterall, if anyone is named (manufacturers should be less skittish than VCs though, for many business reasons). But hopefully we’ll find out whatever way shortly.

      • Frank Acland

        MARK Jansen
        June 13, 2016 at 8:29 AM
        Hi Andrea,

        You mentioned “our partner” does that confirm a new business partnership?

        Andrea Rossi
        June 13, 2016 at 8:59 AM
        Mark Hansen:
        Yes.
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.

        • Ged

          “New” partner would rule out Hydrofusion.

          • You never know with Rossi – perhaps some new agreement with them would make them ‘new partners’ for his purposes. I sincerely hope this is not the case.

            I’m always puzzled by references to Hydro Fusion ‘partnering’ with Rossi/Leonardo. Hydro Fusion Ltd. basically consists of a website and three Swedes operating out of three accommodation addresses in Stockholm and London. Their total assets last year were around £140,000 in unspecified shares, which meant that they were exempt from audit as a ‘small business’.

            https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07661469

            I very much hope that we will learn the identity of the new partner soon, and that it will turn out to be Vattenfall, ABB, Siemens or some similar sized entity. If not, I think there may be more than a little irritation among the camp followers (myself included).

          • Pweet

            quote from Agaricus above:-
            “I’m always puzzled by references to Hydro Fusion ‘partnering’ with Rossi/Leonardo. Hydro Fusion Ltd. basically consists of a website and three Swedes operating out of three accommodation addresses in Stockholm and London. Their total assets last year were around £140,000 in unspecified shares, which meant that they were exempt from audit as a ‘small business’.”

            Exactly! But doesn’t that make them the perfect partner for the developer of a world shattering technological revolution which operates out of a shipping container hidden away in a warehouse at some secret address? Not to mention that the official company address is a condo in Miami. (Oh,.. I just did,.. sorry. )
            On the face of it, it appears to be a perfect match.

          • Pweet

            Rossi seems to make a distinction between licensees and partners, depending on how much money they commit. IH were originally a partner but when they balked at the last hurdle they were demoted to a licensee, and then to just another nobody. (oh the shame of it all.) So, I think it will be either Hydrofusion, promoted from licensee to partner, or a venture capitalist arranged by Hydrofusion.
            I’m sure Hydrofusion will be involved their somewhere.
            It wont be ABB, or anything similar.

          • I’ll probably regret saying this, but if it’s not ABB then I would find that a worrisome sign. We know ABB has in depth awareness (if not directly hands-on) of E-Cats for quite some time and this technology would fit them like a glove (as others have mentioned their huge energy and robotics business centers). If they could prove to themselves that it actually worked then they should be all over it. They have the money and the business incentive.

            If they are not then I have to wonder why not.

          • Ged

            Or someone equivilent to ABB. There are plenty of other such companies that would want their hands on a new energy tech. Big companies like ABB can be slow while smaller competitors could be more nimble. I am sure who Rossi is going with is also predicated on how much money they are quoting him for manufacturing–ABB may not be the most price competitive.

          • Brokeeper

            Ditto:
            Brokeeper deleo77 • 2 months ago

            I’m sure ABB has envisioned the advantages partnering with the E-Cat X developers. It may lead to the next generation of robots from dual arms to dual arms and legs (or wheels) for mobility, perhaps evolving to domestic iRobots. 🙂

          • Anon2012_2014

            “they were demoted to a licensee, and then to just another nobody. (oh the shame of it all.)”

            I guess $11 mm doesn’t buy you much!

        • Another sucker ready for a fall?

          Fingers crossed that we find out who they are soon.

          • clovis ray

            ABB, i think, with many robotic arms reaching out in all directions .
            YOU PROBABLY HAVE ONE WATCHING YOU NOW,

          • I, for one, welcome my new robot overlord. 😉

        • clovis ray

          THIS IS INCREDIBLE NEWS, WAY TO GO LEONARDO.

    • Its significance will not be in validating the technology directly (with provable data), but whatever it can tell us about a new entity verifying the technology and entering into a business partnership with Rossi. Plus any move toward manufacturing.

      If there’s clear, verifiable movement in that direction then it makes the already small chances of a scam that much smaller.

      • clovis ray

        OOOPS, THE DEAD HORSE KICKED, huh lenr g

        • What?

          • clovis ray

            lol,

          • OK so I guess you’re implying I’m being repetitive. Don’t care. I’ll be as repetitive as I need to be to swat down stupid arguments (not your post, barty, that was fine).

            And if I’m repetitive at least I’m repetitive in normal case.

        • Steve Swatman

          I smiled overly long at that, well done you sir!

          • clovis ray

            All in fun i’m sure. i’m to happy to be mean, what exciting times we live in.

        • Pweet

          We don’t know yet. So far, all we know is, someone keeps flogging it.
          🙂

  • georgehants

    Michael, you have the view that “god is letting them starve” that is fair, I have the view that people are letting them starve.
    We are all entitled to see things the way that suits us best.

    • Steve Swatman

      “it is not for us to judge” I agree, however George, you do appear to be judging Mr Rossi and placing the weight of blame and responsibility firmly upon his shoulders, which kinda makes your comments a bit, well, a bit hypocritical really.

      Mr Rossi is not to blame for the problems of the world, and the e-cat and Quarkx will not save the world and probably will not save many children, the poor cannot afford an e-cat, nor quarkx’s, and the governments and corporations of the world will not pay for them to have e-cats or quarkx’s either, just as they will not pay for the poor to have clean drinking water today.

      Why on earth you insist on laying the responsibility on mr Rossi’s doorstep I do not understand.

      • georgehants

        Steve, as I wrote above, it is and I hope you agree, the choice of everybody how they react to our selfish, greedy society’s.
        Mr. Rossi only has a responsibility to himself how he chooses to act, I do no more than to state my belief that Cold Fusion etc. belongs to everybody not just the rich and powerful and those in privileged countries etc.
        That as I clearly mark is my opinion and you and all are perfectly free to disagree, but it is a Fact that we each choose the direction in which we think and that is our own responsibility as members of the human race.
        It is also a Fact that had Mr. Rossi released his secrets five and a half years ago it is possible that people like MFMP or thousands of other researchers who work only for free science, could by now be offering Cold Fusion powered water filters or bore holes to those in most need.
        I believe that society should reward those working for society and that selfish capitalism is outdated and badly needs replacing. (that is my opinion)

  • Teemu Soilamo

    My guess as to what the “report” will be: Rossi saying that the preliminary R&D and the test went well, the potential customer is now a Partner, “proceeding to mass production as quickly as we can, need to see real-world performance in a prolonged test that lasts some months”.

    Nothing else. No data, no photos, no identity of the customer.

    • Ged

      Sounds like the start of a betting pool.

      • Winebuff67

        I think that is a great idea! Everyone puts 10$ in and gets to choose yes or no on a commercially viable product and we souls have an expiration date. We take the $$ and donate to MFMP at the end and one group gets to say I told you so.:)

    • Bruce__H

      At first I was wondered why he does this. What is the point of Rossi continually producing these reviews and reports of mass production and so on. But then I learned of IH and its investment in him. Here was a company that was willing to pay him $100 million for the technology he said he had. Why was it willing to do that? It was because of all the reports and so on and promises of major advances right around the corner.

      OK so it didn’t work out with IH. They pulled out. But now we hear of even greater advances and happy customers and robotocized plants just around the corner. The hook has been re-baited. Any nibbles?

      • Ged

        IH hid in the shadows for a few years. They only came out to everyone once they were making their own reactors and patents. But they could have stayed hidden and never have been revealed and all this now would be under the radar.

        The facts do not support your interpretation. IH invested due to data and results they got first hand which told them there was opportunity here (doesn’t mean it would be marketable in the end, but VCs must have real substance to invest). No one puts down such money just for promises, let alone when the publicly traded Woodford fund jumped in after 2 years of due diligence. That is not how the world works.

        • Bruce__H

          I disagree. This is exactly how the world works. The possible returns are so great that it makes sense to make a speculative investment which will provide money for researchers to burn through over a set amount of time. Even if you judge that you have only a 1 in 20 shot at coming up with the goods, if the possible return is say $10 billion you can afford to peel off $10 million at a time for say 20 different ventures and still hope to come out ahead.

          I was part of a group that was briefly funded in this way during the biotech bubble in the late 90s. I was amazed that the investors would so easily put up their money (the research didn’t work out) but they regarded themselves as aggressive speculators and were content to play the odds. Overall I don’t think they were all that wise — their judgment was affected by the bubble — but I believe there were some tax angles too so maybe they did OK in the end.

          • Mats002

            Risk capital is about 1/10, meaning for each successful project nine is not substantiated (note the wording).

            To me the core question is this a scam or a viable technology? Scam is by now excluded as a plausible outcome.

          • Ged

            That’s the risk about marketability. Or, for biotech, the risk in taking the animal or in vitro data and seeing if it works in humans. But pay -close attention-: In all cases there is data and a future path to build on that data to reach a goal (market and profit, aka ROI).If you want to just sell promises to VCs with no data (or biology in the case of biotech) to back them up and give something that can be built on, give it a shot and tell me how it goes :).

        • Mats002

          Indeed, yes.

    • LuFong

      I think this is a strong possibility but I’m kind of expecting a photo or two given that Rossi has been asked for this before. Of course it might just be a bright light with little detail revealed.

      The identity of the customer is critical to me. The initial publicity (probably very small) for the customer, especially if (hopefully) it is a large conglomerate, will not be a problem at all although Rossi may claim this as a reason for not disclosing it.

      The basic problem Rossi faces now is that he has no credibility, especially with the civil suit mess with IH. This actually may be a good thing as far as Rossi is concerned.

      All just my opinion of course.

      • kdk

        I hope that the partner stays secret for the time being, honestly. If they reveal themselves, they’ll have a bunch of goons jumping at them trying to sabotage things.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Kdk,

          Yup.

          Totally agree.

          Believe they will not reveal their identity or target markets until their QuarkX reactor powered commercial device are ready to be sold.

          Sorry folks but this is now commerce works.
          .

          • Ged

            Well, maybe they will be feeling generous. We can hope! Also possible the test was a production model, as Rossi has been working to get a factory going for years.

          • Mats002

            I guess they now understand the ‘modus operandi’ of AR and by that and combined with the progress made so far they (the partners) can show some generosity and share to us, the peanut gallery, some evidence. We are after all quite a knowledgable bunch of people.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Ged,

            My call is Leonardo will manufacture the modular QuarkX reactors and then configure them into the bigger reactor sizes their clients need to incorporate into their commercial offerings.

            By designing the QuarkX to be highly configurable, one plant can handle many varied commercial build client requirements, with virtually what ever size reactor they need.

            Biggie for Leonardo as they never again need to share the reactor IP with anybody.
            .

          • kdk

            Honestly, it is a very good thing that they don’t, IMHO. Otherwise they will be subject to all sorts of sabotage and corporate spying. I hope it won’t be more than a year before it’s ready for deployment.

        • LuFong

          We now know why Rossi didn’t reveal the identity of “the customer of IH.”

          Without the customer’s identity, willing to stand up and be associated with the technology, it’s just Rossi’s word and it’s worthless.

          You very rarely see secret partnerships in business–only during negotiations–after that it’s good publicity for all concerned. A large company will have no problem with naysayers.

          I actually think we might see it in this case. Rossi has always liked to name drop. We shall see.

    • Mats002

      It’s easy to use acronyms like ‘ABB’ or ‘JM’. Could mean the company I just started. On the other hand – the sum of information out there is a guide to the plausible.

    • akupaku

      I think you are probably right, publishing any unnecessary details at this stage is bad business for Rossi & Co. The only one he needs to convince is his customer/partner, everybody else is an outsider and potential nuisance and time waster (like us begging for info!) or maybe even danger (competitors or TPTB).

      The old saying “speech is silver, silence is gold” is still good advice! ;o)

  • Teemu Soilamo

    My guess as to what the ‘report’ will be: Rossi saying that the preliminary R&D and the test went well, the potential customer is now a Partner, “proceeding to mass production as quickly as we can, need to see real-world performance in a prolonged test that lasts some months”.

    Nothing else – no data, no photos, no identity of the customer.

    • Ged

      Sounds like the start of a betting pool.

      • Winebuff67

        I think that is a great idea! Everyone puts 10$ in and gets to choose yes or no on a commercially viable product and we souls have an expiration date. We take the $$ and donate to MFMP at the end and one group gets to say I told you so.:)

    • But such a statement with the name of the new partner would be kind of a big deal. Especially if the new partner is a recognizable entity.

      If the new partner is hell bent on secrecy like IH was then here we go again.

    • Bruce__H

      At first I wondered why he does this. What is the point of Rossi continually producing these reviews and reports of mass production and so on. But then I learned of IH and its investment in him. Here was a company that was willing to pay him $100 million for the technology he said he had. Why was it willing to do that? It was because of all the reports and so on and promises of major advances right around the corner.

      OK so it didn’t work out with IH. They pulled out. But now we hear of even greater advances and happy customers and robotocized plants just around the corner. The hook has been re-baited. Any nibbles?

      • Ged

        IH hid in the shadows for a few years. They only came out to everyone once they were making their own reactors and patents. But they could have stayed hidden and never have been revealed and all this now would be under the radar.

        The facts do not support your interpretation. IH invested due to data and results they got first hand which told them there was opportunity here (doesn’t mean it would be marketable in the end, but VCs must have real substance to invest). No one puts down such money just for promises, let alone when the publicly traded Woodford fund jumped in after 2 years of due diligence. That is not how the world works.

        • Bruce__H

          I disagree. This is exactly how the world works. The possible returns are so great that it makes sense to make a speculative investment which will provide money for researchers to burn through over a set amount of time. Even if you judge that you have only a 1 in 20 shot at coming up with the goods, if the possible return is $10 billion you can afford to peel off $10 million at a time for say 20 different ventures and still hope to come out ahead.

          I was part of a group that was briefly funded in this way during the biotech bubble in the late 90s. I was amazed that the investors would so easily put up their money (the research didn’t work out) but they regarded themselves as aggressive speculators and were content to play the odds. Overall I don’t think they were all that wise — their judgment was affected by the bubble — but I believe there were some tax angles too so maybe they did OK in the end.

          • Mats002

            Risk capital is about 1/10, meaning for each successful project nine are not substantiated (note the wording).

            To me the core question is this a scam or a viable technology? Scam is by now excluded as a plausible outcome.

          • Bruce__H

            Why is scam excluded? I think the whole interest about the Rossi antics is that both ends of the spectrum scam or viable product) are still in play and it is anything in between that has been excluded. I don’t think these can just be results that have been innocently misinterpreted, they are either real or an intentional fake.

          • Mats002

            Scam is not plausible because of the sum of the number of professionals that have seen the E-Cat IRL for days and months, still endorsing it even against their former customers/employers.

            Add to that the technical coherence of ‘Rossi says’ which has been reviewed by hundreds of professionals in this and other forums over years.

            Add to that 3rd parts NiH experiments showing XH and radiation anomalies, even long before AR appeared on stage.

            Add to that psychology. AR as an individual might be in spin, but how to explain that none of the professionals of all kind (engineers, investors, journalists, …) over 5+ years in contact with him have witnessed so.

            Add to that…

            Occams raisor.

          • Bruce__H

            Academics, engineers, professionals are practiced at detecting the problems in experiments and theories. They know how to untangle the obstacles that physical systems throw at you and how to straighten out or reinterpret mistaken observations and ideas. However if this is a true scam then we are not dealing with any of this. We are dealing with the sort of instructive stage play that scammers create to take advantage of peoples’s natural assumptions. I would argue that scientists and engineers are exactly the wrong people for detecting the work of a scammer if only because they (the scientists and so on) are used to a world with a certain integrity enforced by nature. A scam makes use of this credulity.

            So I would argue that the correct type of person to detect a scam here is not a professional nuclear engineer or fellow scientist but another scammer. Someone who knows how intentional misdirection works.

            I think that a scam is still plausible in the Rossi adventure.

          • akupaku

            You are quite right I think, nothing can be excluded. Scam is not excluded but IMHO is not likely in light of everything we know. Certainly Rossi has made many apparently false promises and announcements in the past but the explanation does not need to be fraud but could be unfounded enthusiasm and optimism or could even be deliberate exaggerations for one purpose or another, either to throw off competition or lure investors to fund an invention that he does not yet have full control and understanding over but sees as promising.

            Seems to me that during the years Rossi has been continuously improving and gaining better control of the e-cat making yesterday’s perspectives and promises obsolete. Hopefully the inventive cycle takes a pause soon to send something useful into mass production.

            I don’t think there is any definite proof that Rossi is completely black (fraudulent) but neither is there yet evidence that he is completely white (honest), probably he is some shade of grey (like most people, a normal person!) but not excluding the extremes as a deceitful crook or an ingenious honest inventor. Time will show but so far I am leaning towards the white end of the spectrum.

          • Ged

            That’s the risk about marketability. Or, for biotech, the risk in taking the animal or in vitro data and seeing if it works in humans. But pay -close attention-: In all cases there is data and a future path to build on that data to reach a goal (market and profit, aka ROI).If you want to just sell promises to VCs with no data (or biology in the case of biotech) to back them up and give something that can be built on, give it a shot and tell me how it goes :).

          • Bruce__H

            We had an idea. It was a guess. We thought that something might work although it didn’t in the end. It was a basic science idea and required research in animals. Really it was exactly the sort of thing that one would usually find funded through a basic research grant from a government funding agency. Medical trials in humans would have been years, maybe a even a decade, away and it is not obvious that the risk capital investors would still have been around at that time. I think they would have sold off their stake in any patent before the hard work of commercialization was begun. It was the patent itself that they saw as valuable.

        • Mats002

          Indeed, yes.

    • Mats002

      It’s easy to use acronyms like ‘ABB’ or ‘JM’. Could mean the company I just started. On the other hand – the sum of information out there is a guide to the plausible.

    • akupaku

      I think you are probably right, publishing any unnecessary details at this stage is bad business for Rossi & Co. The only one he needs to convince is his customer/partner, everybody else is an outsider and potential nuisance and time waster (like us begging for info!) or maybe even danger (competitors or TPTB).

      The old saying “speech is silver, silence is gold” is still good advice! ;o)

  • What?

  • I, for one, welcome my new robot overlord. 😉

    • Engineer48

      While we wait, here is a nice image of the gauge glass on one of the side wall mounted backup reactors inside the container. Next to the gauge glass is the control box that controls the excitation of the reactor’s heater. Note the thick wires.

      Also note the water level, which aligns with how I think these reactors both boil water and generate dry/superheated steam.

      The amount of air space in the reactor above the boiling water level is very clear in this image.
      .

      • Paul Smith

        In the picture and in the drawing we can see the Pressure Safety Valve “V”.
        Do we know the value of pressure for opening (set pressure)?

        • Engineer48

          Hi Paul,

          Have never seen it stated.

      • cashmemorz

        Re the “nice image of the gauge glass”. By “here” I take it it is to be seen somewhere in your comment. I don’t have it anywhere to be seen. Any help?

        • artefact

          reload the page

          • cashmemorz

            reloaded and see it now. Thanks.

      • Engineer48

        Guess what?

        The 1MWt prime reactor also has Gauge Glasses and right by the computerised volume controlled water pumps. Would then be easy to adjust the constant flow pumps to get the right water level in the reactors.

        BTW those pumps would deliver a very boring, day in – day out, constant flow of water into the reactors.

        • Steve H

          I believe they are PID tuned, mass flow controllers – so no worries, as long as they behave themselves. Probably fed from a common manifold, kept at constant pressure using a pressure control valve and dual redundancy water pumps.
          Or maybe you were being very British and ironic!

          • Engineer48

            Hi Steve,

            Pump spec is attached.

            Pump sucks from below, discharge straight out, degas output straight up.

            If you look at the end image you can see the feed is from the lower white insulated pipes & the degas discharge is straight up into what I suggest is a feed back to the condenser to remove the air bubbles.

          • Steve H

            Thanks Eng48
            I couldn’t find the actual instruments and the closest match appeared to be mass flow controllers.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Steve,

            ??

            The pump I listed is the one Rossi used. 24 of them in fact. 6 on each of the 250kWt flat bed reactors.

      • Pweet

        -> Eng48;
        The problem with the design you have shown above is the same as the problem in the original ecat reactor used in the early rests of 2011, and that is, when the water reactor has reached a temperature above boiling point, there is so much bubbling of steam at the reactor/water interface that large amounts of water would erupt very much higher than the tops of the heat exchange fins, and more critically, as high as the steam exit pipes. Thus the outlet pipe would certainly contain wet steam, that is, some steam at 100deg C and some water at 100deg C, or fractionally below.
        If you have a glass bodied electric kettle, and I have, you can demostrate this very easily by putting 25 mm of water in teh kettle and bringing it to the boil, then hold the switch down with your finger to disable the auto off and keep the water boiling.
        You will see the water erupts pretty much to the very top of the kettle. And that’s with a power of 2 kilowatts.
        To guarantee the steam is all superheated and above 100 deg C the design would have to have a separate chamber whereby the section where the steam is superheated is totally separated from the area where the water is initially boiled, to the extent that only steam can exit that section and no water at all.
        The design as shown above does not do that. Thus any volume measurements of the condensate further down the system will consequently be false on the high side. That has always been the criticism of the early reactor design and the test results did not account for it. That was a source of major error to the extent that I believe it accounted for all the supposed excess heat.
        Also, by logical consequence, the volume of supposed steam. and thus excess energy, can be increased to whatever level is required by simply raising the water level in the reactor body, which would result in more and more un-boiled water droplets (or wet steam) being ejected directly out of the steam exit pipe. That is why there could be a guaranteed COP of 6 because the water flow could be increased until it appeared that to be the case.
        In that respect, the design shown above is seriously flawed.

        • Observer

          The problem with your tea kettle comparison is that the heat source of the tea kettle only heats the water and not the steam. aerosoled water droplets entering near atmospheric pressure 103C gas will immediately evaporate. If the steam exiting the chamber at near atmospheric pressure is 103C, then no water droplets can be present. If you want to test this, tilt your electric tea kettle so that half of the heated bottom is exposed only to the steam.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Observer,

            Correct.

            To produce superheated / dry steam, the superheater needs to directly heat the wet steam, which occurs via the heat radiating fins in the upper steam space.

            As far as I know, it is not possible to produce superheated steam by just boiling the water.

          • Superheated steam could be produced if pressure downstream of the NRV at the exit is somewhat lower than within the boiler. Water droplets exiting the valve would then contain enough excess thermal energy to change to the gas phase without additional heat input, as soon as they encounter the reduced pressure.

            That said though, I’m not convinced that ‘fins’ on the topside would be able to conduct enough heat away from the directly immersed main body of the reactor to provide sufficient superheating, and I agree with Pweet that excessive ‘splash’ from furious boiling might be an issue with the ‘flat’ design shown.

            I would expect a more vertically oriented design in which the reactor main body is positioned more or less at the water level so that it is only partially cooled by water, allowing whatever heat exchange surface is employed to become much hotter than the output steam.

          • This is something I suggested back in 2014. The reactor assembly might consist of an insulated solid thermal mass such as a block of cast iron or stainless steel, with multiple cores housed in horizontal bores through the block, closer to the top than the bottom of the mass.

            Separate coolant bores would run vertically through the block, and water level would be maintained at a point slightly below the reactor level.

            This would result in a temperature gradient in the thermal mass, allowing water to pre-heat in the lower part of the bores, boil a little further up, then superheat in the upper parts of the bores next to the reactor cores. The relatively small diameter of the bores and the thermal gradient would act to control boiling ‘splash’, and the design would allow the cores to operate at their optimum temperature of several hundred degrees, as they wouldn’t be directly cooled as in the ‘finned’ design.

          • Rene

            Look at the water level – at the 50% mark. Now look at the entry point of the control wires – at the 25% mark more or less. That could place the upper fins just above the water line to let them be hot enough to superheat the saturated steam. Also, small adjustments of the water level could be one part (the slow part) of the reaction controls. Raising the water level significantly might assist in quenching runaway situations (my guess).

          • Pweet

            The problem is, the whole volume of the kettle is filled with an exceedingly turbulent mass of bubbling water, even though it was only filled to 25mm of water in the bottom.The bubbling is so extensive I can’t see any way that it would not be blown out the exit pipes by the very large volume of steam generated, be it wet or dry.
            I don’t dare tip my kettle on it’s side because it would quite probably crack the glass, even though it’s pyrex, so that point will have to remain unproven.
            However, one point which has been proven is, a watched kettle boils just as fast as an un-watched kettle. But then I think we all knew that.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Actually, having some water in the boiler is a requirement for correct operation of the boiler. We not talking about super-critical steam, but super-heated. In fact as LONG as there is water then you have super-saturated steam.

          So for correct operation even a “tiny” bit of water on the bottom will ensure good contact with the heat source and AS LONG as there is SOME water, then the heat is STILL being used to CONVERT the water into a gas (and NOT attempting to heat the gas which don’t absorb much of if any energy).

          So the diagram in question is 100% correct since the top part shows heating fins exposed to the water vapor (steam area). This additional heat would produce super-heated steam (a trap will remove the water droplets if any in the vapor).

          The superheated steam thus really only needs a “bit” more of additional heat to become that dry steam.

          So given that the steam area and diagram shows heating fins exposed in the steam area at the top – then yes, that would constitute super-heated steam. This is especially the case if the “level” is set to keep the water level shown in that diagram.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Engineer48

            Hi Albert,

            Found the pumps Rossi used on the 1MW plant.

            They have an inbuilt facility to degas the output, which if you look closely at the pump end of the reactor you can see has been implemented.

            Nice work, which would never have been done if this was a scam.

            The more I look at the photos, the more I understand the engineering design & effort that when into building the reactor and the more my engineer’s gut tells me this is a real COP> 50 reactor.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, a stream trap is common and little surprise. They are common in steam heating systems.
            Still, a rather NICE find on your part!

            While this is “interesting”, I think this shows that this is just not a big box with some tubes, but something with REAL WORLD engineering that solves the obvious issues and problems of a setup.

            So having the correct designs, pumps and setup that mimics what Rossi stated about how the plant works does bode well for Rossi. And how such a setup would work also is reflected in this design and pictures.

            In fact, as I pointed out above – pictures give away HUGE amounts of little details that allow one to build up parts of a puzzle. I see the design of this plant MUCH more clearly in my mind as a result of your diagram.

            I thus now see why Rossi is hesitant to release pictures of the Quark-X – it is amazing what one can deduce from just a single picture.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Rene

            Something like this is what I recall of steam superheaters: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_m6EDc76cQjs/TPCO_Alo4yI/AAAAAAAAAD8/FUZoEpKCGS0/s1600/Water_tube_boiler_schematic.jpg
            There is usually a second separate super heating section done to minimize droplets getting through. Is there enough separation, or, is there enough time in the e-cat’s steam section to vaporize any water droplets before they can exit the chamber?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Rene,

            Look at the massive surface area and density of the fins above the water.

            I expect the drawing is incorrect and that the area above the water is at least 50%, maybe even 60% of the total volume. Then make the upper fins length 3x longer.

          • Rene

            That photo of the opened e-cat is a predecessor to the 1MW one. Not sure it applies directly. I am going to assume that the tap points of the water gauge are at the very top and bottom of the latest e-cat boiler chamber. That then suggests half the boiler chamber has water in it. The e-cat could then be placed at the 25% point (I think it is much flatter than shown in the diagram) and have asymmetric fins, taller on the topside, to maximize super heating the saturated steam.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Pweet,

          We must agree to disagree.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Robert,

      I really doubt the water is boiling at such a fierce rate.

      Assuming each reactor is 15m long & 3m wide that is 45m^2 of water surface area per reactor x 4 reactors = 180m^2 of boiling surface area.

      Doesn’t need to boil a lot to generate the 25kg/minute of required steam. At 180m^2 surface area that is 140g/m^2/minute of steam generation.

      • akupaku

        You are quite right I think, nothing can be excluded. Scam is not excluded but IMHO is not likely in light of everything we know. Certainly Rossi has made many apparently false promises and announcements in the past but the explanation does not need to be fraud but could be unfounded enthusiasm and optimism or could even be deliberate exaggerations for one purpose or another, either to throw off competition or lure investors to fund an invention that he does not yet have full control and understanding over but sees as promising.

        Seems to me that during the years Rossi has been continuously improving and gaining better control of the e-cat making yesterday’s perspectives and promises obsolete. Hopefully the inventive cycle takes a pause soon to send something useful into mass production.

        I don’t think there is any definite proof that Rossi is completely black (fraudulent) but neither is there yet evidence that he is completely white (honest), probably he is some shade of grey (like most people, a normal person!) but not excluding the extremes as a deceitful crook or an ingenious honest inventor. Time will show but so far I am leaning towards the white end of the spectrum.

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    June 13, 2016 at 9:36 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    Compared to previous partners and licensees you have been involved with, how important for the development of the E-Cat is this new partner you have just been testing with.

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 11:21 AM
    Frank Acland:
    Very important.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

    • Roger Roger

      THE HYPE IS KILLING ME

    • He doesn’t seem as effusive as he was around the signing of the agreement with Industrial Heat.

      Perhaps he’s learned to be more cautious, or perhaps there are some delicate negotiations underway. I would hope that he and his lawyers would have learned how to create an agreement with fewer loopholes that didn’t favor the other side so lopsidedly.

      All Leonardo really needs do at this point is build cores (not plants) and license their use to whatever industry wants to use them.

      • kdk

        I think it’s indicative of him being in a serious state of mind. He’s weighing lots of details and possibilities that he can’t talk about.

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    June 13, 2016 at 9:36 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    Compared to previous partners and licensees you have been involved with, how important for the development of the E-Cat is this new partner you have just been testing with.

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 11:21 AM
    Frank Acland:
    Very important.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

    • Roger Roger

      THE HYPE IS KILLING ME

    • He doesn’t seem as effusive as he was around the signing of the agreement with Industrial Heat.

      Perhaps he’s learned to be more cautious, or perhaps there are some delicate negotiations underway. I would hope that he and his lawyers would have learned how to create an agreement with fewer loopholes that didn’t favor the other side so lopsidedly.

      All Leonardo really needs do at this point is build cores (not plants) and license their use to whatever industry wants to use them.

      • kdk

        I think it’s indicative of him being in a serious state of mind. He’s weighing lots of details and possibilities that he can’t talk about.

  • Engineer48

    I suggest we all need to understand how contracts with partners are written. As attached are the relevant “Not To Disclose” conditions imposed on the partners in the existing contract.

    If the new partner contract is anything like the attached, well don’t expect much release unless ALL parties see it is to their advantage to disclose.

    Sorry to be a wet sponge, but that is now business works.

    • Mats002

      I totally agree E48. I am an entrepeneur myself with a series of inventions, I know ‘death valley’ and what it mean to marry risk capitalists and big business.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Mats002,

        Been there myself.

  • Engineer48

    I suggest we all need to understand how contracts with partners are written. As attached are the relevant “Not To Disclose” conditions imposed on the partners in the existing contract.

    If the new partner contract is anything like the attached, well don’t expect much release unless ALL parties see it is to their advantage to disclose.

    Sorry to be a wet towel, but that is now business works.
    .

    • Mats002

      I totally agree E48. I am an entrepeneur myself with a series of inventions, I know ‘death valley’ and what it means to marry risk capitalists and big business.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Mats002,

        Been there myself.

  • Robert Dorr

    Depending on the type of relationship Rossi has with his new partner they may be willing to finance Rossi’s court fight with I.H.. I’m sure Rossi knows that his court action will potentially cost much more than the million dollars he stated earlier and it wouldn’t hurt to partner up with someone with deep pockets.

    • Anon2012_2014

      If a major corporation like Siemens or GE says they are manufacturing ECATs, the side show called Industrial Heat will be settled one way or the other on the best economic terms for the manufacturer.

  • Robert Dorr

    Depending on the type of relationship Rossi has with his new partner they may be willing to finance Rossi’s court fight with I.H.. I’m sure Rossi knows that his court action will potentially cost much more than the million dollars he stated earlier and it wouldn’t hurt to partner up with someone with deep pockets.

    • Anon2012_2014

      If a major corporation like Siemens or GE says they are manufacturing ECATs, the side show called Industrial Heat will be settled one way or the other on the best economic terms for the manufacturer.

  • kdk

    Hopefully, the partner stays secret until the product is 1 month from release.

    • Anon2012_2014

      “Hopefully, the partner stays secret until the product is 1 month from release.”

      Hopefully NOT! The secrecy only serves to slow the adoption and penetration of LENR. We need a proud partner that is a major player by reputation (i.e. Siemens) that says “I’m In”. Then we will finally have liftoff of LENR.

      • kdk

        That’s when the sabotage goons come in to keep trillions of dollars for the bankers. They get caught doing fraud all the time for hundreds of millions or only billions of dollars, of course they’ll sabotage LENR if they can over trillions. They don’t care about humanity, but only the big numbers on their pieces of paper that they can look at and the power it affords them.

        • Anon2012_2014

          “Sabatage Goons”

          Sorry, but I don’t believe in conspiracy theories, chem trails, or the X-files.

          The most likely explanation is the simplest – Rossi and IH had a commercial dispute because of different points of view on their responsibilities within their written agreement.

          (Sorry if this dupes — Disqus just crashed and I don’t see my comment.)

          • kdk

            You don’t believe in them because you’ve never looked into them much. For example, the Zapruder film very clearly shows JFK’s head getting blown off by a shot from the grassy knoll and everybody running towards that area searching for the assassin. The first case, that I know of, of one of the miracle IDs, supposedly left by Oswald at the book repository. Because all killers don’t want to forget to bring their IDs with them to their premeditated murders. Honestly, that’s so lame it hurts. They have people so well trained to make excuses for them that it’s just sad.
            Likewise, video evidence very clearly shows chemtrails being emitted by air planes which stick around for hours and morph over days, instead of hanging around for minutes like contrails. The simplest explanation is that there are people who have had many, many years practicing lying and covering things up from the public, especially when hoarded money and power are involved… Hey, here’s another case where there’s lots and lots of money at stake, I wonder what they’ll do.
            Also, the X-files are a bona fide fact revealed in FOIA requests, and the FBI referred to UFO’s as “Security Matter -X” early on in wires to home base, hence the term “X-Files”.

          • Anon2012_2014

            @disqus_SGgnuF4aLo:disqus

            I like science fiction and X-Files. But as a scientist, I don’t believe that those hypotheses are likely to be true.

            Chem-trails are unlikely, as is global depopulation conspiracies. Radiation from Fukushima in our oceans and food chains — that is certainly true.

            Rossi — no one in the global finance establishment is out to stop him or LENR. The most likely explanation is that Rossi is cautious bordering on paranoid and refused to supply his ex-partner IH with all the details after he found they were invested in other competitors. Possibly the machine didn’t work is the second most likely hypothesis.

            On LENR there is a conspiracy, but it is not at the level of big oil. It is the hot fusion establishment people who have so much to lose if Cold Fusion is right. 26 years ago the exchange in Science mag occurred and the Cold Fusion side was suppressed.

            What we are looking at is herd behavior where a lot of buffalo stampede towards or away from new beliefs because their neighboring buffalo have started to run. Strong evidence turns the herd of established science.

            Kennedy — no idea for sure, but suspect that CIA or Mafia was involved due to Oswald’s background. Not material to our discussion.

          • kdk

            Well, research seems like the most scientific way to determine if they’re true or not, fortunately, there’s lot of information online that can be gone through and verified. It is material to this discussion, if you believe that people won’t actively suppress technology which threatens their money. “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” details how people in the global banking circles give predatory loans to 3rd world countries so they can control the policy of the country when the countries are unable to pay back the loans. They also use debt to privatize national assets and resources. The list of things they have done is quite long. We’re seeing Greece being gobbled up in a fascist feeding frenzy from such predatory lending, in the last year. Here’s something important to know: they won’t be content to stop with Greece, which is just the western world’s trial run, since they already have plenty of experience doing this to 3rd world countries.

          • Timar

            How about asking Mulder and Scully to investigate the E-Cat?

          • Observer

            Fact follows fiction (think cell phone). If we have enough movies that show the world is controlled by back room conspiracies, then the next generation will think that is how things are done.

          • Mats002

            Like the columb barrier cannot be overcomed in any other way than physiscists already know about?

          • Observer

            Who needs the key to the door when you can use a sledge hammer on the wall? ;o)

            It is ironic that the “gate keepers” prefer the sledge hammer.

          • kdk

            Yes, it really is ironic isn’t it? I wonder sometimes why they don’t just open the book on aliens but prefer to wait for chaos from all the other garbage they’ve done. It’s actually really puzzling to me. Maybe there’s some bad blood or something there, which would hardly be surprising I suppose considering the things that the elite get up to which totally disregard the value of humanity and pure malice wrought upon the world.

          • Roland

            How is belief a requirement when the internal documents of the conspirators detail exactly what has been done and why?

        • Omega Z

          kdk,

          There is always someone behind the scenes fighting for control or direction of technology. However, in this case, It is not the bankers who would delay this.

          It’s simple. Banks make most of their money off service fees and interest. The financing that will be required for LENR will be stupendous as will be the bankers profits.

          • kdk

            Actually the same gang of people who own the banks, also own the oil, and the media, and the politicians… it is through the banks and bribery of politicians that they got all of this control… it is the bankers, at least the super wealthy ones.

            Furthermore:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlxNnQsbQAE

            And yes again, people are knowingly trying to stave off the end of the petrodollar by spraying the skies with nano-garbage (huge littering fines, yo) to try and hold off global warming so they can do business as usual. And then there are those FEMA camps for trouble makers like back in the Seattle Riots, not that there aren’t tons of other things that the media is lying about that people would riot over. Don’t worry, this time they really, really, have your best interests at heart. Soil remediation is also probably hugely expensive. Remember those Monsanto crops engineered to be alumina resistant? Dare I ask about the trees or other organisms that the ecosystems rely on for our food and CO2 sinks?

  • Engineer48

    While we wait, here is a nice image of the gauge glass on one of the side wall mounted backup reactors inside the container. Next to the gauge glass is the control box that controls the excitation of the reactor’s heater. Note the thick wires.

    Also note the water level, which aligns with how I think these reactors both boil water and generate dry/superheated steam.

    The amount of air space in the reactor above the boiling water level is very clear in this image.
    .

    • Paul Smith

      In the picture and in the drawing we can see the Pressure Safety Valve “V”.
      Do we know the value of pressure for opening (set pressure)?

      • Engineer48

        Hi Paul,

        Nicely sighted. Have never seen the pressure relief valve opening pressure stated.
        .

    • cashmemorz

      Re the “nice image of the gauge glass”. By “here” I take it it is to be seen somewhere in your comment. I don’t have it anywhere to be seen. Any help?

      • artefact

        reload the page

        • cashmemorz

          reloaded and see it now. Thanks.

    • Engineer48

      Guess what?

      The 1MWt prime reactor also has Gauge Glasses and right by the computerised volume controlled water pumps. Would then be easy to adjust the constant flow pumps to get the right water level in the reactors.

      BTW those pumps would deliver a very boring, day in – day out, constant flow of water into the reactors.

      • Steve H

        I believe they are PID tuned, mass flow controllers – so no worries, as long as they behave themselves. Probably fed from a common manifold, kept at constant pressure using a pressure control valve and dual redundancy water pumps.
        Or maybe you were being very British and ironic!

        • Engineer48

          Hi Steve,

          Pump spec is attached.

          Pump sucks from below, discharge straight out, degas output straight up.

          If you look at the end image you can see the feed is from the lower white insulated pipes & the degas discharge is straight up into what I suggest is a feed back to the condenser to remove the air bubbles.

          • Steve H

            Thanks Eng48
            I couldn’t find the actual instruments and the closest match appeared to be mass flow controllers.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Steve,

            ??

            The pump I listed is the one Rossi used. 24 of them in fact. 6 on each of the 250kWt flat bed reactors.

    • Pweet

      -> Eng48;
      The problem with the design you have shown above is the same as the problem in the original ecat reactor used in the early rests of 2011, and that is, when the water reactor has reached a temperature above boiling point, there is so much bubbling of steam at the reactor/water interface that large amounts of water would erupt very much higher than the tops of the heat exchange fins, and more critically, as high as the steam exit pipes. Thus the outlet pipe would certainly contain wet steam, that is, some steam at 100deg C and some water at 100deg C, or fractionally below.
      If you have a glass bodied electric kettle, and I have, you can demostrate this very easily by putting 25 mm of water in teh kettle and bringing it to the boil, then hold the switch down with your finger to disable the auto off and keep the water boiling.
      You will see the water erupts pretty much to the very top of the kettle. And that’s with a power of 2 kilowatts.
      To guarantee the steam is all superheated and above 100 deg C the design would have to have a separate chamber whereby the section where the steam is superheated is totally separated from the area where the water is initially boiled, to the extent that only steam can exit that section and no water at all.
      The design as shown above does not do that. Thus any volume measurements of the condensate further down the system will consequently be false on the high side. That has always been the criticism of the early reactor design and the test results did not account for it. That was a source of major error to the extent that I believe it accounted for all the supposed excess heat.
      Also, by logical consequence, the volume of supposed steam. and thus excess energy, can be increased to whatever level is required by simply raising the water level in the reactor body, which would result in more and more un-boiled water droplets (or wet steam) being ejected directly out of the steam exit pipe. That is why there could be a guaranteed COP of 6 because the water flow could be increased until it appeared that to be the case.
      In that respect, the design shown above is seriously flawed.

      • Robert Dorr

        He could easily have an internal baffle that would eliminate bubbling water splashing above the fins. I know that the schematic doesn’t show that but then again, no one really knows what the inside of the e-cat reactor truly looks like.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Robert,

          I really doubt the water is boiling at such a fierce rate.

          Assuming each reactor is 15m long & 3m wide that is 45m^2 of water surface area per reactor x 4 reactors = 180m^2 of boiling surface area.

          Doesn’t need to boil a lot to generate the 25kg/minute of required steam. At 180m^2 surface area that is 140g/m^2/minute of steam generation.

      • Observer

        The problem with your tea kettle comparison is that the heat source of the tea kettle only heats the water and not the steam. aerosoled water droplets entering near atmospheric pressure 103C gas will immediately evaporate. If the steam exiting the chamber at near atmospheric pressure is 103C, then no water droplets can be present. If you want to test this, tilt your electric tea kettle so that half of the heated bottom is exposed only to the steam.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Observer,

          Correct.

          To produce superheated / dry steam, the superheater needs to directly heat the wet steam, which occurs via the heat radiating fins in the upper steam space.

          As far as I know, it is not possible to produce superheated steam by just boiling the water.

          • Superheated steam could be produced if the only exit from the boiler (other than a safety valve) was via a pressure reducing valve in the exit line. Wet steam exiting the valve and entering the low pressure zone would then contain enough excess thermal energy to fully change to the gas phase as it expands, without additional heat input.

            That said though, I’m not convinced that ‘fins’ on the topside would be able to conduct enough heat away from the main body of the reactor to provide sufficient superheating, as the reactor body and lower part of the fins as shown are immersed in water, which would prevent them getting hot enough. I also agree with Pweet that excessive ‘splash’ from furious boiling might be an issue with the ‘flat’ design shown.

            I would expect a more vertically oriented design (as indicated by the length of the gauge glass?) in which the reactor main body is positioned more or less at the water level so that it is only partially cooled by water, allowing whatever heat exchange surface is employed to become much hotter than the output steam. I would also expect to see a greater heat exchange area above the reactor, and more thermal mass than would be embodied in such fins, to conduct heat to the surfaces.

          • This is something I suggested back in 2014. The reactor assembly might consist of an insulated solid thermal mass such as a block of cast iron or stainless steel, with multiple cores housed in horizontal bores through the block, located closer to the top than the bottom of the assembly.

            Separate coolant bores would run vertically through the block, with plenums at top and bottom for water entry and steam collection respectively, and water level would be maintained at a point slightly below the reactor level.

            This would result in a temperature gradient in the thermal mass, allowing water to enter at the bottom, pre-heat in the lower part of the bores, boil a little further up, then superheat in the very hot upper parts of the bores next to the reactor cores.

            Such a design would also provide temperature stability due to the thermal mass, and more importantly would allow the cores to operate at their optimum temperature of several hundred degrees, as they wouldn’t be immersed in water as in the ‘finned’ design.

            There might also be other spin-off advantages to using a common thermal mass, such as being able to start the reactor using just one core to bring all the others up to operating temperature, or to input additional resistance-initiated heating as required during operation (‘mouse/cat’ system).

          • Rene

            Look at the water level – at the 50% mark. Now look at the entry point of the control wires – at the 25% mark more or less. That could place the upper fins just above the water line to let them be hot enough to superheat the saturated steam. Also, small adjustments of the water level could be one part (the slow part) of the reaction controls. Raising the water level significantly might assist in quenching runaway situations (my guess).

        • Pweet

          The problem is, the whole volume of the kettle is filled with an exceedingly turbulent mass of bubbling water, even though it was only filled to 25mm of water in the bottom.The bubbling is so extensive I can’t see any way that it would not be blown out the exit pipes by the very large volume of steam generated, be it wet or dry.
          I don’t dare tip my kettle on it’s side because it would quite probably crack the glass, even though it’s pyrex, so that point will have to remain unproven.
          However, one point which has been proven is, a watched kettle boils just as fast as an un-watched kettle. But then I think we all knew that.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Actually, having some water in the boiler is a requirement for correct operation of the boiler. We not talking about super-critical steam, but super-heated. In fact as LONG as there is water then you have super-saturated steam.

        So for correct operation even a “tiny” bit of water on the bottom will ensure good contact with the heat source and AS LONG as there is SOME water, then the heat is STILL being used to CONVERT the water into a gas (and NOT attempting to heat the gas which don’t absorb much of if any energy).

        So the diagram in question is 100% correct since the top part shows heating fins exposed to the water vapor (steam area). This additional heat would produce super-heated steam (a trap will remove the water droplets if any in the vapor).

        The superheated steam thus really only needs a “bit” more of additional heat to become that dry steam.

        So given that the steam area and diagram shows heating fins exposed in the steam area at the top – then yes, that would constitute super-heated steam. This is especially the case if the “level” is set to keep the water level shown in that diagram.

        Regards,
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Engineer48

          Hi Albert,

          Found the pumps Rossi used on the 1MW plant.

          They have an inbuilt facility to degas the output, which if you look closely at the pump end of the reactor you can see has been implemented.

          Nice work, which would never have been done if this was a scam.

          The more I look at the photos, the more I understand the engineering design & effort that when into building the reactor and the more my engineer’s gut tells me this is a real COP> 50 reactor.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, a stream trap is common and little surprise. They are common in steam heating systems.
            Still, a rather NICE find on your part!

            While this is “interesting”, I think this shows that this is just not a big box with some tubes, but something with REAL WORLD engineering that solves the obvious issues and problems of a setup.

            So having the correct designs, pumps and setup that mimics what Rossi stated about how the plant works does bode well for Rossi. And how such a setup would work also is reflected in this design and pictures.

            In fact, as I pointed out above – pictures give away HUGE amounts of little details that allow one to build up parts of a puzzle. I see the design of this plant MUCH more clearly in my mind as a result of your diagram.

            I thus now see why Rossi is hesitant to release pictures of the Quark-X – it is amazing what one can deduce from just a single picture.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Rene

          Something like this is what I recall of steam superheaters: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_m6EDc76cQjs/TPCO_Alo4yI/AAAAAAAAAD8/FUZoEpKCGS0/s1600/Water_tube_boiler_schematic.jpg
          There is usually a second separate super heating section done to minimize droplets getting through. Is there enough separation, or, is there enough time in the e-cat’s steam section to vaporize any water droplets before they can exit the chamber?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Rene,

            Look at the massive surface area and density of the fins above the water.

            I expect the drawing is incorrect and that the area above the water is at least 50%, maybe even 60% of the total volume. Then make the upper fins length 3x longer.

          • Rene

            That photo of the opened e-cat is a predecessor to the 1MW one. Not sure it applies directly. I am going to assume that the tap points of the water gauge are at the very top and bottom of the latest e-cat boiler chamber. That then suggests half the boiler chamber has water in it. The e-cat could then be placed at the 25% point (I think it is much flatter than shown in the diagram) and have asymmetric fins, taller on the topside, to maximize super heating the saturated steam.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Pweet,

        We must agree to disagree.

    • GiveADogABone

      Strange things happen when you boil water and make steam. Pweet lays out his argument based on his experience of a boiling kettle. Engineer48 lays out his diagram on the basis of current understanding of the E-cat internals.

      First consider what happens when you allow a totally immersed, flattish rectangular box with an internal uniform heat source to boil surrounding water. That would be box R without the fins in the diagram. What is the heat transfer from each of the six surfaces of the box? This experiment I remember from my college days.

      The first surprise is that the heat transfer through the lower surface of the box is almost nil. What actually happens is that the steam generated on the lower surface forms a continuous insulating film that only escapes from the four edges at a very limited rate. This escaping steam then runs up the four vertical walls and along with heat coming through the vertical walls will form another stable, insulating film that arrives at the top edges as superheated steam.

      The fins B on the underside of the box labelled R would actually increase the volume of the steam trapped under the box and worsen still further the heat transfer. Fins B do not exist in the E-cat.

      Remember the top of the box is just a plain surface, as in Pweet’s kettle and it would behave in the same way. Essentially bubbles of steam formed on the surface are removed by buoyancy and pass to the water surface above. The great majority of the heat transfer would be through this top surface. The generated steam would be wet and contain entrained water droplets.

      Now add the fins to the top surface. Fins improve the heat transfer through a surface, if engineered correctly, which increases yet further the proportion of heat transferred through the top surface. These fins have to evaporate water at their base. This water is supplied from each end of the fin interspace. The wet steam and entrained water droplets generated along the base of the fins is forced upwards and is heated further by the fins. The fact that the steam is moving is important as this improves the convective transfer coefficients of the fin surface. Any entrained water droplets contacting the fin surface are evaporated on hot metal or are evaporated by surrounding superheated steam.

      I see no problem in believing that the E-cat generates superheated steam with no entrained water, providing that the correct water level is maintained.

      • psi2u2

        Thank you for the wonderfully clear analysis.

  • Chapman

    Frank,

    Did anyone determine for sure whether the 6-12 deadline for an IH response is still active, or was it extended to the 20th due to the MTD?

    • Frank Acland

      I think they considered their MTD as the response.

      • Chapman

        Thanks…

      • Engineer48

        Court data here:

        https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/11135976/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al

        As June/12/2016 has passed, it would seem the MTD extended the date to reply.

        Of course if the MTD succeeds, there is no need to reply. I do understand that if that happened, Rossi can refile his complaint.
        .

      • GiveADogABone

        I have some concerns about the idea that the MTD is a substitute for (or actually is) the reply to Rossi’s complaint.

        As I understand it, the MTD is for consideration by the judge as a procedural matter: does the trial go ahead or stop?. Rossi’s complaint and IH’s reply are for consideration by the jury, after a lot of evidence on the opposing views has been considered in full court with the jury present.

        Failure by IH to submit a proper reply has substantial legal implications. It would need an American lawyer to explain exactly what happens next if no reply was filed by the due date.

  • Engineer48

    Interesting life cost of 12.13 Euro / MWh, which includes all cost over 20 years, including the plant cost amortisation.

    That is 0.012 Euro /kWht, then assuming 33% electrical generation efficiency comes out at 0.036 Euro / kWhe.
    .
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4a83aa0017f946dd1237587970947c34caf0f707a438eaabbd42b6a4dd1faa8b.png

  • georgehants

    I don’t think anybody has ever thought of this, but would a completely open, public, repeatable demonstration of Mr. Rossi’s most basic e-cat measured by as many independent scientists as wish to do so, showing a COP above 1 help to establish Cold Fusion as a new science.
    I am sure to get the usual reply’s giving a multitude of good reasons why this would not be a good idea, most of them based on Astrology.
    Mr. Rossi seems to enjoy holding on to his exalted mystery position just like the Wizard of OZ, we, I think, are beyond even capitalistic rationality and only psychology (another failed science) could hold any answers.

  • First we had the low temp ecat, then we had the hot cat, now we have the quark X.

    Every time one version of the ecat reached reliability, Rossi comes up with a new one much better version and neglected the older versions completely.

    Working this way we will never see an ecat on market.

    Where would apple be without releasing one iPhone because better hardware came available in the last months before release?

    Rossi should develop one version, bring it to reliable performance and give it to another team doing the production engineering. In the meanwhile Rossi can work on the next version.

    But this way it will not work…

    • Ged

      The 1MW plants are for sale, as Engineer48’s people are standing by post-litigation. You have gotten the wrong impression. The QuarkX is a new product, but it hasn’t stopped production work of the current product as far as we know.

  • First we had the low temp ecat, then we had the hot cat, now we have the quark X.

    Every time one version of the ecat reached reliability (Rossi said), Rossi comes up with a new one much better version and neglected the older versions completely.

    Working this way we will never see an ecat on market.

    Where would apple be without releasing one iPhone because better electronic components for the hardware came available in the last months before release?

    Rossi should develop one version, bring it to reliable performance and give it to another team doing the production engineering. In the meanwhile Rossi can work on the next version.

    But this way it will not work…

    • Ged

      The 1MW plants are for sale, as Engineer48’s people are standing by post-litigation. You have gotten the wrong impression. The QuarkX is a new product, but it hasn’t stopped production work of the current product as far as we know.

  • DrD

    Here is the report.
    http://ecat.com/news/ecat-quark-x-preliminary-report-findings
    June 14, 2016 on ECAT News

    Report Disclaimer:

    THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT AND ALL THE MEASUREMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY ANDREA ROSSI AND HIS TEAM. THEREFORE THESE RESULTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AT ANY EFFECT OTHER THAN AN INTERNAL PROCESS CONTROL, NOTHING MORE.

    DESCRIPTION OF THE QUARK X:

    Cylinder made with proper material:

    Dimensions:
    length 30 mm
    diam 1 mm
    Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
    Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h
    Light produced (percentage of the energy produced): 0-50%
    Electric energy produced: 0-10%
    Heat produced: 0- 100%

    Light, energy and heat can be modulated to modulate the percentages within the limits above listed, provided the combined percentages must total 100%.

    Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.

    Temperature on the surface of the QuarkX: more than 1,500*C
    Note: 2 other QuarkX put in analogous situation gave the same results.

    Further disclaimer:

    THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT. IT IS AN INTERNAL REPORT RELATED TO MEASURES MADE BY LEONARDO CORPORATION

    End of the report.

    Description of the photo:

    Photo of the heat exchanger pipe that contains the QuarkX: the light spot is through a light eye holed in the pipe. The blue halo from the hole has been analyzed and has made possible to understand the theoretical roots of the effect: the QuarkX is inside the pipe .

    NOTE: THE PHOTO HAS BEEN MANIPULATED TO FORBID HIGH DEFINITION. The colors have been partially obscured. The light is much more intense.

    • DrD

      Rather dissapointing that only 10% can be electric when he previously stated it can be 100%.
      Not surpising in that case that he has concerns about safety when attempting to self drive and control from it’s own electric generation.
      COP = 200
      1 mm diameter ?????? WOW!

      • artefact

        That 10% is still a cop of 20

      • Engineer48

        Hi DrD,

        Direct electricity COP = 20!!!!!!!

        Frack man what more do you want????

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          I guess that DrD is only stating that it is a pity not being able to convert more than a 10%, not that it is not amazing . But of course, it could be improved in the future.

        • DrD

          I agree, it’s excellent! My surprise was just that it’s not what he previously said. EXCELLENT all the same!

        • tlp

          COP is infinite as soon as you get more electricity out than input.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Yup. Just create a grid where you have connected each Quark-X to at least another 3 Quarks. If one doesnt deliver enough energy you always have another two as backup. Then you wont need energy input, they all would feed themselves and you get all the unused energy for any other use you want.

          • tlp

            Yes, and you can just discard the heat, if all you need is electricity, at least in small installations.

          • DrD

            Yep but what ever will we do with all that waste heat (in summer) and light. I know, Steam turbines, so more electric. Maybe some photovoltaics aswell.

          • tlp

            Similar situation as with BrLPs SunCell, their next demo is 28th June, in two weeks.
            They don’t yet have direct electricity harvesting but are using photovoltaics. Anyway about 60% is heat, mainly waste heat, but of course can be used if needed.

        • DrD

          Hi Eng,
          Sorry I gave the wrong impession.
          So what could we do with that excess heat in summer?
          Rankine engine? Steam turbine? to increase the % electric?

          • Thomas Kaminski

            A number of thermal coolers exist, but are less efficient than electrical-based refrigeration. With inexpensive, “waste” heat, you can cool as well.

          • tlp

            No refrigeration needed, just cooling like in a car engine.

      • Earlier, Rossi only has confirmed: “a quark that produces electricity only (no heat), with an efficiency of COP >1”

    • 100 Watts from something smaller than a matchstick, and a thermal COP of 200. OK the electricity output is smaller than previously stated, but otherwise – amazing!

      I wonder what the problem they encountered was? Perhaps it just melted!

      • Roland

        Unless my math is seriously defective there’s an implied power density of 16,978W/cc.

        I’ve run it a couple of times now; as the results are shockingly high perhaps a couple of the math minded posters here could run the numbers as well.

        • Roland

          See one issue already…

          4424W/cc

          • psi2u2

            Please explain. You mean the materials cannot withstand that density?

          • Engineer48

            Guys,

            At electricity COP = 20:
            Power density 424kWe/ltr
            Energy density 3.71GWhe/ltr/year assuming 1 year fuel life.

    • Rene

      Looks interesting. Electrical COP is 20, pretty good assuming it does that reliably. I just wish his photo did not look like a blurry Columbo intro. Clearly he wants to hide the details, so it is still a waiting game.
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4913ee6c4bd5b22b1ec534c5ef2c02fda2583389763774cd73c530d0ff8ef953.jpg

    • Thomas Kaminski

      SO let me set the controls: 50% light out, 10% electricity, 40% heat… Hey Fresh vegetables year round in the frozen north! Hmmm.. Maybe the blue light isn’t good for photosynthesis…

      • tlp

        blue and red are optimal colors. Just add some red leds.
        But in many applications you can discard light and heat and just use the electricity.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          That’s good news. I know a local company had a NASA contract for space-based growth chambers and they used red LEDs. Now we can site the food production to areas with good, sustainable water resources like the Great Lakes regions, rather than regions with good climate but poor water resources (like California!).

          • tlp

            Red LEDs are easier to make than blue. Red is OK but blue+red is perfect.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Blue light is the basis of photosynthesis.

    • Ged

      Dang, >1500C at surface? I see now why they needed so much material RnD at the start of all this last year.

  • DrD

    Here is the report.
    http://ecat.com/news/ecat-quark-x-preliminary-report-findings
    June 14, 2016 on ECAT News

    Report Disclaimer:

    THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT AND ALL THE MEASUREMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY ANDREA ROSSI AND HIS TEAM. THEREFORE THESE RESULTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AT ANY EFFECT OTHER THAN AN INTERNAL PROCESS CONTROL, NOTHING MORE.

    DESCRIPTION OF THE QUARK X:

    Cylinder made with proper material:

    Dimensions:
    length 30 mm
    diam 1 mm
    Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
    Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h
    Light produced (percentage of the energy produced): 0-50%
    Electric energy produced: 0-10%
    Heat produced: 0- 100%

    Light, energy and heat can be modulated to modulate the percentages within the limits above listed, provided the combined percentages must total 100%.

    Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.

    Temperature on the surface of the QuarkX: more than 1,500*C
    Note: 2 other QuarkX put in analogous situation gave the same results.

    Further disclaimer:

    THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT. IT IS AN INTERNAL REPORT RELATED TO MEASURES MADE BY LEONARDO CORPORATION

    End of the report.

    Description of the photo:

    Photo of the heat exchanger pipe that contains the QuarkX: the light spot is through a light eye holed in the pipe. The blue halo from the hole has been analyzed and has made possible to understand the theoretical roots of the effect: the QuarkX is inside the pipe .

    NOTE: THE PHOTO HAS BEEN MANIPULATED TO FORBID HIGH DEFINITION. The colors have been partially obscured. The light is much more intense.

    • DrD

      Rather dissapointing that only 10% can be electric when he previously stated it can be 100%.
      Not surpising in that case that he has concerns about safety when attempting to self drive and control from it’s own electric generation.
      COP = 200
      1 mm diameter ?????? WOW!

      • artefact

        That 10% is still a cop of 20

      • Engineer48

        Hi DrD,

        Direct electricity COP = 20!!!!!!!

        Frack man what more do you want????

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          I guess that DrD is only stating that it is a pity not being able to convert more than a 10%, not that it is not amazing . But of course, it could be improved in the future.

        • DrD

          I agree, it’s excellent! My surprise was just that it’s not what he previously said. EXCELLENT all the same!

        • tlp

          COP is infinite as soon as you get more electricity out than input.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Yup. Just create a grid where you have connected each Quark-X to at least another 3 Quarks. If one doesnt deliver enough energy you always have another two as backup. Then you wont need energy input, they all would feed themselves and you get all the unused energy for any other use you want.

          • tlp

            Yes, and you can just discard the heat, if all you need is electricity, at least in small installations.

          • DrD

            Yep but what ever will we do with all that waste heat (in summer) and light. I know, Steam turbines, so more electric. Maybe some photovoltaics aswell.

          • tlp

            Similar situation as with BrLPs SunCell, their next demo is 28th June, in two weeks.
            They don’t yet have direct electricity harvesting but are using photovoltaics. Anyway about 60% is heat, mainly waste heat, but of course can be used if needed.

        • DrD

          Hi Eng,
          Sorry I gave the wrong impession.
          So what could we do (usefully) with that excess heat in summer?
          Rankine engine? Steam turbine? to increase the % electric?

          • Thomas Kaminski

            A number of thermal coolers exist, but are less efficient than electrical-based refrigeration. With inexpensive, “waste” heat, you can cool as well.

          • tlp

            No refrigeration needed, just cooling like in a car engine.

      • Earlier, Rossi only has confirmed: “a quark that produces electricity only (no heat), with an efficiency of COP >1”

    • 100 Watts from something smaller than a matchstick, and an overall COP of 200 (COP up to 100 for light, up to 20 for electricity). OK the electricity output is smaller than previously stated, but otherwise – amazing!

      I wonder what the problem they encountered was? Perhaps it just melted!

      • Roland

        Unless my math is seriously defective there’s an implied power density of 16,978W/cc.

        I’ve run it a couple of times now; as the results are shockingly high perhaps a couple of the math minded posters here could run the numbers as well.

        • Roland

          See one issue already…

          4424W/cc

          • psi2u2

            Please explain. You mean the materials cannot withstand that density?

          • Engineer48

            Guys,

            At electricity COP = 20:
            Power density 424kWe/ltr
            Energy density 3.71GWhe/ltr/year assuming 1 year fuel life.

    • Rene

      Looks interesting. Electrical COP is 20, pretty good assuming it does that reliably. I just wish his photo did not look like a blurry Columbo intro. Clearly he wants to hide the details, so it is still a waiting game.
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4913ee6c4bd5b22b1ec534c5ef2c02fda2583389763774cd73c530d0ff8ef953.jpg

    • Thomas Kaminski

      SO let me set the controls: 50% light out, 10% electricity, 40% heat… Hey Fresh vegetables year round in the frozen north! Hmmm.. Maybe the blue light isn’t good for photosynthesis…

      • tlp

        blue and red are optimal colors. Just add some red leds.
        But in many applications you can discard light and heat and just use the electricity.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          That’s good news. I know a local company had a NASA contract for space-based growth chambers and they used red LEDs. Now we can site the food production to areas with good, sustainable water resources like the Great Lakes regions, rather than regions with good climate but poor water resources (like California!).

          • tlp

            Red LEDs are easier to make than blue. Red is OK but blue+red is perfect.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Blue light is the basis of photosynthesis.

    • Ged

      Dang, >1500C at surface? I see now why they needed so much material RnD at the start of all this last year.

  • Steve Savage

    Dance Dance Dance

    Nothing left to do but engineer the hell out of this.

    26 years ago the world changed, 5 years ago we see the first usable effects of that discovery.

    Today we see that there are many potential ways to engineer increasingly productive devices using the effect.

    We stand at the precipice of a new era, of a new world.

    Energy is everything, we are closer to being able to harness the energy of the universe. In the next 20 years we will see more refinement and application of the effect. These things we see today are only the first baby steps. Today the baby walks and talks.

    I will celebrate today, deeply and without hesitation. I will salute Senior Rossi and all those who went before him. Salud! Dotore Rossi Salud!

    Dance Dance Dance

  • psi2u2

    Thank you for the wonderfully clear analysis.

  • INVENTOR INVENTED

    I’m looking forward to the report. I believe that LENR is real but rossi has not proved that he has perfected the process in a reactor because he wont let an independent scientific organization examine his reactors. If he starts selling Quark X reactors everybody will have a reactor to test themselves.

  • cashmemorz

    Where is the report?

  • cashmemorz

    Where is the report?