ECW Poll: Your Thoughts on the E-Cat as a Commercially Viable Technology

Some people have asked for this, so I though it might be interesting to put a poll out regarding readers’ current thoughts on the E-Cat as a commercially viable technology. For myself, the whole reason for following this story along its many twists and turns is because if real, the E-Cat would represent a very important technological breakthrough that could bring many benefits to the world.

So this poll is focused on the technology itself, not the parties or personalities involved. Basically what I’m interested in finding out is what readers’ current thoughts are about the E-Cat itself. How confident are you that it is a real and valuable technology?

Whether it will emerge into the marketplace is for me a separate issue, as it could indeed be a real and viable but for possible business, legal or political reasons it might not make it to market. So this poll is about your thoughts on the technology itself.

The poll is posted on the right side of the site, below the headlines on the right column

  • wizkid

    I tried to vote, but it still says zero votes. Is this from Cherokee?

    POLLS

    You Had Already Voted For This Poll. Poll ID #21

  • wizkid

    retract – it works. sorry

  • Billy Jackson

    Just a personal opinion.

    I do believe the e-cat is a viable technology. Though i do not think that its 100% ready to be let loose at this time. For me the e-cat needs to be run or automated to a point where you do not need the inventor sitting in a box for a year to make it work.

    I think for the first time alot of us are being exposed to the process that inventions go through before you see them on TV. The internet has opened the grounds for us to see the daily development of the E-cat, be it for better or worse.

    Rossi’s willingness to communicate ongoing developments has us on the edge of our seats dreaming of the possibilities that this technology might enhance or allow. Yet that communication comes with expectations and when we have setbacks the disappointment is proportional to the excitement we were feeling. I am hopeful that we get it right in the end.

    That being said i have my fears that Rossi, though deserving of as much credit and accolades that we can throw his way, may not be the individual that is best at bringing the e-cat into the market as a viable product. A great inventor does not automatically make him a great business man. It is my belief that for Rossi to make the billions i think he deserves + royalties, he’s going to have to sell (or partner) this technology to someone with a better sense of management.

    • Billy Jackson

      I have read through the entire thread and i have noticed a general theme for those who continually skeptic despite all the evidence they have to dismiss to support their skepticism. This is going to be my attempt to reach out one final time to those who are truly confused on if LENR is real or fake. (please understand i am not a scientist, i have no degree’s in anything to do with a science related field.)

      1. Lugano test . Evidence supports a positive outcome.
      So the biggest argument that you see skeptics use to say the Lugano report was a failure is Rossi’s handling of the fuel. You see skeptic after skeptic attempt to attach some meaningful plausibility to discredit the report simply from this act alone. Yet not once have they been able to dispute the evidence that the this small device ran for 31 days at a COP of greater than 2.x. No chemical fuel that would fit in the size of that container would have lasted for 31 days and produced the level of energy that it did with no sign of drop off. the test ended because they wanted it to end not because of imminent failure of the fuel or the e-cat.

      You will see these same skeptics want you to believe that 7 reputable high level scientist some with massive experience in the lab, were all incapable of running basic meters to read the energy input and output. Despite the evidence the skeptics have yet to be able to point to any part of the test and say “here” that’s wrong. were there errors? yes, but those errors did not change the outcome of the final summary more than a few points. In the end the test was completed and the math shows a COP of 2.x. The best the skeptics have been able to do is dismiss the entire report with no evidence to back them up by crossing their arms across their chest and saying like spoiled children.. “SO! i don’t believe them!”

      As long as this remains their method of debate, their can be no real debate with them as they refuse to acknowledge any evidence that damages their argument or position.

      2. Refusal to accept ANY evidence.
      NASA, US Navy Research, MFMP, MIT, and several other high level industry leaders have come out and said something interesting is going on with LENR. Yet the skeptics still refuse to acknowledge these statements since it does not support their agenda that LENR does not work. Instead they keep pointing back to Rossi and beating on their own beliefs and schooling.. they KNOW its not real, their own experience (of which most have none) and everything they have been TOLD says it cant be real. so it cant be real! (thank god science does not work like that or we would never prove anything) Their clinging to their beliefs despite countering arguments or evidence limits a logical debate on the subject. They know what they know and you cant tell them different. (they demand science like behavior and evidence but then resort to non-science like responses and expect you to accept them.

      3. IH has made a reactor on their own and filed a patent on it reporting a COP of 11+ without Rossi present.
      They absolutely refuse to acknowledge this and have ignored this piece of evidence because it destroys their entire position in full.. This is the smoking gun. throw it in the face of their argument and they will ignore the statement and continue as if you said nothing.

      4. Finally we come to the 1MW plant. this comes down to rumor and conjecture. but we have 3 pieces of evidence. Rossi and IH agreed to multiple people who’s quarterly and final reports are within the margin of error of each other (or close enough that a few percentage points off will not sway the overall outcome) .. again this is rumor and conjecture but with multiple reports saying COP of +50. (even if its half that its still revolutionary!) its very very hard to dispute with any credibility that everything to do with LENR and Rossi is a fraud or one of the largest con’s ever. entirely to many people are involved for “everyone” to be in on it.

      I acknowledge completely that Rossi is a hard person to read and understand at times. Yet at no point have i seen an outright lie. In most cases he simply does not correct our assumptions until we find through a report that WE were wrong.

      the above is my personal opinion and represents only that. Others of this board may have differing views and support or arguments against what i believe. That is their right and privilege on this board to debate their position i simply ask that we all do so in a manner that is productive, based on mutual respect through the use of logical analysis of the evidence and not emotional tantrums that are best left with the children..

      • HS61AF91

        awesome summary, many kudos.

  • Commercially viable. Politically not, except as a monopoly of existing energy cartels.

  • MasterBlaster7

    100%….light this candle.

  • Alain Samoun

    I voted 50-74%, last year I would have voted 75-99%, but the IH problem lower my expectation…

  • peacelovewoodstock

    Oh no! Who is going to tell the many hundreds of researchers who are actively pursuing LENR and who have conducted many, many reproducible experiments demonstrating excess heat production or COP > 1?

  • Steve Savage

    10 Observations re Rossi, LENR and, Commercialization

    1. LENR is a real and proven phenomena – indisputable at this point.

    2. Before Rossi there was very little interest in and progress with LENR research, in fact it was not even called LENR. Rossi was the early leader and continues that role.

    3. Unless he is completely insane or self delusional there is no good reason to disbelieve in most of Rossi’s statements.

    4. Rossi has attracted commercial levels of investment from more than 1 source.

    5. Rossi must fight hard to protect his IP while trying to engineer plant for commercial purposes. This fight and the resulting smoke it generates can confuse even true believers.

    6. Rossi has proven adept at navigating a very rough landscape.

    7. There are probable and viable competitors … Main among them is Brilliant Light

    8. Rossi shows no sign of giving up and it is very unlikely he ever will

    9. There may be forces much bigger than Rossi (but not bigger than LENR) who will impact the nature and timing of commercialization.

    10. 75 – 99% seems most likely to me

  • GiveADogABone

    I am completely confident that the Rossi Effect is real and can be turned into a viable technology but I am not confident that Rossi can do it on his own. He needs commercial partnerships with people with serious capital and an understanding of the inventive process [1:]. I would offer Sir James Dyson as an example. https://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/James_Dyson
    . He said in his book that he built five thousand prototypes of his bagless vacuum cleaner before making the one that really started selling. I reckon Rossi and Dyson should have a chat.

    1: ‘In November 2014, Dyson announced plans to invest a further £1.5bn into the research and development of new technology, including funding for a campus at the Dyson UK headquarters in Malmesbury which will create up to 3,000 jobs.’

  • nietsnie

    I feel quite confident that the technology is real – that is, that an effect exists in which more energy is produced than is supplied which uses some form of nuclear fusion without particle radiation. That alone is astonishing I think (not astonishing that I feel confident, but that it exists at all). But, I feel much less certain that it has been tamed sufficiently to make routine use of. There’s just very little independent data to make that determination. The fact that Rossi spent the entire year of the Florida test in a shipping container so as to be immediately available for the apparently frequent emergencies makes me wonder though.

    My take on it is that it is similar to trying to maintain a very small amount of feedback in an amplified room containing microphones without allowing the feedback to get out of control. Any small misstep and it tries to run away. They have software that watches it and attempts to control it – and yet, periodically, it gets away anyway and requires manual intervention.

    The thing is that there have been several people who have verified the COP > 1 LENR effect. But, Rossi says he’s getting COP over 50 with no independent verification
    whereas all the other experimenters are showing something barely over
    1. We only have Rossi’s say so that he’s getting that or that it is commercially viable now – and he has a financial interest. We’re told that a report exists that indicates that the Florida test was successful. We’re also told that everyone involved is a fraud. I don’t know any of those people personally myself, and the purported report is not available to me. So, I don’t have enough data to even have an opinion.

    If you will recall last year at this time by now there were going to be tours by the ‘customer’ of the plant by now. Yet, now we hear that the customer hasn’t ever wanted anyone to see their technology – and possibly doesn’t even exist at all. I try really hard not to determine where truth lies on an emotional basis or by what I hope or wish for. So, I’m on the fence still – but I’m not happy about it.

  • nietesnie

    Gunnar – the Lugano test was very persuasive to me. Independent researchers, who are known and respected in their fields, testing a Rossi-built device, in their own space, that showed a COP greater than 1 for a month and resulted in nuclear changes to the fuel. That wasn’t ‘trust Rossi’. You can say that you’d like even more certainty, and maybe there were details of the testing procedure that were not 100% air-tight. But you must at least admit that Lugano was persuasive and a very good start.

  • sam

    I might pass a grade 5 Science
    Exam but I put it at 50/50.

  • Teemu Soilamo

    Wow, no wonder I get antagonized so much (1-24%, leaning closer to 24%). The board has completely changed from what it was a couple years ago, when most were still skeptics.

    • SG

      I too am somewhat surprised. It was an interesting result.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    The powers that be want their petro-dollar and carbon indulgences. So, the path of least resistance for LENR into commercial markets will first be the transmutation of elements. Power generation will follow later after Mitsubishi breaks the ice.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzZl9l8nn1c

    • Alan DeAngelis

      PS

      Perhaps making “toys” would be less of a threat. Retrofit the turbojets of R/C airplanes with E-Cats. Then continue to make bigger and bigger “toys”.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLRcYYb1dZ8

      • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

        I want a toy that drives itself, has an inside couch and can load about 500kgs, plus skis.

    • Specifically, transmutation of radionuclides in nuclear waste, which is one of the most pressing problems facing humanity, and requires an immediate solution before the idiots in charge try and stuff it down deep holes in the ground. However, large amounts of heat energy would be produced by devices such as GEC’s ‘hybrid’ reactor, so the energy production side would be pretty obvious.

      • Omega Z

        Maybe the Biggest threat isn’t Rossi’s E-cat, but the consumer energy price/costs Rossi has bandied about. 2 or 3 cents per kilowatt to the consumer. The closet anyone else mentioned was Brillouin(about 6 cents per KW) and I think he was talking wholesale.

        Perhaps Rossi should have stated 10 cents or more per KW wholesale. At least until it was well on it’s way in the market. This goes back to my once upon a time- Energy companies don’t care what they sell you. Fossil energy or pixie dust. It doesn’t matter. It’s the profit margin.

  • Hank Mills

    I have absolutely zero doubt the E-Cat technology works in that a combination of nickel, lithium, and hydrogen can produce massive excess heat, including infinite COP in self sustain mode. When it comes to the test of the one megawatt plant, I suspect it likely produced high levels of excess heat, but I reserve final judgement until the ERV report is released.

  • sam

    On Lenr forum I see this person opinion
    has not changed.
    Mary Yugo
    User Avatar
    Professional
    5 hours ago+1
    The chance of Rossi having table top fusion is about the same as the chance of a large, fat pig flying in through your living room window, wearing a saddle, and asking if you’d like a ride anywhere.

    • Hank Mills

      He is going to be proven wrong within a year when even more third parties replicate, a “guaranteed to work” formula is released, and the world wakes up to the reality of the E-Cat. Rossi does indeed have table top fusion.

      • sam

        Hank
        Maybe I will be the only one that feels this way but I thought M.Y comment was funny.
        LENR gets to darn serious sometimes.
        Regards
        Sam

  • Axil Axil

    Re: Lenr is real. Ecat still needs Rossi babysitting.

    A failsafe control system must be developed and that is no easy job. It could take years for that system to be developed.

    • Gerard McEk

      It would be interesting to know what can go wrong with the Ecat. Will it melt down in case of a runaway? How long will that continue. Will it melt through through a concrete floor? It will surely evaporate all the water around it, so pressure relieves are needed. The level of failsafe control depends on the fault scenarios and as long there is no agreed theory everything is possible. That makes it difficult.

      • DrD

        I think the conditions to achieve a reaction are so hard to achieve that in the event of a loss of control and at the commencement of meltdown the reaction will cease. No doubt there will be a molten mess to cope with. AR did say he had run Quarks into failure so he’s well aware of what happens.

  • Teemu Soilamo

    Most of all to you and Engineer48. 😉

  • Mike Rion

    Rossi understands that no matter how complete he allows it to be tested there will still be many skeptics who throw doubt on it. He has decided at this point to put all of his effort into perfecting it for commercialization.

  • Redford

    “Commercially Viable” means way more than the mere existence of the “Rossi effect”.If you have an uptime of 95% and needs a Rossi level expert intervention once every two years, you’re still far from being “commercially viable”, and that’s for the industrial product, not the mainstream market. On the top of this there are all the doubts on the ERV thing added to an history of perpetually delayed commercial proof. I value all the other news, russians, chineses, MFMP who all bring a net of confirmation on the effect. Still,
    I had to vote 1 – 24 % for “commercially viable”.

  • Gerard McEk

    I voted 75-99%. How much I want to believe AR’s words, I still do not think he has proven it beyond any doubt yet. It seems so easy to me how such a black box test can be done: Just deliver an Ecat to a properly qualified group of engineers and scientists or MFMP. Let them hook it up to whatever is required (e.g. power and water supplies). Let them test it as much as they want… So why hasn’t AR allowed for that yet? That question makes me doubt a bit, but I can’t wait until the Ecat hits the market.

  • hunfgerh

    My unwavering faith in power-generating equipment with COP> 3 is based on the basis of a plausible theory CF = (e / n-capture inside of PdLiH systems). As well as the performed synthesis of the required systems in the nanometer range and detecting their superconductivity.

  • wpj

    Strange that the kit, controller and fuel were made and supplied by IH rather than Rossi- they produced all the bits. According to Eng48, they have also “mislaid” everything from the test.

  • f sedei

    To me, the negative opinions are far less convincing than the positive opinions and known facts.It’s all a matter of time.I hope we are all around to see it happen. In the meantime, keep the learned opinions and thoughts alive. This forum is at least as good as a university class, only with personality plus.

  • Dave Lawton

    This could be useful light weight shielding.

    http://newatlas.com/metal-foam-lightweight-radiation-shielding/38515/

  • nietsnie

    <<>>

    Not really. Rossi wasn’t even in town for most of the test. The researchers had their own instruments collecting data. The power going in was controlled by them. The energy coming out was measured by them using their own equipment.

    <<>>

    I grant – that’s a data whose chain of custody can be quibbled over. But – not very much.

    <<>>

    That the entire team would risk their professional future in order to participate in a Rossi fraud would be an *enormous* conspiracy. It only seems possible if you absolutely refuse to believe the evidence under any circumstances on general principle. And, of course, if that is true – there’s no use discussing it with you.

    <<>>

    So, you’re saying that first they all actively participated in a fraud – and then they failed to produce the same results using their own home made device and reported their failure? What a clever ploy by them!

  • Brokeeper

    In the business world, the often quoted, “Build it, and they will come”, derived from the misquoted “Build it, and he will come “of the famous movie Field of Dreams, is often interpreted with faith in the future driven by a product’s proof and necessity rather than a nostalgic hope.

    The E-Cat has certainly survived thus far the rigors of constant scrutiny and verification to the point the risk is mitigated enough to warrant market development. Its obvious necessity far outreaches any potential risk in resolving this earth’s choking air and poverty stricken societies that is costing many millions of lives, trillions of dollars of spent resources and dire consequences.

    So do I believe in the E-Cat as a Commercially Valid Technology? YES, not only because of its proven existence but because a huge void exists begging to be filled. So I too say:

    “Build it, and they WILL come”

  • enantiomer2000

    skeptical.

  • nietsnie

    Frank – I’m wondering if the poll app prevents multiple votes from the same user? This issue is emotionally charged enough that ballot box stuffing would not be out of the question…

    • Frank Acland

      I believe that the app does not allow repeat votes from the same IP address, but I suppose if you really wanted you could find ways around that.

      • GiveADogABone

        My IP changes every day because I shut down my router overnight and it has to reconnect to the network in the morning.

  • Mats002

    50-74 because:
    There are a lot of data out there; pictures, patents, contracts, claims, scientific witness that have been scrutinised by many people, of which many are professionals and scientists.

    The chance for a scam to survive this far is very tiny.

    Truth is often found in middle ground. I would not be surprised over COP 4.601 as an average over a year, still having stability/control issues.

    • Omega Z

      I agree and everyone should keep in mind. Rossi still stands by the COP>6
      Only on the Blogs does anyone claim COP>50.

      • Mats002

        A public trial that ends up with IH/Darden have to pay part of the 89M$ might the best for all parties;
        – IH/Darden would be right to invest in LENR/E-Cat because it shows to be a smart business move.
        – Rossi would be vindicated
        – Old LENR would be vindicated
        – Maybe MSM opens up about it

        Total win for IH/Darden would make them loosers in front of their investors and partners. Both Rossi and LENR would be loosers.

        Total win for Rossi is good for all, including IH/Darden because they appearently did a smart business move and can continue their quest in LENR land.

  • jimbo92107

    Yet here you are, worshiping Andrea Rossi’s magical crystals. I’m not even a fan of hot fusion, you’re just assuming that. I look for stuff that works, and Rossi hasn’t shown that his stuff works. That’s why his butt is going to court.

    • Jimbo, perhaps it has slipped your mind that Rossi initiated the court action, not IH.

      • jimbo92107

        Because Rossi didn’t deliver what he promised, IH didn’t want to pay him any more money. I never said Rossi wasn’t clever. Everything he has done fits the profile of a clever con man. Nothing he has done so far fits the profile of an honest inventor with a real product. Rossi continually dangles the bare minimum information out there, just enough to keep people hooked, but never enough to confirm that his “technology” actually works.

        I am now merely predicting that Rossi will continue to do what he has already been doing for years. He will continue to claim progress, yet never reveal his “customer.” Everybody that “confirms” his tech will turn out to be some buddy of his from back in Italy. He will also continue to change his stories about what his tech is, as he did with the Quark. What size is it again? Where’s the factory? Who’s the customer? Who, what, where, when, how. You won’t get any straight answers from Rossi, because that would give up the game.

        • nietsnie

          LOL! So you can be trusted because you trust non-skeptics?

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Pardon the double post and typo.
            W(184) + 2d > Os(188) 21.69 MeV

  • jimbo92107

    Does this mean you’ll take my $100 dollar bet?

  • HS61AF91

    enthusiasm for LENR, vit C, DHEA, Melatonin, and exercise help!

  • Mats002

    What if?

    What if Rossi is a big lier on internet? Is it plausible he would get away with it for more than 5 years?

    This is a subject of it’s own worth to dig into. See this article:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-way-we-lie-now/309431/

    In this context I found this list; top 15 liers in history: http://mamiverse.com/biggest-liars-history-60665/

    If IH/Darden and Swedish Public Service Radio are right – would Rossi qualify to the list? What psychological profile fit in his case?

    • sam

      I think A.R. is steady and honest enough.
      I wish he was stronger at thinking
      outside of the box in business disputes.

      • Mats002

        Hi Sam, what data say that A.R. is steady and honest? He seams to become ‘hot’ sometimes and he has spent time in prison.

        • sam

          I use my analysis of all the data to come up with my opinion.
          A.R. came from the tail end
          of a generation that had some awful tempers.
          He spent time in prison for
          tax evasion when thousands
          of God fearing men got away
          with it.
          But God was watching over
          him and put it in A.R. mind
          to study C.F. In Prison.

      • sam

        A.R. & T.D might have a better chance of settling with these people.
        http://www.armstronglawyers.com/business-disputes/

    • Gerald

      To fool technical people(lugano) that are in my opinion skeptic by nature would make him a genius. For me he has the benifit of doubt, the Petrol dragon saga I don’t count. His idea’s were good and in that time in Italie mafia controlled the waste disposal and were tied with politics. I’m not well enough educated to know his proces was commercial viable but it wasn’t for sure the best time to introduce back then. I can’t help it, but when I see Rossi in interviews I see a very a guy with a goal not a scam artist.

  • Omega Z

    Articles like that mean absolutely nothing.

    Should tomorrow come and MIT, Cal tech and a dozen other world renowned Universities pronounce Rossi’s E-cat real and viable, it will take years to have an impact on energy needs.

    As to Oil, At least 20 and likely 30 years to replace the worlds existing auto fleet. This would require a couple thousand new wells a month for a long time and only gradually declining. A new power plant commissioned during the MIT, Cal tech public announcement will likely be near end of life cycle before replaced by LENR. The task is that huge. And Imagine had they stopped with the conventional after Rossi’s 1st public demo. Everyone was certain all Fossil energy would be replaced in 2 years. The world would be in dire straits.

    Never count you chicks before they hatch…

    • roseland67

      Omega,

      Well, I disagree, I think articles like above do mean something, and I think it would NOT take years to impact current energy markets, I think “futures markets” would react immediately to MIT/NASA/Cal Tech etc news that indicated a new, non carbon based LENR form of energy.
      If I am on the board of an oil company or a nuke based utility, and KNEW, LENR based energy was inevitable, I would prepare by weaning my energy investments accordingly, NOT, by spending billions and maybe trillions of dollars on investments that may be worth very little in the event that Ecat is in fact ready for production.

      And I suggest the same to you about counting your Ecat chickens before they hatch. I believe these incubations will take many, many years and may not “hatch” in your lifetime.

      We’ll see

  • jimbo92107

    Can’t wait to see it… the products, of course. Meanwhile, I’ve seen about enough ill-focused pics of jars, boxes and tubes. I’ve seen plenty of flowcharts showing how stuff goes from tubes to other tubes. And the charts? Love ’em, but they don’t prove anything other than people can make charts. Don’t we all love wiggly lines that go up…

  • roseland67

    Help,

    I guess they’re spending, building, processing and distributing now and are preparing to increase all above, to be that is not theoretical.

    Rossi? Well not so much