Rossi Provides Projected Timeline of E-Cat Development

Andrea Rossi was asked yesterday by a reader on the Journal of Nuclear Physics if he could provide a schedule for upcoming E-Cat deadline.

Rossi’s response was this:

Andrea Rossi
August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
Eugenio Mieli:
1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW
2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016
3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016
4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,

There’s apparently a lot going on at the moment with manufacturing and R&D — although not on a mass-production level. We don’t have details on who has made the first orders, but from what Rossi has said, he seems to refer to at least two customers — one being the parent company that used the energy from the Doral plant, and the other being a district heating customer in Sweden.

Interesting that he says there will be a “presentation” of the QuarkX prototype this year — that sounds like a newsworthy event if it happens. I hope we get more details on that. Rossi has always talked about his hope for “massive” production of the E-Cats. If it works as he says, I can understand the excitement, but there will be a lot to do to get mass production set up, especially with the current lawsuit pending. Rossi has said recently that he is spending 40 per cent of his time on the legal case.

  • Bob Greenyer

    What 3 means is most interesting to me.

    • What we hope it means: publication of QX specs, test results, independent validation, vouched for by the new partner. With video demos posted to the web.

      What it will probably mean: an unverifiable Rossi-says that he has successfully delivered the QX prototype to his new partner and they have decided to move ahead with commercializing it.

      • Ged

        I’m thinking more like a car commercial, with dubbing by the truck guy voice and everything.

      • Jas

        Hmm, deadlines.
        BLP Q2 2017. Rossi 2017-2018.
        I hope they can stick to them.

      • Bob Greenyer

        ooo – you cynic / realist

  • MasterBlaster7

    Thanks Rossi!
    That is what I like to hear.

  • Ged

    Within hours would be my guess (a few days for fuel and isotope analysis). Even if potting was used. So, patents and prior art would be the only defense.

    • sam

      What do you mean if potting
      was used.
      Why is this Reverse engineering so easy?
      Will the Ecat be easy to reverse
      engineer also?

      • Ged

        As we found out with the Orbo, potting is a good way to conceal electronics from the casual observer. Of course, it can still be removed. Anyone with metal working tools could cut their way into an Ecat and dissect it, see how the electronics and circuits are built, cut open the core and reverse engineer its dimensions, geometry, and materials. Electronic equipment could allow people to dissect out the activity and programming of any electronic chips or processors, as is done when building emulators of electronic devices.

        The only part that is hard to reverse engineer is the fuel, as the processing done to it is not easily discernable. But isotope analysis and EM microscopy would help crack that. The physical device and electronics are a piece of cake in comparison.

        • Ooh… I didn’t really follow the Orbo testing drama. Was intentional misdirection/doesn’t work the consensus?

          • Ged

            The potting epoxy proved a serious challenge as Frank and most observers didn’t want to risk damaging anything while trying to remove it. We could still see some features, and despite the potting, some amazing electronics folks here were able to diagram the circuit using the terminals available for testing with.

            The end consensus is that the Orbo does Not work as advertised. Either the OCube not Ophone core properly functioned. However, there was some very odd behavior that is hard to explain, and both devices are not simple batteries as we discovered by the shorting and charging tests.

            Still, we found no way to draw from it at a rate that would allow firm conclusions about the under laying technology (i.e. if the principle behind it works and if it really is generating energy),and it will take… quite a number of months still of constantly drawing energy at equilibrium (as fast as it “recharges” itself) from it to prove the energy density is to high to be a battery, or not. A frustrating inconclusive conclusion for the time being.

          • Thanks.

            So at best it sounds like trickle recharge from ambient energy that was hyped into much more to bilk early adopters.

            I wonder how much they made.

          • Ged

            That seems the most likely case, for sure. The Ophone core’s recharge rate appeared consistant with the high end of energy harvesters, as Pekka pointed out. Still, far below the hype, or usable rates.

          • SG

            But really quite mysterious even then because it had no characteristics of an energy harvester, and the metal-enclosed packaging would block all EM fields. Heat and vibration were still candidates, but didn’t seem too plausible. It was all quite inconclusive though, as Ged pointed out, and did not work as claimed.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            You are now producing industrial plants; will they also be delivered this year (2016)? Rossi’s answer to this question was “maybe”. Rossi’s inability to get his reactors to market is becoming a very serious issue.

          • Steve Swatman

            A serious issue for whom? I suspect that any corporate/industrial client will understand perfectly the problems with new technology and will have factored that into doing any business with Leonardo.

            Of course, if you have bought and paid for one of those ecats personally and it has not turned up on the delivery date agreed by yourself and leonardo I can understand why it would be a serious issue to you and your company.

            Have you bought and paid for an ecat that has not been delivered?

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Rossi credibility, once lost, good luck.

          • Omega Z

            It may simply be that lab prototypes work, but production models don’t stand up to the claims. Thus, if each unit needs to be lab built, they will never be an economical product. Frankly, this happens often in the real world. Batteries are a big case in point.

        • sam

          From the Internet!
          Apple has sued a lot of companies for allegedly copying or stealing its intellectual property over the past three decades. In 1988, Apple sued Microsoft and HP for copyright infringement over similarities of Windows and NewWave to the graphical interface of the Macintosh and Lisa. More recently, the late Jobs had declared war against Google’s Android mobile operating system, resulting in a flurry of suits against Samsung, Motorola, HTC, and others who dared to copy ideas expressed in the iPhone and iPad.

          “I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs told his biographer Walter Isaacson. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

          This from the same Steve Jobs who famously said in 1996: “Picasso had a saying — ‘good artists copy; great artists steal’ — and we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.”

          • Guru Khalsa

            No wonder you are disappointed. Somehow you thought this blog was a religion of Rossi says real believers. I couldn’t disagree more. My experience is that the people who participate on this blog are thinking, rational and intelligent individuals who like to follow and comment on the progress of the Ecat from invention to pre-production and hopefully to market. In fact in my opinion some of the comments by the engineers on this blog have elevated the conversation and taken it to another level, especially in retaliation to the accusations by IH. Surely this is more interesting than anything on TV.

            In typical ‘Rossi says’ you want to make a wager on something Rossi never said. Rossi gets asked ‘Obviously without obligation …make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat …that reflects your feelings today,’ and this gets interpreted as Rossi said the quarks would be presented to the public in 2016. Any other time Rossi mentions the quarks and 2016 he uses the words I hope. This actually happens a lot. People take Rossi’s comments out of context all the time.

            I am sorry you won’t be entering the Ecat energy field as you hoped, but do you really feel the readers on this blog owe you $5000.00 for your vigilance and participation? If so please let us know, considering how many comments you made in those 5 years, how much does that come out to per comment?

            Eugenio Mieli
            August 30, 2016 at 7:32 AM
            Dear Andrea Rossi,
            considering the many variables we must consider (technical, legal, political) and consequently the difficulty in being precise in predictions, may you now make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat?
            I’m sure that on certain issues you will be forced to repeat yourself, but I think it is interesting to have an overall timing pattern that reflects your feelings today. Obviously without obligation . . .
            Thanks so much,
            Andrea Rossi
            August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
            Eugenio Mieli:

            1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW

            2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016

            3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016

            4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,

          • Omega Z

            Guru Khalsa, Thank You

            ->”Obviously without obligation”

            I wonder how many missed that 1 little phrase. MANY. Happens far to often. I actually think many don’t even read the threads but go straight to comments. Especially the trolls as many of them seem to be the least informed.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, guys,
        Let’s, analyze , this a bit, Dr. Rossi has spoke to this, back when the robo factories were first brought up, by using robot factories, he can build them so cheap no one, will be able to match his price even if reverse engineered.
        Besides he will be so far ahead no one can catch his production.
        e-cats can be built by robots, as EASY as the chinese, or others .
        Secondary, is this very sobering insight, how many machines has humanity seen, that can do what the E-CAT does, answer’ none.
        Now, let’s say someone, reverse engineers, his cat, what would he hope to do with it, if he tries to market such a device, he will have to get Leonardo corp. to ok is sale.

    • roseland67

      Rossi must realize this, no?
      Maybe that is why he insists on selling MW sized reactors, at least this way he’ll get $1M out of you before you reverse engineer it.

  • sam
  • SG

    We should press for this, seriously. We have a good track record giving Steorn a fair shake with the Ocube, and reporting as we found it. Few people would question the conclusions from this community. We could all pitch in to purchase the QuarkX just as we did with the Ocube. I’d be one of the first (if not the first) to contribute. Although I can’t speak for Frank (obviously), I bet you he would be willing to coordinate the effort, run the test in accordance with community input, and openly share the results. I would be supportive of this effort even if we agreed to test it as a “black box” as it were, with an agreement not to dismantle / reverse engineer.

    What do you all think? How can we persuade Mr. Rossi to let the ECW community do this? After all, we as a community have been extremely open and patient, if not his most ardent supporter on the Internet. I almost (almost) feel like Mr. Rossi owes it to this community.

    • Omega Z

      I imagine Rossi appreciates the community support, but I doubt Rossi feels he owes what you propose to this community or any other.

      In addition, If ECW found the E-cat didn’t live up to expectations, you would be applauded. However, if the ECW community found it to be all it is said to be, then you’re all a bunch of uneducated crackpots.

      You Know I’m Right….

      • wpj

        Correct, and he also said that the plans changed when IH came on board which was later in 2012.

    • Ged

      It was a heck of a lot of fun playing with the Orbo together, theorizing, and experimenting. I would love to see this done with the QuarkX, and utterly agree with you.

      Rossi could even request a two month or other generous time limit to play with it, after which the device has to be sent back to show no tampering or reverse engineering. More control than he would have over any industrial customers. If he’s got the goods, this could only be a win for him.

  • Omega Z

    First, Why does Rossi repeat the mass production statement?

    Because people continuously repeat similar questions. That’s it in a nutshell.

    Keep the above Rossi timeline in context. By reading the Q&A on JONP over time, this is merely Rossi’s hope. It is not written in stone. One of the big issues of the internet, and life in general actually, things can easily be misconstrued even with the best intentions.

    Here’s what mass production will look like if one has followed on JONP for some time. Initially hand built units sold in small numbers to 1st adapters who fully understand there will be problems. Over time as issues are resolved, the numbers will increase. Mass production will be arrived at over several years should all go well.

    • Jarea

      Don´t blame the people for listen to Rossi and expect that what he says become true. Words are words and facts are facts. It is better that Rossi just doesn´t tell any date than what he does.
      Up to know the things he said, have become true, however, he has always been too optimist about dates. That must be acknowledged and corrected if you want to be predictable and accountable so that future investors trust you.

      • Omega Z

        You can blame the people for hearing what they want to hear.

        Average COP=50, Average COP=50 all over the blogs. Rossi never said that. Rossi still stands by COP>6. What was revealed in the court papers was a claim of substantial periods of time of COP>50. Pick your SSM time frame and you can claim any COP you want. However, Average can be substantially different.

        Even Rossi has pointed out he’s sometimes overly optimistic, but should Rossi say something “may” happen in 3 to 6 months, people’s expectations focus on 3 to 6 weeks. I really like the– It’s been a month already. How long can a 1 year test take anyway???

        Also, Should Rossi decide to say nothing, People will still read more into that then is said… This will be followed by what others speculate such as the imaginary Rossi saids that would make the rounds.

        Note many people jump into the comments without reading the topic. This takes place on every blog on the internet regardless of topic and some read but don’t comprehend what they’ve read.

        • clovis ray

          Hi, Omega man.
          Oh, so correct,here is a few quotes,

          “How you think about a problem is more important than the problem itself.

          So always think positively.” – Norman Vincent Peale.

          Many people swing into action only to make things worse. They’re not coming from love, they’re coming from negative feelings. They’re coming from guilt, anger, hate; from a sense of injustice or whatever. You’ve got to make sure of your “being” before you swing into action. You have to make sure of who you are before you act.”

          -Anthony de Mello, Jesuit Priest and Psychotherapist (1931-1987)

          (And one more for good measure,)

          John Michell took this idea one step further, describing what he saw as the universe’s habit “of reflecting back ideas projected onto it, of seeming to provide positive evidence for any theory that can possibly be formulated.” He claimed you could test it for yourself. “Take the wildest idea imaginable, commit yourself to believing it, become obsessed with it, and you’ll soon find all kinds of evidence turning up as confirmation of it.

          • Zavod

            For a period of a few days, I believed in flying monkeys. Sadly, I saw no evidence of flying monkeys. I so wanted to have a flying monkey.

        • artefact

          Rossis court docs say so:

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

          • Anon2012_2014

            Rossi’s proposed 2016 schedule is aggressive for Rossi.

            I would like to see a working Rossi Quark-X machine in 2016 sold to a third party to regain his credibility with independent observers like myself.

            Quark-X has the advantage it small so more easily subject to test compared to the test logistics for a very large shipping container units.

      • adriano

        Thats exactly what I ment. There is no reason at all for him to deliver a date for the supposed mass production if he already knows that it is not going to happen. To be completly honest, what I dont like about this and what scares me is that there are people that after reading this statment are now seriously beliving that now they have to wait another 2 years to see the “historical breaktrough”. I dont like this prospective because it gives me the feeling that he is in some way cheating on people. And I also think this is an issue that should be pointed out in order to not mislead people and in order to keep all of us with feet on the ground

  • georgehants

    It seems interesting that Mr. Rossi is apparently going into a
    multi-million dollar court case where it has been mentioned here many
    times, that, trial by jury can never be relied upon in either direction.
    Of course it would not be logical or intelligent for Mr. Rossi to
    turn-up in court with a piece of paper, from a third party respected
    source, that the court would undoubtedly treat as expert witnesses,
    reporting that the basic E-cat produces an unexplained Cop above 1
    reliably, repeatably and openly.
    Far better to fight the case without these untainted, fully independent reports.
    I wonder if his lawyers have suggested such a silly idea.
    Allowing that it is possible that Mr. Rossi is acting with the above reasoning and just not telling anybody.

    • Ophelia Rump

      All he needs is one satisfied customer. The rest is a matter of contractual obligations.

      The customer is Heisenberg’s cat. It both exists and does not exist until the Judge looks inside the box. Then it either is in the box or it is not. Interestingly the cat can be in multiple state if it is inside the box at all, it can be alive and well, sick, or dead.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Rossis cat is in custody . And there is no question whether it exists or not , there is only one question is this cat alive or dead ?

    • kdk

      It’s harder to buy off jurors than it is to buy off a judge.

    • BillH

      Unfortunately this wouldn’t help secure the money, a test would have to be carried out on the actually plant mentioned in the LA and this is currently impounded. Even if AR wins his case it may be that IH as a LLC will just declare bankruptcy and AR will still be chasing redress for years. Exactly why IH was set up as a shell company in the first place. It’s a modern day shell game on both sides.

      • Omega Z

        However, Rossi doesn’t depend on IH alone, but other players as well as individuals named. Anyway, Rossi’s primary goal is likely that all IP rights of the defendent are legally termed relinguished/forfeited and Leonardo retains sole ownership of that IP.

        It’s been stated that Rossi offered to return the $11.5 million back to Darden inc if they relinguished all claims to any of Rossi’s IP before filling suit. If true and I think it is, then Darden inc apparently see value in Rossi’s IP.

  • Ged

    Ask him for some pizza and beer then ;), that oughty cheer anyone up!

  • BillH

    What disappoints me about all this is a lack of urgency, this leads me to believe that if AR does have what he says, that it is currently unreliable or even worse maybe even uneconomical. The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability issues. To be generous, you could say AR’s deceptions regarding Customers, factories, ERV could all be put down to his attempts at getting cash to fund development, others probably think differently.

    Most of the current LENR research has AR as it’s catalyst. Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize? Otherwise you have to conceive of the whole thing as a big scam and will undoubtedly see LENR fade back into obscurity.

    If AR wants to get some recognition(in his own lifetime) then he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure.

    • Chapman

      Dang It, Clovis,

      I think it was a GREAT idea, and an opportunity for some friendly banter and camaraderie. As such I would LOVE to back you up and participate… But I can’t beat “HELCat”!!!

      ChrisC had to go and score a perfect 10,10,10,10,10 in the first round, so what are the REST of us supposed to do??? I mean, come on. It fits the family name, it is an effective and functional acronym, and it is just basically Bad Ass. I am not sure weather to congratulate the guy or call him a know-it-all smart-ass! All I know is I wish I had thought of it!

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Chapman,
        Smile, i take it you like the name, and would have to admit it’s pretty good,
        better than mine,lol.

    • Freethinker

      Well, well….

      You are disappointed, apparently about many things, but foremost about the lack of urgency.

      “The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime
      during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability

      Wow. You have evidence of what?

      ” Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize?”

      They can crack whatever. I hope they do. I have tried myself. But AR has a patent, and the point from the “crack” to the “scoop” means to be able to make a viable product. Developing products, especially on groundbreaking new technology does take time.

      “… he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure”
      🙂 Too late? Too late for what? For sure? How do you know? Who have claimed to have real customer test yet on the same scale as AR?

      No sir. I think you troll.

      • BillH

        Court case documentation and downtime recorded by AR himself and recorded here. With only an incomplete record of monthly bill requests submitted by JM’s representative it shows at least 50 days when the the plant ran at only 750KW/h
        Unless of course the billing requests were false or contested, or there were no customer.

        A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can. It doesn’t stop someone submitting a more detailed and less ambiguous patent.

        Too late to be announcing things that might happen in the future after the last test that was supposed to precede full production after a year’s testing came to nothing, or worse a legal battle……too late indeed in so many more ways.

        • Omega Z

          ->”A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can.”

          Total NONSENSE.

          Next you’ll claim a Theory is necessary before a patent is even valid.

          As to “monthly bill requests”, I’m only aware of a single month of billing. Not for the duration of the test. I believe Freethinker hit the nail on the head.

          No sir. I think you troll.

          • BillH

            Your awareness is lacking, see exhibit 18 of IH’s August submission which show 5 requests for billing from JM’s representative and a total of 50 days where the plant was running at 75% capacity,

            If anything a patent is used to protect innovation and accrue financial advantage from licensing that innovation, it’s not a lock on improvement or further innovations. It’s up to a patent office to decide based on previous patents and applicability whether some is genuinely innovative.

            Ask AR how much money he has made from his current patent and you’ll see how much it is worth so far.

            There was no next claim…

  • wpj

    Correct; it would have been wise for him to update things when it all changed with IH, but I don’t think that he really believed that things would be delayed so long.

  • Stephen

    Hehe I agree with everyone that name is unbeatable. I just hope it doesn’t come in kit form and Levitate and Oscillate too 😉

  • Omega Z

    It’s always 20 years for Hot Fusion.

  • Steve Swatman

    No, I know that it is none of our business.

  • Ged

    Err… we the community did a lot of reverse engineering with limited access and testing. It isn’t hard, and it doesn’t take unlimited money. Here is an example of reverse engineering an entire computing device and making a hardware emulator for people to use: . To create the emulation of the hardware, they had to reverse engineer the computing behavior of each chip and circuit that composed that hardware. Read their logs on that, it’s really interesting stuff (if they still have it up; some of the chips were very hard to decipher the behavior of).

    If you start delving into the world of reverse engineering, it may open your eyes to whole new horizons.

  • sam

    Pietro F.
    September 18, 2016 at 11:58 PM
    Mr Andrea Rossi:
    What is the situation of the industrialization of the 1 MW E-Cats?

    Buon lavoro

    Pietro F.

    Andrea Rossi
    September 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM
    Pietro F.:
    Small scale industrialization is on course. Large scale industrialization needs longer times, but not too long I hope.
    Warm Regards,

  • clovis ray

    HIi guys
    Thank you,Frank and to you Dr.R for keeping us so well informed about your invention,
    i for one, await with baited breath,on your demonstration of the new power plant that will free the world of the disease of pollution. your name will go down in history and people will remember your name through the ages, i know the gift was God given, and you were just his conduit , but you alone knew how to build and refine it to the standards that he demands,
    And i personally thank you from the bottom of my being, for being such a good worker.–C.R.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.