October E-Cat Presentation to be a ‘Technological Demo’ of ‘1-2’ Hours

Here’s a Q&A from the Journal of Nuclear Physics yesterday:

July 30, 2017 at 10:29 AM
Dr. Andrea Rossi,
The demo you will make in October will be the presentation of the product?

Andrea Rossi
July 30, 2017 at 3:09 PM
No. It will be a technological demo.
Warm Regards,

My interpretation of the difference between a “technological” and “product” demonstration is that Andrea Rossi is not expecting to demonstrate a finished product at the planned presentation. We have learned that he is only now starting to combine his individual 10-20 W E-Cat QX rectors (apparently 20 of them so far) to increase overall output. If he is planning to provide heat to be used on an industrial scale, one would expect that there would need to be thousands of them combined to make plants producing heat in the megawatt range. So it looks like the plan is to show what the E-Cat QX reactors can do, before production of industry-ready plants have started.

Another question regarding the duration of the test was posted today.

Oystein Lande

July 31, 2017 at 3:06 AM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

What is the planned duration of the QX demonstration?

Andrea Rossi
July 31, 2017 at 7:43 AM
Oystein Lande:
One to two hours the part that will be public.
Warm Regards,


This begs the question: what part of the test will not be public? I would guess there will be time involved in setup and calibration, but perhaps Rossi is not planning to broadcast that activity.

It makes me wonder what the overall purpose of the presentation is — who will be the audience that Rossi is trying to reach? Obviously the enthusiasts/detractors who have been following the E-Cat for years will be playing close attention, but maybe this is not the primary audience. Rossi has stated that this demonstration is the opening salvo in his business plan, and maybe he is wanting to reach a wider audience — I expect potential customers will be his priority — who might not have the attention span of the old timers who can watch live streaming data for hour upon hour without getting bored.

  • f sedei

    Is this how brilliant minds function: On the edge of sanity and genius? Andrea’s methods and reasoning escape me. LENR is his baby, and he wants to hold on to it forever. Turn it loose to the world, Andrea.

    • Chris Marshalk

      Another test / demonstration to prove exactly what? How is this test different from the others. I’m so tired of this.

  • Piero

    This is the criptic answer from Rossi to my question:
    July 25, 2017 at 11:08 AM
    Dear Andrea, I was wondering what, in your own mind, should be result of the coming demonstration of the e-cat QX.
    1. Provide hints to all the labs and individuals trying to replicate your effect
    2. Convince some nay-sayers (uhm…)
    3. Please your existing supporters (uhm…)
    4. Attract potential customers
    5. Attract potential investors
    6. Attract industrial partners (car manufacturers, utility companies, you name it ….)
    7. Revamp the interest of the (still skeptical) scientific community
    8. Make a splash with the general public through the media (CNN, CBS, WSJ…)
    Thanks, all the best

    Andrea Rossi
    July 25, 2017 at 2:26 PM
    We want just make a demo of our E-Cat QX.
    Warm Regards,

    • Gerard McEk

      I guess he wasn’t in a good mood… 😉

  • Banned Squirrel

    Rossi does need to put some emphasis on getting a product ready for deployment. Brilliant light power is inching closer to a consumer ready heating system that would compete with the E-CAT. Both systems are starting out as heating elements with electrical output coming later. It’s going to come out to who can get public momentum early on along with a system that is cost effective and efficient.

    • LindbergofSwed

      You are right, if there was no competion I think we would have to wait much longer for Rossis finished product ready to be sold. Rossi does not think his product will save the world because he says climate change does not exist. Now he has to go forward fast with Randell Mills coming fast with a much more effective product.

      • Omega Z

        ->”he says climate change does not exist.”

        Thta’s not correct. He says like many, that people have little or no impact. GW is a natural phenomenon. Note that a 1000 years ago it was warmer then today.

        • LindbergofSwed

          Yes it is correct, he says climate change is not caused by mankind, and you are very eager to correct people, give a rest man, you are actually rude in almost all your comments

          • Buck

            The politics of Climate Change can be intense on this blog. To be fair, OZ is not the most extreme . . . Though I disagree with OZ on this point about Climate Change, he has come to tone it down compared to years ago.

            IMHO, extreme is where some have even used the following as a form of proof as to the conspiracy to defraud humanity:
            LINK>> http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/28/delingpole-revealed-how-renewables-and-the-global-warming-industry-are-literally-hitler/

          • Chapman

            WOW! That is a GREAT Article!

            Thank you for bringing it to our attention.

            We can use every supporter we can get. It is long past time that the world wakes up to the fraud. It is wonderful to see the roots of the crime exposed here!

            You ROCK, Buck! MAGA!!!

          • Omega Z

            Is it rude to point out what Rossi actually said? Or is it rude because it counters what you say?

            I have read all Rossi’s post. You can’t judge by a single post. you must take them all in context. He has said man has had minimal impact. He does not deny GW. Global warmings and coolings are a natural phenomenon. The latest warming trend stated over 10K years ago when there were barely any people in the world. Couple million at most and many experts think far less possibly in the 1000’s. We didn’t start the climate change. It was always changing since the worlds been turning. “Billy Joel – We Didn’t Start the Fire”

            Rossi has repeatedly stated on JONP(to the chagrin of his followers) all energies must be integrated. Couple of points. Why create enemies by saying your technology will destroy them. Another point. 1 posted of Rossi implied that his technology will eventually replace the use of most fossil energy, but the implications was it would happen over decades.

            In fact it will take decades to transition. Regardless what one transitions to. Ignore the hype to anything otherwise. Hype such as electric cars over running the world. 2 Million on the roads. Out of 1 billion plus. Elon plans to double the EV battery production of the world. To 1 Million out of approximately 100 million vehicles a year. It will have taken most of 5 years for him to bring this about.

            German Chancellor GW proponent says it will take 100 years to complete transition to green energy upsetting many. She’s just being a realist.

          • malkom700

            It is now apparent that the US coastal states will soon be flooded by the ocean. Other states such as the Netherlands are even worse off. Skepticism is so strong that even in this case they will not believe that GW is realistic.

          • Omega Z

            The Yellowstone Super Volcano has been acting up. Historically it’s in the mid point of the go zone. The dome has risen 3 foot and the number of quakes have drastically increased. If that sucker goes, it has the potential to wipe out 85% of all sea life and 95% of all life on land.

          • malkom700

            If this is not a joke, it may also be related to general warming because mainly the melting of ice mass causes weight distribution changes that can cause unpredictable processes. In addition, I suggest that this should not joke about.

          • Omega Z

            No JOKE. The Yellowstone Supervolcano is in the window. For the last dozen years it has become much more active. It’s not a coincidence that Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk and a dozen others in a position to know are so adamant to get people off this rock. Note people freak when a few astronauts die in an accident, but Musk is willing to wholesale sacrifice hundreds to start a colony on Mars.(He expects the 1st 500 colonists will not survive long)

            Yellowstone is only 1 of about 2 dozen “known” Supervolcano(Earth is 70% covered in water). It’s 1 of the largest and is known to blow 240 to 600 cubic miles of ejecta into the atmosphere. These are known as mass extinction events. There are those who think it may blow in 100/200 years. Scientists like Hawking will split the difference. He says we may have 100 years to get people off earth. If we’re lucky. So between now and 200 years it’s probable that Yellowstone may go.

            So Colonies on the moon, Mars and possibly a giant self sustaining space platform or 2 are insurance. Whether they call them colonies or lifeboats, What they really mean is human seed banks. People to rehabitate the earth when it becomes habitable again maybe decades or longer after the mass extinction.

            Global warming and Ice have no impact on these bad boys. They are caused by plate tectonic and continental shifts. They are not the effect of climate change. They are 1 of the major causes.The Yellowstone is migrating NE and in time will likely cut North America in half.

            Note the USGS spin machine has been all over this since activity has increased poo poan all Scientific and University studies and reports. They fear the people will go crazy wild like in the movies.

          • malkom700

            Of course I am well aware of the role of the supervolcanos, I was surprised to raise the new theme. I think it would be a more realistic solution to drastically reduce the number of humanity and to prepare for the transitional period. There will always be better conditions than on the surface of Mars.

          • Omega Z

            GW is real. It’s been going on for over 10,000 years or we would not even be here. My current location would be under 5000 feet of ice.

          • Chapman

            It is sad, really… To see such perfect logic wasted on such utterly closed minds.

            But FEAR NOT, Z! These pages are archived.

            In time SOME KID will read them, and say “Wow! A few guys back then really did understand!”.

            And they will print it out, and take it to school as an adolescent act of rebellion against their history teacher who is currently expounding on how EVERYONE in the early 21st century were cretins who believed in Man Made Global Warming, a Flat Earth, and that Virgins sacrificed to Volcanoes could improve the autumn harvests.

            And that argumentative kid will hold up your posts, and say “Uh UHH… Not EVERYONE was a twit! There was this one guy named OmegaZ who knew better!”

            So KEEP TALKIN, Z! For the sake of our descendants… and to help improve Histories inevitably contemptuous perception of our general gullibility.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            Sorry if my straightforward comment was taken as rude. I look at the data and apply my own bias, but it clearly shows a straight line fit to a rise in sea level. I challenge you to fitting a straight line to the data and coming up with a negative slope.

        • Mike Rion

          NASA reportedly just released a report that said sea levels have been dropping for the last two years, instead of increasing as global warming would indicate.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            Reference please: All of the on-line reports and data I have seen say otherwise.

          • Mike Rion

            I’m I believer in climate change, not necessarily Global warming. However I am convinced that human contribution to any type of climate change is immeasurably small and dwarfed by other factors that are basically beyond our control. I believe the whole thing was concocted by folks who saw a way to create a new industry they could profit from. Especially Al Gore. Just the same the above is well documented in the NASA report linked below.


          • Thomas Kaminski

            Sorry, your “well documented” reference says nothing of the kind. What I see is a clear trend of rising sea levels when a straight line is fit to the curves. Even the “well documented” data shows two graphs (ground and satellite) of data. The ground data shows no dip.

            What is missing is the error bars in the measurement. I suspect that the error bars would swamp any “dip”.

          • Mike Rion

            It always amazes me how folks can take reasonably straight forward statistical data and manipulated it to say what they want, or need it to say.

            It sort of like a religion, where folks see signs of a miracle in some of the strangest place. Sure, the climate changes, in a variety of interrelated cyclical ways that range in length from days, months and years on the lower end, to millennia at the other extreme. The are affected by things a diverse as normal global water and air circulation to solar extremes and the earths orbital variations.

            To me it is the height of man’s hubris that he thinks his puny contributions can effect things in any significant way, one way or the other.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            Mike, I agree with you about straightforward statistical analysis. That is why, when taken over decades, data shows sea level rises. When a small part of the data set is looked at, you proclaim “the sky is falling!”. You can’t have it both ways.

            Perhaps man is not the main cause of the effect, but to say the oceans are not rising by selectively taking data is not a correct approach to analyzing the effect.

          • Mike Rion

            Thomas K., I think we agree more than we disagree. I’ve been keeping track of cold fusion/LENR since 1989 more or less. Having followed the IH/Rossi trial closely I was amazed at how so many, apparently credentialed, science people came to the cocksure conclusion that Rossi was everything from a scam artist to a delusional inventor, and all based on totally inadequate information. I still don’t know for sure if he has it, or at least almost has it, but I’m virtually certain that no one can reasonable be sure that he doesn’t, much less that he’s a scam artist.

            I see so called, settled, climate change conclusions in much the same light; too many cocksure believers, with almost religious fervor, and with far too little real scientific evidence to come to the conclusions they so embrace. One thing I’m pretty sure of is that mans almost insignificant contribution to atmospheric carbon is not enough to make the difference one way or the other.

            IMHO the world would be much better advised to take the money we spend on curbing greenhouse emissions and save it for adapting to rising temperatures and sea levels, because the only thing I’m more sure of, than man made global warming being a hoax, is that there is absolutely nothing we can do about it as a people, other than adapt.

            You’re right, I hate Al Gore because I’m pretty sure he doesn’t believe what he is preaching. But he is only the highest profile of many such activists, who are only doing it for the money or political gain. He’s just like our States Governor, Jerry Brown, who has used it to raise gasoline taxes, create cap and trade budgets and to raise money for an ill conceived bullet train project connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco. The only problem is that, due to environmental constraints placed by the California version of the EPA, the train has to go by way of Fresno on the Eastern side of the state, which adds enough distance to the trip to cancel out the advantage of it’s higher speed. Turn’s out it will only save about 20 minutes over the current operating Amtrak route up the coast. It’s all about the money.

  • Gerard McEk

    I hope he invites people that are able to verify the claims. I volunteer to be one of them.
    1-2 hours public demo will not convince many if not details can be checked. I am really curious what and how he wants to demonstrate it.

    • Omega Z

      Volunteers not accepted.

      However, the thought occurred to me that maybe Rossi would invite Frank?

  • Buck

    The missing Oystein Lande – Rossi question-answer:

    Oystein Lande
    July 31, 2017 at 3:06 AM

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    What is the planned duration of the QX demonstration?

    Andrea Rossi
    July 31, 2017 at 7:43 AM

    Oystein Lande:
    One to two hours the part that will be public.
    Warm Regards,

  • AdrianAshfield

    Presumably the demo will help getting investment for setting up a mass production line. I doubt that will be enough – he needs to show a finished product for that. Seems to me he wrote about possibly having that by the end of the year.

  • Paul Smith

    I am afraid that 1-2 hours for the public aren’t enough to show that the QX is really a rivolution thing. Skeptics will write tons of bytes about scam.
    I only hope that the “secret” people with Rossi will see the “miracle”.

  • Omega Z

    Darden/IH, China connection, Woodford, Lugano, Ferrara Italy etc, etc…

    It all leaks out, thanks to Mostly ECW snoops.

    I don’t think this test is for Rossi fans. I think this is just cover to hide the real purpose. Perspective Clients. A demo for potential clients would after all, leak out. Thus just present it as a public demo and hope the details remain hidden. And other then wild speculation, I think the details will remain unknown for the time being.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I see no value in a test like this, the skeptics will have a ball with this one.

    • Omega Z

      We just get to watch. It is not really for us otherwise.

      It is a technology demonstrator for the guests. Likely there will be follow ups that we will not hear about. I suppose we are lucky to know of this.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Why tell anyone about it, why not just show it to the “powers that be” and/or put it to work commercially

        • Omega Z

          Come on Bernie,

          It will leak out anyway. See my post below. Might as well let the fans see something.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Come on OmegaZ, Why not control the message, why give the skeptics a free lunch.

          • Stephen

            He doesn’t care about skeptics. For him they are just noise.

            They may damage his reputation for some reason but in the end all that counts is the product and ultimately they are just punching thin air.

            I think he is always product oriented and the demo is part of that strategy. It’s as simple as that.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Well if Rossi does not care about his reputation (which I do not believe for a minute) the rest of us should care if the skeptics/oil industry is controlling/lying about the message, remember “big lies” work.

          • Omega Z

            What Stephen says…

        • Stephen

          I think he really wants to finally introduce his new child to everyone who is curious to see.

          Maybe to show us her first steps and words and to show us she i real.

          But he is not ready to show us how she can dance and sing yet.

          Hopefully that will come some day.

          I wonder if he will release some kind of road map for future development plans and demonstrations of products or if he will keep that under wraps for now.

  • Oystein Lande

    Let’s do some math:

    If the QX demonstrates 200 watt power net output for two hours, this will be 1,44 MJ energy produced.

    1,44 MJ equals 30 grams of fuel oil. Therefore the QX reactor must be less than some 35 cm3 to discard chemical sources of the energy.

    • Omega Z

      The QX itself is 10mm x 5 mm in size. The charge would be less. What say you?

      • Oystein Lande

        It seems 20 QX is only holding a volume of a few cm3, so a two hour test would be promising then….

  • Jimr

    I don’t believe most realize what a small operation Rossi is running. He is only now attempting to connect 20 QX,s in series after a year of operation, not 100 or more. He states he has six employees but does not say they are full time. Many are saying he is readying mass production. I’m afraid that is years off.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi has been in consultations with Abb robotics. They can simulate a production line on computer and develop an overall layout of a facility and this can greatly reduce the time to setup for actual manufacturing. Rossi has also stated that changes have been made to make the product more easily automated.

      I assume this is for the most part what Rossi refers to as “preparation” for production. We are already aware that Rossi has investigated facilities for the eventual setup. From the word go, it could easily take 6/8 months to be ready for initial production, but it will be several years ramping up to any production of a serious degree. There are so many issues yet to be addressed. I look for the 1st year of production to be a slow process. A misstep early on could be disastrous for Rossi. From the 1st public sale, competitors are going to be breathing down his back.

    • Rene

      Rossi is a marketeer, and that means he gives off an RDF (reality distortion field). Steve Jobs was excellent at doing this, and it looks like Rossi is utilizing the same effect. You have to take anything he says as highly variable, especially if he omits any qualifying adjectives. So “I have six employees” can mean anything from six full time employees working on the QuarkX to six people he has hired on contract once each for five minutes in the past year, and it could also mean someone he hired to mow his lawn. That is market speech, truthful but omitting important details.
      Now that this ‘demo’, which is not a demo, is now turning out to be a company generated technology display of early designs, I value it close to zero. There are no independent controls, and that alone makes it worthless other than for an investor dog and pony show. I am yet again disappointed.

  • Stephen

    I understand from recent posts that Andrea Rossi is not yet ready to demonstrate larger devices. I also think it’s good to tak one step at a time and demonstrating with a smaller group of 20 Devices is a really good start and proof of principle.

    How ever the question did get me thinking about how to most efficiently develope larger systems with out potentially having a lot of E-Cat QX failures due to large scale system failures during development.

    If there are limited numbers of E-Cat QX’s available, I wonder if it is possible and useful to verify thermal power handling of larger systems with some kind of E-Cat QX analog device which has similar size and thermal characteristics all be it with much more input power. If so I wonder if something like a 20 Watt halogen bulbs would be a suitable analog device?

    If so perhaps very large devices can be built and verified this way with good confidence that they would work with E-Cat QX’s once they replace halogen bulbs once the system is verified and they become available.

  • Stephen

    I appreciate this is a first introduction of Andrea Rossis new device so it can only be a limited demonstration but that said I have a big hope it can answer many questions we all have. And at last demonstrate conclusively the concept and its working.

    It would be nice if the duration of the test is sufficiently long that the total energy out significantly exceeds the total energy stored in the batteries supplying the D.C.

    This would be a good independent simple high level verification of excess energy. On top of the more detailed COP analysis based on supplied power in vs thermal power out.

    Would 2 hours be sufficient for this? How many Amp hours would the 24 V batteries have? And what energy would do this correspond to. And is the energy generated by the device expected to far exceed this?

    • US_Citizen71

      It all depends on what is used for the battery. Sixteen AAs will give 24V with 2500mAh of capacity. Two A23 12V batteries would give about 55mAh of capacity.

    • US_Citizen71

      You made me a little curious, I think from a quick page through the link below 4 or more 4LR44 camera batteries might be the way to go depending on how much continuous current they can provide. Each is 6V with 110-150mAh of capacity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battery_sizes

  • Arnie

    What do you think: in almost all of the demonstrations of the ecat, sceptics have questioned the pumps. Incorrect ratings, hidden tubes, half filled pump houses and so on.
    I think abandoning phase change is better than previous setups, but even better would be leaving the pumps behind.
    As I understand it the plan is to measure Dt and flow with 400w qx.
    But why not simply put the qxes in an insulated container with open but small surface, cover the qxes in say 5 litres of water, measure the dt and after testing how much water is left. All the equipment on a wodden table, visible legs.
    Very easy, and no one can question such a test afterwards. (Except electrical input)
    What am I missing? For me, this is the obvious way the demonstration should be done.

  • sumdumscientist

    It is a shame that Rossi is back into the cycle of tinkering and small-scale technology demos. I think it is unlikely this will go anywhere, but I hope I am wrong.

    I have friends who work at SpaceX, for example. With Rossi’s permission I could easily arrange a closed-doors demo with them within 48 hours. If the technology works, I think there is a 99.9% change Elon Musk would license it and get it into manufacturing as soon as possible. Rossi would get rich and be a world hero. Musk would make the technology into real products. Everyone on Earth wins.

    Will we get such permission? Of course not. I have already offered, and Rossi says no thank you without giving any plausible reasons.

    I have followed Rossi for several years, but it is now very difficult to continue believing that he is not a fraud 🙁

    • Vinney

      It would also be in Elon Musk’s interest to suppress or at least ‘control release’ this technology given his investments in solartech, battery technology and electric cars.
      Anyway, Rossi wants to prove he is better than Musk or Bezos.
      He wants to show aspiring entrepreneurs that a lone inventor can change the world for the better against incredible obstacles.
      He has been improving the QX to the simplist elements to better understand the process, and simplify manufacture.
      He will probably introduce some patent and ‘trade secret’ protection measures before going to production.
      He also wants all the ‘accolades’ for his work and make history.
      Proper financial reward would be nice also.

    • Please do it! Please!

      Oh…Rossi denied.. LOL!

    • orsobubu

      I remember some years ago George Hotz, the most famous hacker in the world, went to Musk offering him his breakthrough machine learning auto pilot system; there was some form of agreement, but abruptly Musk returned in the room where Hotz was waiting, he had changed the economic conditions, so disappointed Hotz walked out and started his company. Later NHTSA stopped Hotz for legal requirements compliance, and he renounced to the project, making it opensource. Today AI is widely used in the industry in self driven vehicle development.

    • I absolutely agree with this. I have said many times, that no matter how much I would love the e-Cat technology to be real, the fact is that if Rossi had anything that really works, he would have had big companies or governments throwing billions at him already. If he really had the technology he says he has, it would be so easy to prove and getting enormous investments would be a walk in the park. Here we are after many years, and nothing substantial has happened… that definitely makes me think this is a fraud, no matter how much I would like the e-Cat story to be true.

      • Omega Z

        You ever think that Rossi has what he claims, but had control issues.

        You don’t work with outsiders under those circumstance. History can attest to how that turns out. They will steal your technology at the very first opportunity.

        • It doesn’t really matter if he has control issues. If he really has discovered a functioning LENR+ technology that multiplies the energy going in, he could easily get billions of dollars of investment. In any normal situation he would be working on this with a team of hundreds or even thousands of the worlds best scientists improving his technology… not tinkering on his own with a team of a couple of engineers. This would be much bigger than hot fusion… You think IH wouldn’t have paid up those 89 millions if they thought Rossi actually had the solution to the worlds energy problems in his hands? In that case 89 millions really is peanuts. The whole situation is just extremely unlikely. That said, I would love to see him deliver, that would be an revolution for the world.

          • Omega Z

            No offense, but I think your being naive. Robert Godes and his Brillouin energy has been left with only 5% of his IP. Maybe less now. It would be great if outsiders would collaborate fairly, but they don’t.
            Andrea, Not only do we now control most of your interests, but we also developed the controller and you must pay a royalty for every one of your devices you sell.
            Not an exaggeration. This is how it usually works out. Unless they figure a way to get all of it. They will try. While you’re busy with your R&D, they have assets and are busy looking to find a way to take it all. A VC’s catch phrase-Kill the inventor.

          • Omega Z

            Note – Read orsobubu’s post about George Hotz just below…

          • Yes, of course if you have something worth billions of dollars, or even trillions, then yes there will be people who will try to cheat you and steal from you… at the same time I think plenty of people would see how something like the e-Cat would benefit the entire world and whole of humanity and just do their best to help. And I understand that he is careful. But nonetheless, I think it is reasonable to assume, until we have seen strong and convincing evidence, that LENR+ doesn’t work.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Retrofit this with E-Cat QX reactors and fly it for hours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLRcYYb1dZ8

  • enantiomer2000

    There is, but there will never be enough for the hard nosed skeptics until a commercial product is in the market.

  • Michael W Wolf

    I am afraid this will lead to another contract with a company, if he can find one. The lawsuit in and of itself will drive away many if not all investments. He had better have something definitive, lest he will die before realizing his dream.

  • Brokeeper

    If Andrea Rossi would commit to a commencement date of industrialization during the presentation it should give credence of authenticity to his claims and demonstration.

  • sam

    July 31, 2017 at 2:21 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    Have you made any progress on your inspired chosen model “Dream Town” conceived on New Year’s Eve 2016?
    Warm Regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    July 31, 2017 at 5:07 PM
    Without any doubt the E-Cat QX is a sensitive approach, even if the situarion is changed, because at that time I thought to make light directly with the E-Cat QX, while eventually we learnt that it is more simple to produce heat and then electricity with the Carnot cycle, for many reasons.
    Warm Regards,

    July 31, 2017 at 4:45 PM
    Dear Dr Rossi,

    The old E-cat gives 10Kw thermal power, based on a reliable single cell reactor.
    The new Quark requires a thousand cores (assuming 10W each) to get the same output power:
    apart from an obvious problem of reliability when assembling so many elements to make them work properly together, i dont see the advantage of the new E-cat compare to the old one ? I hope there will be a data comparison between the two versions during the presentation.


    Andrea Rossi
    July 31, 2017 at 5:03 PM
    There is a big difference that make the old E-Cat obsolete respect the QX. The QX is the result of years of experiments and of the 1 year test with the 1 MW plant, an enormous patrimony of information that has generated a strong improvement.
    Warm Regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    July 31, 2017 at 1:50 PM
    Tom Conover:
    Thank you for your suggestion, but our demo will be made with a small module.
    We are still in an R&D phase and we are not going to show an industrial E-Cat QX plant, yet. We are not ready for it.
    Warm Regards,

  • R101

    I do hope that Frank and MFMP get an invite!

  • It is the replication by the Uppsala team.

    • Buck

      Source? Or, just a reasonable guess?

      • Omega Z

        It’s likely just a guess, but if you ask Rossi you’ll get spammed.

        • Buck

          I agree.

  • Karl Venter

    I would like to know if there will be conditions put to the viewers of the test
    Do not touch? – obvious
    No cameras/videos?
    no Geiger counters
    no detectors etc
    Maybe Frank can ask – I am sure he will be invited?

  • sam

    Andrea Rossi
    July 31, 2017 at 5:03 PM
    There is a big difference that makes the old E-Cat obsolete respect the QX. The QX is the result of years of experiments and of the 1 year test with the 1 MW plant, an enormous patrimony of information that has generated a strong improvement.
    Warm Regards,

  • Paul Smith

    I think that during the short public presentation, we the people will receive only few informations about QX. Too bad! And will remain the BIG question: Is it really true?

  • roseland67

    any excess heat in a 1-2 hour demo could be
    chemically created no?

    • any excess heat in a 1-2 hour demo could be
      chemically created no?

      …and even longer if radioactive material is used. Any kind of “demo” is ultimately inconclusive unless close scrutiny is allowed by experts or the demo is followed up by independent research access or products for purchase.

      But you know we’re all going to watch anyway 🙂

    • If it is operating for 1-2 hours in self sustain mode, without a powersource connected, that would make the demonstration a bit more convincing. But I seriously doubt this 1-2 hour demo will be conclusive proof of anything at all…

      • Omega Z

        The period of time means nothing. How much energy is applied and how much is produced means everything. (NIF) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory claims more energy out then in with a laser experiment that lasted less then a millisecond.

        • You are right, it depends on how perfectly it is measured. What I said is just judging from earlier demos. Also, considering that the E-Cat QX will be tiny, there will be much less room for cheating, so depending on how this is set up this could potentially be a good demonstration even though it only lasts 1 to 2 hours. I have just become sceptical after all these years of e-Cat drama without conclusive proof.

    • US_Citizen71

      Rossi could boil 3 olympic swimming pools with just power input of two watch batteries and there would be people who would claim that it doesn’t prove anything. ‘Obviously he had anti-matter as the true power source.’ The only true test will be a commercial product.

      • roseland67

        Boiling 3 Olympic swimming pools using only his latest gizmo would convince anybody.
        Would he sell them then?

  • wizkid


    Regarding Rossi …
    Sounds like his life history, in a rock’n roll way. Don’t you think?

    Let the good times roll
    Let them knock you around
    Let the good times roll
    Let them make you a clown

    Let them leave you up in the air
    Let them brush your rock and roll hair

    Let the good times roll
    Let the good times roll
    Let the good times roll

    Let the stories be told
    They can say what they want
    Let the photos be old
    Let them show what they want

    Let them leave you up in the air
    Let them brush your rock and roll hair
    Let the good times roll
    Let the good times roll-oll
    Won’t you let the good times roll

    Good times roll

    If the illusion is real
    Let them give you a ride
    If they got thunder appeal
    Let them be on your side

    Let them leave you up in the air
    Let them brush your rock and roll hair
    Let the good times roll
    Won’t you let the good times roll-oll
    Let the good times roll

  • Bob Greenyer

    Successful first tests of MFMPs NOVA reactor bode well for live transmutation tests.

    Dr. George Egeley says it has tested well.

    • Sweet integration!! Excited to see the results!!

    • georgehants


    • Andreas Moraitis

      Fine. Is there somewhere a description of this device?

      • Bob Greenyer

        We will publish the plans we have and the circuits.

        It is being made for us by Dr. George Egeley’s team. We were going to make it ourselves, but it was considered far better that the original team made the device.


        • Andreas Moraitis

          In case that you find something in the ash that appears to be iron, maybe you could try to melt it and analyze it again.

          • Bob Greenyer

            We know about magnetic carbon, that would still show as carbon in the EDS.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Yet, but that was not my point. I rather thought of possible nanostructures (“superatoms”) that would be destroyed by melting.

          • Bob Greenyer

            The plasma is pretty good at melting anything, it is 1000s degrees. There are many reasons Dr. Egeley uses Carbon, one is because of its high melting point – higher than all metals.

            The Carbon often turns to gas (like CO2)

        • Rene

          Bob, is there any news from me356? Was it wasted time?
          Likewise ecco – what is the latest on that one.
          Are you planning on writing a synopsis on steemit to capture all that taken place on the various MFMP projects?

          • Bob Greenyer

            Both trips were not a waste of time. More on that later today.

    • Bob Greenyer

      The Spectrum on the left is from 40 – 18000Hz and the amplitude is on the right.

      When we do our actual main testing we will be able to record up to 192kHz and hopefully take samples from the Oscilloscope up to 1.2MHz – so should get a good idea of what sounds are being generated.

  • Omega Z

    Certifications are required for industrial and commercial use. However, they have a much lower threshold then a consumer product. It is assumed trained personnel will always be present when in operation. They can be obtained quite easily. Rossi had certification on the Hot-cat.

    As to selling a prototype, I assume several will be sold, but only after he is reasonably certain must control issues are settled. Some of Rossi’s more recent posts have actually confirmed what many had thought for a long time that he had control problems. That has been one of the primary reasons of the QX. From his posts, there is little control necessary. Just off/on.

  • Buck

    You are confused . . . we have had not discussion.

    And now, you do not address my underlying point . . . that Breitbart has the editorial policy of purposefully inflaming the selected topic with hate, anger, and fear. Look at their elevation of Yiannopoulos, who gained his reputation on the internet as a vitriolic troll.

    There is a tragic quality to how many simply dismiss AGW as some sort of grand conspiracy of the 95%-97% of expert climate/environmental scientists who affirm the scientific validity of AGW.

    I’ll just share the following and then suggest that we will simply have to agree to disagree while we both enjoy the story of Rossi’s efforts to bring the E-Cat QX to market.

    Iain McGilchrist in the TedTalk “The Divided Brain” outlines how Western Culture has overemphasized Materialism. He successfully argues IMO that this has dire consequences given the very nature and structure of our mind. He ties these dire consequences when pointing to aspects of our Western culture and the extremes and prevalence of suffering, both physical and mental.

    The video is 12min long and very dense with information. But, that is easier to deal with than the 600 page small print book it summarizes: “The Master and His Emissary”.

    • Chapman

      The mere fact that you recite the 97% falderal indicates that you are either grossly misinformed, or intentional dishonest.

      Regardless of whether Global Warming is occurring, the relevant question is one of whether there is ANY reliable evidence that HUMAN activities are to blame.

      Unfortunately, the pseudo-science supporting the HUMAN aspect is awash with well documented data manipulation, poor logic, and outright lies and fraud, just like Hockey-Stick-Boy from Penn State. A total fraud, and yet, just like the 97% BS, you guys will continue to cling to it like cat hair on velvet.

      Even the science behind the fundamental warming issues, regardless of cause, are muddled and obscured by analysis failures and data misinterpretations that would relegate ANY OTHER FOCUS OF STUDY to the “Fringe Science” shelves, to be indexed between “A Scholarly Study of the Migration Patterns of the North American Sasquatch” and “Wet and Wild: An examination of the effects of Mid-Afternoon Humidity levels on the Proliferation of Crop Circles”.

      I fully expect the next batch of AGW “proofs” to come via the methods of paranormal investigators, using EVP recordings and ectoplasmic residues.

      AGW was simply wrong from the outset. But it was MAROONS citing fake science, fake statistics, and touting FAKE PROFESSIONALISM that made it the JOKE it is today.

      It is sad that you do not see that espousing AGW nonsense is now as embarrassing as screaming “Oh YEAH, That’s my JAM” when the oldies station plays “Ice, Ice Baby”!!! Have a little self respect! Listen to some CCR, and actually READ a little bit about Climate, History, and VALID Scientific Methods before buying into academic voodoo.

      In Conclusion: AGW is foolishness.
      Attempting to legitimize it is Foolhardy.
      Actually BELIEVING it, well that just defines one AS a fool.

      • Frank Acland

        Hi Chapman, we are getting quite a long way off topic here!

        • Chapman

          Preaching to the choir, brother!

          Which is why I am amazed that every time we try to have a discussion about LENR and the E-CAT it seems someone is compelled to drag in “Starving Babies”, “The Evil of Capitalism”, and AGW!

          Why can’t we just enjoy a nice Technology discussion without getting trolled with politics???

          Why not just remove the initial posts that start off these inane tangents, and let the discussion stay on topic? I will leave the moderation up to you, but you can hardly expect to have someone post derogatory or inflammatory comments without having OTHERS reply and correct the issue.

          Best just to eliminate the issues entirely…

          But I will defer to your better judgement, and ignore the nonsense.

          • Frank Acland

            Good points, I get what you are saying but don’t always have the time to intervene,

            and, you can’t entirely get away from politics, economics, climate change, etc. since technology touches on them all.

            I think posters usually do very well at self moderation, but I don’t mind stepping in when I can!

          • Chapman

            Luckily the old dog only has to bark once in awhile to remind the neighborhood kids not to stray into the back yard! 🙂

  • orsobubu

    Confirmed again by Rossi to me just two days before the trial, Steve

    • Steve D

      Good news orsobubu

  • georgehants

    Science News from research organizations
    Research and design for carbon quantum dots catalysts
    Date:August 2, 2017Source:World ScientificSummary:A new study that provides a new approach for the rational design of carbon quantum dots (CQD) modified catalysts with
    potential applications in energy and environmental areas. The study
    discusses the introduction of CQDs into Bi2WO6 photocatalyst and the
    demonstration of its good photocatalytic performance in pollutant
    degradation and hydrogen evolution.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks George,

      We have agreed the narrow focus of the release today and will hopefully be Live with Q&A afterwards in the next 2 hours.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Live Presentation

    Ryan Hunt
    Alan Goldwater
    Bob Greenyer


    • Axil Axil

      So Sorry, I have an opinion that contradicts your current thinking.

      Back in 2011-2012, Rossi had radiation problems. Rossi solved these problems by adding a secondary heater to preheat the reactor to a high operating temperature. Currently, Rossi does not use lead for radiation protection.

      IMHO, Piantelli sometimes sees radiation because he runs his reactor cold. The radiation elimination mechanism (Bose condinsation) requires vigorous pumping( high heat) to get the BEC going.

      By the way, the “signal” marks the start and end of the BEC formation.

      • Bob Greenyer

        This is not something to apologise for and *personally* I agree that the system has to be in a domain to avoid radiation. Some say that is surface plasmons, others charge clusters. We have discussed many times how, in 2013, our repeatable ( and replicated by JPB inside 24 hours, and planned as part of tests in California) gamma release was due to the in-rush of gas flash-cooling the wire and breaking down whatever prevented emissions.

        Gamma is one thing, Neutrons is another. This whole presentation was focussed on the Neutrons as a safety issue as were were presenting data form two claimants that said they had excess hear and the data showed a transmutation we had never seen before but that Piantelli warned us about and was the cause of their most successful excess heat data.

  • Omega Z

    Rossi obtained a certification for the LT E-cat reactors (as used in the 1MW unit) long ago. It was even made public and I believe even published here at ECW. Or possibly just a link to it. I think the certification company was SGS.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    It is my understanding that the rapid rise in temperature we have seen over the last decades, coupled with the rapid increase in CO2 in the atmosphere are unprecedented in the geologic record. I have seen the CO2 atmospheric graphs over eons and it is true that there have been periods of high CO2 concentration. During those times (which occurred over many thousands of years) there was also no permanent ice on the poles according to the geologic record.

    It sounds like your hatred of Al Gore has colored you ability to analyze data.

  • Buck


    Do you think I am reading too much into Rossi’s lack of response to your question in light of the fact he chose to post your question rather than spam it, leaving your question unanswered? Is he say “yes” to your assertion without really saying so?

    Of course he may eventually answer your question, but he seems to have skipped it and answered several that came after you.

    Frank Acland
    August 3, 2017 at 3:38 PM

    Dear Andrea,

    From your answer to Jaroslaw Bem it would seem that the control
    system you are using for the E-Cat QX consumes less than 20W. Am I
    Many thanks,
    Frank Acland


    Jaroslaw Bem
    August 3, 2017 at 3:08 AM

    Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi,
    You have got my great respect for your achievements.
    I have an practical question.
    Assumption: The whole apparatus E-cat QX consist of: array of E-cat QX, heat exchanger, control system, cooling system, converter AC/DC, cables and the pumps.
    Each of these components consumes energy.
    Assumption: For the user of E-cat QX apparatus, Energy emitted from the other components than heat exchanger, is not usable. Usable Energy is only Thermal Energy from the outlet of the heat exchanger, and the E-Cat QX works at max power = 20 W each cell.
    COP = Usable Thermal Energy Produced, to the Energy Consumed by the whole E-cat QX apparatus.

    How many E-cat QX cells in the array is needed to make COP of the whole apparatus bigger than 1?

    I know, it depends on the efficiency of the heat exchanger, but for example, how many E-cat QX cells in the array is needed to make COP of the whole apparatus bigger than 1 in your demonstration set?

    Best regards,
    Jaroslaw Bem

    Andrea Rossi
    August 3, 2017 at 7:15 AM

    Jaroslaw Bem:
    The COP is given from the ratio between the energy produced by the E-Cat and the energy consumed by the E-Cat, independently from the energy consumed by the control system.

    The control system consume is made by the heat in which the flowing electricity is dissipated, that obviously cannot be accounted for the COP of the reactor.

    The thermal energy in which the electricity of the control system is converted can be recovered itself, with a COP close to 1, if opportune, because the heated air can be sent in a preheater of the water before it goes to the reactor. It is just standard air/water heat exchange and it can recover practically all the energy dissipated by the control system. This, obviously, does not change the COP of the reactor.

    To reach a COP>1 adding the energy consumed by the control system is enough 1 E-Cat QX.

    Warm Regards,


    • Frank Acland

      To me, it seems like he chose not to answer. However, I think his answer to Jaroslaw does suggest quite strongly that the control system consumes less than 20W

      • Buck

        Though I cannot assess the engineering implications of Jaroslaw and your conclusion . . . I do come to the feeling that the implication is affirmed.

      • Buck

        I thought about this 20W overnight.

        Taking this 20W as fixed value to control 100 QX modules where each module is rated at 20W and with COP = 22,000, points to a COP = 100 for the entire E-Cat Q2.

        A COP=100 is not as exciting as 22,000 or 2000. But it is important to recognize that there is still a dramatic reduction in the cost of the heat generated.

  • Mylan

    August 5, 2017 at 12:28 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    To measure the amount of energy that flows in a circuit composed by the power source and two resistances of which one has a known ohmage and one has not, you have to measure the voltage across the known R and once you have the voltage, you make V/R and you have the amps. Then, making V x A, you know how much energy you have in the circuit. By the first principle of thermodynamics, the energy cannot be more than that in any point of the circuit, but it can be less if the resistances dissipate energy in form of heat.
    Is it this you are doing?

    Andrea Rossi
    August 5, 2017 at 8:25 PM
    Warm Regards,

    Why?! This is simply wrong, and the whole presentation might be useless. You can not calculate the power of the whole circuit by knowing just part of the circuit. If the unit power is high and the resistance of the Qx is high, we would get the same readings, but the Qx would need a lot of electrical power.
    This would only work if we had a a constant input voltage, but this we don’t know and Rossi doesn’t tell, aside from the 24V comments, but that’s a different topic.

    • Omega Z

      From Rossi’s past statements, power is always applied “even during self sustain” periods tho at a very low level.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    I am not 100% sure of the reason for the demo? I think everything centers on creating a working device, and then partnering or outsourcing manufacturing of the said product.

    It not clear what one will or can conclude from such a demo. Of course it certainly will raise awareness. And perhaps
    seeing the smaller solid state device in action will generate interest but at the end of the day this just a demo.

    I guess the real question is why not in the meantime create some plants on the know working 1mw design and sell them
    for working capital to fund the next gen ecat-x? That existing plant looked rather well built and designed.

    Obviously Rossi feels the “x” model is where all the efforts are to be made, but the device is at an “early” stage.

    Perhaps Rossi should be asked if he is in need of working capital, and if yes, then it would seem that selling some working 1mw plants would easily result in funds for further ecat-x development.

    So “why” the abandonment of the current 1mw design? This does not make a lot of sense to me, but just serves to kick the can father down the street.

    So this “demo” or step is somewhat confusing to me?

    I mean, sure do the demo, but it seems rather strange to let the current 1mw plant design “fall” by the wayside simply for a better next gen iteration of his technology. I mean, sure some small prototype demo is “neat-o”, but it
    seems to miss the point here.

    At anything around 40-100 cop, most of us would not really care that some next gen device will have a cop of 500 or
    2000. Anything over 30 or 40 easily has a winning market place value for any kind of heating, or even power production.

    I can well understand efforts on a new e-cat, but I don’t grasp why the current systems are not being considered for

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Omega Z

      Albert, I think Rossi is just throwing the fans a bone. The test actually appears to be for special guests that will be present.

      As to the 1MW plant. It only produces low temp output. The QX will allow for very high temps and would be easily adaptable to nearly every L,M,H temp process.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        That is fair. However, I would have to thus assume Rossi feels he not that far away from a working QX
        design, or Rossi not in need of any funding to setup and start manufacture of
        the QX.

        I guess you canspin this either way. If Rossi is “close” to a working + manufactural QX, then
        no need for the existing e-cat selling to raise funds for QX.

        Or Rossi simply not in need of funds, or he feels he so close to a QX design that anything in
        regards to previous systems is a waste of time and effort.

        All of the above simply kicks the LENR can down the road for Rossi.

        Perhaps in the demo Rossi will give some hints as to how close he is to a design for manufacture of
        the QX, but we kind of starting over with a new design – one that I would guess
        is going to require a number of years to “build” up some testing and numbers in
        terms of fuel consumptions etc.

        We in effect gone from a larger power plant to a small “lab” table top demo much like what we saw
        back say in 2011 before the whole deal started with the 1MW plant. I consider
        this a set back at this point in time.

        Given that QX works so different than previous designs, then quite a bit of R&D looks to be
        required here.

        However, will be most happy to be proven wrong by Rossi.

        However, in the time I started following LENR, two other significant technologies have

        Solar panels – they are dropping in price, but from 2009 to 2014, we saw a whopping 50% drop.

        And from that point on, we seen some REALLY stupid cost drops.

        We seeing stacks of panels sell for as low as .33 cents a watt.

        To be fair, it more like .50 or 60 cents, but we are seeing “below” .50 cents a watt. That means $2000
        spent on panels will get you MORE than 4000 watts of panels (such prices are
        un-dreamed of just some years ago). Of course the rest of the system and setup
        will cost you more, but it still an AMAZING transformation since I started
        following LENR. And of course solar have rather limited uses, but solar really
        is taking off right now. In fact, it going to get so bad, that we see power companies
        staring to MOVE AGAINST people using and installing solar panels. (Who’s going to
        pay for the grid?).

        The other area is high power, low pressure and “safe” Thorium (nuclear) reactors. In the last year,
        we seeing a “critical” mass (pun intended) in regards to companies looking at room “pressure” nuclear reactors as opposed to high pressure (and dangerous) heavy water nuclear reactors.

        So “2016” was kind of a special inflection point for Thorium nuclear reactors. China, India and
        now a slew of American companies are jumping on this bandwagon. I think “many”
        may have seen this video on thorium, but if not, it worth a watch.


        Thus on the horizon is Thorium – it that or LENR.

        Particular “astounding” in this video? Is the part towards the end – it shows the power of the
        internet. Kirk Sorensen in 2004 was handing out CD roms to people. Then in 2006, he placed his work on the internet. And in 2016, we seeing an eye-popping number of people and companies start up in regards to Thorium – including some with ties to president Trump

        In effect, we not need LENR if the work on Thorium continues to gain traction. A table top “pot
        belly” Thorium reactor is a reasonable and possible design.

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Omega Z

          “assume Rossi feels he not that far away from a working QX”

          That’s where I am. I think the QX overcomes many of the problems he’s had with the earlier E-cat reactors.

  • Jarea

    Another demo, how many demos already?, We want the product not more demos.