Black Friday Was a Day of Success for Rossi (ECWreporter)

The following post has been submitted by ECWreporter.

It is Saturday morning and after a good breakfast in my hotel I am down at my laptop in order to summarize what really happened yesterday at IVA Conference Center in the heart of Stockholm.

The short one is:

From my view as one of the quite privileged around 70 participants in the First E-Cat QX presentation at the the Wallenberg Auditorium, we were all witnessed an historic success. At the same time my own ambitions to try being a real time reporter on behalf of ECW was rewarded with some failure.

First, quite a short comment on the reporting that did not work out as I hoped, maybe someone can benefit from it more than myself. As mentioned in my earlier post, I had already before the event accepted to try assisting ECW with reporting including also,if possible, a direct feed back from the room during the day.

The direct feedback failed and here is what happened. After the arrival to IVA we all had to show our ID and were given a neck badge without names on them. At 10:00, doors were opened and after some delay the introduction by Mats Lewan started and he confirmed that all reporting was free.

Almost immediately I began to upload my first photos and videos to Frank at ECW, but also quite soon felt that this was probably not the good for way for me to do it. As a retired senor citizen, born the same year as Andrea Rossi, and not yet very experienced in video streaming and messaging from smartphones, I got problems.

It soon became clear to me how difficult it would be to perform meaningful direct reporting while at the same time following the presentations. So finally, my ambitions for real time reporting was dropped and I decided to fully trust the professional (2 cameras) continuous video recording that was to be published with around 8 hours delay. After that I instead fully concentrated on the measurements, while now and then discussing the outcome with different attendees.

Now is the time to motivate why I already, the morning after the presentation, dare to use the big word of success. I wrote an earlier post on ECW and before I get down to the details here is maybe a good moment, if case you have missed it, to briefly browse that post published the day before the test.

My intention with that was to assist ECW followers in their preparations, both for what should take place during Black Friday, November 24, but also for the different reporting and comments that should be expected afterwards. And I noticed at least one already but more are likely to show up already later today.

Especially I suggest you review the last two segments: Varying expectations and hopes, and, Will the test procedures be transparent enough?

Now let us try to find the answer to the most important question: was the demonstration a success or not in the eyes of the viewers?

The main reason for my assumptions for a positive verdict is of course the now already known remarkably high COP of 507 which was officially confirmed late last night.

Related to this is also the important key question already well formulated several weeks by Dr Mike: “will Rossi make a measurement of the device input power in a manner that is deemed accurate by the audience observing the test?”

Already this morning I think most people present yesterday are prepared to answer this question with a yes.
And as soon as the complete video recordings from yesterday are publicly accessible I suspect that a large majority of the viewers will join with their positive answer.

Unfortunately, still at this time of writing, I have not yet see the videos published but they hopefully will show up quite soon.

The other is the now much improved transparency of the test protocol.This was achieved by two important changes that Rossi, on proposal by Mats Lewan, allowed to be introduced in the measurement of the electrical input power to QX generator. First one being an oscilloscope used for the real time visualization of the generator current to be able to visualize exclude any additional high frequency power feeding the generator and two additional measurements where the QX generator was replaced by two dummy resistors, one being a conductor and an 800 Ohm resistor.

The measurements with the conductor dummy shows that he assumption of QX being an ideal electrical conductor is really valid as there was no significant change of the measured current noticed when the QX was replaced. The detailed figures from the actual dummy measurements were also reported from Mats Lewan yesterday
late when I was already in bed.

Now let’s check on the expectations and hopes. Did Rossi fulfill his expectation on this day of demonstration,
A successful first ever demo of a LENR powered energy generator, the E-Cat QX?

According what he told Frank Acland (present on Skype) and myself in a private talk afterwards he was quite pleased and thought that in general the demo went according his expectations. The only real problem was he could not verify the plasma temperature during the spectrometry measurement. The details on why will be clear from the video.

He means that the now officially calculated result from the test, a COP of 506.66 should be enough to show the public what the E-Cat QX can offer. And as one of the lucky observers having the opportunity to follow the remarkable presentation yesterday at only arms distance I cannot do anything else than agree.

So the only conclusion I can make after only a few hours awake the day after is that Black Friday November 24 2017 became a day of success rather than failure for the E-Cat QX and than the clear majority of the audience (I could not find anyone disappointed) was convinced the claimed performance of QX seems valid.

Hopefully within a few hours the rest of the world will also be allowed to make their verdict from watching the presentation demo. [Note: since the time of ECWR’s reporting, the video showed up here]

  • Max Nozin

    Where is K.Gullstrom speech anybody please?

    • Frank Acland

      Mats said it would be on a new version of the video. They cut it to speed up processing time for the first one.

  • Christina

    Dr. Rossi:

    Congratulations. May God bless you and the efforts of your team.

    • John Kari Koskela

      God speed Dr. Rossi

  • My post-demo-video (pre-Gullstrom-video) take:

    I’m left wondering what this was.

    It clearly was not meant to prove to skeptics, universities, the press or the world at large that the E-Cat QX works. Although there are dozens of ways aspects of the demo could have been faked, you really don’t have to go any further than Rossi’s team controlled the measuring instruments. If you’re willing to entertain the idea that they are being duplicitous, then you can’t trust those measurements, period, end of story. So this failed utterly as the elusive proof of a high COP LENR device, but you can’t really fail at something you weren’t trying to achieve. Proof was not the objective here. So what was?

    I’ve seen a lot of suggestions that this was for potential investors. That Rossi is fishing for his next partner/sucker now that Industrial Heat is in his rear view mirror. I think that’s the simplest explanation but I wonder if it’s the right one. It just doesn’t sit right with me and here’s why: Rossi said he is already engaged with an engineering company or companies to help him address his control box overheating issues. Why wouldn’t that engineering company run with this capability? They’d be pinching themselves, begging Andrea to partner up. And what of ABB? Wouldn’t they have done the same thing by now. Anyway, the real dance would be happening behind closed doors, with interested companies meeting privately, not this public session, IMO.

    Instead this felt more to me like a progress report. The room was filled with people that have been engaged with his efforts in one way or another over the years. There may have been some interested parties best described as potential investors there, but that was no investment seminar… that was a geek-fest. It was basically Rossi saying, “I did it!” to a room that would understand best what that meant. COP 500 bitches and drop the mike. It was a wounded but triumphant warrior addressing his troops before the next battle. It was a solemn moment of silence to absorb the gravity of the moment. It was a coming out party for his new baby of which he is so very proud. It was a celebration of all that has been achieved as a bracing for what remains to be done. It was an intimate moment with his inner circle and the circle or two beyond that.

    Maybe also it was trolling for dollars. But it was definitely more than that.

    • Buck

      I think you hit the nail on the head.

      I believe there is an important element implied in your description: Rossi was not there to convince anyone new to LENR. You either accept his integrity along with his results or you don’t. He has involved over the last decade too many in varying forms of 3rd-Party validation and taken very risky legal action to preserve his ownership/control of his IP to do a rehash or dog & pony show.

      Also, I believe introducing the QuarkX with a COP=500 dramatically increases the negotiating pressure upon those interested in partnering and bringing the E-Cat to market. I would like to think that this sort of pressure will strip away any incentive to pull IH/Darden like behavior and force to the top of the potential list only the strongly capitalized having excellent engineering resources.

    • sumdum

      I think you’re being too generous. This “demo” simply didn’t serve any real purpose. It was extremely amateurish, and had so many problems that nobody who wasn’t already a believer would be convinced. Certainly no reasonable investor would take notice of this event.

      After 6 years of following Rossi, and after the collapse of the Industrial Heat deal, I can no longer give any benefit of the doubt. This demo was his final chance to convince me. I now believe it is just a scam, like the Orbo, and that makes me very sad 🙁

      From this point forward, I will not believe the QX or any other Rossi product works until it is handed over to a third party for independent long-term testing and proven.

      • Timar

        I can understand your position, but consider this: it is now abundantly clear that Rossi simply doesn’t care to convince you or me or any skeptical person that his technology works. He does care however, to some degree, about his loyal followers, and that strikes me, following LENR G’s analysis, as a major reason for this demonstration.

        • Vinney

          And he also cares to attract suitable partners and investors.
          But, I have said it before and say it again.
          The technology is now ready for Ecat QX large plant (even with the oversized controller), and by that I mean at least 1MW and multiples of.
          With a COP conservatively of 500, this is ready for powerplant installations.
          Why doesn’t he allow investors in to fund a heat generation (sale of heat, lease of heat) company, where the investors get return on the heat efficiency compared to other sources, and the growth of the company (the amount of heat, and number of sites), and mutually exclusive to the ownership of the IP and future development of the IP ( E-cat). The plant are operated by trained personnel, connected to a central control (for monitoring, firmware upgrades, etc) and with 24/7 security onsite and backup via monitoring.
          There is little chance of reverse engineering (not to mention, these plant will still be complex, expensive and engineered for reliability) he maintains 100% of ownership in IP, and he gets the funds and expertise to develop the consumer level E-cat appliances in the deal.
          He doesn’t need ABB, Siemens or Ericsson, he needs to ask for investors to finance this company, and luckily it is ideal for thousands of small investors, and is scalable over many rounds of financing.

  • DrD

    Sorry to say so but that was very disappointing indeed.
    The input temperature was NOT that of the water entering the reactor. It was the input to the pump. Does no one understand that a significant % of the pump power goes into heating the water. What was it? I assume it’s very small but only needs to be about 20 watts to eliminate any over unity. It would have been easy to measure the correct reactor water input so why didn’t he?
    I wholeheartedly agree with the comments below regarding the use of the 1 Om resistor. Very poor indeed. It means we really don’t know what the reactor input power was. Even the 1 Ohm power calculation isn’t acceptable, It needs to be an integration of the area beneath the curve.
    Also. was that arcing at the end of the reactor? If so it implies very high voltages, 100’s or even 1000’s which is a long way from the few mV which are assumed.
    Well I appreciate it wasn’t meant to be a scientific proof but this didn’t demonstrate anything of use and it would have been so easy to avoid all of those criticisms,

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I do not think that a small pump would be able to rise the water temperature by several degrees. But Mats has the pump and might be willing to test it.

      Undoubtedly, the input measurements leave open questions. However, I think it is possible to go without integrating if you just take the peak voltage, and thus systematically overestimate the input. I guess that is what AR did. I am rather concerned about the (re-)ignition phases where the reactor might have consumed more power than during normal operation.

      But as has been said, this was a demo and not regular test. I would rather have been surprised if it had been conclusive, after all the experience from the past.

    • Gia’

      to me this test set-up was voluntarely rough, that is not a big issue, seen the audience, to properly datalog each single parameter for few hundreds dollars. One interesting aspect of this roughness is indeed the missing “drop ?” in voltage on the ecat which to me is the real missing key. Is the control box dissipating charge energy coming from the ecat in form of heat ?

    • Axil Axil

      It is difficult to show something when much of it must be kept secret.

    • Steve Albers

      I think they ran the pump before turning on the reactor to demonstrate a null result, showing the pump isn’t adding heat.

  • The demo was a clear success. It achieved what it was supposed to. This seems to freak out the some of the “sceptics” at the LF site. Mod Eric Walker is trying to argue that the demo objective was something else than stated and when confronted with this lie he acted on instinct 😉

    • Max Nozin

      It was clear nothing sorry.
      I thought I understand Rossi but now I am loosing it. Maybe you can tell me why aging and unhealthy man is trying to get rich instead of making a history.
      My biggest fear is that Rossi might have something but never shared with anybody and will soon taking it to the grave like all others.

    • Stanny Demesmaker

      How can Eric Walker ever become a moderator on a LENR forum when he is a LENR denier? When a high level astroturfer like him is full time moderating a low level discussion forum about LENR, you know for sure that Rossi’s technology is real.

  • Dr. Mike

    Thanks for your observations of the QX demo. I hope to have a post together by tomorrow with my comments on the demo, perhaps after watching a few key sections again.
    Dr. Mike

  • Bob K

    One thing that encourages me is that Fulvio Fabiani is still sitting at Andrea Rossi’s side. Even after the trial fiasco. If AR was a con man and had nothing Fulvio would not be there.

  • Guru Khalsa

    What is disappointing for me is that we are no closer to seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. How close is Rossi to a working product. He thought he had one in the 1 MW plant, only to realize after a year of hands on tinkering it wasn’t. Will the controller turn out to be unfix-able? He did say the wires were heating up the sensitive components and I don’t think he is dumb enough to be talking about the supply lines to the QuarkX. So maybe there are windings in the controller that are causing the problem.

  • Tomasz Jastrzębski

    So, absolutely no, that was a day of inventor presentation. And he has deliberately chosen to be so.
    In another words, what has been presented, unfortunately, did hot proof anything.

  • Gerard McEk

    After having seen the video (which should have been shorted here and there) I still am not fully convinced. Based on the data that Mats has provided you can perform COP calculations (I have made a spreadsheet for it) and I conclude that the COP is around 40 and still amazing. However, the video also shows that Andrea seems to flip some switches under the cover of the control box before these additional current measurements (short circuited and with 800 ohm) are done. That does make the whole purpose of these additional measurements incredible, unfortunately. Further I have doubts about the voltage measurement over the 1 ohm resistor. Those were not RMS, as far as I could see.
    I guess we have to wait (again) for a real independent test. I think I take a few years of holidays first ;).

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I did not watch the video, but if the sequence was as follows

      Running the QX -> intervention -> 0 ohm resistor –> intervention –> 800 ohm resistor -> QX

      we could totally forget it.

      • Gerard McEk

        Well, they surely did not do the calculations I did, although Mats could have prepared a spreadsheet for it, like I did after I heard how Mats intended to do it. That would have added to the professionality of this event. Possibly the additional measurements came last minute.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          We need to know the type and order of events. With only one intervention, manipulation would only have been possible if the 800 ohm resistor was introduced before the ‘0 ohm resistor’ (the former would require the same setting as the reactor, the latter a modified one), and if the QX had not been connected another time after these tests (QX -> 800 ohm -> intervention -> 0 ohm -> stop).

          All other scenarios would have required more than one intervention for a successful manipulation, as far as I can see. Two interventions without the possibility of manipulation are also imaginable, for example QX -> intervention -> 0 ohm -> 800 ohm –> intervention –> QX.

          • Gerard McEk

            You can see it between at 2h 30′ and 2h 31′. Andrea Rossi said he was opening a ‘temperature window’ because the controller was switched off and had no cooling after 2 hours of operation.
            I do not know it it makes much difference if it is done before or after the short circuit test (Rqx=0). It was done after the test of the QX.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Since nobody discovered a second intervention, and according to Mats’ new blog article, it seems to have gone like this:

            QX -> intervention -> 0 ohm -> 800 ohm

            That makes a manipulation less likely – although it would still be possible with a programmable controller (somebody mentioned Volkswagen in another thread).

          • Gerard McEk

            I think that if he may have switched off the HV starting pulses that would have occurred in case of the 800 ohm. He may also have switched off the HF signal that is used to measure and contol the plasma. The DC signal is less distorted during this test. Rossi clearly doesn’t want to reveal details like that. For the same reason he couldn’t do that publicly as well.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I am not asserting anything, just trying to analyze the theoretical possibilities.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Wait…that’s only correct if the QX was not connected again (see above).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            …remove the “not” (it’s too early in the morning). So again, if the sequence was

            QX -> intervention -> 0 Ohm ->800 Ohm -> stop (= QX not connected again),

            a simple reduction of voltage should be able to produce the observed behaviour (the order of resistors does not even matter).

            QX -> intervention -> 0 Ohm ->800 Ohm -> QX

            would be much more difficult to manipulate.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I once thought that there are only two possibilities: either it works or not, either he has anomalous heating or not. But thereafter I learned from some sceptics that shades of grey are also possible. For example, as bachcole has proposed, that he had a genuine device, but then lost his marbles and fooled himself with QX. Or maybe he observed genuine LENR with Focardi, but lost repeatability at some point (like has happened to many, e.g. Mizuno) and instead of admitting it started to fool himself.

    But Rossi’s version of the story is also possible. In which case, a reason why he doesn’t make a convincing demo could be to continue his flight below the bigger radars.

  • Tim

    I was disappointed from the start when they they said it would use 60W to cool to get about the same out, meaning the demo as a whole are still not energy producing.

    It’s difficult to see how so much heat could go through the wires back to the controls if most of the heat was going to the water- so why was so much power need to cool the remaining? Very dubious, or just a really really poor choice of cooling.

    If it was that much heat then the wires should have been cooled externally and visibly between the control box and the QX. That would have been much more impressive. No need to trust the power input is not getting to the invention, and if water cooled then the heat from the wires could have been added to the output for an even higher COP.

    Disappointing that if this really works they could have done a really impressive demo by giving nothing extra away but having the cooling external, visible, and measured.

    • Bruce__H

      Soon after 1:50:00 in the video that is currently up you will hear Mats Lewan explain that heat being conducted along the wires from the QX back to the control box is not currently a problem (apparently it used to be but that is now solved). Rossi now specifies that the the heat problem in the control box arises totally within the circuitry.inside it.

      • Tim

        Hmmm, then that’s even more worrying. If it takes so much energy to safely produce the control signal then they cannot just ignore it from the calculations.

        • Probably they didn’t worry about it because they were just trying to get the sampling and control algorithms working, knowing that their custom-made electronics could easily be optimized once they nailed it down.

          I don’t see it as a real problem, energy-wise if they can control 100+ QX’s with a cigarette-packet sized controller as they claim to expect.

          The power used for control will need to be factored in, sure, but not necessarily at this stage when the controls are relatively crude.

      • roseland67

        Switch mode power supply’s?
        They create heat and potentially harmful harmonics.

        • Martin Lund

          Even so, a linear regulator would produce even more heat.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Maybe Rossi is using vacuum tubes in the control box to protect it from possible EMPs from the reactor. That might be an explanation for the need to cool the control box.

      A year ago, I mentioned that the Mig-25 used vacuum tubes to make it resistant to EMFs from H-bombs.

  • artefact

    Matts, the attendances were not allowed to go behind Rossi. Was it possible for you to have alook at the control box on the Rossi side? What could you see?

  • Buck

    One of his players sat behind the table.

  • Gerard McEk

    I believe Mats wrote nice reflections on the event!
    Well done, Mats!

  • artefact

    Carl-Oscar Gullström: Working with theory about the Rossi effect

    • Gerard McEk

      I watched it, but I do not want to be examined that I understand it.;)

  • Buck

    I expect the savings are even greater . . . about $15,000,000/day

    This assumes that it takes about 6kWh electricity to refine 1 gallon of gasoline, which at a bulk-buyer’s cost of about $0.05/kWh, totals about $15,120,000 for 1.2 million barrels/day at 42 gallons/barrel. With a COP=500, the electricity bill drops to about $32k/day.

    Assuming the Andeavor refineries run 300 days/year with 65 days for maintenance, this brings the total annual savings to $4.5billion/year for their investment in LENR.


  • Thomas Kaminski

    I looked him up, too. I could not find anything indicating he is still with Andeavor. Did you? If so, that is a big deal.

  • Some suggest creating an ICO with connection to LENR technology.

    • Bob Greenyer

      We have been considering it for about 6 months – but only when there is a good direction.

    • Jerry Soloman

      There are Billions in ICOs right now, Matts you would be the perfect guy to put this together, build a team and a good website and go live, start now before it gets to regulated.

      Make a presentation in Miami, Dr Rossi would probably join you there.

  • Buck

    Yup . . . . like I said before, a COP=500 simply upends the global economics of energy. A COP=2000 or COP=22,000 as in the Gullstrom test is just getting ridiculous.

    To be clear, I am a firm believer in Rossi’s ability to attain and improve on this COP=500 . . . and, I believe the likes of DoD, CIA, NSA, and all other forms of alphabet soup see and have concluded that the QuarkX as the harbinger of change. I doubt even they can clearly imagine how the change will unfold, but change it will.

    I say “Happy Holidays and Happy New Year”

    • Omega Z

      It’s like dividing a chunk of cheese in half then repeat. At a certain point, the returns are so small it doesn’t matter. After about COP>40 your talking change.

      DOD and the alphabet- I’m certain they know very well how it will change things. Economic reality has limits. Developing adaptation hardware and all takes time.

      That’s actually a good thing. If it changed to fast, it would wreck the world economy and that would lock the economic brakes delaying transition to an even longer time.

      • Buck

        I agree with your cheese analogy, however only up to a point.

        In all of our analyses, there has been a tendency to look at the change in isolation rather than within a web of interrelated industrial processes, existing and potential. What might be deemed as a small incremental change in COP may actually pass through a threshold for a potential disruptive technology.

        One that might be a perfect example is the relatively recent description in the MSM of how the DoD may now synthesize fuel oil out of C02 dissolved in sea water. It is energy intensive making it a non-economic industrial process valuable only in DoD situations. As Sifferkol has suggested, the presence of a LENR with COP=500 may open the door to changes in the economics of industrial synthesis of oil.

        In addition, our small picture analysis seems to ignore the broader picture question of “what will push Early Adopters into the situation where it is economic/business negligence to ignore this opportunity?” In effect, what will foster the creation of the actual “Tipping Point”.

        Regarding your position on “managed change”, I agree. It is a good thing. But, there has to be a first step/change to begin the process of integration into the existing energy economy.

  • psi2u2

    He didn’t say he didn’t think it was meaningful. He said it was not intended to supply a scientific proof, but to demonstrate a concept for potential investors. Despite the many, sometimes justified, complaints, it seems that from that POV the test was in fact a success. How many of those in attendance have you heard complaining that it was a fraud?

  • Jerry Soloman

    Big oil has Zero interest in home eCat units as the ecat goes deeper into obscurity, it will be years before anyone in this room will benefit from the LENR revolution.

    I expect we will be paying more for electricity by the time the meter is put to these units.

    • Omega Z

      ->”it will be years before anyone in this room will benefit from the LENR revolution.”

      You may very well be right. I’ve stated often that this will be a several decades long transition. It’s just an economic reality. First it will be used in industrial settings which will slowly benefit the general public. This technology will also require data from industrial use that will determine -it’s safety and viability before before it is available to the general public. This alone could take several years.

      The cell phone was not a revolution, but an evolution that took several decades. LENR is more complex and will be far more expensive. It will also be an evolution and will take even longer. This is not that important. What is important is getting it out of R&D and into the market. Nothing else can even start until then.

  • Jerry Soloman

    This is huge for you Sifferkoll as you are connected to the vendors that will sell these
    ecat containers to petroleum companies.

    you did put up a good fight. congrats.

    • Why not? I do not see any problem in such a development. It will take many years before all transportation goes electric, if ever. And in the meantime I see benefits in locally produced synthetic fuels. Distribution networks are there and it will be cheaper. Such fuels will be clean and climate neutral. Home E-Cats will come for sure, but it will take time especially for transportation due to need of infrastructure and production.

  • Omega Z

    ->”From 1 small unknown refiner.”

    You obviously haven’t looked into this company. They operate 10 refineries in the western U.S., A couple CHP power plants 2 million barrels a day equivalent when you include the natural gas, several major pipelines. They handle approximately 7% of the oil refining. Revenue of 37 billion$ and profits from 800 million$ upwards of 3 billion$. The variance is due booth current prices and on going investments that reduce the profit short term.

    Formerly known as Tesoro
    On June 1, 2017, Tesoro acquired(a $6 billion acquisition) Western Refining and announced that the company would adopt a new name, Andeavor, effective August 1, 2017.

    ->”If the Ecat truly worked as stated,
    Rossi could literally burn $1,000,000/day and still could not spend the interest on 1/10th of the $$$ he would make just from oil refiners in the US.”

    Not when it isn’t ready as yet for industrial use.
    When it is, he will likely build a couple units in collaboration with others, but once the problem issues are resolved and there will be such issues, I suspect Rossi will only manufacture reactors. All else will be done by other expert in their respective fields.

    Do you really think Rossi will build E-cat cars or others will build the cars with an emblem stating E-cat inside.. I see the latter for all products.

  • Omega Z

    They have been fracking wells for over 80 years. It’s just in the past they used explosives. Sometimes fracking the same well 3 or 4 times. And the reason there is no fire caused by this is the explosives burns off all oxygen.

    Hydraulic fracking is relatively new technology. More controllable and safer for all concerned. The problem with Hydraulic fracking is disposal of the fracking liquid afterwards. This requires very deep wells(1000’s of feet) and forcing the fluid down into it. The same deep well is used multiple times(because very deep wells are expensive) until they can force no more into it.

    This process does not create earthquakes, but it can trigger quakes in fault shifts that have already built up pressure. ie, instead of happening 5 years from now can happen in days, weeks or months shortly after.

    This is presently under scientific study for the intentional triggering of quakes. Trigger them when they will be small and do little damage rather then the natural process when they are much stronger.

    As to the fracking fluid, there is a small company that has developed a process for a complete recycling of this fluid. Extracting the chemicals and reusing both them and the water. Thus disposal wells will no longer be needed and far less water will be required. They indicate a 75% reduction in fracking costs. However, this will take at least another 5 years before it becomes a common practice. The real world always moves slower then we expect.

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