Rossi: Higher Power E-Cat Reactor being Tested — QX Still to be First Product (Update #3: Prototypes are 10 kW and 100 kW)

UPDATE #3 (Mar 4, 2017)

Frank Acland
March 3, 2018 at 4:52 PM
Dear Andrea,

Is the larger reactor under test 100 kW or 10 kW?

Andrea Rossi
March 4, 2018 at 2:25 AM
Frank Acland:
Both.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

UPDATE #2 (Mar 2, 2017)

Anonymous
March 2, 2018 at 10:46 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi:
From your comment of yesterday I understood that the new big reactor has a power of 100 kW: did I understand well?

Andrea Rossi
March 2, 2018 at 3:32 PM
Anonymous:
That’s the prototype we are testing.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

That’s quite a change from a 40 W QX reactor!

=========================================================================================================

We know that Andrea Rossi has never really been completely satisfied with any version of the E-Cat. From the very beginning of his going public we have seen various models, ranging from low temperature E-Cats to Hot Cats, to the E-Cat QX.

Now we learn of an even newer E-Cat which doesn’t yet have a name. From what Rossi has described it is a larger version of the E-Cat QX, in other words a higher powered plasma-based reactor which he says his team has just started testing.

According to Rossi, this does not mean that the E-Cat QX plans are now on hold, which has been the concern of some E-Cat followers. On the Journal of Nuclear Physics, one reader stated “There is a problem with you being a genius. The problem is that you never stop being inventive, and creating better technology. That, of course, has a downside – the product is never static enough to go into mass production, and potential customers will be waiting for the next big development. The world needs your Ecat NOW. Can you come up with a Quark based product, designed so that the smaller composites could later be swapped for the more powerful unit. If you were able to do that, and promise a FREE UPGRADE for early adopters – that would get the money flowing, and please me and the rest of your followers.”

Rossi replied:

Andrea Rossi
February 28, 2018 at 1:45 PM
Greg Leonard:
Attention: as I said, the bigger reactor does not interfere with the process of industrialization of the Ecat QX.
Thank you for your critic, anyway, I will treasure it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

A prototype of the new large reactor has apparently been built, and Rossi has said that it must go through the same type of Sigma 5 testing that the E-Cat QX went through — which lasted about a year. So if Rossi does get a product under production this year, it will be E-Cat QX-based.

Rossi has always said that E-Cat R&D will never end. I would guess that it will be on the R&D side of things where Rossi will expend most of his efforts, as he most likely will be letting robotics experts and engineers deal with the production of the finished products, which Rossi has less experience with.

Meanwhile, Rossi is asking people to suggest names for the new product.

UPDATE: I asked a few more questions about the new reactor:

Frank Acland
March 1, 2018 at 12:03 PM
Dear Andrea,

It is good to hear your R&D continues.

1. Will a customer who buys an early E-Cat QX plant be able to get an ‘upgrade’ if the plants with larger E-Cats are better. (For example, in software many customers get free upgrades for new versions)

2. When it is time to replace E-Cats, do you think it will be possible to replace small E-Cats (QX) with your larger E-Cats if they prove to work well, without replacing the plant?

3. Do you anticipate the control system for the small QX reactors work for the larger E-Cats, or will a different control system be needed?

Andrea Rossi
March 1, 2018 at 5:07 PM
Frank Acland:
1- yes
2- yes
3- it will be substantially different, because it is in it the core of the difference.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

So the difference is in the control system, and it doesn’t sound like early adopters will be penalized if the opt for the QX plants if they can upgrade if an improved reactor comes along.

  • Brokeeper

    Like many longtime followers, I found the output of recent 40W E-Cat (although with an amazing COP and control improvements) a drastic reduction from what we were accustomed from the 1.5+KW reactors of the past. The one thing I was concerned about was the numbers of E-Cats required to equate the previous prototypes. Even with robots this requires much more production time to manufacture, load and reload by shear numbers. With the new powerful ECat hopefully it will cut production time significantly assuming the size does not increase appreciably thus hopefully cut down on 1MW module sizes. If small size E-Cat applications are required perhaps the current E-Cat would still be produced in separate facilities. Anyways, its great to know this should not delay the long awaited commercial release.

  • Tadej

    E-Cat Aether
    E-Cat A

  • Ophelia Rump

    The supply and distribution channels will need to be fairly large. We will see the first shockwaves hit the financial world when word of those being established and orders being placed inevitably spreads.

    Financial markets will gamble on the effects of the movements of giants, whether they believe in giants or not. When money flows there is money to be won and lost.

    • Brokeeper

      Well said, especially at IPO offerings.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Do you really think that they will go public?

        Once they get past initial release the biggest financial problem will be figuring out what to do with the profits.

        • Brokeeper

          All I remember is that Rossi said they would, but like you said it may change in the turmoil. ???

          • Ophelia Rump

            That is interesting, I think it is a mistake if they have the money to launch. I take it as a sign that either he did not have the backing then or he does not have sufficient backing now.

        • Omega Z

          Giganticus is not a good business model. You soon lose all control over costs, become bloated and ROI becomes slim to none with an over priced product. It’s a recipe for some small startup to bump you off.

          Smart business will retain control over the core technology and force smaller companies to be innovative to compete against one another that keeps component prices down and profit margins up for the core technology company.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          “…problem will be figuring out what to do with the profits.”

          déjà vu

          Ah yes, the movie Scarface.

    • Keep in mind that if an invention has demonstrable public value, the patent holder can (in this case probably will.) be legally compelled to provide licensing at a fair price.

  • Jonnyb

    E-Tiger or E-Saber

  • AdrianAshfield

    Glad to see plans for production of the QX were confirmed.
    i see the future being relatively small E-Cats suitable for homes and vehicles. Probably have local small networks rather than each home generating electricity.

    MW requirements to be met by QX turbines, possibly supercritical CO2 turbines at a later date. GE is making a 10MW CO2 turbine that is only 4.5 ft long weighing 150 lb.

    As for a name, why not QX2 or E-Cat 4 (the current generation) so new models just require a new number.

  • Atsom

    As for the name ECAT LP
    LP for
    Large Plasma – as suggested the plasma is larger.
    Large panthera – a bigger stronger cat.
    Long Play – Longer fuel lifetime & operation.

  • ScienceFan

    If it’s based off of the QX, how about E-Cat MegaX?

    • kenko1

      Naw, it’s eCat JUmBo. i’ve confirmed it. The logo will be an elephants head on a cats body or vice versa.

  • jaman73

    E-Cat Aurora seems appropriate for a plasma machine.

  • Gerard McEk

    When Andrea says that the control system is at the ‘core’ of the power output performance improvement, it means IMO that he has managed to improve the stability under hotter conditions. I assume also the COP has improved.
    BTW, when he says that the output is improved ‘substantially’, would that imply a factor 3?

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    March 1, 2018 at 10:20 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    How has your R&D on this new, larger E-Cat affected your focus on your goal for E-Cat QX mass production in 2018?

    Andrea Rossi
    March 2, 2018 at 6:24 AM
    Frank Acland:
    Absolutely NOT !
    They big reactor is in the R&D laboratory, the QX is in the industrialization development process. Different places, different guys involved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • sam

      Fox
      March 1, 2018 at 6:49 AM
      Dear Rossi
      you had a hard experience with Petroldragon.

      Andrea Rossi
      March 1, 2018 at 10:50 AM
      Fox:
      Yes, but my failures have been the pillars of what I eventually did. Survival made me stronger.
      See
      http://www.ingandrearossi.com
      Warm Regards
      A.R.

  • sam

    Gerard McEk
    March 2, 2018 at 8:48 AM
    Dear Andrea,
    Congratulations that you found a way to improve the output power of the E-cat QX, mainly by improving the control. I have some questions about this:
    1. Does it mean that the usable output temperature has increased?
    2. Is the COP also improved?
    3. If the QX reactor size stays the same, does a higher output imply also a shorter operational time?
    4. Can the operational time be compensated by changing the fuel mix when the reactor size stays the same?
    Thanks for answering our questions.
    Kind regards, Gerard

    Andrea Rossi
    March 2, 2018 at 9:08 AM
    Gerard McEk:
    1- maybe, to be tested
    2- no
    3- the size is not the same
    4- N.A.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Gerard McEk

      Yes, I obviously misunderstood it. I thought just the control was the main reason for the improvement of the output power, but I was wrong, also the dimensions changed.

      • Frank Acland

        This is my interpretation of what is going on.

        Rossi went small with the QX because the control was easier and he needed to get something stable to make commercial plants with. He did the approx 1 year Sigma 5 test to prove its viability and this got his new partner on board to help with commercialization. THey have designed and prototyped the first generation of plants around the QX and they are now preparing to build them.

        Meanwhile, as Rossi always does, he tries to make improvements. Obviously it would be less complex to build plants out of larger reactors (fewer individual items to build, faster refueling of plants, etc.) but it sounds like they are harder to keep stable. So now Rossi is long-term testing a larger reactor with a new control system. If it is a success these controllers and reactors will likely be used in the second generation of the commercial plants, and might be used to replace the QX controllers/reactors in the first generation of plants when the time for recharging comes around.

        • Gerard McEk

          Thanks Frank. You asked Andrea if your interpretation is correct. This was his answer:

          Andrea Rossi
          March 2, 2018 at 3:34 PM
          Frank Acland:
          Yes, your interpretation is correct.
          Warm Regards,
          A.R.

  • greggoble

    The “Cat’s Meow” CM
    or
    HP for High Purr-formance as in
    “that reactor really purrs”

  • Ophelia Rump

    Replacing the initial reactors with the next model is a bad idea. It will kill the first year of production capacity by having to repeat it entirely,when a simple refuel would have sufficed.

    E-Cat will be more than a bargain when it first releases. It will be a power play in whatever market you are in.
    The first adopters will be blessed with the gift of market domination, and it will pay for itself in two years.
    In three years that first model will become an extremely valued asset, and it’s configuration will remain entirely irrelevant to it’s function.

    • kenko1

      Rossi is either a genius or a fool when it comes to marketing. I believe he has said that his firm will sell heat or a 1MW plant, whichever the customer prefers. Probably very few are going to opt for purchasing since generation II is forthcoming. His IP remains close to his vest and customers validate the claims of substantially cheaper energy when leasing.

      • LarryJ

        If very few opt to purchase then those who lease may not validate the claims of substantially cheaper energy since critics will claim that Rossi is simply selling grid power at a loss. It would have the advantage though of allowing him to keep his reliability problems quiet while he works out the kinks and it would keep his reactors out of the hands of copy cats.

        • kenko1

          Channeling that much grid power would probably be easy to detect if one has access to 1 cargo container and not the entire factory building as Rossi has had.

    • Omega Z

      I believe in time, there will be many different sizes, output and various designs each with its unique advantages dependent on what it is used for.

  • kenko1

    The name should be something more descriptive than the bra cup sizes you suggest. Like “JuMbO” as mentioned elsewhere.

  • artefact

    Q for Quark (like single basic thing)
    X as aplaceholder for the verson number

    (so the name could be Q2 🙂 )

  • Richard Hill

    It is surprising that Rossi is the sole source of information about what is now or soon to be a major industrial enterprise. When there many people involved there will be leaks.

    • LarryJ

      When something is so unbelievable leaks don’t really matter. An ex employee could scream it from the rooftops and he’d just be discounted as some disgruntled flake.

  • Buck

    The following exchange is the root exchange between Sture and Rossi describing Rossi’s “Ecat SK 100kW” statement. For me, it does NOT describe the power of the enhanced singlet reactor. It describes the power output of the plant as well as the replacement of “Q” in the product name with “SK” as tribute for Sven Kullander’s role in the development of the Ecat. This is because Rossi has always described the product name as the Ecat QX where the “X” defines the size/power output of the aggregate.

    In the QX, the power of the singlet is 40W. I have two suggestions for the power output of the SK singlet. As a very simple association, the 40W becomes the “100” of the 100kW and therefore an SK singlet is 100W. However, I am biased towards recognizing that the basic unit of the QX is 4kW and Rossi is possibly suggesting that the basic unit of the SK is 100kW, or 25x the size of the Qx. This suggests a rationale where the SK singlet is 1000W, or 25 x 40W, maintaining the assumption that there are 100 singlets in a basic unit.

    Of course I could be wrong.

    =============================================

    Sture Andreasson
    March 1, 2018 at 5:43 PM

    Dear Andrea Rossi:

    Your Customers need to know from the name of the model its core characteristic, which is essentially the power. On the other side, Ecat is a strong trade mark, therefore I suggest you as a name “Ecat” followed by the power in kW, e.g. “Ecat 100 kW”. I can’t wait to see i the market the new product with the plate dedicated to Swen Kullander, as you did with the Doral plant.

    All the best,

    Sture Andreasson

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Andrea Rossi
    March 1, 2018 at 5:48 PM

    Sture Andreasson:

    Great suggestion: the name could be ” Ecat SK 100 kW “, wherein SK stays for Sven Kullander, as explained in the plate that will be attached to every Ecat.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • Buck

      Well, I was wrong . . . he is testing both a 10 kW and 100 kW singlet reactor.

      =============================================

      Buck
      March 3, 2018 at 1:29 PM

      Good Day Andrea:

      please forgive my repeating a question already asked and answered.

      Yesterday you asserted that the new Ecat SK will be a 100kW reactor. To clarify, just as the singlet reactor within the existing Ecat Q 4kW unit is rated at 40W, are you saying that the singlet reactor within the prototype Ecat SK will be rated at 100kW and not 1000W which is already 25x the rating of the Ecat Q singlet reactor? You are testing a singlet reactor 2500x the rating of the Ecat Q 40W reactor?

      If so, I am dumbfounded by your revolution within a revolution. I can only imagine the far more stringent requirements encompassing the control module, reactor materials, reactor super-structure materials, the heat transfer fluid, and the rate of heat transfer.

      _____________________________________

      Andrea Rossi
      March 4, 2018 at 2:30 AM

      Buck:

      we are testing prototypes trying 10 kW and 100 kW of power. It is premature to say if we will succeed or not.

      Warm Regards,

      A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    March 1, 2018 at 10:20 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    How has your R&D on this new, larger E-Cat affected your focus on your goal for E-Cat QX mass production in 2018?

    Andrea Rossi
    March 2, 2018 at 6:24 AM
    Absolutely NOT !
    They big reactor is in the R&D laboratory, the QX is in the industrialization development process. Different places, different guys involved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • kenko1

      Thanks, Frank. But I’ll stick with my hand warmers in 2025 for a product rollout.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Does anyone know how large the 100kW unit is?
    Is it the same size as the 20kW unit, or is the size also scaled up.

    If it is the same size, wouldn’t that have a major impact on heat transfer out of the reactor requiring significantly higher temperatures and larger heat exchangers?

    I do not know much about heat exchanger design but I imagine that they have design limitations.
    This would make replacing the initial units with the second model impractical unless perhaps oversized heat sinks were initially employed.
    That is just something to consider.

  • kenko1

    2025 product rollout…a portable hand warmer maybe.

  • Gerard McEk

    For casuals observers, as we are, the step from 40 W to 100 kW seems unbelievable. The much higher output requires a large change in the reactor design because you need to manage the heat balance and avoid melting the reactor. Obviously the new design of the controller made this possible. AR must have been designing the new reactor over the last few months, after the new controller showed a better performance and much better ability to remain the reactor’s stability.
    I do hope that achieving a sigma 5 for the 100 kW doesn’t take so much time as it did for the 40W reactor and controller.

    • sam

      Jeffrey Khalaf
      March 3, 2018 at 7:03 AM
      Dear Andrea,
      …a 10 kW single reactor? Fantastic, if you succeed it is another masterpiece.

      Andrea Rossi
      March 3, 2018 at 1:18 PM
      Jeffrey Khalaf:
      We are working hard on it, but we are far from a product.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

      • Gerard McEk

        AR has relplied now (4th March) that both 10 and 100 kW reactors are being tested and that it is still in a very early stage.

    • kenko1

      How many manufactures-developers use this 5 sigma for quality control or a benchmark for reliability? Other than in these forum I’ve never heard of its use.
      tia
      kenko1

      • Gerard McEk

        Not many as far as I know. Mainly scientific groups use levels of sigma to determine (levels of) confidence for something they want to prove. It is a statistical method that can be used to prove someting, that cannot be proven in an absolute way (i.e. when a proven theory is missing).

  • Jimr

    Which is it. The first I read of it ,it was a 10kw unit, now everyone talks about a 100kw
    Unit? I would be happy with either.

    • Jimr

      Never mind. He answered my question on his blog. He is testing both.

  • Alan DeAngelis
    • sam
      • Vinney

        The furnace in this design can simply be replaced by E-cat reactors. It certainly seems to drive smoothly, and emits very little noticeable steam.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          And refuel once a year (or once every ten years ?).

          • bob dash

            Six months is realistic.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Yeah Sam, I saw that. Very practical. I just thought that having a LENR race car in the Indy 500 would grab a lot of attention. Maybe Lear had this car in mind when he came up with his steam racer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysGNu5BkxSI

  • sam

    Alessandro Coppi
    March 4, 2018 at 4:32 AM
    Hi Andrea,
    The reactor used in the last public presentation had an aspect very
    green, not very different from the first protype, I believe It is a
    precise choice to mantain covered the actual state of the art, but It
    Will be great if you could show some images of the real reactor,
    probably a compact array of qx with its heat sink.
    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

    Andrea Rossi
    March 4, 2018 at 12:44 PM
    Alessandro Coppi:
    We will do it when we will make the presentation of the product.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Buck

    One for the books:
    =======================

    Frank Acland
    March 3, 2018 at 4:52 PM

    Dear Andrea,

    Is the larger reactor under test 100 kW or 10 kW?

    Thank you very much,

    Frank Acland
    ________________________________

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    March 4, 2018 at 2:25 AM

    Frank Acland:

    Both.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • blanco69

      Yes. Both. The input power is 100kW and the output power is 10kW. You wanna buy one?

  • sam

    Viktor Shipacev
    March 4, 2018 at 2:58 PM

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    are you already manufacturing reactors with robots?

    Andrea Rossi
    March 4, 2018 at 3:00 PM

    Viktor Shipacev:
    No.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Omega Z

    Why make it so complicated. One could simply use a turbine powered by the heat like a jet turbine with an alternator driven by the shaft to provide electricity for all accessories and battery charging that provides the electricity that powers the E-cat.

    • bob dash

      this way you can have in wheel hub motors with four wheel drive. better performance than electric or fossil fuel cars

    • Vinney

      A turbine with a closed CO2 cycle to generate electricity for all accessories and the electric drive trains, and battery to start.
      We have come a long way from steam engines, but mechanical power is always fascinating.

  • LarryJ

    For obvious IP protection reasons Rossi cannot prove his technology beyond any doubt and to do so without first having a product ready to market would be counter productive. It would give his enemies a rallying point, bring an unwanted worldwide focus to his efforts and provide useful information to copy cats.

    Ever since 2012 he was in a partnership with Industrial Heat who it turns out were not industrialists and had no interest in developing the technology. Their interest was in trying to corner the market in cold fusion, sell investments and Rossi’s tech was the crown jewel in their portfolio. During this period Rossi’s IP was controlled by IH and he had little say in what could be done beyond forcing them to complete the terms of their contract which demanded a one year test of his reactor. It took him 3 years to get them to comply with that requirement and once done gave him the grounds to sue them and finally retrieve his IP. This explains the lack of products for so many years. Now he is free to proceed apace again and we are seeing quick progress. Don’t give up. It is darkest before the dawn.

    Even once the tech is on the market it will require a period of use in an industrial setting before the home insurance industry will consider it worthy of approval for safe unattended use in a home setting. They need safety statistics before they are going to approve the unattended use of nuclear reactors in home space heaters. This is not an unreasonable position for them to take. Home Depot will probably not see product before 2020.

  • blanco69

    To be testing a 100kw reactor you actually require a reactor with an output of 100kw to test. Otherwise you are testing a toy. Now, please excuse me, I have to get back to testing my anti gravity flying spaceship. In all of my tests to date my spaceship has remained firmly on the ground but I remain hopefull.

    • Vinney

      The way Rossi works, he has already made hundreds of reactors between 10 and 100KW and has selected two to test thoroughly.
      Don’t be surprised if he configures a new design tomorrow.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Perhaps Prof. Nassikas can help you with your antigravity flying spaceship.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEi8oUqh7W8

  • Buck

    It seems like Rossi is following the same 5-Sigma rigor with the 10k and 100k reactor testing. Strictly as a guess, I believe he will also be doing extensive stress testing about these new units.

    ===================================

    Tom Conover
    March 15, 2018 at 1:41 PM

    Dear Andrea,

    The 80W cats still have a very valid position in the marketplace, especially for small appliances. Large groupings of the 80W units also have industrial significance, but the fully automated manufacturing costs and support costs of the 80W INDUSTRIAL UNITS costs would logically be at least ten times more than the 10k/100k units. These units are difficult if not impossible to recharge without recycling them. The 80W cats would be obsolete before they get to market.

    A) Have you therefore already changed your plans over to the 10/100 cat line for the primary manufacturing, pending Sigma 5 on these units?
    B) Are the existing 80W Sigma test results that currently exist able to be used to reduce the time it takes to achieve Sigma 5 results with the 10K and 100K cats?
    C) Can sigma validation for the 10/100 line be completed by July or August of 2018?

    I would rather see the 80W cats soon, instead of waiting longer for the 10/100 series. I would rather see the 10/100 units manufactured THIS YEAR instead of the 80s units. I would rather see the 80w units THIS YEAR than wait longer for the 10/100 series manufacturing to begin.

    Thank you in advance for your answers to A,B & C if you can reply, and thank you again for you and your awesome teams (Plural!) work
    efforts!

    Warmest Regards,

    Tom
    ______________________________________
    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    March 15, 2018 at 10:11 PM

    Tom Conover:

    A- no
    B- yes
    C- I do not know, yet

    Thank you for your attention to the work of our Teams,

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

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