Rossi: ‘Enormous Improvements’ in the E-Cat QX, ‘ Now our module is very close to be ready to be reproduced massively’

Here are some exchanges from the Journal of Nuclear Physics yesterday which perhaps can help us get an idea of Andrea Rossi’s current level of confidence regarding his goal of industrialization of the E-Cat.

Anonymous
March 29, 2018 at 5:05 AM
Will you have also a module reactor of the Ecat QX with a power of 1 kW?

Andrea Rossi
March 29, 2018 at 10:18 AM
Anonymous:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Frank Acland
March 29, 2018 at 10:49 AM
Dear Andrea,
Does your answer to anonymous mean that the 1 kW will be the standard rating of the QX reactor now? Or will there be different QX sizes? If so, which will be the first one you will produce?

Andrea Rossi
March 29, 2018 at 11:08 AM
Frank Acland:
We will give detailed information on this issue at the presentation of the product.
Warm Regards
A.R.

Frank Acland
March 29, 2018 at 12:43 PM
Dear Andrea,
I understand about not giving specific details, but can we assume you have made improvements in the E-Cat QX recently?

Andrea Rossi
March 29, 2018 at 1:09 PM
Frank Acland:
Enormous. Exponential for what concerns the development of a module industrializable and the industrialization itself. Now our module is very close to be ready to be reproduced massively.
Warm Regards
A.R.

I found it interesting that here Rossi confirmed that there will be a 1 kW QX reactor, whereas previously the largest one mentioned was 80 W. So it sounds like there has been a new development or breakthrough. Of course not very much to go on, but it’s interesting that Rossi is sounding even more confident than before about industrial production starting up.

  • coolabuelo

    Great news! Thanks Frank! Happy Easter everyone!

  • Gerard McEk

    Some additions:
    DT
    March 30, 2018 at 1:18 AM
    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    How much of the production of an Ecat will be made manually and how much by robots, in percentage? AR: “20%”

    Gerard McEk
    March 30, 2018 at 4:25 AM
    Dear Andrea,
    Your last answer to Frank Ackland sounds very optimistic, some questions if I may:
    1. Have you already produced a QX automatically? AR: “no”
    2. Have you tested this device and did it work?”AR: “n.a.”
    3. Do you intent to produce also the control system yourself? AR:”yes”

    My comment on this:
    Doing 1/5th of a ‘massive production’ manually seems a lot and very labour intensive.

    Andrea isn’t as far as I assumed from his reply to Frank. This is what needs to happen before ‘massive’ production can start:
    1. All production steps defined
    2. All required machinery/robots defined
    3. Mechanical-, Electrical-, gases-, liquids-, suer- HVAC- designs ready
    4. Purchasing orders for acquiring equipment done
    5. Factory lay-out is ready
    6. Preparing software (robots, PLC’s, SCADA system)
    7. Preparing production hall for equipment and all other systems
    8. Installation of equipment
    9. Testing software Factory Acceptance Test (FAT)

    10. Installing software and Local System Test (LST)
    11. Integration test
    12. START-UP PRODUCTION

    And this is just a very rough overview. It would be a miracle when AR would be able to realize this within this year, but maybe his initial production is not as ‘massive’ as I thought it would be.

    • Dr. Mike

      I think Rossi has given up on the thought of “massive” production by the end of 2018, perhaps his thoughts are more like getting a prototype out by the end of the year? Your list of “what needs to happen” should be a indication to all that it going to be very difficult for Rossi to get out even a prototype by the end of 2018 unless it is mostly put together manually. Another large task that needs completed is developing a test for the individual QX reactors to verify that they are similar enough that they can be operated in parallel by the controller.

      • Omega Z

        Rossi never said “massive” production by the end of 2018. Only to try and have a working product in operation. He never even said anything beyond 1 tho I think he’d like to have at least a couple out the door so as to start working out any issues that will obviously arise in any new product let alone one never produced before.

        • Dr. Mike

          I believe that shortly after the Stockholm demo, Rossi claimed a goal of massive production by the end of 2018. Hopefully Rossi will completely test his product and design, including reliability, before having any product “out the door”.

          • Omega Z

            I think you’re inadvertently blending different conversations.

            Rossi stated it would take 1 to 2 years to get a manufacturing facility setup, tho most who are involved thought it most likely would take 2 years. Rossi wants to try to have a facility setup within 1 year, but that it would be very hard to make that time frame. Nothing was said about mass production.

            We already see how the blog narrative is being presented, played out, and Rossi’s detractors will be all over this if nothing happens by the end of 2018. Even tho Rossi said it would be a hard target to reach and may not happen.

            Mass production was in the context of mass production equals lower costs thus product to cheap for competitors to bother reverse engineering and better for them to just license his technology. Tho I’m certain Rossi knows this will not apply to all competitors. Besides that, No Government would allow a long term monopoly. At some point they would intervene even if that meant higher prices and Force Leonardo to relinquish some of it’s IP technology. I highly doubt that will come to pass.

    • Omega Z

      ->”but maybe his initial production is not as ‘massive’ as I thought it would be.”

      I think you’ve been overly influenced by other posts here at ECW over time. I Never thought production would Start Out massive and Rossi has never stated that. Rossi has only said he wants to massively produce product. Mass production is something you aspire to and gradually match demand. No one would want to start out massively producing a new product only to find it had a major problem to be worked out. There will be a learning curve working through issues that inevitably arise with any new product. It will happen over time.

  • Dr. Mike

    In regard to Frank’s statement: “I found it interesting that here Rossi confirmed that there will be a 1
    kW QX reactor, whereas previously the largest one mentioned was 80 W.” Actually Rossi answers “yes” to the question will he have a “module reactor of the E-Cat QX with a power of 1KW”. He refuses to answer the question about “a 1KW reactor”. With Rossi purposefully sometimes interchanging the words reactor and module it seems like his goal is mainly to create confusion about how his initial product will be configured. However, he certainly is not saying he now has “a 1KW reactor”, he will have “a 1KW module reactor available” (sometime). Perhaps a better question would be does he really have a 80W QX reactor? What calorimetry method did he use to verify that the QX was really putting out 80W?

    • Omega Z

      There will ultimately be many sizes of reactors used according to best applications. QX is just a designation. Q=Quark and X is a place holder for reactor output. A full operational system will still be E-cat.

      In this time, if Rossi wasn’t tinkering, he would have a lot of down time as much of the work involved with production is left for others to do. Rossi would mostly be of an adviser. And like in the military, it would be hurry up and wait.

      In the mean time, he can tweak the technology. That’s pretty much what the big boys do. Apple tends to tweak a product right up until production starts in earnest and some times beyond as some issues arise.

  • gdaigle

    A fully or mostly automated factory can be problematic, even if you are Elon Musk. Here are recent articles outlining how his reliance upon automation before a reliable manual operation has been established can actually slow things down.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-robots-are-killing-it-2018-3
    https://www.investopedia.com/news/teslas-hyperautomated-assembly-line-could-be-its-downfall/
    https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/28/tesla-is-overusing-automation-in-model-3-final-assembly-analysts-say/

    • sam

      They do not build like they used too.

      https://youtu.be/qCgRSJZiloE

    • Roland

      ABB robots are heuristic and can be directly taught, and physically directed in their movements, by humans.

      A fundamental aspect that does require a firm decision is the scaling of the robot relative to the scale of the article under manufacture.

    • Vinney

      Rossi is the Chief Scientist, Engineer and Inventor in his organization, whilst Musk is merely the ‘Chief Hustler’ in his engineering enterprises.
      He has no input into the day-to-day innovations. He merely invites his billionaire friends in on another money earner, in the meanwhile skimming billions from the multitude of small shareholders.
      Rossi has the total respect of his innovation team, whilst Engineers and Scientists in Musk’s employ are there merely for the money.
      Totally different scenario’s, as Rossi is total control of the finer details of his invention, and is the best estimate of it’s timeline.

  • Buck

    The mention of a 1kW reactor astounds me. Right or wrong, the SAFIRE presentation video with its details on the self-forming containment fields and their creation given SMALL increases in the voltage applied sticks in my mind. It was shared with Rossi, and IMHO presents a visualization to Rossi that given his +7 years of experience aids him towards his goal of the 1kW, 10kW, and 100kW single reactor power ratings.

    Time will tell how this all works out . . . I am in agreement with Frank; it seems Rossi has made another significant breakthrough.

    • causal observer

      I keep going back to the idea that the QX reactor follows the design of an arc lamp. From an industrial assembly and performance perspective these apparently can be mass-manufactured up to outputs of at least 7kW. (Hopefully I’m not mistaking W and w, etc).
      https://www.ushio.eu/product/xenon-short-arc-high-wattage/

      So the idea of a 1kW QX is not implausible from a gross materials perspective.

      Of course, the neat trick is that a 1kW QX is an energy amplifier versus simple radiator.

      From that point of view, based on what I’ve seen in SAFIRE and SPAWAR, and from what Axil and Bob G point toward, there is lots of COP available, and the problem is control, i.e to keep the thing from exploding.

      So I do not see increasing output as a problem of having to find new elements to add to the system. Instead I see it as a problem of “controlled release” of a very large potential energies. This could be accomplished by incrementally tuning the mix of matrix, fuel, reactor body and control signal. It make sense that when Rossi jumped from the HotCat to the QX he was first most interested in control and was thus happy with relatively low output. I would say from these big jumps in output that Rossi already sees the path to create such jumps, and is working on technical implementations to attain stages of that path.

      Or more poetically, the incremental increases in output wattage are based on finding ways to relax the chains on the dragon without the dragon eating the dragon owner.

      And if it’s all real, more testimony to Rossi’s combination of genius and perseverance.

      Re industrial production, “overshooting” the original design energy output should not be a problem if it does not fundamentally change the overall physical design of the reactor, controller and multi-reactor module. In fact it would improve the safety margin if Rossi knew how to reliable build a 10kW reactor and went to market with just a 1kW reactor.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e7a67b6c1147661c7224027057944b61f8cd001aadc367d0760a2f5620e745f8.png

      • Buck

        I agree with your optimism and your sense that Rossi is learning how to harvest a trickle and then a steady stream of energy rather than an overwhelming torrent.

        His optimism grounds my optimism.

        • frank

          „…it seems Rossi has made another significant breakthrough…“
          Does reflect what Rossi writes reality or is it simply wishful thinking? What will be next after 1MW, then 20W, 80W, 1000W, 10kW…? 1GW, in the end with 11000C reactor temperature (I have read this somewhere…)?
          Is everybody willing to always wait for the next advanced version? Is Rossi’s legacy in the end never ending R&D only? Shouldn’t we vote for a pedition that he should stop this and manufacture and sell and bring a product to market? I cannot imagine that all here want him to climb to the next level.
          My concern is he will take all he knows (or claims) to the grave and nobody will ever be able to buy and use one of his products…

          • causal observer

            $10M, Doral, court win…

          • Buck

            I have followed this story for years and see it differently. I have become familiar with Rossi’s competitive nature and am not overwhelmed by his behavior or progress. Certainly, I have wished for an earlier commercial introduction, but understand how the IH/Darden – Leonardo/Rossi relationship sidelined this goal for about 3-4 years.

            I am more optimistic. Of course, time will tell how this story peaks.

          • Brokeeper

            I agree, Buck. Generally and eventually what Rossi has promised he has delivered, especially the Stockholm presentation. He does not have control of external forces that delay his progress. I believe he has earned the trust.

          • Buck

            I like his response to your question. It implies that Rossi has had another significant breakthrough allowing for the 1kW, 10kW, and 100kW reactors

            ===============================================
            Brokeeper
            March 31, 2018 at 8:17 AM

            Dear Andrea,

            The E-Cat has gone through several astounding innovative turns since the November Stockholm presentation.
            • Control system improvements with less heat lose.
            • Industrialized E-Cat QX has increased from 40W to 1kW output
            • Anti-reverse engineering
            • Creation of the E-Cat SK of 10kW-100kW outputs passing improvements to the QX
            • Other unpublicized achievements
            • “Now our module is very close to be ready to be reproduced massively”.

            All contributing to the E-Cat’s long-awaited commercial realization.

            Increasing individual QX reactors power will certainly increase production proficiency, thus increasing the number of modules with less time and cost past onto the customers. Congratulations!

            If you can answer, because of E-Cat’s increased output, have the modules made up of grouped individual reactors increased its Power to Total Volume ratio?

            Wish you and your team a very Happy Easter!

            Brokeeper
            __________________________________________________

            Andrea Rossi
            March 31, 2018 at 10:54 AM

            Brokeeper:

            Yes.

            Happy Easter to you,

            A.R.

          • LilyLover

            That’s one thing he made sure to safeguard for humanity more than his own MaxWealth. He will produce and sell and keep improvising. Fear not. If he won’t, I will. So, relax.

          • LarryJ

            He remains confident there will be a product released this year. No tech company ever stops R&D. To do so would be suicide.

  • Buck

    In the following excellent exchange between Frank & Andrea, some of the groundedness of Rossi’s optimism is explained. I especially like his comments on the benefits of testing the Ecat SK reactors upon the Ecat QX reactors.
    ============================================

    Frank Acland
    March 30, 2018 at 10:21 AM

    Dear Andrea,

    Very interesting to learn of your ‘enormous’ improvements. Some questions if I may:
    1. Has your testing of the large E-Cat SK reactors helped you improve the E-Cat QX?
    2. I would assume it is critical for you to get everything fully prepared and planned before you start trying robotic production. Is this what you are doing at the moment?
    3. When you are ready to start production, will you start small, in order to ensure the system is working well?
    4. What is the likelihood now of production starting in 2018?
    5. What is the likelihood now of the product presentation in 2018?

    Thank you,

    Frank Acland
    ______________________________________

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    March 30, 2018 at 11:08 AM

    Frank Acland:

    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    4- stable
    5- stable

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

  • Ophelia Rump

    It sounds like maybe prototype parts are being produced by the robots with a new level of precision, bringing a new level of control.

    He had better change the world before there is not world left to change.

    • LilyLover

      There will be Worlds left to change – for every power hungry psychopath realizes that mass slavery is better than mass extinction for that allows for kingly treatment.
      King of the empty World is unappreciated by the empty World.
      Showing off the dominion to more is better than to some and than to none, in their truthful minds.

      • another view

        Would that ego and self-cherishing were that rational. Some will choose apocalypse over self-denial.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yeah, Rossi does needs the planet Earth to be around in order to pull this thing off.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        But
        I don’t need the does.

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • kenko1

    ahem…2025 plz

    • Rene

      2023 is my pool bet.

  • Vinney

    Rossi seems to get all the luck when it comes to LENR.
    It seems to be when you are on the right path, the sky’s the limit.
    I am still betting on production units and massive media launch in 2018.
    Early distribution to limited companies, as he tests ‘reverse’ engineering protections and reliability in its day-to-day usage in controlled locations.
    You can get a lot of information on long-term reliability from 24/7 usage in a monitored setting.
    Probably, with each installation having dozens of additional sensors to monitor everything down to vibrations and stresses at various critical points.
    Small modifications, will be required before filling back orders for thousands of units mostly in 2019.

    • Dr. Mike

      Let us hope that Rossi is not going to verify initial long term reliability by evaluating units in day to day usage in his customers facilities. For a product using an unproven technology, reliability must be verified in Rossi’s production facility before he ships his first system. If there are initial reliability issues, the reliability will still have to be verified after any attempt to fix the initial reliability issue with changes to production before product can be shipped to customers.

      • Vinney

        The E-cat QX is already extremely reliable, it runs for thousands of hours and has been switched ON, and powered to ‘pre-determined’ temperatures (power output) and switched OFF, millions of times.
        The assemblies need reliability testing, but they are using experts to consult and design those components for early market entry.
        Of course they will run through a series of tests (probably a month of grueling tests) before delivery to pilot customers.
        But no machine type is immune to the special conditions of real world applications. They may have to custom make machinery for some customers.
        But it will suit the needs of the majority of customers.
        These pilot customers are more to vouch for Andrea Rossi’s performance claims at market launch.

        • Dr. Mike

          Have you ever been responsible for seeing that a new product delivered to a customer is reliable? Do you know what the costs have been to companies that have put an unreliable product on the market?

          • Omega Z

            This is why I say only a few systems will be put out initially. Real world use is the only way to determine real reliability. All the work in Rossi’s facilities(Not even years) can begin to assess the real world environment where these devices will be put to use.

    • sam

      The most optimistic view I have seen yet.I hope your
      right Vinney.

      • Omega Z

        Not as optimistic here. Things seldom work out as hoped.
        My guess is 1st half of 2019.

  • Ophelia Rump

    There must be severe competition for market penetration and control of the market before the devices ever reach consumers. Otherwise the energy will remain metered.

    The natural capitalistic stance will be to sell metered power to consumers until forced to do otherwise by competitors willing to ruin the wall and accept a lesser markup.
    The dream has a very real potential to remain just a dream until the industrial market becomes saturated. The dream may never be realized if the big boys can lock out small competitors before the wall comes down.

    • cashmemorz

      Just like the competitors in internet connectedness are dependent on the infrastructure of the big ones, as in BELL and Rogers in Canada, then the ones owning the infrastructure of the electric power lines make the competitors dependent on the infrastucture owners. The old owners will dcide who and how much the compettitors are a d will do. Similar to the Florida power system owners forcing thru legislature to disallow solar power by anyone who is connected to the grid and the power bill management of powwer utility in Ontario Canada manages power bils to invert the combined costs of water and power in favor of the power grid. No disruption wilo be allowed even by competitors.

      • LarryJ

        If the ecat evolves into a standalone combined heat and power unit then the utilities could control what excess they buy back from you but it is hard to see how they could prevent you from using a standalone generator that is really no different than a diesel generator except in terms of its efficiency and carbon footprint.

        • cashmemorz

          The grid based power providers won’t have to lift a finger to prevent you from using LENR. If you do and something goes wrong with your installation, you would have to have another unit for backup. That alone can double the costs of LENR. Most people want convenience when using a new thing. So a back will be a nuisance. Better to try and use the old tried and proven grid. If you happen to have removed yourself from the grid in favor of a personal LENR installation and something goes wrong with it for more than you are willing to put up with, then you might want to use the grid. But you had decided to get off the grid permanently. To use the grid for emergencies or backup costs an awful lot to get back on or use it intermittently. That is wheer the grid owners can get you to pay huge premiums to get back on the grid. The other altenative would be to stay conneted to the grid and use little or no power. That will allow the grid owners to continue charging other fees besides the the base power you use. After all, a long time user of their power who uses their power only on occasion costs them more then you are worth. The only way to get around that is if the LENR supplier has very prompt service By prompt means within an hour, or it may in some cases mean the difference between life and death if the LENR device is powering medical equipment. Or the LENr supplier will take care of the backup device to haveit kick in automatically in case the main unit fails. This is a feture that might be needed if the5 sigma device that Rossi has perfected is to fail that one time out of a million or billion exactly in your house. The grid covers that by having many power stations and inteconnectedness, and even they have brown outs and blackouts. LENRT will be the same and need those backups via the grdif or secondry backup units everywhere. This will continue to allow the grid owners to overcharge on occasion until the two systems into somekind of agreement to work together. More like;y the grid owners will just buy and use LENR devices to make their power so cheap as to out compete private LENR installations.

          • Omega Z

            Well stated. I’ve posted before that it is likely we will see a decentralized grid more locally distributed. This even makes it very feasible for much of the waste heat to be sold for local needs reducing the overall costs.

            A home stand alone wont be as economical as some believe. This is because they do not understand the intricacies of energy generation and it’s use. One may use a 100 watts now, but in half an hour, require Kilowatts thus you need to run at maximum demand even when not required in order for it to be available(On Demand). Doesn’t matter how cheap energy is to produce. It’s becomes expensive if you throw most of it away so to speak.

            Also should the stand alone breakdown, how long before you get a service tech. Tomorrow, next week, and the service fee will not be cheap. Just a couple service calls a year can wipe out any savings of producing your own energy. This is not an issue for a grid and very convenient as you don’t need to deal with all the issues. Please Hold until the next service tech is available. 🙁

            All considered, I see a localized grid and the only in home LENR system I expect is a heater that given average use and it’s simplicity needing serviced/recharged every 5 plus years powered by cheap grid electricity. Actually, I can easily imagine a pop in heating unit that is merely replaced every 20 years about the size of a trash compactor. No other service required.

        • Omega Z

          Basically, In my state, Illinois, they can treat you like any other energy producer. They only have to pay you wholesale rate for any surplus electricity that you produce and charge you retail for any energy you use from them. Also, they do not need to buy your excess if there is no demand.

          The process should work like this, a Business.
          If you are going to produce excess energy that there is no demand for, as a producer, you either need to produce less or invest in your own storage capacity. Batteries, hydrogen conversion/storage or what ever.

          All regulations that apply to producers apply to you. The producer. Also, like any producer, You should pay income tax like anyone else minus your legitimate cost deductions etc…

    • Buck

      Ophelia,

      I agree with your perspective. However, I think it appropriate to take into account a change in the political landscape that became apparent in 2015 with the entry of Bernie Sanders into the Democratic primaries, a populist that proved the dramatic shift in the political tides towards the average citizen.

      IMO, the political Status Quo was aghast during the 2016 election due to the presence of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. One party was able to derail their populist candidate. However, the other was unable to stop the Authoritarian Populist from becoming president.

      My point is this: when the average global and US citizen learns of what LENR means, I believe they will quickly embrace how LENR constructively impacts many of their respective concerns. Just as ‘medicare-for-all’ has gained supra-majority support among voters of both US political parties, I think the same can be said for LENR . . . it will become a political hot button; it will become a political force.

      I think the struggle you describe will still occur. I just think that there is a new additional force, political populism, that can materially and maybe dramatically change the pace of LENR integration. I point to the results of the many recent special elections held throughout the US as further evidence.

  • Curtis Sherwood

    I’d be interested in reading some comments and discussion about the implications that such a device would have on the world in the near term/long term future. If Rossi really is close to reaching his goal of industrialization this year it would seem like a good time to do this kind of a thought experiment as a group.

  • Vinney

    Not necessary, he is going to market with the E-cat QX, as he is now confident to have a much larger product line next year.
    Everything from 1Kw, to 10 and 100Kw sometime afterwards.
    The rate of innovation alone is protection against ‘reverse’ engineering in the next decade.
    A decade of market dominance is a long time in the internet age.

  • Vinney

    At potentially US$100k to 150k a MW, it will replace a lot of boilers for anything, as its operational costs a lower and is environmentally cleaner.
    A lot of buyers will need much lower capacity, and will only need to recharge after 1 or more years.

  • sam

    Dr. Mike
    April 1, 2018 at 9:34 PM
    Dr. Rossi,
    I believe achieving 1KW of power with 13 E-Cat QX’s in a box the size of the one used in the Stockholm demonstration is extremely encouraging. Congratulations on your and your team’s progress!
    Dr. Mike

    Andrea Rossi
    April 1, 2018 at 10:11 PM
    Dr Mike:
    We are working very hard to arrive to sell an industrialized product this year. I am not sure we will succeed, but the effort is brutal under every point of view and very risky too.
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Dr. Mike
    April 1, 2018 at 7:16 PM
    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    It was certainly good to hear that the output power of an individual E-Cat QX device has been increased from 20W to 80W. What calorimetry method did you use to measure this higher output power? Did you measure the output power using a water flow rate and delta temperature as was done in the Stockholm demonstration? How many E-Cat QX devices were used in the output power measurement?
    Dr. Mike

    Andrea Rossi
    April 1, 2018 at 7:56 PM
    Dr Mike:
    1- yes
    2- 13, to make 1 kW in a box as big as the one you can see in the Stockholm demo video.
    Warm Regards

  • Dr. Mike

    The primary “enormous advancement” that has been made on the QX device appears to be increasing the output power of the basic device from 20W to 80W with no change to the device dimensions, which I believe everyone would agree qualifies as an “enormous advancement”. It would seem to be proprietary information to know what internal changes Rossi made to the device (like the fuel composition), but he did state the external dimensions of the device did not change. My best guess is that increasing the output power by a factor of 4 was accomplished by improved heat removal from the device. From what Rossi has stated about his 5-Sigma testing, all we know about this test is that it was composed of turning on and off one or a few devices millions of times. It doesn’t seem that this test would be affected at all by increasing the output power of the device. Rossi has not discussed any other reliability testing. However, I believe that you are correct that increasing the output power by a factor of 4 would require starting over on any comprehensive reliability testing.

  • AdrianAshfield

    This comment from Rossi seems to confirm the 1kW “module” is made up from 80W QXs.
    It would be great if he makes a production line to manufacture these with automation.

    Andrea Rossi
    April 2, 2018 at 8:17 AM

    Gennady:
    Not yet, but it is realistic to assume that the model shown in Stockholm on November 24th will be the 1 kW module dimensional point of reference.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Omega Z

    You’re talking about stranded assets.
    The truth is the consumer will pay for these whether they are aware of it or not. There is no way around it. As an example, when you take out a lone, a portion of the interest rate accounts for the losses in loan defaults.

    The Good news is this. Any energy transition will be a slow (5-?)decades long process. Thus, most so called stranded assets will have been used for their full life cycle. Those assets left stranded will only be partially lost and this will likely be absorbed through a slower energy cost decline.

  • Dr. Mike

    I agree that it would have been better if Rossi had been able to demonstrate greater power out than power in for the system at the Stockholm demo. However, the demo did show that Rossi’s calorimetry method of heating water can measure the output power of his QX reactors. Now he claims with using that same calorimetry method, he has measured 1KW output power with 13 QX devices. My guess is that Rossi could now demonstrate a system COP somewhere in the range of 5 to 20 with an assumption that the controller driving the devices consumes between 50W and 200W. Of course we will have to wait until Rossi releases data for the power consumption of the new controller before we get a definite value for the system COP.

    • Obvious

      The last version had a COP between -15 and 22000, so don’t hold your breath for a definitive value.

  • sam

    Raffaele Bongo
    April 2, 2018 at 10:50 AM
    Hello A. Rossi

    I understand that your technology is evolving exponentially. It is difficult for you to imagine today what will be the definitive characteristics of the E-Cat 1 MW. There is still a trend that is emerging. It was probably less bulky and lighter.
    Do you have an idea of ​​the shielding weight / total weight ratio and the power per unit mass and volume of the E-Cat boiler?
    Tough wishes for success and all the best for your team

    Your support Raffaele

    Andrea Rossi
    April 2, 2018 at 1:31 PM
    Raffaele Bongo:
    In our case the shielding is light, because we do not use radioactive materials and our radiations are not ionizing, due to the low energy inside our Ecat.
    In all the experiments we made ( tens of thousand hours now, with me as the Guinea pig ), we never found ionizing radiations exit the Ecats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dr. Mike

    I would also liked to have seen all of the specs by now. However, I now think that the design of the modules is not yet complete. If it was assumed that a preliminary design of a basic module was done (on paper) at the time of the November demo, that module would have to be completely redesigned once the QX output power was increased to 80W. Actually, it is more likely that improvements in the module design have allowed the QX devices to be operated at a higher output power. Once the module design is optimized, there will another time period spent on learning how to integrate the modules into a larger sub-unit. Perhaps some specs will be released once the design iteration of the sub-units is complete (including prototype verification).

  • Anon2012_2014

    Frank, I guess reporting on what Rossi says on his blog is news. I am waiting for him to have some demo follow through to the public. I read his pronouncements in frustration.

    • AdrianAshfield

      Who cares if an anonymous blogger is frustrated? Rossi has clearly stated there would be no more demos until the product is released for sale.

      • Anon2012_2014

        OK Adrian — you don’t care. Maybe you are new here. About 60% of us who were here in 2014 are frustrated. About 40% like you will wait until Rossi supposedly ships. For me, another year goes by and no ECATs in the wild.

  • cashmemorz

    I’ll keep you in mind if you do decide to sell them. I, as much as a million or two others, have a couple of units on order from Leonardo, Rossi’s base firm. Rossi is the owner, manufacturer, then you would be a distributor or end seller. Rossi wants to sell the units at under $1000 per 10 kilowatt unit. Then the dirtributor, you will have a markup of 10 to 50 percent depending on how well the market is attracted and how many or the million or two are still on the waiting list. My first bunch of concerns are, at what point is payment required? Before delivery, at delivery, before installation, after installation, how is the unit to be interfaced with my home power system(s), or payment after a trial period for thrashing out all of the fine points of my particular needs and idiosycracies, if it is not suitable after the trial period how much of my payment is returned, and many other details before final signing of a year or two contract, when to expect to replace the core power unit, what services are covered by the base purchase, how dependable is the early version of the services. Many more points have to be worked out to make a realistic comparison against the grid service.

    • Omega Z

      The business model says at least 50% markup. This markup covers brick and mortar secretarial ect cost of the business. An $800 high efficiency furnace billed out at $1200 or more plus additional materials A business concern with high volume of sales can likely get discount cost of $500 per unit, but this will not be passed on to the consumer. Installation(Including install labor) will be more. The average cost of installing that $500 furnace will average $4000 for a simple change out.

      Someone buys and installs his own furnace and AC. Calls me to sweat the pipes, vacuum out and charge the system takes about 1 hour. Going rate for this is $200. Note the refrigerant charge is contained within the AC unit itself. I may only need to add an ounce or so of refrigerant if any. This only happens if the copper lines exceed 25 foot.

      Also note that if the owner didn’t get everything done right, I charge more for remediating those issues.

      • cashmemorz

        I understand how that works. I had almost finished my unfinished basement when I could not continue. The contractor who got o do the rest did not even bother touching those areas I had left. The parts they did any work on were the areas that had to be started from bare cement walls. Also no other handyman would agree to finish up what was partially done by me. No one wants to responsible for doing the second half of a job started by someone else. If anything is wrong with the job when finished, it can lead to disputes as to who was responsible for it going wrong, the former worker, me, or the latter one, the contractor or handyman I hired to finish the job. No one likes getting involved in someone else’s partially done project. That is why getting anyone to finish work started by someone else is, if one can even find such a risk taker, is very expensive,in time and money. I have learned the hard way, that if I am not competent to finish the whole job, then it is cheaper in the long run to just hire someone to do the whole job. But first one has to get severl recommendations and try to figure out who is most competent.
        Rossi’s firm will have to train many competent installers to make sure that Leonardo is successful. It is about much more than just a good working Ecat Quark X.

  • Omega Z

    A transition this huge assures a long transition. It’s shear economics.
    An example: Sales aren’t limited by the number of cars that can be manufactured. We are limited by how many cars the market can absorb in a given time. Economics.

    We’re also limited by the number of available skilled tradesmen. Example: You have a 1000 patients that need surgery and 1 surgeon. Not everyone will have surgery today. Take a number and wait. The task of an energy transition dwarfs this example.

    There will be years of re-engineering and retooling of the entire industry(electrical, cars, planes, trains, ships etc). This is why Rossi is going for the low hanging fruit 1st. Simple heat production products. Thus giving time for these other things to get started, Even simple home heating will require operational use in an industrial setting for safety data for a number of years before it is deployed in the home. This is another take a number and wait on skilled trade installers.

    A victim of it’s own success. Example: As electric cars enter the market, gasoline will decline in price. Ev’s have an equivalent cost of $2,50 a gallon. At $2 a gallon, the consumers urgency to transition declines. Even lower cost gasoline adds to this issue. Government could add mandates and taxes, but that actually slows down the transition even more. If smart, they would let natural economic forces do it’s job.

    ->”starting at 5 cents a kWh” I just switched to a supplier at 5.5 cents a KWH retail.

    The reigning thoughts on CO2 capture is expensive plus the cost to compress and inject into the ground. However, a few entities are thinking outside the box and added chemists into the mix of engineers. Using new technology, they can double efficiency of power plants(to 60%) where CO2 is included in the process and the CO2 is captured in solid form to be used in polymers and many other consumer products with the eventual cost of 2 cents per KWH electricity.

    While this technology is still in the pilot stage and likely 10 years out, this kind of innovation will both slow the transition and good for us, force the LENR energy concerns to provide the cheap energy it’s capable of.

  • The problem is, the random messages of A. Rossi are completely unreliable. He for example announced robotized plant before years already in the same way. But the first publicly available cold fusion technology (no matter how productive it will be with respect to overunity providing it will be higher than COP > 1) will become immensely important from psychological reasons: it will serve as a further stimulus of cold fusion research and it will also inhibit the huge and futile spending into research “renewables” and hot fusion research, which are underway. Which is also the main reason, why the cold fusion technology has been ignored so far – not proverbial big oil lobby, which could become first large cold fusion customer instead.

  • sam

    Bobby Ellery
    April 19, 2018 at 9:28 AM
    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
    Are you still keeping your hands dirt making tests and prototypes, or now you leave this part to others of your team?
    Godspeed, Bobby

    Andrea Rossi
    April 19, 2018 at 4:07 PM
    Bobby Ellery:
    I still need to wash my hands many times a day.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

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