The Penon ERV report apparently states that the 1MW E-Cat plant ran with an average COP of around 50 for the duration of the 1-year test. From what we have heard from people who say they have connections with Industrial Heat, IH does not dispute that the report states this — however they apparently do dispute the accuracy of this report. They apparently hold that it was not possible that 1MW of heat could have been provided by the plant. This must mean that they think that Penon was incompetent or fraudulent.
How can we get to the truth of this matter?
I think the key witness in this whole affair has to be JM Chemical Products, the customer who used the heat provided by the 1MW E-Cat Plant. So far, this customer is a very mysterious entity. Andrea Rossi has said that the company was set up specifically for this test, with the assistance of Henry Johnson, a Miami area attorney who is also a business associate of Rossi’s. According to documents filed with the court (see p. 25), the parent company of JM Chemical Products, Inc. is an unnamed UK company; Rossi has said that they did not want to be identified publicly.
If someone from JM Chemical Products gets on the witness stand and testifies that they did indeed receive an average of 1MW of heat for the duration of the test, it would certainly bolster Penon’s conclusions in the report. It would be important to be able to see as evidence this customer’s power bills, and also to see their production data, showing how much of their product was produced over the course of the test, and whether that product could have been produced with a lesser amount of energy input.
However we would still need to know whether this customer was a legitimate business, and not just some actor hired by Rossi and Johnson to tell lies to visitors and tell lies to the court. So in my mind, it would be very important to know who exactly is the parent company that had the JM Chemical Products Inc. set up, and also to know details about the product they were making, and how it was made.
From all accounts, this customer did not want any scrutiny. Industrial Heat personnel were not permitted to enter the customer’s facilities that were located in the same warehouse as the 1MW plant, but in a separate location behind a dividing wall. If called to testify in court, the customer might not want to disclose details about a production process which they seem to consider some kind of top secret proprietary process. Whether they can be compelled by a court to disclose trade secrets, I don’t know.
I can imagine that the web of secrecy surrounding this whole affair and all the intricacies involved could become very frustrating to the judge and jury alike. I hope that Judge Altonaga is a woman of common sense, and that she can make sure that the plain facts concerning the important aspects of the case come to light.
To my mind, if the facts are still elusive after all the discovery and testimony has taken place, perhaps the most effective thing she could do would be to order a new E-Cat test to take place, with a court-appointed independent expert or experts in place as a new ERV. It would not have to be a year-long test — maybe a week would suffice.
If Andrea Rossi can (or cannot), under order from the court, show that an E-Cat can produce a COP of around 50, as claimed in the ERV report, it would make things much simpler for the jury to come to a decision.