Rossi – IH Settlement Published: Rossi Gets Back All Rights to E-Cat, IH no Longer Involved

Thanks to Mats Lewan who has posted an interview with Andrea Rossi about the settlement between Rossi and Industrial Heat on his An Impossible Invention blog.

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2017/07/18/heres-the-settlement-getting-the-license-back-was-rossis-top-priority/

Mats has also posted the settlement document which he states is from “An Undisclosed Source”:

https://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/settlement-agreement.pdf

More analysis to come.

  • Engineer48

    HeHe.

    • 🙂

      • Gerard McEk

        Thanks Mats, a great interview. Good work!

      • TOUSSAINT francois

        Great interview Mats! looking forward for your energy conference !

      • Thomas Kaminski

        Great work, Mats! I always though that your measurements on earlier E-Cats were spot on and the technology was real. Fast forward to the Energy Conference.

    • hempenearth

      “like trying to define the sex of a stone”
      hilarious!!!

      • Omega Z

        That’s easy.
        The stone with the crack in it is the female….

        • Nahh. You take the stone and bang it on your head. If your head is harder than the stone, you’re a male.

  • Facepalm

    I’m a bit surprised that this was mainly a battle over the licence agreement. I guess that means that Darden is convinced that the E-Cat works.

    • Mylan

      I he was convinced, then 80 million would be really cheap for such a license. So no, on the contrary, I assume it means he is convinced the E-Cat doesn’t work.

      • Vinney

        They built several experiment samples and reactor core assemblies, so they still have the know-how.
        And as we also know, they have invested in other LENR companies and IP.
        So they can re-fashion the IP, and their total cost for this know-how was $30million.
        It’s unfair really, especially after wasting 2-3 years of Rossi’s time.

        • Omega Z

          Darden/IH are not allowed to use any info from Rossi’s IP. Anyone the Darden works with in the future will have their products and IP carefully scrutinized. Even minor similarities with Rossi’s IP can lead to legal issues for them…

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          No. The Settlement Agreement requires IH and IH people (Darden and Vaughn, signatories to the settlement agreement) to give up the IP entirely, turning over all copies, and returning all reactors to Rossi. There are provisions to provide some teeth to this (and, by the way, they involve Lukacs’ firm, if I’m correct). If they refashion the IP, they could be screwed. Dumb idea.

          • IH is working with Brullioun and will help them as much as they can. They will pull a Glenn Curtiss when the technology takes off to refashion the IP as indistinguishable and claim they were going in this direction all along.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            If IH does pursue other paths, having the IP knowledge gives them and edge that they can exploit. Companies often violate patents (or IP covered by trade secrets), knowing quite well that the battle will be long and costly. He who has the biggest war chest often wins by wearing down the patent holder financially. Perhaps IH wanted to settle to preserve what capital they had for the long battle.

      • Omega Z

        Actually, Had the trial concluded and Darden/IH lost, the cost would have been $89M times 3. ($267M dollars)

      • IH was looking at it through a 1% chance prism. If it had a 1% chance of being real, it was worth sticking in. But once they realized that Rossi wouldn’t blink and they were more than 1% exposed to losing the $267M lawsuit, it was in their best interest to settle.

    • interstellar hobo

      IH had other IP by then and may have felt whatever value Rossi’s had was less than, say, Brillouin. Darden is by no means out of the game. If I had been in Rossi’s shoes, assuming what he has is real, and knowing IH would be able to claim ownership of QuarkX, I would have sandbagged the test.

      • Rossi has seen others try to steal his IP, so sandbagging and pulling a Fred Flinstone are within his skillset at this point.

        My prediction is that no matter who gets to market first with LENR, the whole field will be tied up in litigation for a generation. Patents will expire and then a whole new generation will have the pleasure of seeing it get tied up in litigation…. until some deep pocketed $billionaire steps in and scares everyone else away from the field. Either that or some 3rd world countries will simply steal the IP and start taking the lead.

    • SD

      Darden avoided a potentially expensive lawsuit by giving the licence back. So definitely the licence had some value to IH, but not in the way you imply.

      • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

        Their costs in the lawsuit, to complete the trial, are not clear. Many, though, have probably overestimated them. There is no evidence that the Settlement Agreement was part of the verbal agreement in court, which was simply to drop the claims with prejudice. IH was not legally required to give up the License. As Rossi points out, that wasn’t going to happen from the lawsuit (and he’s generally right on that). So why did they do it? At that point, they could simply have walked away and done nothing. Rossi couldn’t sue them any more. They could just sit on the license until it developed that it had value, then asserted claims anew, and these would not be claims that were discharged by the verbal agreement for dismissal with prejudice. That they went ahead and gave up the license, without any compensation at all, then, indicates that it was completely worthless to them.

        I’m talking about the situation after the case was dismissed, if they simply refused to agree to what Rossi wanted. It is possible, though, that the informal agreement in court was more or less what the final agreement says. That surprises me, because it’s a step further than I expected.

        Going back to before that, their court costs would probably have been under $50,000 to complete the trial. Just my guess. Say under $100,000. There is another consideration: their plans are to support inventors, and if inventors are afraid that they will aggressively sue them if they make mistakes, this would damage their long-term goals. However, the Rossi technology, if real, was, my opinion, worth about a trillion dollars. If there was 0.1% chance of this technology working as claimed, they were giving up an expected value of around a billion dollars for very little gain, a simple reduction in cost of a tiny fraction of that.

        My opinion is that they decided to write the whole thing off as completely worthless. I haven’t talked to anyone from IH, yet. I will probably see them again in the next year.

        I’m assuming that the agreement has actually been settled and is as claimed. If not, this will come out.

        • Their costs in the lawsuit, to complete the trial, are not clear. Many, though, have probably overestimated them.
          ***And by the same token, many have probably UNDERestimated them. But this little jab you write sets up your spin.

          There is no evidence that the Settlement Agreement was part of the verbal agreement in court, which was simply to drop the claims with prejudice.
          ***Except that this is what Rossi points out in the interview. Geez Abd, all you can do is spin.

          IH was not legally required to give up the License. As Rossi points out, that wasn’t going to happen from the lawsuit (and he’s generally right on that). So why did they do it?
          ***Because the offer on the table was that IH would release all IP back to Rossi. As I’ve been saying all along.

          At that point, they could simply have walked away and done nothing.
          ***Then why didn’t they? Why pay $millions in lawyer fees? Because they wanted to hang onto the IP, that’s why.

          Rossi couldn’t sue them any more. They could just sit on the license until it developed that it had value, then asserted claims anew,
          ***Um no, because the settlement included IH giving back Rossi’s IP which we can all see EXCEPT YOU.

          and these would not be claims that were discharged by the verbal agreement for dismissal with prejudice. That they went ahead and gave up the license, without any compensation at all, then, indicates that it was completely worthless to them.
          ***What color is the sky in your world? If the IP was completely worthless to them then why didn’t they walk away more than a year ago and spend $millions on lawyers trying to keep this supposedly worthless IP?

          I’m talking about the situation after the case was dismissed, if they simply refused to agree to what Rossi wanted. It is possible, though, that the informal agreement in court was more or less what the final agreement says.
          ***Gee, ya think?

          That surprises me, because it’s a step further than I expected.
          ***Only because you haven’t been listening, and loudly proclaiming that this wasn’t possible, etc. etc. etc. You could look across the sky and be surprised by the sun.

          Going back to before that, their court costs would probably have been under $50,000 to complete the trial. Just my guess. Say under $100,000.
          ***So take the next step, Abd. Why didn’t they settle way back when court costs were so low if that IP was so worthless to them?

          There is another consideration: their plans are to support inventors, and if inventors are afraid that they will aggressively sue them if they make mistakes, this would damage their long-term goals. However, the Rossi technology, if real, was, my opinion, worth about a trillion dollars. If there was 0.1% chance of this technology working as claimed, they were giving up an expected value of around a billion dollars for very little gain, a simple reduction in cost of a tiny fraction of that.
          ***Do you listen to yourself? You’re arguing against your own position!

          My opinion is that they decided to write the whole thing off as completely worthless.
          ***And your opinion gets less and less valued with each passing post. They wrote off the whole thing because they had actually become exposed to a non-negligible chance of losing a $267M lawsuit and they started looking at personal bankruptcy as a result.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      The settlement indicates the exact opposite.

      • If the exact opposite were true, IH would have settled more than a year ago. Get a grip, Abd.

  • Karl Venter

    Rossi got nothing except his old ecat ip back which he isnt going to use in any case?
    Or am I wrong?

    • Frank Acland

      From Mats’ interview:

      *What would have happened with your new reactor version, the E-Cat QX (formerly known as Quark X), if you hadn’t got the license back?*

      “It would have been very complicated because it’s an E-Cat—the theory base is the same and the patent protection is basically the same, even though revolutionary inventions have been added, but the license agreement expressed very clearly that all inventions, also subsequent and future ones, would become IH’s property. Together with the clause of *first choice* it would have become very complex. So it was absolutely necessary to eliminate the license.“

  • Gerard McEk

    This is extremely interesting to read and very plausable as well. Just a pity for Andrea that he didn’t get the money. Now industrialization will go a bit slower.
    I just wonder if this doesn’t impede on nda. We ill see.

  • wpj

    I hope that the LF people show a little guilt for the comments that they made regarding his wig (doubtful, though). Hope he is OK.

  • georgehants

    It is absolutely staggering how people do not see the absolute insanity of this situation and continue talking as if this is in some way normal.
    The human race is regressing to a intellectual situation below the insects and do not seem to be the in the slightest way aware of it.

    • Axil Axil

      The LENR reaction is not cold fusion, rather it is the decay of the nucleon. When we start off with an invalid assumption, then all derivatives of that assumption are invalid.

    • Richard Hill

      GH: COP above one is a joke. The heat pump outside my window has a COP around 3. AFAIK you can get high performance CHP (Combined Heat and Power) units with a COP nearly six.
      Rossi knows this.

      • Omega Z

        Should the temperature drop below 32`F, then your heat pump COP can drop into negative territory.

    • George:
      I posted the link to the MFMP LENR recipe to you and you thanked me. What more do you want?

      MFMP Publish their LENR Recipe. Posted on February 24, 2016 •
      http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/02/24/mfmp-publish-their-lenr-recipe/

    • Vinney

      What NGO’s can do at this stage is create crowd-funding sites in the developing world, and start projects that target particular needs or communities, that people can donate funds to.
      Any QuarkX device for the domestic market in the US or EU will require extensive and lengthy certification, but this will not be the case in Africa, Middle East, Indian sub-continent, many countries of Central and South America and Asia.
      With donations for development and pre-sales (based on real working product samples) you can fund some of the development of domestic E-cat appliances.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Rob,

    What does Rossi having skin cancer on his head and wearing a hair piece have to do with “any better reputation of his reliability”?????

    • TOUSSAINT francois

      Do not take notice of silly remarks ! Now great things will happen, and you are part of it !!
      Cheers !

  • magicsnd1

    It seems clear from the settlement doc that the prior license to AEG has been restored, as was specified in the cancellation terms in the IH license itself. The specific exclusion of AEG in the settlement doc seems to confirm this conclusion.

    • Vinney

      They (AEG) are like Rossi’s business agents, someone should ask Rossi what role Ampenergo have in the ongoing development and industrialization of the E-cat technology.

    • No. Forgot to write that. Rossi clarified that AEG was out of the picture when Rossi signed with IH in 2012. They never re-entered and they have no role with regard to this now.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Mats,

        So to be clear, AEG is not a Leonardo license holder and thus all it’s territories now belong to Leonardo?

        • AEG has no license since 2012. Rossi said that the only license holder at this moment is Hydrofusion for parts of Northern Europe, but I think that there might be some of the old local commercial licenses that are under some kind of litigation. Didn’t have time to talk further about that.

  • Come gather ’round people

    Wherever you roam

    And admit that the waters

    Around you have grown

    And accept it that soon

    You’ll be drenched to the bone

    If your time to you is worth savin’

    Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone

    For the times they are a-changin’

    😉

  • Thanks Mats! Thanks Andrea! Good luck to both of you on all your future endeavors! May E-Cat (and EEStor) technology save the world!

  • MasterBlaster7

    Well that didn’t waste a year or anything. Best possible outcome. It is a shame Rossi didn’t get the money, but to get the money + continued involvement with IH was a non-starter. So, anyone wana give Elon Musk a call? I bet he would love to fund this tech to charge his batteries in the future; plus hez a swell guy.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Who needs fuel cells when they have a fusion reactor?

      But can you imagine the range on that baby without all those heavy batteries, and a one year refuel interval?

      • Omega Z

        Ophelia,

        Around 8700/9000 hours of operation. How many hours do you drive in a week times 52 weeks. Devide that into the operational hours and there is the number of years between fuel recharging.

    • I was hoping Rossi would win the $20M “forbidden energy” X prize. Maybe there will be something similar in the future, now that his IP is basically a free agent.

      http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2024

  • Steve Swatman

    Time to pick up some popcorn, sit back, let Mr Rossi do his thing on the Qx and hope that we see a really strong demo in October, preferably early October. Everything else it seems, has been sorted,

  • Leo Kaas

    Or another possibility he realized they couldn’t pay, so he settle for getting back all rights to his E-Cat.

  • Dr. Mike

    Thanks to Mats for publishing both the interview and the “confidential” settlement. There are some new issues that arise from both the settlement and the interview. From Section #7 of the settlement it appears that that fuel contains an “Additional Element” that is not to be disclosed by IH. However, where is this “Additional Element” mentioned in Rossi’s issued patent #9,115,913 issued on 8/25/2015? Does this mean Rossi was issued a patent in which he failed to fully disclose his IP? My guess is that the patent office will want to re-examine this patent in the light of this new information.
    Another issue is that Rossi claims he was running a process for JM Products that used an average of 20-40% of the energy provided by the 1MW reactor. What volume/weight of reactants would have been needed to consume this much energy? Also, Rossi claims the steam was delivered at “a pressure of a few bars”. If the outlet pressure of the reactor was one bar, how was there any steam flowing to where there was a pressure of “a few bar”? The whole issue of JM Products using any steam other than for a short term experiment or two remains questionable.
    It was good that Mats asked if there were any pictures of the “heat exchanger”. However, he should have also asked:
    1. What happened to invoices for the material used to build the heat exchanger?
    2. Who were the contractors that built the heat exchanger?
    3. Who were the contractors that removed the heat exchanger, the output pipe, and all the electrical lines used for powering the fans?
    4. Would you take a picture of the fans where they are now being used?
    5. Would you take a picture of the heat exchanger pipes and outlet pipe where they are now being used?
    6. If your research is now focused on a 20W device, how could you possibly be using the parts from a 1MW heat exchanger in a proprietary process?
    7. Why didn’t Fabiani and Bass testify as to the existence of a heat exchanger in their depositions when questioned by your lawyers?
    8. And finally, why didn’t the radiation man Stokes testify in his deposition as to his examination of the heat exchanger? (Does anyone believe that someone who took the time to check the offices would not have followed a teeing line into the mezzanine and asked to see what was inside the heat exchanger?)

    A final issue that has not yet been resolved is did Rossi pay taxes on the initial $10M payment? It’s hard to believe that the IRS won’t look into this issue. It would have been a good question for Mats to ask Rossi.

    Let’s hope we eventually get to observe a demonstration of the E-Cat QX in which there is no uncertainty about the amount of energy used to supply the device and the energy output is measured with a calorimetry procedure that would be deemed acceptable to most scientists.

    • Omega Z

      No Dr. Mike,

      There is nothing for the patent office to review here. Rossi’s patent didn’t pertain to the fuel. The patent is only for the design of the reactor.

      (Rossi claims the steam was delivered at “a pressure of a few bars”)

      No. Rossi didn’t say that. He said the steam was applied to a sealed device of which produced internal pressure of about 2 bar to the ingredients inside it. Set an unopened bottle of water under a heat lamp or in the sun. the water will expand and bubble out the sides of the bottle. Applied to sealed metal container will raise the bar pressure.

      As to the E-Cat QX. If I recall, Rossi uses a 24 volt battery. Simply measure the heat output. Compare to the battery capacity. If output exceeds the battery capacity by 10, then draw you own conclusions.

      • James Rice

        A patent application must have enough information for a person “skilled in the art”, I.e., a mechanic or engineer, to reproduce the invention. The secret additional element appears to be necessary for the functioning of the invention. Rossi appears to be pursuing two incompatible I.P. strategies simultaneously: Trade secrets and patents. You can’t have trade secrets that are essential to the functioning of the invention, because the invention cannot be reproduced. That’s the bargain with patents. You give up all this information to the public domain, but in return you get a monopoly for 20 years.

        I think Rossi’s patent is probably invalid.

        • US_Citizen71

          A Franklin stove produces heat with pine, but it produces even more with coal. Would you invalidate the patent on it if coal wasn’t listed as a possible fuel? The missing ingredient likely greatly increases the efficiency but is not necessary.

          • Dr. Mike

            There are two issues. If someone knowingly fails to disclose a feature that is later shown to be important for making the device operate efficiently, they will probably not be able to defend a challenge to disclosure rules. Also, if someone else files a patent application to enhance the E-Cat with this special “additional element”, they will own the rights to that additional element. Rossi would not be able to use this additional element in any reactors that he sells without paying royalties to the patent holder (even if he claims his fuel always really did have this element).

          • Engineer48

            From page 4 of the agreement:

            “Defendants shall deliver or cause to be delivered to Plaintiffs’ counsel a certificate, executed by Darden, confirming the destruction of any written materials containing or memorializing the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula and confirming that, to the best of Defendants” knowledge, the only persons who know the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula are Rossi, Darden, and the two other individuals who attended the meeting at which Rossi communicated the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula to Darden.

            Within the same 10 day period, Defendants shall deliver to Plaintiffs’ counsel who is a partner at Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP (“Hinshaw”) a sealed envelope containing the names of the two other individuals, such envelop only to be unsealed and provided by Hinshaw to Rossi or counsel for Rossi pursuant to a valid court order based on a finding that there is reasonable cause to believe that one or both of the two other individuals disclosed the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula to someone other than Rossi or Darden.”

          • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

            Yes. That counsel is Lukacs, who clearly engineered the settlement, this was quite visible in court. Lukacs had been added as counsel just before the trial, and probably was able to obtain Rossi’s trust. He was able to speak to Pace as a peer, and had no investment in prior advice given to Rossi.

          • Omega Z

            “Rossi would not be able to use this additional element in any reactors that he sells without paying royalties to the patent holder (even if he claims his fuel always really did have this element).”

            To this I agree. However, Rossi’s full fuel composition may be included in another patent not yet disclosed. Which when eventually becomes published would be in effect. Given that Rossi’s filing date predates anyone elses patent filing date.

        • Omega Z

          Read my lips.

          Rossi patented an electric heater core.
          Not the fuel, nor even the electric/computer controller in this patent. Very likely those items will be in additional patents.

          • James Rice

            Unless the nature of the additional element is known already by persons skilled in the art, which it obviously is not, the invention is not reproducible. Unlike an electrically powered heater, where the basics of using electric resistance to produce heat are well known, a functioning LENR fuel is not common knowledge and without it the heater cannot function and the invention cannot be reproduced.

            The patent is probably invalid, or if indeed it’s for an electric heater core, worthless.

          • Omega Z

            It did include a USPTO identifier number as an electric heater. It made no claims of LENR or cold fusion. Also, if you look, I’m certain you would find many products that are patent piece meal with no further discription of what the other components may be.

            Note the Fuel charge did include hydrogen hydride(currently under R&D by others for fuel cells etc..). However, I doubt that matters as the fuel was not what was being patented. You could just as well hook a propane tank to the heater core and it would work producing more energy out then the electricity applied.

          • Dr. Mike

            You really should read the patent (#9,115,913) rather than have someone read your lips. The fuel and its processing are in Claims #1,#2, #3, and #10. I took the time to verify the patent covered all elements of the fuel except the “Additional Element” before I made my comment on the patent issue. Why don’t you do the same?

          • Omega Z

            I did read the patent. Multiple times. And initially from your perspective. And it didn’t add up. To many details were vague. Then it occured to me that the patent was all about the reactor. The rest is filler. Anyone skilled in the art can replicate the reactor. From here, Rossi can add additional patents that play off of this patent. This patent was just a foot in the door. He can build on it.

            This patent was not published at the time most patents are published and made available to the public.It was concealed up until just a couple weeks before being granted at Rossi’s request. Had Rossi not made the request, it would still be concealed. It was also reviewed for national security purposes.

            And as far as we know(and is likely), the fuel and control system are fully disclosed in additional patents. That Are Concealed. The patent office would have access to them even tho no one else has. There are many products in the world that have seperate patents for each and every little component. Many that have no purpose without the whole. It is how Corporations like Apple protect their IP. Every detail is a battle should someone infringe. Patents like a rectangle of a specific size and a specific rounded radius on the corners. A patent I still question, but was granted as it applies to other components also under seperate patents.

            Did you notice that a similar patent applied for by Darden inc was declined. The difference was it included the USPTO identifier number for LENR/Cold Fusion. This switched the focus to the fuel and not the reactor itself. Big mistake…

        • Rene

          James, no. There is nothing about LENR in his patent. The claims are basically a hydrogen heater.

      • Dr. Mike

        Omega Z,
        If you would have taken the time to review the above mentioned patent, you would have easily seen the patent completely covers the fuel, but there is no mention of “Another Element”. Claims #1, #2, #3, and #10 contain information on the fuel. Your explanation of what Rossi means in his “description of the technology” that JM Products was supposedly using really does not add any clarity to what Rossi said in the interview, but you were able to add some words to what he actually said. If you really know what JM Products (really just Rossi) was doing in his use of steam, please explain. Perhaps you can also let everyone know the volume and/or weight of the material processed in consuming 200-400KW for a period of ~350 days?

        I agree that it is important that any demonstration of a E-Cat QX be run long enough to insure that energy is not produced by an internal hidden energy source, but this should not be an issue due to the small size of the E-Cat QX. However, I’ll stick with my original statement that the input power to the device needs to be carefully measured (including use of an oscilloscope to check for any high frequency input) and the output power needs to be measured with a calorimetery procedure that would be deemed acceptable to most scientists (there will always be someone that will claim a better procedure could be used).

        • Rene

          The claims are ambiguous and quite frankly, as written, so long as applying a voltage makes it generate heat, that’s enough. Reading this patent, I see a hydrogen based heater. Missing are ratios and process, which presumably makes for LENR, but again as written the patent makes no claims for that phenomena. The only fuel claim is #1

          claim 1 – said fuel mixture comprises lithium, and lithium aluminum hydride, wherein said catalyst comprises a group 10 element,
          claim 2 – wherein said catalyst comprises nickel powder.
          claim 3 – wherein said nickel powder has been treated to enhance porosity thereof.
          claim 10 – wherein said reaction comprises reacting lithium hydride with aluminum to yield hydrogen gas.

          And, claim 1 cannot standalone. it is all the claims that comprises the patent. What is interesting is that all of the fancy stimulus is not covered in this patent. At most this basic stimulator is covered “wherein reinvigorating said reaction comprises varying a voltage of said voltage source”.

  • SG

    I take it as a partial explanation. Apparently, with his LENR reaction, the input power can fluctuate (including decreasing) with the output power being maintained (or at least not dropping precipitously).

    • Bruce__H

      Rossi’s E-Cats, may indeed be constituted so that there is an inverse relationship between energy in and energy out. But this is independent of the definitional formula for COP.

      What I am complaining about is that Rossi thinks that the definition is some sort of proof of an inverse physical relationship.

      • Omega Z

        When the E-cat goes into self sustain. the input will be decrease while the temperature is maintained and may even increase. That Smith and others don’t seem to grasp this may be an indicator that Darden hasn’t explained well what the E-cat is supposed to do.

        COP is determined by the input divided into the output. It should be noted that Rossi has explained in the past that COP isn’t really an accurate description for this technology, but scientifically described as just energy going in verses energy out.

      • No, what Rossi says is that mathematically COP increases when input power decreases. He doesn’t say anything about how input power and output power is connected/correlated. We don’t know anything about that. Neither does Murray. Rossi maybe knows, but he says nothing about it.

  • SG

    Big thank you to Mats. Now, can you pull getting a QuarkX live demo at the (hopeful) New Energy World Symposium? I’ll attend either way. But if you can persuade Rossi to do something like that, then please expect (and plan for) hundreds to attend.

  • Buck

    I think the following exchange between Mats and Rossi cements, IMO, Rossi’s motivation for dissolving the License Agreement and taking back the IP. In light of Darden/IH’s inability to present an incontestable argument on the 1-Year test performance of the E-Cat, I take this as evidence for Darden/IH’s unspoken motivation to act in a fashion supporting Rossi’s gut instinct described in the following:

    Mats: “Going back in time—when did you first understand that things were not going well between you and IH?”

    Rossi: “When I discovered that IH was making agreements with our competitors. At that point, I understood that they were trying to fill up their portfolio of intellectual property in view of litigation with us pending the huge payment they were going to have to pay. It was instinct—I had no proof, but eventually, the facts confirmed this instinctive doubt.”

  • Omega Z

    The average energy production of solar cells is 6 hours or less. There is nothing adequate about that. Current battery technology has about 20 cents storage cost per kilowatt plus the cost of the energy produced to store in them.

    • “Current battery technology has about 20 cents storage cost per kilowatt plus the cost of the energy produced to store in them”

      reference please

  • Omega Z

    In the beginning, A Woodford fund representative stated that this was all about IP control/ownership. It would now appear that he was the only one who new exactly what he was talking about.

    As I have pointed out to a few in the past, Rossi wears a wig because he had a skin melanoma(cancer). Had nothing to do with the 1 year spent in the control container. This is the same medical condition that Peter Gluck(EGO OUT blog) suffers from and has cost him his vision.

    • Michael W Wolf

      Many of us claimed it was all about IP.

      • SG

        True, although Woodford saying it does carry some weight. That IH and Woodford fought as long as they did to hang on to it should mean something. They could have saved several million just by exiting/settling early on.

        • That’s the only real scenario that makes sense.

        • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

          What Woodford said has often been misrepresented in these discussions.

          • SG

            In what way?

          • Especially by you.

          • Omega Z

            I no longer have the link, but it appeared pretty clear to me what he meant. It’s about IP ownership rights. He also stated that it is pretty common in these situations.

    • sam

      There was one other person who had a comment that it was all about I.P. I do not remember who
      it was.

      • Omega Z

        Maybe posting the “the only one” was a bad choice of words. I had also stated early on that it was about the IP. I based that opinion on the contract and that Rossi had inadvertently boxed himself in. Darden was in a position to delay things until the patents expired if he so chose. Darden/IH not paying up gave Rossi an opportunity to get out.

      • I was saying that. Of course, over at LENR Forum I was roundly chastised over such impossibility.

    • I think there’s some radiation exposure going on with these devices. Focardi died of cancer, and a couple of other researchers. This seems statistically anomalous.

  • Michael W Wolf

    Seems all Rossi wanted is his IP like he said. Being that he offered to return IH’s money for it, I would say IH lost because not only did they not get their 11.5 million dollars back, they had massive lawyer’s fees. Winner, Rossi! IH did not prove a single thing. Sifferkoll was right. All FUD!.

  • Man. It just feels really good to have been able to deduce a few significant things that turned out to be true inside the blizzard of disinformation that has been relentlessly blowing now for years.

    Back to cautious optimism. Rossi better come through this time.

  • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Aw, c’mon. The wig looked fine and this is just mean. Stop it.

  • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Darden doesn’t keep $89 million in a shoebox. He gets money from investors when it is needed. He didn’t just “try” to get investor money, he got it, and obtained commitments for more ($150 million more from Woodford if needed). No, Darden didn’t take money from anyone based on assurances that Rossi technology worked. And the money did not go to him. The bulk of money invested was in the new parent company, IHHI, $50 million from Woodford, and that money went entirely to non-Rossi projects and that, in fact, freaked Rossi out, he appears to have considered it some kind of betrayal.

    • I can see it from Rossi’s perspective, it was a kind of betrayal.

      As far as Darden not taking “money from anyone based on assurances that Rossi technology worked” , that is directly proven false in the marketing evidence entered into the docket.

    • Buck

      Betrayal . . . Yes . . . especially when IH/Darden did not follow through with the $89M. You have described Rossi as being paranoid despite the fact IH/Darden chose to not fulfill their commitment to pay $89M.

      IMO the following exchange between Mats and Rossi defines Rossi’s motivation for dissolving the License Agreement and taking back the IP. It speaks to Rossi’s intuition on Darden/IH being a “bad player” intent on gaining full financial control of the IP. Further, in light of Darden/IH’s inability to present an incontestable argument on the 1-Year test performance of the E-Cat, I take this as evidence for Darden/IH’s unspoken motivation to act in a fashion supporting Rossi’s gut instinct described in the following. In addition, I take this as evidence that the E-Cat did perform at a level of COP between 60 – 80. Of course, you likely wont agree with this logic.

      Mats: “Going back in time—when did you first understand that things were not going well between you and IH?”

      Rossi: “When I discovered that IH was making agreements with our competitors. At that point, I understood that they were trying to fill up their portfolio of intellectual property in view of litigation with us pending the huge payment they were going to have to pay. It was instinct—I had no proof, but eventually, the facts confirmed this instinctive doubt.”

  • SG

    “Given what I knew of the case, from the case documents, this indicates
    to me that they came to the conclusion that the IP was totally
    worthless.”

    That was quite an epic battle over worthless IP. Woodford even suggested that it was all about control of the IP. And if the e-Cat works, IH/Woodford will have a very special place in history.

    • Yup, Woodford/IH will be like the producer who told Led Zeppelin that they had as much chance of making it in the industry as a Lead Zeppelin, hence giving them their name. But no one can quite remember who that producer is now, can they?

      Why did they fight if the IP was worthless? Methinks the ladies doth protest too much.

      • roseland67

        Kevin,

        Actually that was Keith Moon, drummer of The Who,
        not a music producer

    • Vinney

      Yep! A footnote.
      Future historians will try to limit the number of mentions of Darden, IH, Cherokee and Woodford.
      They will become known as the group that wasted a great inventors time, at a crucial moment in his life, with the world in need of this long awaited technology.
      All for a couple of million dollars, which they could easily have gotten from other investment partners.
      They aren’t even worth being called venture capitalists. Utter failures.
      Andrea Rossi on the other hand completed his side of the contract in good faith.

  • Michael W Wolf

    Why were they in court? Because Rossi wanted the 89 million or his IP given up by IH. He made that clear by offering their 11.5 million dollars back. But IH chooses to go to court and launch what we now know as Fud. What makes more sense to me is IH simply did not have the 89 million and went to court to try and win on some technicality and get to keep the IP and licensing rights. And since they went to court with no evidence they lose the chance to get the 11.5 million back from Rossi. I figure Rossi demanded 89 million or his IP back. Unable to discredit Penon the took their losses and went home. It was over the IP and Rossi getting it back is evidence it is at least worth 11.5 million to IH or else it would have never gone to court.

    Scientists have been trying for almost 30 years and failing to get access energy. Few have done it. This means it will take billions of dollars and armies of scientists and engineers to have a viable stable product ready for market. But you want Rossi to do it alone in a week. gees.

    • “It was over the IP and Rossi getting it back is evidence it is at least worth 11.5 million to IH or else it would have never gone to court.”
      ***Yup, it was over IP all along, just as I’ve been saying and Abd doesn’t get it, or perhaps is telling himself this couldn’t be happening. But I doubt IH thought this was worth $11.5M, they thought they would get their money back and were holding the IP hostage. In the end it looked like they were risking a $267M loss to gain a couple $M back from Rossi. Definitely not worth it.

      • Right. My interpretation is that IH was in a very difficult situation. They probably wanted the money back, but couldn’t get it.

        • Earlier, Rossi offered to refund the initial round of $11.5M if they would have just given up the IP. Well, at least Rossisez that. There appears to be some evidence for it, because you were the one who published it.

          So why did IH hang on so long in the face of an earlier offer to relinquish IP? They wanted the IP.

  • Michael W Wolf

    Nope. Rossi made a public offer and I read it. If IH would have come out and accepted it, we would have all seen whether Rossi was for real. We would have all left if Rossi turned them down. And IH knew it. But what did IH do? They could have ended this instantly. If Rossi gave the money back then we would know he at least thought it was worth it. If he didn’t give it back , he would have lost most of us. The question you need to ask yourself is, “why didn’t IH call Rossi’s bluff”? Because of the IP, it’s the only thing that makes sense to me.

    • “Rossi made a public offer and I read it.”
      ***Several of us thought we did as well, but when I went searching for the offer I couldn’t find it. I think it was on Rossi’s blog and he deleted it. Do you have a link?

      • Pedro

        Guess Rossi retracted his offer at a later stage. IH let the moment pass. After that the offer was no longer on the table and the offer now was… Either you give me my 89M or you give me my IP back.

        • That appears to be the case.

      • Michael W Wolf

        It was posted here on franks blog. And yes it was on Rossi’s blog reader on several occasions. I remember someone asking Rossi if the offer was still on the table and Rossi said yes. Frank could find these threads where Rossi’s reader was posted here. There is no way in my mind that IH or Jed and company weren’t aware of it. If IH was out the 11.5 million and wanted it back, that was their opportunity. So there was something else in play. The IP!! ABD and the skeptics gave us a lot of bad information and made guarantees that didn’t come to fruition. Why believe any of them now. They claimed to be absolutely sure. So they new they were/are spreading FUD like Sifferkoll said. ABD may not be included in that last remark. But if you want to sleep with snakes, you may be mistaken as one.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      There was a report of an offer without evidentiary substance, a rumor that started based on a misunderstanding of a comment, that would be what Michael remembers.

      If anyone can find actual evidence, I’d very much want to see it and report it.

      Bottom line, if IH believed the IP was as valuable as $10 million, they’d have stuck to the lawsuit — or refused to sign a settlement agreement that would not compensate them. I know the evidence that they had, and I saw what was coming in court. they would have prevailed; this is never a complete certainty, because jury decisions can sometimes be erratic, but it was very likely, including considering the psychology of juries and how the opening statements went.

      There is another factor not considered. One of the things that LLCs provide is tax deductions. The settlement agreement, if this is real, will allow them to write off what may be on their books as millions of dollars worth of intellectual property, thus allowing them to distribute losses to investors (which then reduce their taxes). So when I’ve written “worthless,” that must be glossed as “worth less than the value of tax deductions.”

      • Bottom line is they settled, and relinquished claims on the IP just like I said they would. They would have had a more favorable settlement if they did it a year earlier but they wanted that supposedly worthless IP.

  • Michael W Wolf

    Hey you can say IH wasn’t convinced it worked, to say they were convinced it didn’t work is contradicted by their failure to have Rossi return their money. You guys can’t say IH didn’t know about it, the fud masters who claimed they had direct contact with IH were reading it, just like we all did. Oh but they didn’t say anything to IH, huh? bull crap. IH was trying to weasel the IP without ponying up the money they owed.

    Nothing anyone can say can convince some of us that Rossi’s public offer wasn’t valid. IT would have ended it all.

    FUD is proven. Everything the skeptics claimed, turned out wrong. And proof of a Rossi win is evident by the skeptics calling him names and remarking about his hair after cancer treatment. Even they think Rossi won. We’ll find out if it is real sooner or later. But let me ask you this, Why should we believe any of the skeptics now? It’s almost like you are conducting spin control. And you know what people think of politicians these days.

    • “Nothing anyone can say can convince some of us that Rossi’s public offer wasn’t valid.”
      ***I and a few others have tried to track down Rossi’s public offer. Do you have a link? I think Rossi might have deleted it from his JONP blog.

      • Vinney

        Mate, read between the lines, the offer ‘indirectly’ was posted here, and as you know all the FUD crew (frequently acting stupid, like repeating claims that had already been dispealled) was also here (ECW) and this FUD crew would have reported back to Darden, do you now get it.
        And Darden could have publicly (press release) said that no such offer was made. We would believe that, but no such official announcement was made.
        I doubt Darden and Co would miss such a trick (knowing the characters they are).

        • You can’t read between the lines if there are no lines.

      • Michael W Wolf

        Frank had pulled the quotes in several different posts right here on ecatworld. And many of us remember and discussed it. I personally am not going pour over the site looking for them. As we know ABD and company will just dismiss it and lawyer their way out of it in their own minds. But he made an offer and it was public. IH knew, and it was legit. All they had to do is publicly accept it and out Rossi for the fraud they say he was/is. And they darn well know it. It was out there and they know it. And I will stay on it every time they post in favor of the less than sincere IH.

    • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

      What I claim is that the reality behind this case is revealed in the case documents, if one becomes familiar with them. Again, this “public offer” is strangely not public. I’ve not seen any confirmation of the offer. There was discussion of this, discussion assuming an offer. Not evidence of the offer. If Rossi had made that offer, this would have been a splendid foundation for a Lukacs proposal. It looks like it wasn’t. Lukacs must have used another approach.

  • Omega Z

    Had Darden/IH lost, which is a good possibility, they stood to lose $267M dollars. Not being able to pay that, they would ultimately lose all rights to the IP. This was just Darden cutting his losses. One of Dardens greatest arguments was the pump capacity to the E-cats. They were totally wrong.

    (without a heat exchanger, as Rossi later claimed, heat levels would have been fatal.)

    This is NONSENSE. Obviously, many who make these fatal heat claims have never done a real laborious jobs in their lives.

    This was an industrial/commercial building. It would leak heat like a sieve would leak water. I’ve done work in a building double the size of the Doral building where furnaces produced 10’s of megawatts of heat with 30 employees present 24/7 365. A few suffered heat exhaustion in July when outside temps exceeded 100`F, but not one died. Even they returned to work the next day. None of this heat is actively removed. It passively dissipates through the walls and ceiling with only 1 6`x 6`cupola in the roof and 2 bay doors like the one in the Doral building.

    The building itself acts like a giant radiator and the more heat produced, the more a metal building will radiate. Rossi’s E-cat produced 100`C temps that radiated to an infinite heat sink of 30`C or less.

    • Dr. Mike

      What errors did you find in the simulations that showed the air temperature would have risen to >>50C in the JM Products room without the heat being dumped somewhere else? Do you actually believe that Rossi processed enough material to use 200-400KW for 350 days?

    • Stephen

      That and convection of the stratified hot air out of any high doors ways and openings in the roof.

      • Omega Z

        Correct,

        And heat dissipates at a much higher rate then many think. Containing heat has always been a much greater issue then expelling it. Heated air expands and becomes lighter and aside from rising also creates a pressure differential where it tries to push out. In bay dors, it goes out in the upper half and draws cooler air in at the bottom. A venturi effect of sorts. An so called old gravity feed furnace worked quit well before forced air systems came into play.

  • Engineer48

    Interesting statement from page 4 of the agreement:

    “Defendants shall deliver or cause to be delivered to Plaintiffs’ counsel a certificate, executed by Darden, confirming the destruction of any written materials containing or memorializing the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula and confirming that, to the best of Defendants” knowledge, the only persons who know the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula are Rossi, Darden, and the two other individuals who attended the meeting at which Rossi communicated the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula to Darden.

    Within the same 10 day period, Defendants shall deliver to Plaintiffs’ counsel who is a partner at Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP (“Hinshaw”) a sealed envelope containing the names of the two other individuals, such envelop only to be unsealed and provided by Hinshaw to Rossi or counsel for Rossi pursuant to a valid court order based on a finding that there is reasonable cause to believe that one or both of the two other individuals disclosed the Energy Catalyzer Fuel Formula to someone other than Rossi or Darden.”

    • Dr. Mike

      Yes this is interesting. It clearly means that Rossi is trying to maintain the E-Cat fuel as a trade secret, which means he did not fully disclose the fuel formula in issued patent #9,115,913. Should we expect the US Patent Office to invalidate this patent in the near future? It will be quite difficult for Rossi to commercialize his E-Cats without patent protection.
      A question for a patent lawyer: If Rossi is found not to have fully disclosed the fuel in Patent #9,115,913, would he have problems trying to patent enhancements to the E-Cat?

      • Engineer48

        Hi Mike,

        Simple for Rossi to say the additional fuel element was added after the patent was filed.

        • I think the E-Cat works as it is described in the patent. The additional element and other details are for increasing the COP.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Mats,

            I agree.

            As I read the patent it is for the older Black Hot Cat type cylinder reactor but with the sandwich stack shown in planar form.

          • Hi Mats,

            if so, why we haven’t a convincing reproducible public test?

          • Rossi isn’t a scientist, he’s an entrepreneur. He didn’t even want to do ANY public tests, but his friend Focardi got cancer and wanted the recognition that was due to him, so he agreed to do a couple of (poorly executed) public demos.

            As far as Rossi is concerned, the only demos he needs to do is to paying customers. In Mercado Veritas. But if you’re a skeptopath, you’re convinced that he is a professional at pulling the wool over the eyes of his investors. If that were so, he would have taken the money from Darden rather than preserve his supposedly worthless IP.

          • Engineer48

            Hi EF,

            Rossi did an invited public demo of 1 MW plant that ran in SSM mode at 1/2 MW for 5 1/2 hours.

            He then said no more public tests.

            I was invited to a private test as part of my client’s desire to buy several 1 MW plants. Then the lawsuite happened and my client, being a public company, decided they would wait out the trial.

          • Dr. Mike

            What evidence did you see that the reactor was outputting 500KW?

          • SG

            I don’t think anyone has tried reproducing what is in the granted patent. Parkhomov, MFMP, and others have focused on replicating the Lugano device with some degree of success (although not as high of a COP as claimed by Rossi).

          • Ged

            Exactly right.

          • I simply think it’s difficult. But possible.

          • Rene

            Because the patent describes a design that generates no overunity heat. There is no LENR claimed.

          • Claiming LENR is a quick way to get your patent denied. Several patents have gone through by disguising that they were connected to cold fusion.

      • Rene

        Patents and trade secrets are mutually exclusive. Period. Trade secrets have weak protection. It is legal for someone to build up claims and patent what is contained in a trade secret. As for the Rossi patent, if the claims are sufficient to show a device generating heat (nothing in the claims describe overunity), then it’s safe.

        http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/trade_secrets/patent_trade.htm

        • James Rice

          A weakness of trade secrets is that anyone can patent them, if someone finds them out somehow from the secret holder or develops them independently, AND before they become common knowledge. That is, if someone finds out the LENR fuel formula that works from Rossi and publishes it on e-catworld, the formula becomes unpatentable. But if they rush to the patent office and submit an application before it gets out, the fact that Rossi had it before doesn’t count because he kept it secret. That is a danger Rossi is facing if he continues to keep trade secrets: That someone else will patent his innovations.

          • Omega Z

            You must also consider that they may also not be patentable. Note Rossi’s patent includes multiple ingredients, but they are not under patent. Or that Rossi has already filed a patent that has been concealed from the public. Anyway, I think if you were to start using Cokes secret formula of KFC’s secret recipe, you would find yourself in a serious court battle.

          • MasterBlaster7

            Ok. I have a law degree, courses in Intellectual Property and a US Patent that I did 100% percent of the patent drawings and 90% of the write up on–excluding claims….so I’m going to chime in here. Rossi is doing the absolutely, right thing here in keeping reaction mixture a trade secret. One thing James Rice left out…the trade secret strength…trade secrets are forever–if you can keep them. Omega…if Coke and KFC started suing someone that used their trade secrets…it would have to be under a different theory than patents and probably a pretty weak argument at that (IDK…if they could prove theft or misappropriation or some other around the box legal theory).
            Also, the reaction mixture as a “new chemical/nuclear process” is iffy…primarily because there is no set scientific theory for said chemical/nuclear process. Would it have to proceed under recipe?–recipes are unpatentable btw (see Coke and KFC et all.).
            Lets say there was a set theory, and the reaction mixture was patentable, there is nothing keeping competitors from altering the formula slightly and/or improving the formula and getting a patent on those. (see Prozac and Zoloft et all.)
            What Rossi needs to do…is keep the reaction mixture secret….patent what he can–device wise…..then get to market as fast as he can. If he ‘gets big fast’ there is not alot that can stop him. Look at Elon Musk…he offered to open source all of SpaceX without patents to encourage competion….if you are big enough and move fast enough (entrench your product in the market and gain a monopoly) patents dont much matter. But, there is a serious inflection point that needs to be reached so Rossi needs to move fast and make his design ‘already existent in market’ for patent challenge purposes….the big worry is that if someone like ‘Jet Energy’ goes the patent troll route…this could tangle up Rossi…these are patents that have been achieved before Rossi has reached his inflection point. It should be a mad dash to market now for Rossi.

          • James Rice

            The problem with keeping the reaction mixture secret is that his patent cannot be replicated with the information contained in the patent and information available to someone “skilled in the art”. That is required. Therefore the patent is probably invalid. BTW, a fuel mixture that works would be patentable. It is the unique and useful combination of already existing ideas or things that constitute most patents. Very few patents are completely new.

          • Dr. Mike

            Great explanation of the problem with Rossi trying to keep one component of his fuel as a trade secret.

  • I believe this outcome is what I predicted.

  • If IH thought the IP was worthless all along, they would have settled long ago and saved the legal fees.

  • Geez, Abd, your legal theories are ridiculous, one after the other after the other.

    • Michael W Wolf

      They are not always ridiculous. He does know what he is talking about a lot of the times. It seems to me that he has ulterior motives.

  • I was saying similar stuff over at LENR Forum but I was crazy to be focusing on a settlement like that. And look, it turned out almost exactly as I had been saying.

  • If this technology is bogus then why didn’t IH settle a year ago and not pay a bunch of lawyers to hold onto “worthless” IP?

  • Axil Axil

    ​The working relationship between Rossi and IH was hard on them both. But that relationship produced the Lugano reactor which was a God sent to Rossi. The Lugano reactor inspired Rossi to build the QuarkX which eventually has solved all of Rossi’s technical problems. That year of torture during the IH test will pay huge dividends in Rossi’s future commercialization plans. Sometimes an improbable predicament works out for the best in the end.

    • Rene

      “The Lugano reactor inspired Rossi to build the QuarkX which eventually has solved all of Rossi’s technical problems.”
      To be determined. We have no proof whatsoever that the QuarkX works, or works well, or works reliably.

      • Omega Z

        “We have no proof whatsoever that the QuarkX works, or works well, or works reliably.”

        Agreed-
        That is what Rossi is working on when he says working towards sigma 5…

        • Rene

          Yes, but Rossi doing that for the purpose of proof has low value as it is no substitute for independent verification. Besides sigma5 is not about proof, it is about achieving a level of reliability, which again would require independent testing. Without that independent verification, proof devolves to market release in which case all the notices, all his ‘disclosures’ are all rainbows and unicorns.

  • Björn-Ola

    If it was bogus, why didn’t IH call the police?

    • Police are lazy. They will wait for you to do all the work. In this case they see that the evidence wasn’t compelling enough to meet the “preponderance of evidence” civil burden so there’s no way it would meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” criminal burden.

  • help_lenr

    Not necessary. For example it is possible that IH thought that they found a deal to make fast money easily, then they found out that this plan was wrong ( they are going to lose money if they fail in court). Therefore they abandoned this deal.

  • LION

    Hi Abd, if you are home now please could you let me know how you want to proceed so I can buy the film, thanks.

  • Vinney

    I think he had the jurors in mind when he wrote those statements (Watt hours per hour) which are frequently used and correctly understood by non-experts.
    I think he means COP goes up as energy consumed goes down for the same energy output, in his case 1MW.

    • Bruce__H

      Here is what Rossi says in point 2 of his handwritten notes on Smith’s expert disclosure …

      “The fact that COP increases when the energy input decreases is obvious: in the calculation

      COP = energy output / energy input

      being the energy input at the denominator, it is obvious that the lower is the value of the denominator, the higher is the value of COP.

      This is middle school math.”

      This argument of Rossi’s is completely screwy. It is just plain wrong and yet he doesn’t seem to realize it. He is somehow trying to use this as a proof that COP must increase as energy input decreases. But to do this he is assuming that energy output remains stable as energy input decreases, and this would be exceedingly unusual, even for his claimed system.

      Consider a passive resistor in a circuit. An incandescent light bulb will do. i suppose that the COP would be 1 or a little less. The same equation would describe COP as for Rossi’s system, and yet do you imagine that decreasing the input energy to the light bulb would leave the energy output stable and thereby raise the COP?

      • OMG. A lightbulb is not an LENR reactor. There’s no internal process that releases energy. Obviously COP is constant = 1, if you consider all forms of energy input and output.
        Consider instead a nuclear reactor, or a coal plant. Let’s say that you through som kind of optimization/improvement can maintain the output power while reducing overall input power, then COP increases. That’s the relevant parallel.

      • Thomas Kaminski

        Bruce_H: You are completely wrong — Rossi’s measure is correct. The problem is that the interpretation of Energy-Out/Energy-In is not defined well. One must look at the energy produced/used over a long time, integrating the values for it to make sense.

        Let’s take a simple case: An electrical heater coupled to a large mass of heat-storing material. If we measure the energy out as the combination of radiation, conduction, and convection losses of the heated device and energy in as the electrical energy, we can get some pretty unusual numbers taken in the short term. For example, the electrical energy might be large (say a POWER of 1 kw for 1-second = 1 kw-second of ENERGY) when first heating the mass, but if the mass initially stays at room temperature, the energy out will be zero (0 kilowatts out for one second = 0 kw-sec). At that instant, the COP is (0 (kw-sec))/(1(kw-sec)) = 0. After the device reaches equilibrium, the input power will equal the output power. At that point, the combination of convective, conductive, and radiated power will equal the electrical input power. Now if we abruptly cut the power, the energy stored as thermal energy in the mass will continue to provide an output power. At that instant the power out will still be 1 kw over 1-second for a 1-(kw-sec) of energy. The input power will be 0 over 1 second for 0 (kw-sec) of energy. The COP will be infinite.

        You might be tempted to “average” the COP. This is wrong. Let’s say that the equilibrium state is reached in 10 seconds, at which time you cut the input power. The “infinite” COP will dominate the average, leading to an “average” of infinity. Clearly this cannot be.

        The only thing that makes sense in a complex system is to integrate (sum) the input energy and output energy over a long enough time to minimize the effects of system time constants. For the Doral device, this might be over several days, given the start up time and long self-sustain times.

  • 😉

  • ???
    It’s basic mathematics. x/y increases when y decreases. Period.

  • Wh/h refers to an average value. W refers to an instantaneous or constant value.
    The unit dimension is the same, the interpretation different.

    • Omega Z

      When attacking the issue doesn’t gain traction, (Abd) seems to attack the person and his integrity. Obviously, here, Abd is saying Rossi isn’t smart enough to have created a working LENR device. This is the message he is trying to convey.

      • In fact that could have been the trap that IH fell into, thinking that if someone as stupid as Rossi got it to work then with Brullioun it would be a slam dunk.

  • Read my interview.

  • Just went through these comments. Fun discussion as always. Some commenters apparently have reason to resist the obvious, or to not admit what they know. But as I usually say, physics don’t care much about people and will prevail 🙂

    • Martin Lund

      Your interview with Rossi has given me a more positive impression that he is truthful about his situation and technology. However, the proof is in the pudding – only once Rossi has put his E-cat QX product in the hands of public testers/customers will we know for sure if his LENR technology is real or not. The sooner the better!

    • Mats, from the look of it you interviewed Rossi in person in Miami. I feel like maybe you discussed more than you have published in your blog.

      Were there other topics? Did you have a wide-ranging discussion that you distilled down for the official interview?

      What Fabiani is doing in Sweden? What the Swedes are up to in general? Gullstrom? Nobel prize consideration? Jet engine research?

      Is your sense that the “tragicomic scam-whisperer scenario” is what played out? That Rossi really has working E-Cats and IH believed that he did and fund-raised off of it until late in the game when Rossi’s defensiveness, games with the “customer” side and an influx of super-skeptical (if not super-careful) engineering consultants convinced them they’d been victims of fraud.

      • I have some ongoing info that need some time before it’s ready to report, but as soon as I can I will.

    • LuFong

      Hi Mats,

      I’m curious.: do you or anyone close to you have a financial stake in the E-Cat? I’m not talking about your book (which I bought and read) or your efforts to spread the awareness of technology or its impact on society.

      Thanks

    • Dr. Mike

      Hi Mats,
      How much of the pre-trial motion evidence, including depositions, did you review?

  • Omega Z

    “If output power is constant regardless of input power, why is there even any input power? Why wouldn’t it be reduced until it is either zero or is at a minimum level, below which lowering it would indeed reduce output power?”

    Are you just throwing this stuff out there to sandbag people or do you not understand the concept of LENR. The above sounds like your mind think is stuck on a conventional electric heater.

    When the device is heated, it activates whats been called the Rossi effect. It is self sustaining and when the input is reduced, the effect is self propagating. When you make posts like the above, it makes people question your motives. It sounds as if you’re parroting some of Mr Smith’s thinking. He also seemed to describe a conventional electric heater.

  • You cannot assume the opposite either since you don’t know the process. You simply have to measure. And if the measurements tell you that x is unchanged while y has decreased, then COP has increased.
    Assuming that x should change with y is simply wrong if the measurements don’t say it does.

  • I said read my interview. Apparently it’s some kind of invention, so there’s nothing like it on the market (BTW ‘these systems’ is nothing that is commonly known — Rossi designed the plant around the E-Cat, which is not a very well spread technology) and it’s positioned in close connection to the heat exchanger (or maybe I missed writing that? sorry in that case, will edit if I didn’t).

  • As I just answered somewhere else — you cannot assume that x changes with y, as in a light bulb, since you don’t know the process. You just have to trust your measurements. If the measurements show that x is unchanged while y decreases, then COP increases. That’s it.

    • Pretty simple unless you’re trying to explain it to someone who refuses to draw the simple conclusion because it would make them look bad.

  • Once again Abd looks across the sky and fails to find the sun.

  • Omega Z

    First, “not technically valid” doesn’t make it wrong.

    Notes are notes. You have no idea what he was thinking. I’ve wrote many a notes that appear to be gibberish to anyone else.

    In my notes: Marbles!

    WTF does that mean?
    It means I didn’t intend to write a biography. These are just notes/reminders. I was thinking the guy had lost his marbles. To be discussed later in a verbal exchange. Only then can they be understood. As the trial was terminated, you will not know what Rossi meant in his notes. But your pretty good at projecting your opinion of what “you” think he meant.

    • Bruce__H

      “Not technically valid” means that the court found Wong’s argument was not a technically valid answer to Murray’s complaint about the inverse relationship between COP and input power. I was impressed at the time that the court’s ruling was based on engineering/physical reasoning and not on legal principles. So yes, it does make Wong’s reasoning wrong.

      Regarding Rossi’s notes. Object to specific things if you want to but I can’t respond if you stick to hand-waving.

  • Frank Acland

    Rossi now wears a wig. See the last part of Mats’ interview where he explains the reason.

  • Dr. Mike

    I haven’t read what Jed said, but I agree with your above comments. As a rough estimate Rossi should have been able to melt about 10,000 lbs. of ice per day with 200KW of equivalent steam power. Assuming that you could find a chemical reaction that used as much energy as to melt ice, he would have had to run on average > 10 ton/day of material (material density assumed to be 2) through the JM Products “technology”. Just does not make sense when several people testified that there was almost nothing on the JM Products side of the wall except for the big box. However, do note that he did not say that JM Products was using 200KW-400KW of continuous power, he said that on average they used 20-40% of the 1MW reactor output. If the reactor output was really close to zero, his statement is probably true.

    • Gerard McEk

      JM productschap using that l 200-400 kW power does not mean that that product absorbed that power. Maybe only a temperature difference was needed to fabricate the product and that most of that energy was drained into the sewer with the cooling water.

      • Dr. Mike

        So now there was cooling water supplied to the JM Products unit? Is this consistent with the water usage at the plant during the 350 day test? During the period the 350 day test was being run and during the period while everyone was awaiting Penon’s report, the argument was made that the amount of material that JM Products processed would be a secondary proof that the reactor was really delivering 1MW of power. Did that ever happen?

        • Gerard McEk

          Could be, we do not know if cooling water was used. The money payed by the ‘customer’ for the energy deliverd is obviously extremely weak. Penon it the only (not strong) independent evidence available. Maybe we will never know ;).

        • Vinney

          You also have IH to thank for this scenario, by absconding on ‘finding a Customer’.
          Why don’t you contemplate on the meaning of this, rather than aiming squarely at Rossi all the time.
          I personally think it was ‘insanely’ stupid.

    • Ged

      What is everyone’s obsession with ice? Ice melting is orders of magnitude less endothermic than even heat storage salts, for instance. Seriously, water ice is lame in the scale of endothermy, which I have pointed out several times. People need to use more valid scientific comparisons.

      • Dr. Mike

        Ice is something that most everyone can relate to. So why not use the materials Rossi discussed in his deposition. Per Bruce_H below Rossi processed a few grams of platinum sponge and a total of 150 grams of graphene. Do you really believe it took 20-40% of the 1MW reactor’s output to produce this amount of product? Rossi is now trying to convince the world that JM Products was really processing material which is not consistent with his deposition testimony.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    I have no idea what you mean by “quasi steady state”. My guess is that the system is never in a steady state, but requires constant prodding by the control system to maintain operation. But what difference does it make how you define COP? What counts for a “customer” is how much is the bill. The bill is simply how much it cost me to purchase the energy to run the plant over a billing period, usually a month. If I get 60 times the heat energy out per heat energy in, my “heating bill” is 60 times smaller than it would be if I just used electrical heaters.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    Apparently you have never really taken a thermodynamics course. W-H/H is not the same as W. There are an infinite number of ways to get 1 W, for example 2 watts for 1/2 hour, 1 watt for 1 hour, 1/2 watt for two hours. You are just blowing smoke here.

  • Ged

    The MFMP dogbone and assorted tests were not on the patent. They have never tested the patent–that is a sandwich layered clamshell device that is very different from the dogbone/glowsticks.

  • Omega Z

    If it has not already been paid, Yes it prevents them from being billed.

    It ends all claims by all parties other then what was stipulated such as return or destruction of IP info held by Darden etc…

  • Michael W Wolf

    That public offer IH ignored is the smoking gun. Why would IH risk not getting back the 11.5 million if they were convinced the ecat didn’t work? It is clear to me IH didn’t have the money and could not convince woodford and or investors to raise the money to pay Rossi. If they thought Rossi was a fraud like ABD and company says, they would have sued Rossi long before Rossi had a chance to sue them. For the FUDsters to say Rossi settled because he was afraid of being outed as a fraud is not accurate. Because he would have never sued. Case closed in my book. As we all see now, all those proofs the FUDsters said IH had was poppycock. Now either they are frauds or IH deceived them. Either way Rossi got his IP back like he originally said he wanted. And IF IH has proof of anything, why don’t they sue Rossi for the 11.5 million he stole from them, supposedly? They are all full of it. Except for Rossi and his people.

    • That’s almost exactly what I had been saying on LENR-Forum but they disliked it so much that they banned me for “boorishness”. And yet, the settlement all shook out almost exactly as I was outlining.

      I don’t think it was so clear that IH didn’t have the money as much as they realized that the contract they had entered into with Fred Flinstone meant they could lose $267M and face personal bankruptcy and STILL not have a working prototype that didn’t depend on Fred Flinstone to operate it.

  • Frank Acland

    This is what Mats Lewan reported after an interview he had with Rossi in May 2016

    “During summer 2015, IH offered Rossi to back out from the test and cancel it, with a significant sum of money as compensation. Rossi’s counter offer was to give back the already paid 11.5M and cancel the license agreement, but IH didn’t accept.”

    https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/05/16/rossi-makes-offer-on-swedish-factory-building-plus-more-updates/

    • Buck

      Frank,

      to the best of your knowledge, has anyone refuted Mats Lewan’s reporting of the May 2016 interview with Rossi? Did either Rossi or Darden declaim this reporting?

      • SD

        Dewey Weaver, an IH insider, has denied the claim that Rossi offered a refund.

        • Steve Swatman

          Dewey weaver, hahahahahahha of course.

      • I’m sure Abd will come along shortly and offer his ridiculous legal opinion and then proceed as if, because of his amazing preeminence, the whole thing has been refuted… you know, because he said so.

    • Here’s what Rossi answered when I asked him about the buy-back offer again:

      “I had made that offer at the beginning of the litigation and it has been public. Eventually they answered publicly that they could not accept and wanted damages refunded to them.
      Eventually, with the development of the litigation, the situation changed and many proposals and counterproposals have been done, contingent with the facts emerged during the litigation.
      At the end has been reached the settlement .
      The reasons why proposals and counterproposals changed in time depended on the developments on course with the litigation .
      At the end has been agreed upon the text of the settlement you published, that has been signed by all the parties involved in the litigation.”

      • DNI

        Hi Mats. Thanks for asking Rossi about this. Did you follow up with asking how the offer was made public? And how IH answered in public? Because I have been following this on both LENR-forum and here since the litigation started and I have never heard of any publicly made offers like this from Rossi or publicly made answers from IH. The only time a read about the offer was in your article. And that alleged offer was made before the litigation started, in the summer 2015. And it was to my knowledge not made publicly.

        • I asked about that and he said that one way it was made public was through my interview. He also said that IH’s respons became known through some blog or forum comment. I haven’t followed it in details so I cannot tell what was published where. I’m afraid it will be difficult to confirm since IH might simply deny. Only the two parties and their lawyers probably know for sure what’s true.

          • Rossi has been known to delete sections of his blog. He probably deleted that section so that IH couldn’t bring up old, stale offers to hammer him with.

          • DNI

            I agree that only the two parties know for sure. And IH don’t say anything about it. Dawey, at LENR-forum, denied that any such offer was made. But he, of course, is not officially IH.

          • “IH don’t say anything about it.”
            ***Uhh, wrong. IH accepted the offer of settlement. It just so happens to follow exactly the outlines that Rossisez.

          • DNI

            I don’t understand what you mean Kevmo. And It seems like you don’t understand what I mean. But we have disused this at LENR-forum without getting anywhere. And I don’t think further discussions will help.

          • “I don’t understand what you mean Kevmo.”
            ***It isn’t that difficult to understand, in fact it is quite simple. But you don’t WANT to understand. That’s where your problem lies.

            But we have disused this at LENR-forum without getting anywhere.
            ***Without getting anywhere, huh? Within a day of my temporary banning, the offer was accepted. I’d say that is getting somewhere but the moderation over there is so pisspoor that they won’t be seeing daylight for 5 years. Might as well examine for polyps while they’re stuck down there.

            And I don’t think further discussions will help.
            ***That’s because you just lost an argument. You’re going to need a lot of help in the future because there’s a lot of simple things you will not understand.

          • DNI

            When reading your answer above I’m not surprised you got banned at LENR-forum. I will let you live undisturbed in your bubble from now on.

          • And I am not surprised that you ran home to mommy rather than discuss things in the open.

          • Omega Z

            On LENR-forum, there is only 1 narrative and anything else does not exist. No matter the source…

      • Thanks for posting that. There had been discussion with Abd, Dewey and others over at LENR-Forum, they denied there had ever been a settlement offer.

        • DNI

          As far as I know we only have Rossi word that there has been such an offer. And since we only have Rossi word for it I don’t think it make any sense basing any conclusions on it.

          • We originally only had Rossi’s word, but then only 1 day later we had a settlement. You can’t claim a settlement offer wasn’t on the table if one was actually accepted.

          • DNI

            In the alleged offer Rossi was to pay back 11,5 million dollars. That’s not in the settlement.

          • That’s because IH didn’t take up that offer, nor the others that were presented until later.

            I was using the FACT that Rossi had said he presented an offer that it could be used in court to compel the discussion by the judge towards settlement. Dewey was saying that no such offer was submitted, that it was a lie, so it woulda been all the more troublesome for Rossi to have to discuss that offer in front of the judge. But the folks at LENR-Forum are so triggered that they can’t see it in any other light.

            It’s no mistake that the settlement came at the beginning of the trial, because that’s when the judge starts keying up on whom she is pissed at, on whom she holds responsible for them wasting 3 weeks of their lives. In this case it looks like IH was the one she would give a hard time.

          • Michael W Wolf

            I saw it, I know it 100%. People even asked him if said offer was still on the table some time after Rossi originally posted it. He said yes every time, including the the accepted offer Kevmo refers to, only Rossi gets to keep the 11.5 million this time. I saw no public response from IH.

        • Omega Z

          And yet there was a settlement. Those at LENR-Forum need to understand the discussion had to start somewhere. Settlements don’t just instantly happen.

          • Settlements do just instantly happen, in their minds.

      • BillH

        This if true it is quite revealing. As I said many months ago, if the offer was made they might have refused it because it was not enough, at that stage they may have expended between $20-30M. Note, there was no mention of IP or LA. When people get stung they are quite often not willing to settle for just their money back, they want blood. In the cold light of day 2 years later, they may have realised there was no blood in the blood bank.

      • Omega Z

        “Eventually they answered publicly that they could not accept and wanted damages refunded to them.”

        What they may call damages is what most courts would call the cost of doing business. It’s no different then accepting an initial business arrangement that ultimately doesn’t pan out. All expenses of R&D, sending people for consultations and the cost of hotel rooms away from home as well as any initial setup expense are just part of doing business. I’m certain Apple has spent 10’s of millions in component acquisition prospects only to take a different path. If one is not willing to except such costs, they should not be in business. However, with the Darden situation, they were probably looking at forcing Rossi to accept their terms and hang on to Rossi’s IP.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    From the interview:

    “The real use for the Grundfos pump was instead to push the water through a by-pass with a filter about once a week to make it cleaner.”

    Typically, the Grundfos devices are called “circulator pumps” and are used to pump water around a heat exchange loop. Here they are apparently used to filter the water circulating in the steam/condensate loop.

  • It doesn’t prevent IH sending the bill but if it goes unpaid, there is no recourse to collect it; it is unenforceable.

  • I don’t remember Murray’s point exactly, but if he assumes that output power depends on input power, as in a light bulb, when measurements don’t say so, then he’s wrong since he knows nothing about the process inside. You cannot assume that. So if your measurements tell you that output power is constant and input power decreases, then COP increases. That’s just it.

  • Gerrit

    “Completely worthless to them”, or maybe IH believes they have access to better, more reliable inventor teams and won’t need Rossi, nor his IP to become succesful with those.

    Just saying, maybe for IH Rossi would be “nice to have”, but the money is simply better invested elsewhere.

  • Michael W Wolf

    Rossi said the offer was still on the table. More than once.

    • DNI

      Where and when? Do you have any links? I have only seen the offer mentioned in Mats blogg.

  • Yes, I hope so. Darden, for example, promised me an interview at ICCF in Padua, but he left before I arrived, since he was sick. I have then asked him several times if we could do the interview, recently just a few days ago, but he never answered. We’ll see. I just think it’s in everybody’s interest to tell the true story, as they see it. But I want the true story. Would be curious to hear it.

  • Yes, I didn’t write that in the interview, but Rossi said that the process on the JM side was changed several times during the one-year test. Without specifying how.

  • 1. Not knowing the E-Cat process and its characteristics means that you don’t know the system either, since you don’t know how various parameters such as pressure, flow, temperature ecc, influences the E-Cat process, which in turn influences the rest of the system.

    2. My interpretation of a ‘recirculator’ is something that helps moving fluids (gas, liquids) in the system. However, we don’t know if it works on the gas phase or on the liquid phase or both, and we don’t know if it’s designed to keep pressure or flow or some other value at a certain level, or at varying levels according to some desired function. There’s really a lot that we don’t know.

  • this sadden me.

    anyway the old science stays solid, even if maybe half of the results are not solid, 10% are rock solid.

    LENR in PdD electrolysis can be replicated, by competent lab experimenters, provided they don’t as usual try to “improve” the protocol, to “prove” their pet theory, and don’t have to play with shoestrings and tricks to get arround underfunding.

    Once it is replicated, and it is already in ENEA and SKINR, there is a huge need of modern instruments, and not shoestrings.

    The instruments exists and are funded for reserach in nanotechnology, in accumulators, in semiconductors, in biotech, in nuclear and particle research… but they are very very expensive.

  • Frank Acland

    http://e-catworld.com/2016/10/26/e-cat-plant-test-plan-fabio-penon/

    This plant description by Fabio Penon also describes mentions a recycling system.

    • Bruce__H

      Frank,

      Do you mean this passage from Penon’s report?

      “The steam is then passed through the customer’s facility, where it cools up to its condensation.

      The water is so recycled to the internal tank in a closed loop.”

      I think this is a general comment, and to Penon simply means that the water arriving at the E-Cat plant from the JMP side is derived from the steam sent over to the JMP side in the first place.

      I have 2 reasons for thinking that Penon’s description has nothing to do “recirculator” mentioned recently by Rossi. First, Penon’s description would apply even if there is not extra pumping device on the JMP side. Second, since Penon knew nothing about any of the equipment on the JMP side, he couldn’t have known about this specific piece of equipment Rossi says was over there.

      • Frank Acland

        Yes, that’s what I was referring to.

    • Dr. Mike

      Penon describes a recycling system that does not include a recirculator in the system. The recirculator appears to be a recent invention of Rossi needed to make the system appear to work, just as the heat exchanger never appeared until it was needed (after the 350 day test was done). Ask for a picture of the recirculator as it was installed in the system or as it now exists. Anyone want to take a bet that there were no pictures of the recirculator in place and now pictures are not allowed because even the external view of the recirculator is proprietary (ala the heat exchanger fans, the heat exchanger pipes, and the output pipe)?

  • Chapman

    It is truly amazing how much energy and time you are willing to invest in your hate-campaign against Rossi!

    It occurs to me that if we were able to tap your hate-energy-reserves, and somehow thermalize it into productive heat, the world would not need to wait for the E-cat.

    The direct joule value of your accumulated smarmy sarcasm, vitriol, and contempt would be more than sufficient to provide for ALL of George’s “suffering children” AND still have energy left over to power the electro-shock-therapy wing of a major psychiatric hospital specialising in psychotic fixation. (hint)

  • Chapman

    So, has this site degenerated to the point we are now bashing Mats Lewan?

    What the hell???

  • SD

    I thought one of the IH experts had already documented that there was an extra grundfos pump on the JMP side?

    • BillH

      We have to be careful about this Grundfos pump, IH and their lawyers made a visit to Doral and apparently found it just lying around. Some of AR’s keenest supporters were keen to explain what it might have been used for but unless they had inside information we can never be sure. We can’t even be sure that it was ever installed or used, in fact, we can’t even be sure that it was there during the test.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      According to Bass’ deposition, that pump has been used only at start-up to push the water through the filter.

      However, as I have tried to show several times, even with a reduced flow rate and partial evaporation the COP could easily have been high enough to meet the requirements of the contract. Also, the flow might have been supported by convection. (That would certainly happen in an open system – about a system with a closed loop I am not entirely sure.)

      For those who are still interested in the ‘pump issue’, Alan Fletcher is about to conduct a test of the Prominent Gamma L 0232, more information can be found here:

      https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5300-prominent-gamma-l-0232-flow-rate-test/?postID=65772#post65772

      • GiveADogABone

        Test result reported on rossilivecat.com
        DT
        July 20, 2017 at 9:11 PM
        Dear Andrea:
        I tested the Prominent pump of the photo in the report of Smith and discovered that you are right: if you pump water through a pipe 20 meters high it has a flow rate of about 32.5 liters per hour, but when I cut the column to 1 meter it pumped 68 liters per hour !
        You were right. Also in the data sheet available on the internet, 32 l/h is reported as the minimum flow rate at 2 bars.
        Warm Regards,
        DT

  • Steve Savage

    If you believe that IH are happy with this settlement, then you are probably misreading the situation. They were put in a tight spot as a result of the suit, likely to lose $$ and ending up working with a hurt and damaged partner, not much of a future there. With the settlement, they were forced to give up the IP / license claims, they did not want to give them up because they recognize the value. It seems obvious to me that Rossi may have held some things back so that IH could not fully realize the IP’s value without his full cooperation, but that value was readily apparent in what they witnessed in multiple tests, including Doral. IH needed to finesse a solution to a somewhat ambiguous investment situation, in trying to do so they painted themselves into a corner with their defense. They were completely outmaneuvered by Rossi.

    Go Rossi!

    • I agree that they were outmaneuvered by Rossi.

  • Frank Acland
    • clovis ray

      Thanks,had to go back and reread that part. i’ll put it here.
      During summer 2015, IH offered Rossi to back out from the test and cancel it, with a significant sum of money as compensation. Rossi’s counter offer was to give back the already paid 11.5M and cancel the license agreement, but IH didn’t accept.

  • BillH

    E48 and the others need to sit down with AR and explain to him why a recirculator was total unnecessary, as they have already explained in great detail.

  • Because you signed a contract with Fred Flinstone. The IP got transferred but the only one who can get it to work is Fred. So even if you pay the remaining $89M, you’re still stuck with Fred at the controls of the earthmover dinosaur.

  • BillH

    As I read the spec Bruce the pump is supposed to push out a set amount of water dependent on stroke length and stroke rate, If the stroke length is set to 100% this is the maximum amount of water the pump can take in at one time. The actual output can be varied by increasing the stroke rate up to a maximum of 180 strokes per minute or 3 per second. So whatever the maximum input capacity of 1 stroke is you get a fixed size dose out, the only complication with this that excessive back pressure can reduce the flow. But you can use the chart in the manual to compensate for this.

  • BillH

    It would seem that the maximum capacity of a 100% stroke is 3.35 ml of water at 1bar, and could there be space for any more? this works out at 3.35*180*60 or about 36 l/h which checks. At 2bar the capacity of a stroke is down to 2.96 ml presumable due to the extra back pressure. This works out at 32 l/hr( 2.96*180*60) with k=0.9. I can’t see that a low back pressure would deliver more than a full dose 3.35 ml, at even very low back pressures, it’s designed to deliver a set dose.

    Pushing water through a pump rather pulling in a measured dose, not a good idea.

  • there is no evidence that the pumps on BF4 were ever rerouted to other BF units.
    ***Is there evidence that they were NOT rerouted? If there’s no evidence one way or the other, you could be committing a logical fallacy of arguing from silence.

  • I tried to find it on Rossi’s blog but the search function doesn’t work very well, and doesn’t work at all on the Wayback Machine.

  • Engineer48

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=255#comment-12850300

    DT
    July 20, 2017 at 9:11 PM

    Dear Andrea:

    I tested the Prominent pump of the photo in the report of Smith and discovered that you are right: if you pump water through a pipe 20 meters high it has a flow rate of about 32.5 liters per hour, but when I cut the column to 1 meter it pumped 68 liters per hour !

    You were right. Also in the data sheet available on the internet, 32 l/h is reported as the minimum flow rate at 2 bars.

    Warm Regards,
    DT

    • So does that settle anything or is there going to be endless debate on this item?

    • GiveADogABone

      Any chance of some photos from DT?

      • BillH

        Something we’d both like! That makes the K factor about 1.9, I assume the actual water was collected and measure, because the reading on the display is very likely to be wrong.

    • BillH

      A pre-emptive strike, I love it, hehe

    • LT

      Posted yesterday (6-8-2017) a possible alternative explanation on the Always Open thread.
      Since my background is in electronics and not in steam, pumps and associated plumbing I would value your opinion.

  • Because control of a disruptive technology is worth far more than $100M, and IH doesn’t have $300B lying around.

  • Omega Z

    “A megawatt would ordinarily be dissipated with a cooling tower”

    Nonsense. I wonder why you defend Mr Smith who didn’t even get the pump specifications right with the literature in hand. The vast majority of industrial heat processes dissipate the majority of heat passively. Pay me a visit. I’ll see if I can arrange a tour of a local facility. I can sit you down in a 5 foot walkway between 2 half/meg furnaces. There is no active venting of any type. I guarantee it’s not fatal. In addition, these 2 furnaces are surround by about 2 dozen additional furnaces ranging from 1/2 megawatt to 5 megawatt. All dissipate heat passively.

    As to Rossi setup. It’s much cheaper, easily removed and requires no special building permits or any major modifications to someone elses building. It’s obvious to me that some of you have no real experience around industrial heat processes and how they work in the real world.

  • DNI

    Abd, my comment was about the aleged byback offer from Rossi to IH long before the trial started.

    I didn’t comment about the settlement.