Rossi’s Approach to E-Cat Commercialization: Economy of Scale Best Protection

Here’a response today from Andrea Rossi to a question I posted on the Journal of Nuclear Physics about what the significance of approaching 5 Sigma in his E-Cat QX testing in terms of commercialization.

Andrea Rossi
September 2, 2017 at 9:00 AM
Frank Acland:
Premature to answer.
Sharks are around ( especially the most vociferous competitors, whose vociferity is inversally proportional to their capacity to make something real by themselves, otherwise they’d have not time to vociferate ) waiting for the availability of our products to copy them. It is true that our patents cover our IP, but litigations have a huge cost. The best protection will be our economy scale. This makes unlikely that we will put for sale our mass products before we will have completed the industrialization of the manufacturing, to put for sale the E-Cat at a price able to restrain the competition from the beginning. We will continue to sell only big industrial plants, directly managed by us until we will be ready to put in commerce our E-Cats at a price for which the competition will not be encouraged, or able, to proceed against us.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

I find this quite an interesting response. He seems to be expecting reverse engineering attempts, I don’t think there is any doubt that this would happen once the E-Cat is available in the marketplace. It seems that Rossi believes that at least some of his vocal critics are in fact competitors who are waiting to copy the E-Cat when it is available, so until mass production is in place, it appears that only custom plants over which Leonardo has close control will be put into the marketplace. I suppose that they will take great pains to make sure the proprietary parts of the plants will be inaccessible to the customers.

After the lengthy litigation process he has just gone through with Industrial Heat, Rossi is clearly not wanting to count on legal recourse to protect himself from competitors. The bigger the stakes, the longer and more expensive legal cases would be, and I am sure that Rossi would far rather put all his time, energy and resources into developing the E-Cat than in fighting for it in court.

As far as the timing for mass production, Rossi has said recently he thinks it will happen in 2018, but he will certainly need lots of financial support to make that happen.

  • Ophelia Rump

    The notion of an economy of scale where no one could compete is out of touch with reality when combined with the concept of being the sole producer.

    The target market is equal to total global energy consumption plus growth spurred by reduced costs.

    Unless Rossi can instantly produce enough 1MW plants per year to satisfy a majority of the current 50,000 Terrawatt hours per year which the world currently consumes this strategy is doomed.

    One Terawatt hour is equal to a sustained power of approximately 114 megawatts for a period of one year.
    There are 8760 hours in a year. So 114 x 8,760 x 50,000 / 365 comes to 13680000 1MW units per day.

    You will not be able to penetrate a single percent of the market. It would be miraculous if you could produce one ten thousandth of a single percent.

    Dottore Rossi, the fastest way to market penetration is to license your product to your would be competitors and let them do the heavy lifting of manufacture and distribution while you collect royalties.

    • Bruno Padovani

      Ophelia, I think that your math is wrong. If the world consumes 50,000 TW-hr/year then:

      (50,000E12 W-hr/yr) x (1 MW/1E6 W) x (1 yr/(365×24) hr) = 5,707,762 MW machines operating continuously.

      But we won’t replace it all at once. Units will be produced to cover rising demand, plus the obsolescence of the existing base. Figure that LENR would spur 5% annual global economic growth and that 2% of installed capacity becomes obsolete each yea5+2 = 7% total. Let’s round that up to 10%. This means that Rossi would need to make roughly 570,776 1xMW units/year for all types of energy. But a lot of the energy used by the world is things like home heating, transportation etc…. in other words, non-industrial. So maybe he only needs to make 300,000 units/year to cover industrial electrical generation & heating. Still a tall order, but conceivable when you consider that a single large auto assembly plant turns out 500,000 cars/yr.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Thanks for the correction, I am surprised my numbers were that close.

        I would like to hear some specifics about the planned production rate.

        How many 1MW units a day will be rolling off the production line when this plant begins operation?
        What is the projected maximum production of this plant?

        • cashmemorz

          Another side to the take up by the market place is how controls on its adoption are already being put in place.

          Where I live the high cost of electricity is being manipulated between the new private owners and the government that sold it to the private area a couple of years ago. To lower the cost to complaining consumers, the government has lowered the price by promising the new owners to pay off the difference by mortgage, us consumers again covering this interest down the road, later on over much longer term, 30 years is the promised term. So I will be paying a little lower than real price in the near term but will continue that price even if get LENR device on top of the mortgage I have to pay for earlier unpaid electricity. They have me by the proverbial test…les.Now the government has introduced a nother layer of complexity to this power unpaid deal deal by offering time of use packages that may or may not be to one’s advantage. If I decide on a package where I use most power at 9am when I awake and cook breakfast and do laundry etc. but hen find I have to live on a scheduke that is vastly different later on then I am screwed or have to renegotiate another time package. I don’t expect the government or power producers will look kindly on everyone changing their time of use every few months.

          Besides this point, the Canadian military had published a statement about them being watchful about the economic aspect of the country with regards to the impact of cold fusion or LENR. So if the military are in the game of keeping the economy safe from disruptive tech then we are doubly disincentivized to use LENR only when one wants

      • Gerard McEk

        I agree with your answer/outcome to Ophelia, but I think your calculation is a bit confusing. I would write it like:
        (50,000E12)/(1E6x24x365)=5,707,662 1MW units per year.
        (I am not sure the 50,000 TWh is right though, I think it is a lot more).

        • Leonard Weinstein

          Look up on the web! The world Energy (net electrical only) is about 17,000 TW-hr/y. Including losses and conversion, the thermal input is ~50,000 TW-hr/y.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Well, nowhere does Rossi speak about no one being able to compete. What he talking about is first
      mover advantage.

      The simple issue is that by jumping into the marketplace with first mover advantage, then you do
      what is called in the software industry a real estate grab.

      Facebook for YEARS had ZERO interest in making money (and they did not). They simply grabbed market
      share – and THEN they started to “monetize” their 100+ million users (they now make several billion per quarter).

      When apple jumped into the smartphone market, they held massive amounts of that marketplace for
      years – and still to this day what they hold is MOSTLY due to first mover advantage
      – not IP rights.

      In regards to Texas Instruments – they also enjoyed YEARS of great market share. Rossi not
      suggesting that by manufacturing you don’t get competition – nowhere did he
      state that. However, he MOST certainly concluded that if you jump into the
      market place with the ability to deliver the product, then you wind up with
      that first mover advantage. And that advantage is FAR MORE valuable then IP
      rights.

      Remember, the business model here is much like HP and inkjet printers. For a GOOD number of
      years close to 40% of HP revenue was due to replacement ink jet cartridges (and
      toner). In effect HP was printing money – silly little ink jet cartridge that
      cost a few dollars to make was selling for $40 or even $60+ dollars.

      Eventually competitors to HP were able to move into the marketplace (but you had to dump your printer
      to change!!!). And if you want to change from apple phone – you have to dump
      all the software you purchased!!

      As for photos and inkjets? Well smartphones, internet picture sharing and sharing pictures on Facebook
      really killed the ink jet business (it still a great commercial venture for HP
      but only a former shadow of what it used to be).

      When you purchase your beast master 4000 LENR barbeque, in place of purchasing a propane tank,
      you purchase a replacement cartridge. Will it be a Rossi cartridge, or is your barbeque
      (or clothes dryer) going to use a GE based energy cartridge?

      So your fridge or say clothes dryer or water heater will plug into a standard wall socket to
      power the electronics, but the heat will come from a replacement cartridge. (Much
      like a “toner” cartridge that you buy for your printer).

      So you purchase a water heater at Home Hardware, and then a LENR cartridge that will run the
      heater for 1-2 years at a silly low cost. When the cartridge is low, you go back to
      home hardware and purchase a replacement cartridge – a Rossi one, or perhaps a
      GE one?

      Between Apple and android, there really not much left over in the market place for anther phone system.
      (Just ask Microsoft who attempted to “buy” their way into that market place
      with the purchase of NOKIA, and their failure of the windows phone).

      >Do
      you remember when Texas Instruments mass marketed the first inexpensive
      calculators? Did that stop competition?

      As I pointed out, TI did benefit HUGE from their first mover advantages. And they did own the patent
      rights to the integrated circuit, and the payout to them was huge:

      Quote:

      In the 1990s, all
      of Japanese IC manufacturers had to pay for the 30 years old patent or enter
      into cross-licensing agreements. In 1993, Texas Instruments earned US$520
      million in license fees, mostly from Japanese companies

      End quote

      http://www.nytimes.com/1994/09/01/business/company-news-texas-instruments-loses-in-japanese-ruling.html

      So the issue not necessary lower cost but that of first mover advantage (market grab).
      Windows desktop owns the desktop – mostly due to first mover advantages. Linux is free for the desktop,
      but when you purchase a Dell computer you only paying about $50 for the OS –
      and over 5 years that only $10 per year – really less then coffee money).
      So the convenience of using windows is LOWER than the cost of using free Linux for the
      desktop. (it not worth $50 over 5 years in terms of the hassle of switching). Coke sells
      billions of dollars of sugar water each year. The reason is the cost is low and people like
      the product. Same goes for windows desktop – people pay for it since it such a good deal
      and is rather low cost.

      So the first mover VERY much applies to apple phone, and next in line was android. Who wants to
      switch from their apple phone EVEN if a lower cost and better deal android phone
      comes along – the cost of switching and time + effort comes into play here.

      Whoever gets large numbers of LENR devices into the marketplace based on THEIR standard replacement cartridges will enjoy YEARS AND YEARS of marketplace advantage regardless of competitors.

      And you do the above by MAKING SURE you jump in with a cost advantage to GRAB that marketplace – one done then competition now faced not with making a lower cost product but FIGURING HOW to make consumes switch. (and how Microsoft get Lotus 123 (90% of the marketplace) to switch is MOST interesting. And same goes for how Microsoft make Wordperfect users swtich (WordPerfect had 90% or more of the market at one time).

      And lets not bring up the screw type light bulb vs the Westinghouse plug type of socket (one of the first format wars by the way).

      So Rossi not saying that the “most low cost” will prevent competition, but the obvious business
      reality of “first mover” in the marketplace is what grants you MORE protection
      then IP rights.

      In a nutshell:

      It called getting your foot in the door – it the most basic and simple business concept that
      Rossi or anyone who taken business 101 understands.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • Omega Z

        I agree. Rossi doesn’t always say it with clarity, but what he means is the 1st to market advantage. He knows very well what is coming and he knows it will involve big money players. Rossi has to get it right the 1st time. There will be no second chance for him.

        • That would be why he wants to sell the heat. But eventually if you’re selling heat for 1/10th the cost of others and aren’t losing millions of dollars, someone will buy your device only to open it up rather than use the heat.

          • Omega Z

            I think you’re misinterpreting Rossi’s answer to Frank.
            This is just at the beginning when a few hand built units are put into production. These will be beta systems to work out any issues before mass production begins. Rossi’s people will be present to work out any issues as well prevent corporate espionage.

            This is also when Rossi’s secrets are most at risk, but is necessary. You don’t want to pump out large volumes only to have a massive recall. This would be a competitors dream allowing them to close the gap. As in my prior post. Rossi has to get it right the 1st time. He obviously can’t have people everywhere once mass production begins. It would cut deeply into any cost savings the technology offers.

          • Rossisays he’s been working out the bugs of his boxes for 6 years now. I think that particular excuse has worn pretty thin. He’s been doing Development work, which would ordinarily require an R&D team of 4 or 5 top PhD physicists or industrialists.

            That’s one of the inventor’s diseases, to wildly underestimate the time it takes to develop a technology. It’s like he’s William Shockley doing all the product development and yield enhancement work. If that had been allowed to happen, Intel would still be selling individual transistors.

          • Omega Z

            “That’s one of the inventor’s diseases, to wildly underestimate the time it takes to develop a technology”

            Actually that comes with most tasks. Which is why when I was in business, I always told the customer it would take longer then I thought it would. Even a task I did often. If it should take longer or a problem arose(It happens), I was covered. Tho most always I finished well ahead of time and the customer was always pleasantly surprised.

            As to Rossi, He has confessed to this “inventor’s disease” some time ago which is why he generally gives a disclaimer when projecting. However, most people overlook those disclaimers and take a projected time as gospel. That’s their fault.

            I’ve seen Rossi say a report “may” be available in 2 to 4 months, but doesn’t depend on just him and people immediately start a 2 month count down. They completely over look the “may” and the “4” and that it doesn’t depend on just him. SO, if it doesn’t happen in 2 months, they are upset with him that he didn’t meet “THEIR” timeline.

            OCTOBER: Now, Initially Rossi disclaimer-ed when he 1st mentioned a demo in October. As the time gets closer, he has been more specific that it would be near the end of October. If not, then people can lay this on Rossi. Personally, I’ll give him room as long as it happens before mid November. Sometimes shet happens. Note: Some will have already set their own timer as the 1st of October. That’s on them…

            His latest with disclaimer is Sigma 5 by the time of the Demo “if” things continue as they have. However, he did say the demo will take place regardless of reaching sigma 5.

  • Anon2012_2014

    “This makes unlikely that we will put for sale our mass products before we will have completed the industrialization of the manufacturing, to put for sale the E-Cat at a price able to restrain the competition from the beginning.”

    I apologize for being blunt, but this is circular reasoning — the perfect excuse to never release anything as we have no way to independently verify that Mr. Rossi has even started the industrialization process.

    We (that is the world at large) if we are interested in the benefits of LENR commercialization, will have to wait for any competitor or research lab to deliver a testable device. The rest of Mr. Rossi’s comments are immaterial to the real world — might as well be angels on the head of a pin (that no one can prove) as the words have no impact on the real world that everyone lives in.

    Where’s the beef Mr. Rossi — a material technology release and demo that proves you have the technology? How many more years are you proposing we wait? October (which ends 60 days from today) is essentially the last credible chance for a real world release. After that excuses like waiting for industrialization appear more like hand waiving to distract from the fact that there is not any publicly released device or replicate-able demonstration.

    • cashmemorz

      Listen. Anyone with a brain knows that is a possibility of there not being anything real in terms of a LENR device from Rossi. Putting that front and center as if that is the one and only possibility is also a too extreme position when nobody knows one way or the other for sure. What everyone here is talking about is, just in case it might be true that it exists, then what do we do or plan for. That is the point of this blog and similar. So stating the possibility of it not being real as the only possibility is just one sided thinking, and for what reason, some agenda to make sure less people might think positively? Very few here care to make a hard decision as yet.

      Also, I keep on harping that QWM is wrong and Mill’s theory is right. That also could be all wrong on my part. It is just what I see and understand with my limited contacts with the actual sources. Which is zero contacts in terms of the ones actually having anything real. I have just gleaned as much as I could from all over and have that as data to base my conclusions. Same as you or any one else. Making emphatic statements such as you are doing makes one wonder what it is you hope to gain.

      • Anon2012_2014

        “What everyone here is talking about is … that is the point of this blog and similar.”

        My point is literally to encourage Mr. Rossi to actually deliver a working demo, as opposed to encouraging him for to keep delaying with reasoning like that above. I assume that Mr. Rossi may occasionally read this and certainly Frank does often communicate with Rossi directly. I wish Mr. Rossi well regardless, but asking us to wait indefinitely for a factory that appears to be poorly financed if at all is unfair to his audience — an audience that Mr. Rossi himself has been cultivating for at least 8 years.

        • As if he could stop competitors in a meaningful way in the long term….

      • “nobody knows one way or the other for sure. What everyone here is talking about is, just in case it might be true that it exists, then what do we do or plan for. That is the point of this blog and similar. So stating the possibility of it not being real as the only possibility is just one sided thinking, and for what reason, some agenda to make sure less people might think positively? Very few here care to make a hard decision as yet.”
        ***Some of us wouldn’t mind taking a Schroedinger’s Cat approach to that hard decision. Using that analogy, Rossi’s LENR box is Real and Not Real at the same time until you open the box. So an investor might understand that point heat sources that LENR generates would have to be converted using things like Thermionics devices (not many out there, not efficient) and Stirling Cycle engines such as what Rossi claimed he was playing with. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXhZyUmYvWAhUN9mMKHcOmBu0QFggvMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mdpi.com%2F2071-1050%2F6%2F9%2F5714%2Fpdf&usg=AFQjCNEGaU-QLzil0Wp5tiS3KtXdAvAU6Q

        So if Rossi’s box is real, CHP Stirling Cycle engines will really take off. If Rossi’s box is not real, such Stirling Cycle engine companies might still be a good investment. Kind of like investing in Woodward, which gave 14% return, which was ok — but if they had found the magic LENR wand their stock would have skyrocketed.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          For sure the “general” context here is we assume Rossi has what he claims.

          However, I think it fair to say that “most” here also take what Rossi claims and says with a grain
          of salt.

          If one follows this story close, then one will reach a point in which it becomes “clear” that Rossi
          has what he claims. At that point you still have a LONG lead time in terms of
          what will occurring in regards to Sterling engine makers. So I think one will have ample time to look at sterling engine makers and their offerings.

          I can say that I am in 100% agreement that good CHP sterling engine companies and makers stand to benefit HUGE from LENR.

          I had hoped by now that Dean Kamen’s “beacon” CHP (C-combined H-heat & P-power) system would be commercially available by now.

          Such systems are a DREAM marriage with LENR.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Omega Z

            It is just “my” opinion that the Grid, although greatly dispersed rather then highly centralized will prevail. The general population doesn’t want the responsibility and stress of running the own little system. They will perfectly happy with cheap energy at the flip of a switch.

            Among other issues, the grid will be much cheaper then one having his own “beacon” CHP system. Small systems are maintenance heavy as they must work harder and break down much more often. Who wants to wait on a certified technician. People want to know when the power goes off, there are people on it immediately. People are notoriously bad about having annual HVAC service thus higher repair costs when things break. And who wants to bother/wait for a tech to recharge the system every year.

            A home unit must have much larger peak demand power even tho it is only required for short periods. A grid system can provide power for 5 homes with the same capacity as an individual system because of peak balancing.

            Anyway, That’s my view. One can have energy and be so called off grid, or, one can have cheap dependable grid energy. The vast majority I think will want the latter.

  • Mats002

    Those who gape over too much often loose it all (a classic Swedish saying).

    I don’t like the ambition of world domination. Not if E-Cat is for real and certianly not if it is a scam.

    • Gerard McEk

      Would you invest in something that will not work? I am sure neither Rossi nor any investor would. So if the mass production factory is to be built the E-cat QX is real.
      The reason AR expects many copy-cats is that the principles to get it in operation are quite simple, I guess. If you use the same materials for the reactor as AR did and study the control system carefully, then you may expect many similar devices within a few years on the market. AR will be able to compete them from the market by lowering the prices and if he earned enough money, he will bring them to court also, but his patents are not accepted in all countries.
      I believe his strategy may work and I welcome it, because it means that it will quickly penetrate the market.
      About domination: What is the difficulty if he puts something on the market that is so cheap that nobody bothers to copy it? It is good for everyone, I guess. Yes, AR will be filthy rich, but he said he would use the money for the benefit of those in need. Everybody happy!

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Right, but I do not understand the reason for the public October test. If he needs investors, carefully pick them, get a good attorney to write an iron clad contract, and build the production facility.

        • Gerard McEk

          I would think that it is to demonstrate it exists and really works. For investors and his followers and for commercial reasons.

        • Omega Z

          The up coming test/demo is not at the behest of someone else such as Focardi. It is not an undisclosed test that will leak out.

          Don’t you find it interesting that this is the 1st time that Rossi “wants” to do a public test/demo of his own volition.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            I agree interesting and unnecessary. For six plus years we have watched Rossi try to protect his IP it is time for him to get some reputable investers and go into production.

          • Omega Z

            “reputable investers”
            That’s like finding an honest politician…

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Believe it or not, there are investors who will only demand 10% rather than trying to steal his entire IP.

          • Omega Z

            Those will arrive after Rossi has at least a couple plants in operation. That’s because they become concerned they may get left out. It’s a natural progression with most products and even new business ideas. With an idea, they want 90% and aim to steal the other 10%. The closer you get to fruition, the more accommodating they become.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            I am not as cynical about our system, been in business for fifty years, if there is proof Rossi IP works there are many honest investors who would jump at taking the gamble for 10%. This is not some kid with a business plan he developed in a coffee shop.

          • Interesting distinction. Then Rossi will need a convincing hook. When the ash from his last demo was analyzed, the results were so astonishing that people said that he salted the ash or palmed it as a magic trick.

          • Omega Z

            There is a video on YouTube where Focardi says that Rossi’s original public demo was at his behest. That Rossi thought it was way to early to go public. Rossi did it out of his friendship to Focardi who was already in ill health and wanted it to go public while he was still here to witness it.

            To my knowledge, all the other info(Lugano etc) since was leaked by those close to Rossi. Which explains why most of those people are no longer in the inner circle.
            And people wonder why Rossi seems a little paranoid…

      • cashmemorz

        The point about patents not recognized by other countries: there was a legal decision by the USA that items patented in USA but made elsewhere, where those patents have no recognition, such items have legal status in being imported and sold without regard to USA patent. So a LENR device made according to the design in the USA patent but made in Singapore may be imported and sold in USA without copyright or USA patent protection.

        • Omega Z

          Legal action can be taken to stop imports of products that infringe on patents and financial penalties can be levied against the infringer. Note Google, Microsoft, Samsung, Apple etc, etc…

          It’s more then a little disturbing that so many people look to steal someones years of hard work and sacrifice. And don’t kid yourself. It is stealing. It’s no different then knocking someone down and stealing their pension check.

          Fortunately, even countries like China are waking up to IP rights. They’ve become concerned about IP now that they have skin in the game. If they want their IP rights respected, they have to return that respect to others.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      I don’t think there is any kind of world domination here.

      The issue really centers on how Rossi can make money from this product – really that simple.

      The really great part is Rossi seems to think that replication is not going to be that hard. So
      you better get a product out and get a return on your investment.

      The really bad part (at least for Rossi) is again the same issue – > h seems to think that reverse engineering will
      occur. This “aspect” is really great since it means that competitors will rise
      up.

      So the interesting take away from all this is Rossi seems to think that it not going to be that
      hard to replicate his device.

      So depending on what side of the fence you are on, this “worry” on Rossi’s part is a good thing
      in regards to LENR.

      However, at the end of the day, Rossi is getting old – he going to start running out of lifespan
      time soon.

      I think this whole issue is rather simple:

      If Rossi has what he claims, then the product will not take that long to reach market if he is “reasonable”
      beyond the R&D stage, and the outputs he claims are real.

      If he still too early, then more R&D is required.

      On the other hand, the Wright Brothers had the same fears of reverse engineering – the result was
      about 7 years of VERY little progress and revenue for the Wright Brothers. The Wrights were OFTEN hesitant to do a demo to prospective buyers for fears that such buyers just want to “see” the plane to get ideas.
      By the time the Wrights really got their act together, competitors really quite much
      caught up in that 7 year time span they wasted.

      I don’t think Rossi has much competition unless some other LENR company makes progress, but Rossi
      needs investment money else he may just become too old to benefit from LENR.

      Regards
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • I think your Wright brothers chronology is all crabbed. They refused to do demos to anyone who didn’t have the authority to buy airplanes. It saved them a lot of time and weeded out the lookieloos until the US Army agreed to their terms. Competitors didn’t believe they had the goods, so there was no real competitive development until AFTER the Wrights demonstrated their airplanes in 1908, and then development was far more rapid than they anticipated. All of those lookieloos could easily have been trying to steal their ideas, and even one time Smithsonian asked them about their Roll Control functionality late in the game. Wilbur called the request “cheeky”.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Actually, I still such much of an analogy. In fact what you written quite much confirms what I stated.
          The Wrights were cautious and were hesitant to do demos. The Wrights like Rossi in “general”
          attempted to limit expose by demos – and with good reason. There nothing wrong
          with keeping such technology “close” to ones belt. So it seems quite clear that
          that this kind of thinking was much of how the Wrights operated, and also that
          of Rossi (and I not saying it is necessary good or bad – but only what occurred).

          I think it is rather “natural” and prudent to limit exposure from “tire kickers” etc.

          However, one has to achieve a balance between demos to promote the product and that of competitors just poking around to see what you are up to.

          The significant difference between Rossi and the Wrights was other competitors were moving forward at a rather rapid pace. The result was most of Wrights 7+ year’s advantage did melt
          away.

          Rossi right now does not have much competition. We see “some” activity in regards to Berllioum , but they still seem stuck at a rather low COP.

          This issue not about LENR, but the kind of COP’s you can obtain, and coming up with a package that is suitable for commercial use.

          I still find parallels in this industry to that of the early days of airplanes, and even that of the
          early days of the computer industry.

          Off the self-low cost “computers on a chip” were around for several years. First appeared “kits”
          etc., but the REAL winner was going to be a “ready-made” computer that you take
          out of the box, plug it in and you are off to the races. So Commodore, Apple
          etc. did really well WHEN they provided a full out of the box experience.

          Rossi not yet proved (to most people) he has high output LENR. However if Rossi does, then it should not take that long to see working products if Rossi has what he claims.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • You haven’t got your history straight. There was almost zero development in the aeronautical field from 1903 to 1908. There was a ton of development after the Wright brothers demo’d in 1908.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Well, the Wrights certainly were working hard after that 1903 flight – but keep it much under wraps (to be fair, much due to the plane not being perfected as much as they wanted, but ALSO due to keeping it under wraps).

            From several sources, we find MUCH development occurred – and occurred not in public.

            http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/1908-the-year-the-airplane-went-public-8791602

            So to be fair, perhaps the issue is “more” of the Wrights working to get a “better” plane working then deciding to demo that plane. At the end of the day, historical documents certainly point to and support my idea that they “waited” considerable time before demoing the plane – and during that time others made progress. However in reading the above, it would seem LESS progress was made by competitors then I been given credit for. (this would weaken my point that they lost a lot of ground to competitors in that time frame – but I still think they did).
            R
            Albert

          • You basically just argued against your own position.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Hum, must be missing your point here?

            What evidence have I provided that contradicts my position?

            Please quote (to save ime) form a valid link and articles that disproves what I stated here? (And quote my text to show the point you trying (and failing) to make here?).

            My basic point was that the Wright brothers (just like Rossi) used considerable caution and were often VERY hesitant to show their technology to people.

            BUCKETS of historical articles point the above.

            So the above point of mine is dead crystal clear based on article after article on the Wrights.

            The Wright company was founded in 1909. And they spent much of their resources and time protecting their patent rights rather then developing new aircraft. Their company built ONLY about 120 aircraft.

            So exactly what evidence are you providing that contradicts this rather obvious point of mine? (i.e.: that Rossi and the Wrights worked hard to keep their secrets close to themselves).

            The above point of mine is not really subject to much debate based on historical evidence.

            My next points
            (where I believe we disagree) is two fold:

            1)
            Valuable time and market share was lost or wasted due to this “secretive” policy of the Wright brothers.

            The above is more of a subjective observation and is certainly open to debate. However, many artciles and papers support this position that they spent more time on protecting IP rights then actually building products.

            2)
            That quite a bit of aircraft development occurred during this time of secrecy. Keep in mind I NEVER limited this time frame to 1904 to 1908, but I am open to such
            limitations for points being made here.

            There was significant development occurring by 1907 by “would be” entrepreneurs. And this is before that public demo by the Wrights. Alexander Graham Bell found the AEA (Aerial Experimental Association in 1907!! – so CLEARY much development and activity was occurring here).

            And by 1909 competitors were catching up fast. Now with WWI and the government forcing of cross licensing – that was also a factor here.

            So I can STILL make a good case that in place of too much secrecy, they should and could have moved faster – but their position on secrecy and wanting to hold on too close to their technology was “one” of many reasons for them losing out in that industry over time.

            Toss in lawsuits and then the expiry of their patents? Sure, I think I can make a case that they lost valuable time.

            If you cherry pick particular time frames, then you can make a case against some of my points, but as a “general” over all point, I do think they lost and wasted valuable time based on some of their actions.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • You have argued way past your “basic point” because the Wright brothers stated publicly that they wouldn’t demo to anyone who would not buy airplanes from them. Your claim was that during this time, others developed very quickly but that was not only untrue, but it was argued AGAINST by the article you posted.

            Your point is far below dead crystal clear and meanders from your original discussion so there’s little reason to belabor anything with your addlepated approach. What developments did Bell’s group do in 1907? None. What developments happened after Wright brothers demo’d in 1908? Tons.

  • pg

    Andrea, we are all getting old. Just come up with anything that works, and then the whales will protect you from the sharks. See you in a few months.

  • HS61AF91

    Robotics producing E-Cat QX from US and Swedish production lines, at a cost measured in automated output, vice any slower means, would be what. 90% raw material, 5% human oversight, and 5% to keep the robots ‘greased’? Go get ’em Doctore! You got it made over any potential copy cat, or devious rat, waiting for one to duplicate. We all still have our prior orders in, and maybe a reorder, all over again. The path to economic and social freedom is paved with near free energy bricks, ala E-Cat QX paving stones.

  • sam

    Andrea Rossi
    September 2, 2017 at 12:19 PM
    Dan C.:
    Within October we will reach Sigma 5 if everything goes on as now.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Ted Rygas

    I think that Rossi leaves a big gap by going full steam to industrial applications. The private market will get access to the technology and the competitors (legal and illegal) will fight for the share of the home applications market.

    • Omega Z

      By “private market” I’ll assume you mean all your friends and neighbors. Most can not afford the 1st products to market. Those products entail all the costs of a new technology being brought to market.

      Industry has large expenses, thus if they can use a new technology to reduce those expenses, they can more easily justify paying the higher price of the new technology.

      Profits from these higher prices paid by 1st adopters allows the business developing the new technology to refine the product and improve manufacturing that brings the costs down. Only then can mass production bring this product to the masses at a price they can afford.

  • Axil Axil

    Regarding the home application market

    If you have looked at Rossi’s latest theory paper and tried to understand it, most likely you have failed, but you would have seen countless references to the words, mesons and pions.

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05249

    These particles are now only produced by particle accelerators the size of cities and they decay into muons. Even though Rossi has stated that his reactors do not produce muons…they do…they must. When the government realizes that these reactors produce muons, there will be concern which will result in an uncertain regulatory situation.

    Muons catalyze fusion at a distance maybe inside the human body.

    What is this strange radiation that MFMP is now seeing?

    It is possible or maybe even probable that the LENR reactor will evolve into something that looks like a current nuclear reactor with the LENR core composed of an array of Quark reactors producing loads of muons surrounded by depleted uranium dissolved in a molten salt blanket which converts the muons into heat?

    Such a reactor cannot be built by robots that supply massive production. They are build by big money and thousands of construction workers.

    Detail, details, details…

    Does Rossi know how his reactors work in detail and what they produce? Will he be surprised by new discoveries in LENR?

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Initially, rail freight transport. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_freight_transport

    Power the locomotives (“big industrial plants”) that transport coal.

    https://oakland.edu/Assets/upload/images/Energy-Management/Michigan_2008_Energy_Flow_Diagram_lowres.jpg

  • sam

    Aaron
    September 3, 2017 at 11:11 AM
    Dear Andrea
    less than two months to the end of October: are you still solid on that date for your Quark(x) demo/presentation?
    Best regards
    Aaron

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    September 3, 2017 at 1:10 PM
    Aaron,
    Yes
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • NCY

    I think Rossi is living in a pipe dream. He wants to make all the money from this invention, but It ain’t gonna happen. So he delays and delays, when we could have been well on the way to a LENR future for the world if he had just released the secrets he has about LENR years ago so that others can also work on these devices.

    He has the goose that lays the golden egg, except every golden egg hatches another golden goose, so he can’t sell the eggs without giving up the goose as well. GIVE UP Rossi. For the good of mankind. You are old, and have enough money for your life. How do you want to be remembered? As a stingy fool who delayed the miracle of LENR for a decade, or the man who gave his invention to the world, and saved the world?

    Release your patents to open source like Elon Musk has done, tell your secrets far and wide, and the world will give you something far greater than money, respect.

  • Omega Z

    Day 1 when the 1st product goes out the door, Rossi will already have an R&D team familiar with the basics at work on the 2nd generation. Collaborations will be in the early stages possibly with some big players. Rossi isn’t going to manufacture everything. You need to think Intel inside. That is how you grab market share.

    1st products will be heat for things like food processing and manufacturing the requires heating or oil refining and such as they are the most easily adapted to. Next will be high temp heat processing and steam for energy production. This will likely be followed by large transport such as ships possibly followed by trains etc..

    At some point if there are no serious issues, there will be home heating systems of various types. Eventually, the technology may be adapted to Aircraft and cars, but this will require years of research as safety issues will be a high priority.

  • Chapman

    That is a set of astute observations.

    Well done, but I fear that few will grasp the nuance you are highlighting. Rossi will have a head start only in so far as he will have a working physical solution for the useful harnessing of said reaction, but there will be limitless variations that can achieve the same result. And that result – the actual physical reaction – is not subject to patent.

    The best he can hope for is to enjoy a one or two year market lead. After that he will just be the leader of the pack, and even THAT will only last a short while. Once the “CAT” is out of the bag, so to speak, and the issue brings the focused attention of the major players like GE, he will find himself facing a combined technical juggernaut that will leave him far behind. 5 years after he introduces his first product to the market he will be gone, with nothing more than a footnote in the history books to honor his contribution to the field.

    Rossi needs to have a 3 year plan that offers the highest return, because that small window likely represents the full extent of his opportunity to capitalize on his work and secure his riches. His initial product will likely see his highest profit. After that, each new iteration will cost him more to develope, and will see a smaller market share. After a few versions, he will simply be unable to bring new ideas to the market with any profit margin at all.

    Rossi = Compuserve… Remember them???

    So, if Rossi optimistically believes he can generate 150 million in that time, but GE, or some other Energy Tech Giant, just flat out offers him 300 million for full purchase, and a lifetime 1% royalty, should he take it? Financially it makes sense, and GE will probably control the market one way or another regardless, so why hold out?

    Perhaps, by seeing it through an initial industrial sector rollout, and not trying to crack the domestic market, he thinks to at least establish the undeniable reality of the tech, which would prevent it from being officially denied by the establishment and buried??? Perhaps his minimalist rollout is ACKNOWLEDGING the lost patent battle, but is a means of receiving a fair compensation for his efforts, while also guaranteeing that his “baby” goes full term and enjoys a long and happy life to the benefit of the public as a whole.

    It disturbs me to see so many that are willing and eager to disparage the man, and call him a greedy brastard for “denying the world the benefit of his discovery”, but if that were the case, I suspect he could just sell his tech outright to GE for just such a sum and LET it be mothballed, and never brought to market. But he actually wants to SEE it change the world, and the best way to do that it to see the task through himself… Who would YOU trust, if YOU were in his shoes?

    No, I am quite confident that he is playing it the best way he can, and that the result will be the best the world could hope for.

    Not that he will ever get anything close to an apology from the demented haters out there.

    • Gittyup

      Thank you for expanding my comment and hopefully making it more clear to others what I was trying to say. You seem to understand my viewpoint.

      I agree completely his minimalist rollout is because he knows what he has isn’t patentable.

      I wonder if the IH fallout was partially caused by this as well. IH could have realized that were about to pay $90M (or whatever the final payment was) for something that, when released, would be quickly obsolete and under no IP protection. I also wonder if someone like GE would realize this as well and not be interested in buying the IP. For all we know GE is developing their own LENR as we speak and have not disclosed it. They could be way ahead of AR already in both theory and production. Same can be said of any multitude of companies. Mitsubishi has made some claims about their lenr tech etc.

      Wouldn’t it be a sad day if right before AR announces start of sales and production some giant company comes out with a more efficient and better looking product they have been quietly developing for past few years.

    • ” But he actually wants to SEE it change the world, and the best way to do that it to see the task through himself… Who would YOU trust, if YOU were in his shoes?”
      ***It appeared that Rossi trusted Industrial Heat. But IH started funding Rossi’s competitors, probably because Rossi is such a difficult personality to work with. It could also be because Rossi is a fraud, the evidence is smoky and obscured.

      Who would I trust in his shoes? I would buy coal plants. They’re available very cheap. And you can sell the electricity. By the time he’s cornered the market on [formerly] coal plants, he can leverage that money to buy shipping companies that put his LENR engines into their ships. And by the time he has cornered that market the ECat is solidly out of the bag but he has a stranglehold on Electricity production and shipping. He’s probably the only person on the planet who can make Warren Buffet look stupid.

      • Omega Z

        If a coal plant is cheap, it’s because it is near end of life. Installing Quarks wont change that. In fact, Rossi would very soon be responsible for the dismantling of such plants. If these old coal plants were of any value, they would already be or soon be converted to natural gas.

        In addition, Rossi’s focus will be on E-cat production. Power plants will be left to those with the decades of expertise and they will adapt the E-cat technology to their technology.

        The only plants Rossi will build will be the initial heat exchangers that others will tie into their production facilities. Within a short time, Rossi will only sell E-cat reactors for customer products. Think Intel inside.

        • A coal plant that doesn’t use coal is gonna be real, real cheap. It’s like buying a car that has a gas tank with a million miles worth of gas in it, same size as an ordinary car.

          Rossi cannot trust people who “will tie the initial heat exchangers into their production facilities” because they’ll take apart the device and then the multibillion dollar R&D funds will take over. Just like what’s been happening with microprocessors for decades now. Think Chinese and Taiwanese industrial theft.

          • Omega Z

            Power plants are not cheap. They cost Billions to build regardless if you use coal or gas. The majority of U.S. plants use the same heat exchanger and can easily be converted between gas/coal. The burners are the primary difference. Coal burners use different orifices as they jet out a fine coal powder rather then gas.

            As to the life of a power plant, that is determined by the DOE who determines whether the boilers are becoming brittle or suffer from metal fatigue. This also applies to the turbines. The oldest plants that still use crushed coal are being shut down by the
            DOE as becoming unfit for any use due to safety concerns.

            E-cats would need an entirely different heat exchanger design. They will likely be more like Nuclear plant boilers tho not needing to be nearly as robust.

          • The most expensive thing about the power plant is the coal you buy. Just like the most expensive thing about a car is the fuel.

            Let’s say you were gonna buy a used Toyota Corolla for $10k and all the 2 million miles of gas it would use. That would come to about $300k, so the total would be ~$310k.

            Let’s say Rossi has to get an extra special Toyota Corolla so his total cost is $320k rather than $310k. But, it turns out he doesn’t have to pay $3/gallon for gas, he pays 3cents/gallon, so his total cost is $23k versus his competition which lays out $320k. See how I can develop that coal plants that don’t use coal would be real cheap, even if you pay more initially at the outset?

          • Omega Z

            Your math is way off. On average you’re going to need about a dozen of those Toyota’s to drive 2 million miles “if” you do your due diligence in maintaining the cars. Otherwise you’ll need even more Toyota’s. And that due diligence costs far more then people imagine. Maintenance, upkeep multiple sets of tires each are expensive.

            As are power plants that need constant 24/7 Maintenance, upkeep and constant replacement of components. Fuel may be the single biggest single cost, but overall makes up about 40% to 50% of the energy costs.

            As for cars powered by E-cats. Not for 15 to 20 years at best.

          • I see you’re taking the standard approach towards an analogy you disagree with by complicating it with a big pile of bullshit and then saying that your bullshit is better than the other bullshit.

            You even acknowledge that fuel “may be the single biggest cost”. Anyone with a business model that can do the same thing as the competition at 40% discount is sitting on a pile of gold and everyone knows it. That’s why Uber was valued at $17Billion, more than all the cab companies combined.

          • Omega Z

            “more than all the cab companies combined”
            Not even. And Uber bypasses a lot of regulations that Cab companies can’t They also throw all the costs off on the Uber drivers who have no benefits. YET. When the regulations are finally all put in place, that will change.

            What’s BS about figuring in real costs instead of hiding behind a set price. An honest cost analysis must include all real costs. Other wise, it is BS.

          • This isn’t a cost analysis, it is an analogy. Arguing from silence is a classic fallacy. In your case you’re arguing from the future (uber will be regulated) vs.the present valuation of uber.

          • Omega Z

            Uber is direly hoping for a breakthrough in self driving cars. That’s because they are aware that their business model is highly flawed. Most Uber drivers are coming to realize that after all expenses are figured in, they are earning less then minimum wage and without benefits. Thus, the reason for all the lawsuits.

            When Uber is forced to recognize these drivers as employees and have to shell out $10K each for insurance and higher pay, they become nothing more then another cab company. Prices and all.

          • Again, you argue from the future, a classic fallacy of arguing from silence. It’s astonishing to watch. You seem to be in the habit of arguing from the future. If you know so much about the future then tell me what stock on the exchange will rise the most tomorrow in 1 day?

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    September 3, 2017 at 8:55 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    You say that your the first plants that you sell will be managed directly by you.

    a) Can you explain what you mean by that?
    b) Have you any agreements to build plants for customers yet?

    Thank you if you can answer,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    September 3, 2017 at 9:32 PM
    Frank Acland:
    a) that we will operate the plant and the Customer will not have access to the reactors
    b) yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      IOW, Rossi will be selling the heat.

      • The northern countries are gonna love this development.

  • attaboy

    After all the years this “Rossi effect” has been out there, Its amazing to me that no one has been able to completely replicate this effect or come up with another variation that produces the same result.

  • So Rossi almost got away with selling 2 rocks and verification of fire production until Industrial Heat realized that it won’t work unless Rossi is there. That’s why IH didn’t just give him back his IP immediately, they spent $millions trying to hold onto it.

    Maybe Rossi can bypass the inevitable obsolescence of his technique is to make a few $billion and then take the Elon Musk approach towards opening up the technology so that competitors will find it hard to compete against hobbyists. Kinda like when Apple Computer sold more computers than IBM right off the bat, but at 1/20th the cost. IBM got in and then got out of that market because even though they were selling millions of computers, they only made pennies on each one rather than the 5 or 6 figures they were used to.

    • Omega Z

      IBM merely waited to long to jump in. They were of the opinion that PC’s were a fad just as Television manufactures thought about recording devices. IBM also thought software didn’t have potential profits in the long term, thus Microsoft ripped them a new one.

      Note Elon open sourced some of it’s battery technology just to assure their standard design became the standard everyone would us. Thus avoiding becoming the Betamax instead of VHS standard. It assured his investment.

      • Energy companies aren’t going to make those stupid mistakes. Computer companies didn’t perceive the threat to their business until it was too late. Not so with energy companies, who already know extremely well how this kind of a disruption would knock them out completely.

        It’s not like IBM has been bankrupted, they’re still an $80B company or so. It was the BUNCH/7dwarves that got hit so hard, and are barely in business today. BUNCH= Burroughs, UNIVAC, NCR, Control Data Corporation (CDC), and Honeywell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BUNCH

        LENR will be as fundamental change as the onset of gasoline engines, which knocked out steam engines.

        • Omega Z

          Most energy companies aren’t going no where. They may shrink and consolidate, but that’s going to happen anyway with or without LENR. But they will be around a very long time.

          Power plants will still power your home because it will be much cheaper then providing your own. Buy the time LENR replaces the combustion engine, Oil will already be becoming critically short in supply. In fact LENR will extend the period that oil is available even should the be synthetic.

          Energy makes up about 10% of product and services. LENR may bring that down to about 3%, but the other 90% will still be there. LENR is not magic. It will merely make things a little cheaper.

          I get where you’re coming from. Some people want to throw iff the shackles of the system, but what they ultimately get is just a new set of shackles.

          • Samec

            Wrong. Even if big centralized powerplant companies sell electricity into transmission system (grid) for free, they will not competitive with on site LENR generators.

            Powerplant companies will bankrupt 5-8 years after launch of LENR tech.
            Of course launch not in dreamed Rossi style, where he want 2 robotized factories for whole world supplies.

          • Omega Z

            No Sir, You are wrong. You are unfamiliar with the generation of electricity and the issues of doing that at small scale. At best, you will get 20% efficiency meaning you need 5KW of heat to get 1KW electric requiring a minimum of 21KW E-cat heat for peak demand periods. The majority of homes will require substantially more. Most of the time, you will be using about 1KW of electricity while producing 10KW. Even at 1 cent per Kilowatt, your spending 10 cents overall.

            Power plants need only produce 2 kilowatt of electricity per customer, because they can balance out peak demand. They waste very little. They can double their cost and still beat you out on price.

            To best understand the issues, You should do some in depth research of the ORC CHP(Cooling/heating/power) system. I don’t know what a new one costs. They just say call for pricing. However, used ORC’s go for $10K-$15K. Their primarily designed for N-gas, but may be converted to propane as well.

            They’ve been working for years to get a 10,000 hour life cycle. To my knowledge, there doing good to reach near 8,000 hours. That’s less then 1 year. Thus, they are and likely always will be recommended as a backup generator. They simply are not economical even with free fuel of which even the e-cat has an annual refill cost.

            In addition, maintenance will easily eat up any savings. I’m not certain how much a tech call will cost nor how long you’ll have to wait, But in commercial business work such as refrigeration, They wont even show up for less then $200. Even if it only requires 1 minute to diagnose the problem. Repair not included.

  • georgehants

    In my opinion, the pure unadulterated, inefficient, selfishness and greed encouraged by most on page is a sad reflection of our society’s.

  • US_Citizen71

    LENR could be such a boon to aviation and air freight. Imagine ginormous carbo blimps lifted by hot air generated by LENR heat and propelled via LENR powered turbo jets. It would drop the price per kg/km enormously.

    • Omega Z

      “ginormous cargo blimps”
      Their Achilles heel- The Woodpecker… 🙂

      • US_Citizen71

        And BB guns! But in all seriousness they would likely be made with kevlar or stronger skins and carbon fiber/titanium frames. If LENR is used to breakdown nuclear waste the resulting daughter helium created might be enough to allow helium to be used for lift as well. But I think that would take longer to develop at scale.

        • Omega Z

          I always entertained the idea of a hybrid. Helium to produce a neutral buoyant blimpy, with hot air for the cargo weight.

          Just wondering. For 30 minutes or less delivery, can we throw in some afterburners. 🙂

  • Albert D. Kallal

    It not simple. First mover advantage is a huge issue. Microsoft purchased Nokia (for 8 billion).
    Then threw countless MORE billions into their smartphone play. The result was less than
    3% of the marketplace – and now I think it down to 1.8%.

    While Microsoft is a smaller company then say Dell, or Sony, or Apple, and fails most of the time to make the fortune 100 top list, they still are a significant player in the software industry. Regardless, no matter what they attempted, they failed in the smartphone business.

    We call such first mover advantages in the technology industry a “real estate grab”. When the
    coffee business boomed, the top 15-20 locations in prime downtown areas were already
    grabbed.

    At that point you can take LARGE sums of money, but unless you have those “cherry” coffee shop locations, it going to be a tough battle to break into the coffee business in a significant
    way.

    Such moves EVEN with large companies still allows a relative newcomer to break into the market place. So Apple got their foot in the door. No doubt when IBM finally moved into the marketplace it was a near death blow to Apple.

    So keep in mind that Microsoft failed to crack the phone business – and money was not the issue – the issue was the first mover advantage.

    The real issue is how “slow” the major players in the heating industry will move on this LENR technology. Many will be caught with their pants down. Likely what will occur is Honeywell, or Lennox etc. will purchase LENR devices from Rossi for use with their products).

    IBM looked at the personal computer industry as a curiosity for many years. And IBM really did
    not want to enter the desktop computer industry because it would “cannibalize”
    their existing business computer model they were making so much money on. (A
    typical minicomputer “lease” to a business was like $4000 per month – they were
    printing money!!).

    However, when Apple hit 1 billion dollars (and was at that time the fastest company in USA history to reach a 1 billion in sales), then IBM realized they HAD to make a play into
    that marketplace.

    The result was the IBM PC – and it took the market by storm – dominated the market for quite a few years.

    The competitors to Rossi are much in the same boat. They not make a move until Rossi technology becomes more then some lab bench curiosity.

    If Rossi grabs a chunk of the heating market, it will be quite hard to take that market away from
    him unless competitors move rather quickly – and even then, history shows it hard to take that market away from first movers).

    The widespread “doubt” of LENR is certainly something that is helping Rossi right now.

    Rossi not really proved much of anything at this point in time. The issue will really center on Rossi delivering a working product.

    Many are cheering for Rossi – but he has to deliver something that works – and until such time we really don’t have much to go on.

    Regards,
    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • Omega Z

    Actually, It depends on how Rossi goes about it. If he tries to do everything himself, you may be right. However, If he focuses only on producing the reactors and controls and just sells to manufactures such as G.E, Siemens etc to produce consumer products, then he will have a big lead. He will “also” be able to have many of the best people in the field working in the R&D department.

    You see, Nobodies can compete against the big boys. A group of 5 nobodies in a small office can become the largest software company in the world. Two kids working out of a garage can become a world renowned computer/phone manufacturer. Two dorm students can become a search engine giant or 1 dorm student can become an internet media giant, and so more. The succeeded where others failed because they believed.

  • NCY

    I hope so.

    • Omega Z

      I fully expect Rossi’s initial sales to be beta heat production systems to work out any issues with the technology. This will allow him to retain control of his technology during this dangerous period(Competitors want to get a hold of it).

      Once that is concluded, I expect him to license the use of his technology to Industry leaders in consumer product and builders of power plant components etc.. From that point on, Rossi/Leonardo will merely manufacture reactors and perform R&D work. Product manufactures will do the rest.

      It will take time to design and bring products to market. Rossi can gradually ramp up E-cat reactor production as needed. Contrary to popular belief, this will be a long term transition. It’s all due to real world economic constraints.

  • georgehants

    scottlshman, probably agreed do you not feel there is an argument that millions of years later we may have evolved into something a little more advanced.

    • scottlshman

      .

      Greed and laziness are still present in humanity. There are people, and corporations, who would rather steal an idea than create something unique by themselves.

      Sir Stanley George Hooker, FRS, DPhil, BSc, FRAeS, MIMechE, FAAAS, was a Mathematician and jet engine engineer. In 1943 he helped to develop most powerful aero engine at tat time in the world: the Rolls Royce Nene.

      Some Nenes were sold to Russia and without any license they were copied
      and produced in great numbers to power MiG fighters. Nenes were later
      built in France, China and other countries. 15 years later Hooker was on a trade visit to China. He toured an aircraft engine factory and was amazed that they were still making copies of the Nene engine. He noticed a row of holes drilled in the engine’s casing and he asked a Chinese engineer what the holes were for. The Chinese Engineer shrugged. Hooker told him that holes were for a shroud fitted to improve air flow in the engine. It was discovered later though that the shroud would be better placed in a different location and the holes in the Chinese Nene’s were copied from an early pre-production engine that had had the shroud moved hence the row of redundant holes. The Chinese had been slavishly drilling the redundant holes in every engine they had built since.

      Sir Stanley told they could stop drilling the holes as they served no useful purpose.

      .

      • georgehants

        scottlshman, in a sane system where caring and sharing is the norm, with higher rewards for those contributing the most to society, stealing etc. becomes unnecessary, just everybody Worldwide working on for example Cold Fusion for the benefit of all, equally, everybody gains, nobody loses except the pointless manipulators using this crazy system to become personally ridiculously rich and powerful.