Initial Production Goal for E-Cat QX: 100,000 1kW per Year

Gerard McEk asked a good question on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today:

Just one question about the industrial road you are going:
What production capacity in Ecat QX output kW’s are you aiming at when you introduce your industrial plant?

Andrea Rossi’s reply:

Answer: we would be ready for 100,000 kW/year, easy to upgrade following the market.

Rossi has said they will start by producing 1 kW E-Cat QX modules that can be combined to make plants of any desired size. 100,000 1 kW modules is a relatively modest goal; it would be enough to build 100 1 MW plants initially. It seems they are planning to start small, which makes sense in terms of setting up and testing the production processes, and controlling costs.

If Rossi’s goal is to start production this year they probably have no choice but to do it this way given time and money constraints. Rossi says that this would be easy to upgrade, and I would imagine that if the plants are demonstrated to work well, I would expect there will be very high demand for them, requiring rapid expansion of production facilities.

  • Jag Kaurah

    Good to start small but that is way too small

    • Omega Z

      This would equate to 100 1MW units per year or average such 2 units per week. Considering there is currently few applications ready for drop in replacement, this is a good starting point.

      It will take a while for industry to redesign boilers and heat exchangers to adapt to this type of heat production system.

      • Vinney

        If this where the case, a company like Andeavor (or Marathon as the new buyer) could easily buy the entire annual production.
        He certainly wouldn’t need many customers.
        In any case, the important thing is to get the Ecat out into the market.
        Limiting the customers could be an IP protection (minimise reverse engineering efforts) measure.
        Rossi’s plans nay change within months of market introduction, to allow more companies to design with the Ecat QX modules.

        • causal observer

          I assume Rossi’s number is the target for the initial assembly line configuration. Probably in the contract with ABB.

        • Vinney

          To reach the historic $1 trillion IPO the capital markets will request that some ‘iconic’ companies will be able to demonstrate products based on the 1kw and the 10kw module, and Leonardo Corp should allow them to adapt the Ecat QX.
          This gives them (the capital markets) 1a better indication of the enormity of the market.
          Leonardo Corp should start talking to companies it would like to deal (and work) with soon after the official release of the product.
          We (well I don’t) don’t want to see a future Facebook or Snapchat top his IPO figure.

  • AdrianAshfield

    A small stand alone plant can be duplicated very quickly. It is also easier to fix faults without too much disruption and adapt one for an upgraded reactor.

  • Vinney

    Sounds as if customers will be able to design their own heating appliances with 1Kw EcatQX modules.
    This is good as the customers will be designing the heat exchangers, and calculating all the fluid dynamics, rather than Leonardo Corporation.
    Hundreds of engineers and designers will have to be hired. The low quantity must also mean the EcatQX is going to be more expensive at introduction.
    But this is normally the case with new technology.
    But within months of operation, there will be no doubts on the value of the technology.
    The introduction of the 10kw Ecat QX will also be the start of the IPO process, probably 3rd quarter 2019.
    I still believe it will hit $1 trillion dollar market capitalisation.
    With this sort of money, production will quickly scale up and multiply in many countries.
    The 10kw module will really become the industrial standard, a infinitely more versatile capacity.
    Making machinery simpler, cheaper and more reliable.
    By then, the numbers (performance) on the 1kw and 10kw will be publicly (and independantly) verified.

    • Anon2012_2014

      We know nothing about timing, only that shipping Ecat’s to market will get him all the funding he needs. So speculating on the IPO date as “probably” is ahead of ourselves here with the information we have.

  • Andre Blum

    Hah. Reading the kW/year unit auto triggered my “tsssk! Another person who does not know the difference between energy and power” reaction. But of course rossi doesn’t make such mistakes. Indeed he means annual power.

    • Omega Z

      That would equate to 100 1MW systems per year..

  • J2

    Sounds as if customers will be able to design their own heating appliances with 1Kw EcatQX modules.This is good as the customers will be designing the heat exchangers, and calculating all the fluid dynamics, rather than Leonardo Corporation.Hundreds of engineers and designers will have to be hired

  • roseland67

    Just so I understand,

    He is planning on making 100,000
    1 KW electrical heating, nuclear
    pressure vessels but has not received
    UL certification?

    Is this correct?

    • causal observer

      Industrial certification only.

      • Dr. Mike

        Do you know what agency certified the revised and improved controller, and when did the agency complete its certification? Was the QX device certified for operation at its higher output power level of 80W? Can it be assumed that the certification only covers verification of the safety of operation when the system is operated within specified parameters?

        • Toussaint françois
          • Dr. Mike

            It makes sense that he would use this same company, but has SGS verified the safety of the new controller and the QX module of 13 devices that that has an output power of 1KW? It seems they would also have to verify the larger system composed of the 1KW modules since these modules would have to be connected by a master control system.

          • Omega Z

            SGS as in my post above.
            The did the test on the 3KWh hot cat.

    • cashmemorz

      Was received that nuclear certification about three years ago just before the one year test at Doral.

    • Anon2012_2014

      We are way ahead of ourselves. If Rossi can produce it he will. Once he makes and ships 10 working 1 kW heaters with COP ~6 to the _public_ with or without certification, he will have tens of billions of euros (or dollars) to invest in brining this to market big time. I’m waiting to see these in public. That is the big day.

  • causal observer

    Industrial only.

    • Luca Meli

      Do you really think authorities will give him the chance of produce and install a huge amount of such devices without knowing anything about their security?

      • frank

        Of course…many here think (among them experienced engineers) there is no certification at all required for industrial heating devices, even if their energy production principle is unknown or doesn’t fit to any known theory (sarcastic…). Rossi will need to provide such certificates, otherwise his million dollar investment in robotized lines doesn’t make sense.

  • causal observer

    Rossi’s reply does not identify a starting date or duration for that level of production. I assume he means that is the target of the initial assembly line configuration.

  • Karl Venter

    He must hurry!!
    If the MFMP get the theory/practice out there there will be many players fighting in the market

    • LION

      Hi Karl Venter,
      I believe that to remain strong Andrea must only do what he is comfortable with, that way fewer mistakes as he is so thorough anyway.
      Other players there will be for sure whatever he does, and many of them have vast resources. It is for this reason that I HOPE his financial backers seeing these developments in LENR will fully commit to him and provide all the money and support he needs to complete his task.
      In my opinion he thoroughly deserves this full commitment from them.

    • Are they gonna release those details on that “O Day,” or is that something different?

  • Monty

    A single unit to buy and approve independently would make all the difference in the world…

  • Frank Acland

    My interpretation of Rossi’s comment is that when they start up they will have the capacity to produce 100,000 kW per year. If they are planning 24 hour production, and and if each module is 1 kW (which I believe is the plan), that would mean they will be able to make about 11 modules per hour.

    • Buck

      And, at 13 single reactors per module, about 143 singlets per hour . . . totaling about 1.3 million singlets per year.

      At this point, I am assuming that this is split between the two factories (USA & Sweden).

      • Omega Z

        I wouldn’t assume that.

        I think a single manufacturing facility will be built and the 2nd will follow there after when they know the 1st setup works as desired. Otherwise, you have the time, cost and confusion of correcting everything twice.

        • Buck

          Did I say they would be started concurrently?

          I am merely assuming that when he talks about capacity, he is speaking of the combined capacity of the two plants he has already shared and put on the table for all to see. Otherwise, one might presume that each plant has an initial capacity of 100,000/year, which I don’t take as his meaning. Of course that is an assumption where I could be wrong.

          Like you, I believe he and his consultants (ABB ?) are mapping out how best to build a production-line operation that can expand rapidly, both effectively and efficiently, across many different plants. I speculate that he will have more than two plants by the end of the 5th year of production.

          • Vinney

            Soon as production and distribution starts on these Ecat QX, the interest from industry and the public will rise exponentially.
            Demand will far outstrip supply.
            Some robotic and miniaturisation firms will contact Rossi with inprovements., even in their current production line.
            This figure will double within months.
            And whilst he is busy improving both the production line and his 10kw Ecat QX, he should allow companies to design machinery using the 1kw Ecat QX, seeing they are so scarce rather than solely package them in 1MW heaters.
            He can also only choose companies he likes and trusts for these developments.
            This will really fire up the imagination of the public.

          • Buck

            Vinney . . . Here is Rossi’s response to your thoughts and concerns, though expressed with my questions

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

            Buck
            May 7, 2018 at 8:52 PM

            Good Day Andrea:

            I have to say that I see your sense of excitement as your goal approaches. Also, I have a question about your expansion plans and the many ways of preparing for the rapid increase in demand.

            Using some of the ideas in TQM as well as Nash Equilibriums, are you setting up two production lines with their respectively staffed teams? For example, two at the USA plant, or maybe better yet, one at the USA plant and the 2nd at the plant in Sweden. This done with the goal that each is to share their tricks to building each QX and QX 1kW module right and to be the objective view when the other team hits a snag? Effectively establishing an environment where each team recognizes that the goal, their success, is defined by their individual choices as well as their collective choices.

            I raise this question because of optimism. I believe your greatest challenge won’t be the sale of the first 100,000 1kW modules but rather the demand that each production facility will face in solving the problems created by rapidly expanding production through adding lines at their location (USA & Sweden) as well as the addition of lines at entirely new locations with entirely new untrained or partially trained teams.

            As always, my best to your and your team,

            Buck
            _______________________________________

            Andrea Rossi
            May 8, 2018 at 9:14 AM

            Buck:

            Thank you for your intelligent suggestions. I am taking advice of them. This push-pull-push-pull of information with our readers is very precious to us.

            Warm Regards,

            A.R.

  • Gerard McEk

    I do believe starting this in a moderate way is the best appoach. You first prove that your higly automated process in minimum configuration (the minimum of robots conveyor-belts and all equipment around it: one complete production unit) works and is reliable. That includes also your whole administrative, purchase and sales chain and
    then you can multiply it as many times as you whish.
    It is a huge task, though. I do not envy Andrea Rossi and I do hope he has a reliable partner now.

    • cashmemorz

      A full business organization with all of those elements, of “administration, purchase and sales chain” being put in place would leave some obvious publically traceable activity in the hiring area, such as LinkedIn, wouldn’t it? Hiring just one closed mouthed employment agency might work, to keep it all a secret, maybe not. That kind of agency is not used to acting like Rossi is a civilian based Manhatten Project.

  • Stephen

    I’m almost as curious about the production plant as the E-Cat QX module itself.

    This is a first of its kind I would think. And in many ways just as it makes sense to start with a prototype for the device it makes sense to start with a prototype for the production plant.

    I wonder about the plants size. To produce 11 units an hour. Is it self contained in a typical warehouse type building or does it require a larger or smaller space?

    Does it have typical power requirements for manufacturing in a ware house or require more?

    Is the process optimized in automation or manual construction and what kinds of user space, work force manning, training does it require. Is this part of the sizing constraint of a prototype?

    If this size production is an optimum unit size for facilities, Manning, power supply constraints what kind of business model would be appropriate. Is it optimum for distributed local manufacturing in each city. Or more optimum to centralize the production in a estate of such plants? Or perhaps optimum for both.

    Would a distributed production be easy to set up. I can imagine an automated production plant delivered to a city as a package almost as the ecat can be delivered as a unit it self. Could such a unit help stimulate the local economy rather than centralizing it in one place?

    Very curious how it goes forward but looks to me to have good potential, however it goes. It’s a base production unit that opens possibilities.

    • LilyLover

      Nothing beats using hard working, educated, Chinese workers using high automation for production and uneducated UPS drivers for door to door delivery.
      It’s even better to use automated cars for delivery and keep our uneducated on cheap welfare.

      Devolution to oblivion of labor is a natural consequence of diluted American education. Today’s average college grad in US is worse off than a fourth grader of forty years ago or an eighth grader from China.

      Distributed production is antithesis of efficiency. Just because it can be thought about, doesn’t mean it should be. This ‘unqulified Seat at the table’ dilutes the dialogue and wastes time on useless dead end ideas. Yet, the dumbos feel they “contributed” by wasting everyone’s time.

      Nothing against you, general observation.

      • Anon2012_2014

        “Just because it can be thought about, doesn’t mean it should be. This ‘unqulified Seat at the table’ dilutes the dialogue and wastes time on useless dead end ideas”

        Really? You chose to read ECW so it is your decision on how you invest your time as it is everyone else’s on this forum. No need to attack Stephen’s opinion.

        • LilyLover

          Really, not attacking Stephen, I’m fed up with “seat at the table” and “diversity candidates” and proliferation of low IQ workers at meetings in my company, on national discussion, and “pay us-the-artless-artsy-folks for our worthless contribution” attitude.
          Sorry about this spillover from personal life onto this forum. Really nothing agains Stephen.

          The people I’m fed up are the ones that think their incompetence ought to be revered as much as competent persons’ productive work.

          • psi2u2

            If you are against welfare, and you understand that robotization is destined to produce a class of serfs if it is not checked by some ethical force, then you might be interested in the UBI (Universal Basic Income).

          • LilyLover

            I’m pro-UBI and pro-welfare. I dislike to force incompetent people “seem employed” doing nothing but interfere while adults work. I’m against namesake employment programs. I’m against insisting that incompetence and competence are worth the same.

          • Anon2012_2014

            Sorry Lily, this is a forum to discuss LENR and similar devices. I really think we should leave social commentary to some other discussion group.

      • psi2u2

        “Today’s average college grad in US is worse off than a fourth grader of forty years ago or an eighth grader from China.”

        What’s your source for that? Or is that just your opinion?

        • LilyLover

          Michigan .edu archived “examinations” from 1700s, 1800s, 1900s, Chinese Maths textbook homework Questions vs SAT, GRE, GMAT, LSAT, USMLE examinations.

          Reciprocal test-solution evaluation.

          Put simply, average SAT topper in US, cannot do better than average middle school topper from China.

          Verified.

          • psi2u2

            That is not a source.

          • LilyLover

            Personally verified 100s of students in reciprocal situations. I am the source. Feel free to pamper your kids about how great their achievements are while they figure out the rest of the World views them and ours as illiterates.

          • psi2u2

            I don’t pamper my kids, but I also don’t buy your argument.

            You stated: “”Today’s average college grad in US is worse off than a fourth grader of forty years ago or an eighth grader from China.”

            This not the same thing as “Put simply, average SAT topper in US, cannot do better than average middle school topper from China.”

            The second statement is carefully hedged and is probably correct. The first one is an undocumented overgeneralization, something college graduates are warned against.

      • Stephen

        Lilly you obviously know very little about me or my background. Yet you try to discredit my observation and compare it to an ignorant time wasting observation from an undereducated person in your board room.

        Then say it’s nothing against you to try and justify your self.

        Very nice. Congratulations.

        I can’t take offense though. Speaking generally nothing against you but since the topic has come up: in my view Attacks are a reflection of the mind of the attacker not the intended target. In my experience people resort to general attack’s when they are in a position of weakness or insecurity or ignorance about the discussion point themselves. Competent people seek clarity on view points they don’t share and don’t assume they understand and know better a point that someone else has shared. I just feel sorry and a bit embarrassed about people who need to attack others and wonder how their insecurity can be helped.

        Regarding your point of Globalization and cheep educated Human Resources abroad. This is and has been the model recently until now you are quite right. But It’s not sustainable. I travel too China from time to time so I know it well. In China the echonomy is rapidly evolving and is already approaching that of the US. It is no longer the cheap source of educated labor. Cost of living at wages are rapidly approaching that of the West. Of course there is always the next place… etc… for now…

        As automation takes over from manual labor, the labor force cost becomes less of a driving factor for the location of the manufacturer etc. More important are other cost like the cost of facilities and land and the cost of utilities such as power and cost of transport. The cost of Utilities and Facilities will depend largely on local conditions. The trade off would be between that and the transport costs. Transport costs themselves would be a trade off between transporting finished products or transporting a raw products and components. This can lead to advantages in localized manufacturing etc.

        Due to increase in automation, AI internet and networking band width and associated communication technologies The echonomy is rapidly evolving regarding job types and availability. High labor type jobs are most affected. This has happened before with the industrial revolution and is happening today. Work fields that still require human input are mostly in creative arts, skilled artisan work, education, science and research, communications and government. Most of these still require a high degee of education of some kind either academic, practical or technical.

        local and national governments will need to look at ways to stimulate and sustain their economy to sustain their whole population not just the highly educated. If the costs of localized automated industry results in a cost savings in the local echonomy they would likely lobby for that.

        But then you would likely say this is an opinion of an unqualified seat at your board table. Well there you go take it as you will.

        • psi2u2

          “the pace of technology development and the huge number of research
          papers in new nano technologies that are produced every year etc is
          clearly inconsistent with your arguments. This requires a very high
          level of cutting edge skills and up to date education and ability.”

          Right.

    • gerold.s

      I agree! Setting up such a production operation (completley new product, probably no own know – how for production operations) unless you have an experienced partner is a complex task. Probably even more complicated than the development of a new product. There is now way that you do that all by your own. This tells me that Rossi probably has an experienced partner. Anything else would be a great surprise.

      If this is true there are probably a number of people that know what is going on and an info leak would be only a matter of time.
      So far, it seems that we only receive fragmental info directly from Rossi. There seems to be no other source.

      This makes me think if the hole story really can be true.

  • Anon2012_2014

    If this happens it would be really great. Waiting…

  • cashmemorz

    Done on the year long test at Doral. And radiation test certification was given just before that. What applied to the larger sized ecats at that point is similar to the Quark X since both are industrial mode and same kind of device basically. Industry uses standards that are more dependent on the users safety by having experts on site or close by. This is to incentivize the use of innovative tech by industry. IE more jobs. Any government that is against more jobs will be looked at funny. What is proven out to work in industry then gets to be more easily given the OK in the domestic version.

  • Omega Z

    This is the company Rossi has used previously
    SGS- is an international testing company.

    https://www.sgsgroup.us.com/

    https://www.sgsgroup.us.com/en/testing

    SGS is the world’s leading inspection, verification, testing and certification company. We are recognized as the global benchmark for quality and integrity.

    Our global network of laboratories and testing facilities, staffed by knowledgeable and experienced personnel, help you to reduce risks, shorten time to market and demonstrate the quality and safety of materials, components or products.

  • gerold.s

    I don’t understand why one needs to be so secretive before lunching a new product within the next 12 months. I think Rossi needs to change his paradigm when he really starts to deal with customers.

    • Observer

      Some people do not want other people knowing what they ate for lunch. ;o)

      • gerold.s

        that even might be true 😉

      • Omega Z

        But others post a selfie of every bite they take and become offended if you don’t give them a LIKE.

        Then when Facebook and others share it with all, they become indignant that anyone would invade their privacy.

    • LarryJ

      You need to keep in mind that this is not just some improvement on an existing tech. It is a paradigm shift and will have a dramatic effect on our economy and on the livelyhood and investments of millions of people. People hate change in general and this is change on a massive scale.

      For instance, if Rossi were to prove beyond any doubt right now that what he has is real it would give his enemies, who are numerous and powerful, a rallying point. They could say, hold on, this is nuclear, we need hearings, controls, reviews and time to prepare. He needs to be shut down for now. If that happened it could fade from public view. Just another impossible invention.

      He might also have the whole world breathing down his neck. All sorts of vested interests would take to the streets. He is much much safer flying below the radar. As long as the mainstream scientific community says it is nonsense he has complete freedom of movement. The only people who need to be convinced at this stage are his backers.

      Once he announces his product his enemies can only react. The horse will have bolted so to speak and closing the barn door will be too late. Once in the hands of the public nobody can deny its reality, efficacy or safety and public demand will keep it front and center.

      • gerold.s

        Thanks for these valid arguments. I hope, if this is his strategy, it works out for him. Its time for a change!

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    May 7, 2018 at 8:58 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    1. Have you started building your production machinery for the E-Cat QX?
    2. If so, have you started testing your production machines yet?

    Thank you and best wishes,

    Frank Acland

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    May 7, 2018 at 7:14 PM
    Frank Acland:
    1- yes
    2- no
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Buck

    I believe the following exchange with Rossi highlights that he is now thinking about how to deal with any sort of rapid growth in demand once the Ecat QX hits the market and proves its worth.

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

    Buck
    May 7, 2018 at 8:52 PM

    Good Day Andrea:

    I have to say that I see your sense of excitement as your goal approaches. Also, I have a question about your expansion plans and the many ways of preparing for the rapid increase in demand.

    Using some of the ideas in TQM as well as Nash Equilibriums, are you setting up two production lines with their respectively staffed teams? For example, two at the USA plant, or maybe better yet, one at the USA plant and the 2nd at the plant in Sweden. This done with the goal that each is to share their tricks to building each QX and QX 1kW module right and to be the objective view when the other team hits a snag? Effectively establishing an environment where each team recognizes that the goal, their success, is defined by their individual choices as well as their collective choices.

    I raise this question because of optimism. I believe your greatest challenge won’t be the sale of the first 100,000 1kW modules but rather the demand that each production facility will face in solving the problems created by rapidly expanding production through adding lines at their location (USA & Sweden) as well as the addition of lines at entirely new locations with entirely new untrained or partially trained teams.

    As always, my best to your and your team,

    Buck
    _______________________________________

    Andrea Rossi
    May 8, 2018 at 9:14 AM

    Buck:

    Thank you for your intelligent suggestions. I am taking advice of them. This push-pull-push-pull of information with our readers is very precious to us.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

  • Dan Galburt

    Looking through my crystal ball

    If Dr. Rossi comes out with a competitive E-Cat QX system in the 2018 – 2019 timeframe, the resulting operation of multiple E-Cat Qx units should result in de facto multiple third party verification of the first practical LENR device that safely generates heat with a useful COP and life. Achieving de facto third verification assumes that at least some of Rossi’s customers will publicly release test results. I sincerely hope that this will be the case.

    In the immediate future it is likely that Dr. Rossi will maintain control of his technology by using patents and keeping some information secret. The fact that there is not yet an excepted theory of how the E-Cat works should work to Dr. Rossi’s advantage providing that de facto third party verification occurs. When the world at large realizes and accepts that the E-Cat QX is a safe highly competitive alternative to existing energy sources the world will change and the LENR age will have begun.

    Immediately, the media, scientists, industrial leaders, and governments will take great interest in E-Cat technology including how it works, what it offers, and what problems rapid introduction will cause. Military applications may cause some development to be done in secret, but I hope that the use of the technology to generate power will remain in the commercial world.
    The price at which the E-Cat QX produces energy and the COP of the reactors will determine how rapidly the use of the technology will grow. The initial rate at which Rossi is proposing to manufacture E-Cat QX systems is more than adequate to start the revolution provided it gains acceptance. Once widespread acceptance of the technology occurs money will pour into the technology and it will rapidly spread to all applications where it is competitive. Assuming that first E-Cat QX systems can produce heat at a cost that is, at a minimum, half the cost of burning coal it will be obvious that the E-Cat technology will displace fossil fuels and possibly green energy technologies including solar cell and wind turbines. Nuclear power plants based upon fission will be phased out. Laser Driven Hydrogen/ Boron11 (LDHB) fusion proposed by Prof. Heinrich Hora may survive in some applications including spacecraft propulsion.

    In my opinion, laser driven LDHB fusion is being unfairly compared to other fusion approaches that have thus far failed to meet the public’s expectations. LDHB fusion is made possible by rapidly advancing laser technology, and unlike other fusion systems is likely to become a reality in less than 10 years. Fortunately high energy pulse lasers have multiple uses and continued rapid advancement of laser technology is almost a certainty. LDHB fusion like LENR provides safe clean energy, but because of the laser’s current cost cannot be easily scaled down.
    One advantage of LDHB fusion is that it releases energy in the form of fast moving charged alpha particles not neutrons. The motion of the charge particles can be efficiently converted to high voltage electricity without a thermodynamic engine and generator.

    In the near term, the only competition Rossi’s E-Cat technology may have is Brilliant Light Power’s Hydrino based reactors, but like Rossi, Dr. Mills needs to produce multiple commercially competitive systems, and also get multiple third party verifications. (The race is on!)

    Wait! My crystal ball has just turned cloudy so I have no idea what is going to happen next.

  • Vinney

    Off-topic but of interest as we approach the introduction of the Ecat.
    We all know Jay Leno was mightily impressed with the Chrysler Turbine car of 1962-64, that he purchased the 1963 Ultimate edition.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b2A5ijU3Ivs

    Jay Leno and a small team of enthuisiasts have built the ‘ultimate’ jet engine muscle car. the ‘Eco jet’.
    The turbine is small, but still producing over 600hp, over 600 ft.lb torque force and travels in excess of 200mph.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=10q9_pB6unU
    This could have been a ground breaking project with real world economic impact.
    We here at ECW know the potential of very small turbines to produce electricity using a closed CO2 cycle, making such a concept a hybrid.
    The power is stored in batteries, and power management can reduce their size significantly.
    A muscle car using this CO2 closed cycle could easily fit up to 4 turbines, easily powering the car directly (batteries don’t need to be enormous) if required at cruise speeds.
    The other reason to develop the car with these tiny turbines is, less waste heat, quieter operation and lastly ( but not least) it would have been a car ready to adapt the Ecat QX (1kw or 10kw).
    It could have been Leno’s truly ultimate editions

  • Omega Z

    Underwriters Laboratories as of 2012 is a for profit company.

    Are you aware that UL certification is not legally required nor does it mean absolutely safe(There is no such thing). Standards are set within reason and probabilities. Also, though not legally required, there are many agencies(such as OSHA among others) that do require safety tested equipment(not necessarily UL) to be used in most facilities. Aside from safety issues, it is also about “limiting liability” and Insurance companies also have requirements of testing in order for insurance to be applicable.

    Underwriters Laboratories also doesn’t perform all tests themselves but have affiliates that do it for them.

    Subcontracting. You agree that we may subcontract Services to any UL Company or other third parties subject to our requirements. We will provide as a term of any such subcontract that the subcontractor will meet our current qualification requirements, including complying with our confidentiality requirements. UL will be responsible for any breach of this Global Services Agreement (GSA) by its subcontractors. That’s an NDA.

    Note: Certification for industrial use is also much less stringent as there will be trained personel present.

    A list of acceptable U.S. certification entities other along with UL. You will find SGS among them.

    Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories(NRTL)

    -Bay Area Compliance Laboratories
    -Canadian Standards Association (CSA) (also known as CSA International)
    -Communication Certification Laboratory, Inc. (CCL)
    -Curtis-Straus LLC (CSL)
    -FM Approvals LLC (FM) (formerly Factory Mutual Research Corporation)
    -International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials EGS (IAPMO)
    -Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc. (ITSNA) (formerly ETL)
    -MET Laboratories, Inc. (MET)
    -Nemko USA, Nemko North America, Inc.(NNA)
    -NSF International (NSF)
    -QAI Laboratories, LTD (QAI)
    -QPS Evaluation Services, Inc. (QPS)
    -SGS U.S. Testing Company, Inc. (SGSUS) (formerly UST-CA)
    -Southwest Research Institute (SWRI)
    -TUV Rheinland PTL, LLC (TÜVPTL)
    -TUV SUD America (TÜVAM)
    -TUV SUD Product Services GmbH (TÜVPSG)
    -TUV Rheinland of North America (TÜV)
    -Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL)

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