eCatNews Direct to your MailBox

Enter your email address to follow the ecat story ahead of the crowd

I loathe spam. You can unsubscribe at any time. I will not pass your details to a third party

eCat To Have Inexpensive Global Kittens – Updated

January 15, 2012

The details behind AR’s 1 million production push are beginning to gel thanks to a comprehensive interview on The Smart Scarecrow Show.

A tiny device somewhere between a cigar box and a laptop (not sure if this is just the core or complete system) it is destined for a $500 price tag with a small customer-replaceable ‘energy stick’ at $10 a pop. Lasting 6 months of constant use, a customer can buy a number of these and stock them. It appears to be a stand-alone heater and is with the Underwriter’s Lab for (UL) certification. Where this so, the company would have to have completed their design and built the device and be willing to make any changes as directed by UL.

For those uninterested in anything beyond concrete proof, you may want to sit this one out but for the rest of us trying to piece this thing together, the price drop and mass market prediction with sales over the Net now makes a lot more sense.

With the first factory in Florida, he is considering a second in Massachusetts.

There is a lot of detail in this interview so I’ll let you watch it before commenting further. Kudos to Sterling Allan for mining so many nuggets.


While I was compiling the following summary, Aussie Guy e-Cat posted his own excellent version in the comments section. Well worth reading and a thanks to him from me.

  • 2007/2008 started getting LENR reactions. Sold other businesses. Asked Prof Focardi through Uni Bologna
    to answer why his system/idea could not work. Bad news,Focardi saw no reason. Professor Focardi helped with radiation and safety.
  • Intention to produce energy useful for industrial applications
  • Distinction between industrial and domestic units.
  • Size about box of cigarretes. Powdered Ni and compressed H and catalyzer
  • Low energy Gamma heats lead andlead  heats water outside reactor
  • For 1MW with ‘thin’ amount of H and Ni… Theory soon… Understood well.
  • No gas (exhaust) waste radiation etc – clean. No danger of meltdown – no radioactive materials
  • Should temp be too high Ni melts and stops working switches off
  • 1st gen ecat heated facility for two tears but that facility now sold. However ecats at present working continuously in tests.
  • Only heat – 1 to 2 years for electricity
  • 1 gm of matter (Ni or anything) 23,000 MWH of heat energy – if all global energy is eCat, still only 1% world production of Ni
  • Few public tests in past but make tests every day in production
  • Started UL tests
  • Prepping robotised factory for 1 million cats in US – love US – First factory in Florida. Now important to push price down. Want $500 tag. Hence robots and well-designed manufacturing lines
  • Will soon have lots of competitors.Trying to head off future reverse engineering by countries not respecting rights. Foresee China or other countries will do this – can’t compete on price – have to fight them with improving tech. You will be surprised at the high level of easyness for the eCat systems.
  • Study Solyndra and other companies to anticipate war (it is a war). We want to win.
  • Without catalyst it does no work. Many attempts in past did not work without catalyst. Once millions out there, simple for any lab to know and copy hence low price and engineering strategy
  • RFG – confidential but like oriental martail arts – forces that should fight against us (coloumb) used to help instead. Effect turn theoretical disadvantage to advantage
  • NI – helped enhance stability. This is useful in future to get electricity. Need 400 deg (Celcius) at least. Unstable reactor at that temperature. Currently up to 120 celcius stable. Now no power spikes. In theory, can put in series to get high temp but then unstable. Tremendous help from 1MW customer and NI (NI philosophy is to teach how to fish – this from NI first meeting when company man said they want to improve the technology together)
  • UL – exactly as it will be as sold. Has been assembled to instructions given by UL engineer
  • Many people complain we don’t go to conferences and tests but need to work. Have fast roadmap. No time to lose. NI is very fast in everything.
  • Looks like a small portable computer. Apply it to any existing heater. Like software that you can insert into any kind of computer. Any installer can insert it into any type of heater anywhere in the world easily.
  • Cannot get heat on demand. Response time too slow. For sanitory water (shower or hand washing) use normal system but to heat a resevoir tank or for warming home in winter the eCat is good.
  • Still looking at preheating water for commercial power plant elec generation. Problem with authorisation. Any changes to their system requires complex authorisations. Tech wise it is easy but administratively difficult.
  • 180 operational days. Use eCat for 1 month per year and will last 6 years. Put on for half hour and switch off and it effectively uses nothing.
  • Assistance point close to customer. They will supply refill. Customer can change or call in plumber. Very easy – old cartridge sent back for recycling. Retreat Ni in the old cartridge to become new and then put back in operation. A cycle of cartridges in exisence.
  • Because it can be fitted to any type of heater you can go to your normal supplier (hence supplier will always be close to you)
  • Next week will be in Boston to talk about another possible manufacturing plant
  • Hydrogen cannister? Big surprise. Very likely will work without seperate Hydrogen cannister. Resolved problem by putting a substance inside reactor to produce and recycle Hydrogen. Picograms of H used. Originally, getting certification was big issue. Without H cannister, this is no problem.
  • Instead of using pressure of H as control, now solved problem by using heat.
  • $10 per recharge
  • Automation gets price low. Everything automised to max level. Cut time and cost of assembling.
  • Organising network with licencing agencies and sell directly on Net. Also asking customer to put in touch with installer to build network close to customers.
  • eCat will go self-sustain when system decides it can. All automatic. Like elec car control system that decides if petrol or battery power at any instant. Invisibleto and not the choice of owner. Once in self-sustain mode, small input for control and any fan etc
  • Gamma radiation. Transmutation Ni to Cu is side effect. Evidence of 511 kEV gamma at 180 deg electron positron (antimatter) production. [This is interesting].
  • 1MW in modification with NI – new control system now in operation. Customer happy at test with condition that gaskets are sorted etc. Will be in operation in 1 month max in the field of customer
  • Other 12 systems underway
  • Bound by NDA can’t talk about customer
  • Another 1MW sold. Plus many, many in discussion
  • The Colonel has big experience in power plant and thermodynamics helping us get electric generation sooner than expected
  • Start up energy – every 10kW 2.7 (to 2.9kW) power input for activation. This takes around one hour in domestic eCat.
  • Only one reactor in Home unit
  • Patent in Italy – took two years
  • Int and US still pending. Can’t know when and what will happen regarding patents. ~Does not depend on them. Patent attorneys working on it.
  • On giving tech to world (open source). Not the best way. If you take all incentives away from investors will be no investments. If want to make something beautiful for mankind, this way is efficient. Giving away would be worst way. Open source and copying becomes worthless if the eCat has best tech and very cheap.
  • Testing U of Bol and Upsalla. Working on it. Very close to be started. Tremendous amount of work to do recently in small amount of time. Need time to work on it. Should be by February.
  • Never comment on competitors (BL Power etc)
  • No more public tests. Everything goes into preparing for mass production and working on technology
  • Once small eCats on sale, everybody can buy one and make any test they want.
  • Start production in Fall. Will have ready all engineering to start production. Sales in winter. Now ’till fall, prepping factory
  • 1 Million units per year
  • 3 to 5 years – depends on market – difficult to predict production rate
  • Investing? What rate will you consider? This is a hypothetical question. When producing 1 million pieces, they will be a warship. Not want to put at risk family savings. Enterprise still risky for many reasons. Can accept investments from big organisations (amounts that are small for them). Hedge funds etc: anything goes wrong, no one will cry. Too early for people to invest in our business. Not consolidated enough for that risk. When well consolidated, will go public.
  • Thousands of supporters who want to assist. Any way for them to help? Working hard to make low price so it will pay back itself quickly then 30 years saving on fuel. Good way to help is to preregister interest in buying 10kW plant. No money but offer later 400-500.
  • Taking enquiries for licencing. Send an email, or from
Posted by on January 15, 2012. Filed under Business,Media & Blogs,products,Roll-Out,Uncategorized,Videos. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

126 Responses to eCat To Have Inexpensive Global Kittens – Updated

  1. Aussie Guy

    January 15, 2012 at 8:54 am

    My take of the interview:

    10 kW home E-Cat is the size of a portable computer.

    Single reactor is the size of a packet of cigarettes.

    Rossi calls the recharges “Energy Sticks”, fits with the ball point pen like refill statement.

    Replacement is simple and can be done by anyone.

    No H2 canisters used.

    Reactor stores and recycles the H2.

    Only uses picograms of H2.

    Reactor control is via regulation of operational heat point.

    Extremely stable operation at 120 deg C.

    Above that temperature work is it progress.

    Fuel lasts 4,320 operational hours (180 days at 24 hours a day).

    E-Cat will signal when refill is needed.

    Customer can purchase several refills and keep them in stock.

    Cost of the refill to the customer will be $10 plus installation if needed.

    Refills and E-Cats will be available via internet sales.

    Home units will run in self sustain mode.

    512 keV 180 deg Gammas have been detected.

    Heating is via low energy Gammas hitting the lead shielding.

    1st 1 MW plant is in modification. Should be operation in 1 – 2 months.

    12 additional 1 MW plants are being built.

    1 additional 1 MW plant has been sold to another customer.

    UL certification of the home E-Cat is in process.

    2.7 to 2.9 kWs needed for 1 hour to start the home 10 kW E-Cat.

    Rossi claims the RFG helps the Coulomb barrier work with the reaction and not against it.

    First E-Cat factory is in Florida.

    Rossi is going to Massachusetts to further discuss building another E-Cat plant there.

    Home E-Cat production will start in the US fall.

    Sales will start in the US winter.

    Rossi is not interested in family investors as the business is still risky.

    Large hedge funds are welcome but only with a small % investment.

    Does plan to go public.

    Home E-Cat has a 30 year expected life.

    Customer price between $400 to $500 for a home E-Cat 10 kW thermal unit.

    Rossi is onto a winner here.

    Look at the earlier copper pipe Door Knob style reactor. It produced in the 10 to 20 kW range, same as the home E-Cat. Put it in a case, a few fittings for the fluid, small mirco for control, small transformerless power supply, wraparound heater, RFG coil, a screw in “Energy Stick” with the Ni power and like Bob’s your uncle, you have a home E-Cat. Cost when making 1 mil per year? Maybe $100 tops. He needs to give WalMart and other retailer around 100% markup, so out the factory door at $200 to $250 for a $400 to $500 retail. Nice profit there for Rossi and the retailer.


    Can see there will be addons, like external heat exchangers and circulation pumps with fans for space heating, inside water tank heat exchangers for hot water, etc.

    Doubt this is a whole system price, more like a price for the E-Cat thermal unit.

    Well done to Andrea Rossi and the E-Cat team.

    • AB

      January 15, 2012 at 9:17 am

      Sounds great, especially not needing a technician to replace the fuel and not having a hydrogen tank. The one last thing I dislike is the use of lead. Are there not any nontoxic alternatives that can shield against 512 keV gammas?

      • Alain

        January 15, 2012 at 9:36 am

        Defkalion use a polymer, but maybe is there a temperature restriction. they seems to use argon to insulate, and the box is bigger.

      • praos

        January 15, 2012 at 3:32 pm

        Iron. Little more on weight basis. The problem is triffling.

      • Quax

        January 15, 2012 at 6:10 pm

        Lead sheet metal that is not used in any chemical reaction but is just part of the case is nothing to worry about. Even the lead in you car battery poses more of a danger.

      • Nicholas Payne

        January 15, 2012 at 6:41 pm

        No doubt you never use a car because it has lead in its battery

    • Sophareth

      January 15, 2012 at 10:09 am

      Appreciate a lot your summary.

    • Bill Nichols

      January 15, 2012 at 10:20 am

      @Aussie Guy:

      Agree w/ your comments on VORTEX-L. You obviously understand new technologies growing pains. Consider restating your points here for the readers. As I’ve stated before w/r/t E-Cat posts, did this (new cutting edge technologies) in prior lives as well. Murphy and his law(s) have a long relationship.

      I’ve stated several times, concern about E-Cat stability.

      The stories from first customer are reasonable.

      Everything I keep hearing from Rossi and others the way this is unfolding overall are logical from numerous past experiences…not indicative of a scam. Having seen anomalous energy from “in situ” measurements in early 1990’s w/ US military and validated, its not a paradigm event for me to see LENR arrive (just when).

      What I tend to think is a bigger risk is the stability issue, I wouldn’t be surprised if this is a harder nut to crack for a fully reliable and operational system.

      Testing of the E-Cat must be done to the highest suite of environmental standards. This will be necessary and critical, I don’t hear enough discussed about this besides instabilities. I can envision issues the way I see this unfolding…impacting performance and reliability…leave it at that. Crude example: Think in terms like interference.

      What I will say is he made a comment supporting this risk may be very real!

      Again, Aussie Guy, consider restating your excellent points with your dialog yesterday at VORTEX -l. Also, please be vigilant on demanding the highest testing standards if you pursue an industrial E-Cat as I understand you are.

      Bill Nichols

  2. Jacob Jensen

    January 15, 2012 at 9:53 am

    So im no expert on this, but i did some math.

    From a random website i found, the average person uses around 2000KWH / Year.
    If the 10KWH ecat was to fill that need it would have to run for 200 hours right?
    the ecat will need refueling after working for 180*24 = 4320 hours.
    So if you only need to run it in theory, 200 hours a year, you would only need to refuel it every 21 years O.o for 10$.
    Correct me if i missed something

    • Sebastian

      January 15, 2012 at 11:34 am

      I remember Rossi saying that the E-Cat will be always on, not just on demand as startup times are relatively long.

      • Jacob Jensen

        January 15, 2012 at 12:59 pm

        Yeah that would be optimal, as it uses 2.7 to 2.9KWH on startup which takes 1 hour. You would probably just end up sending electricity back into the grid and get payed for it. But in theory

    • praos

      January 15, 2012 at 3:40 pm

      You are tallking about 2000 kWh of electricity, while eCat produces heat. Space heating uses about 50-100 W/m2, so a 10 kW unit could heat about 100-200 m2 of space. One is enough for a flat or a small home. As for electricity, you’ll have to wait 1-2 years.

    • TPBurnett

      January 17, 2012 at 8:55 pm

      The average home uses 2000 Watts/hour (or 2 KW per hour). That works out to be 17520 KWH / year. The 10 KW eCat producing heat should easily be able to co-generate 2 KW of electricity from that heat.
      At any rate, I would guess that you would be looking at Rossi’s suggested price for 180 days as what you would be paying. Of course that would depend on how much heat you need and how efficiently you convert to electricity.

  3. Bruno CAUDANA

    January 15, 2012 at 9:58 am

    The use of lead is a minor drawback. We used lead in our plumbing until very few years ago. The lead here is confined.

    • AB

      January 15, 2012 at 10:11 am

      Lead was also added to petrol until a few decades ago. That doesn’t mean it was okay. It led to intellectual deficits in children. Presumably the lead plumbing also does.

      While the lead in the e-cat is confined, it should still be considered negligence to use it when alternatives exist. I’m looking at the bigger picture here of the consequences of every household having one or more e-cats with lead content.

      • Loonyman

        January 15, 2012 at 12:54 pm

        the lead in petrol was emitted along with the exhaust fumes, and breathed in, unless you plan on eating an ecat, the lead content is the least of your worries…..

        Now about that bet, Anders, if you read this, lets swap contact details and make this bet a formality… 1000SEK of mine vs 10000SEK of yours, to a charity of the winners choosing, I say no LENR products proved to work/in the shops any time in 2012, you say there will be…

      • praos

        January 15, 2012 at 4:37 pm

        Stop making problems when there is none! Anything could stop radiation, lead is only slightly more efficient (as well as more dense and pliable), so it’s used for compact sources. In industry the source is generally screened by earth, iron and concrete, lead being too expensive. For eCat a piece of heavy plate would perfectly do. Substitution of lead by iron should be justified by the costs considerations alone.

        • Quax

          January 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm

          They want to make it compact enough to fit into existing heating systems.

          This is probably why they go with lead.

        • Billkt4ye

          January 16, 2012 at 4:20 pm

          Defkalian is proposing a non-lead shield. See their detailed description.

  4. admin

    January 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Post updated….


  5. daniel maris

    January 15, 2012 at 1:07 pm

    Any indications of when we can expect electricity production from either the domestic or commercial units?

  6. Mahron

    January 15, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    Maybe its an antimatter reactor. That would be the ultimate energy tech.

  7. James Pelsor

    January 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    Heating oil is currently $3.50/gal and more. The average Maine home owner is being beggared by oil prices.
    To my knowledge kids eating lead based paint was the biggest health issue. Plumbers using lead and oakum with any sense of self survival worked with it directly for years. Heck they still show tv spots of kids soldiers being made with lead and then painted.
    There will be environmental issues with any product – cars kill people for goodness sake.
    Lets get our priorities straight and get this product out on the market before every dollar in the world is in the hands of a dozen oil companies and the politicians who protect them.

    • spacegoat

      January 15, 2012 at 2:12 pm

      And the best way to get this product out would have been for Rossi to release his findings. He would still be ahead of the pack and make his mountain of money.

      It is vain to believe as he does that he has the perfect system at the lowest cost. China has robots too.

      Rossi stands on the shouldesr of Celani, Focardi, Fleishman, Pons and all other creative scientists who have brought science forward.

      Instead of being hailed as the greatest man who ever lived, having solved the worlds energy crisis and several other crises permanently, AR will go down in history as a money grubber.

      All sorts of applications and problem solving is being delayed because AR is acting like Scrooge. Only 1 team is working on this instead of the whole world.


      • Pekka Janhunen

        January 15, 2012 at 2:38 pm

        “Only 1 team is working on this instead of the whole world. Sad.”

        I think that the fastest way to accomplish a given technical task is that one team does it whose size is optimal with respect to the complexity of the task. Furthermore often the optimal size is surprisingly small. I believe that Rossi’s chosen strategy is indeed the fastest way of getting his catgets into service.

      • Lu

        January 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm


        I generally agree with all your points except how AR will go down in history (which is sill being written and is not important right now).

        I was shocked to hear in the interview that Rossi is using Microsoft as his model. Microsoft has innovated very little, copying others, usually poorly, and has gotten market dominance through quasi-monopolistic practices and being in the right place at the right time. It appears to me that Rossi is intentionally following this model as well although I need to re-listen to these parts of the broadcast again to better understand his point of view.

        A better approach in my view, and one where Rossi can still get rich, is to license the basic technology (reactor core) and let the whole world improve it and apply it to produce systems that actually heat domestic water and not just air, don’t take 1 hour to start and one hour to stop, generate electricity, come in different sizes and performance characteristics, etc. At the same time he can develop his own systems if he is concerned about the technology being suppressed or abused. It will happen anyway, as Defkalion may have already done so.

        By all of this I don’t mean to diminish Rossi’s accomplishments–it still looks to me like a revolution in energy and it has arrived just in the nick of time.

      • Pipmon

        January 15, 2012 at 9:39 pm

        While it’s of course true that Fleischmann, Pons, Miles, Arata, Piantelli etc..etc..predated Rossi, it seems clear that he has made a significant contribution. He has on various occasions mentioned that he made a sort of serendipitous discovery concerning LENR while working on a completely unrelated technology! The outcome (asking Focardi for a reality check, and all the rest) seems to have been that his method greatly improved the energy yield.
        Maybe we should sleuth his previous work a bit to see if there are any clues as to what this was!

        • spacegoat

          January 15, 2012 at 10:21 pm

          No one denies AR has made a significant contribution.
          Very interesting point. AR is fascinated with Bill Gates monopoly. How sad. He will be characterized as Scrooge not Ghandi.

          • GreenWin

            January 15, 2012 at 11:05 pm

            Pshaaaw. Rossi likes the idea of a huge industry financing a huge charitable foundation – which is where Gates’ and Buffet’s fortunes are at work.

            Mr. Gates might be impressed by a man who may save more human lives than the entire disease eradication project. There is a bit of Ghandi in us all – should we look for it.

      • Rockyspoon

        January 17, 2012 at 5:13 pm

        So you figure every home owner is going to take the time to build a $500 unit with, say 500 hours of work and $5,000 of tools, controlled environmental workspace, workshop, compliance with regs…

        Should I continue, or do you want to think about what you’ve stated and withdraw your silly comment?

        Look, I don’t want to have to build my own ecat any more than I want to have to build my own computer, or automobile, or rifle. I’ll buy one of each and leverage what it can do for me and concentrate on what I’m good at, which is NOT making an ecat, computer, automobile, or rifle. (Or do you want to run your home-built ecat WITHOUT UL approval? What if your local officials or the EPA eventually ban them for failure to meet strict environmental guidelines on powdered nickel contamination, or gamma ray emissions?)

        But if you REALLY want to get ticked at somebody regarding cold fusion, direct your ire toward MIT, who was the biggest player in delaying CF for, oh, 20+ years:

    • Quax

      January 15, 2012 at 6:19 pm

      Until very recently all you electronics were soldered with leaded solder.

      A EU directive ended that practice a couple of years ago – at this point everybody still has plenty of lead in their house.

      The EU directive BTW was not for immediate health but environmental concerns.

  8. Iggy Dalrymple

    January 15, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    The ‘Greatest Generation’ that won WW2 and the generation that took us to the moon were both raised on lead paint and gasoline.

    What’s the E-Cat’s problem with hot bath water? Is he saying the water will be too hot or too cool?

    • daniel maris

      January 15, 2012 at 5:01 pm

      There was a debate on another site about this. I think there may have been some misunderstanding. He might have been saying that the system could not produce instantaneous heat from a standing start. However, as many on that other site have pointed, you can store hot water for a long time. It seems unlikely this would be a real problem.

      • Quax

        January 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm

        Yep, that’s the way I understood this. No wall mounted instant-on ecat water heater.

  9. spacegoat

    January 15, 2012 at 2:23 pm

    Further he is not licensing to the Third World where Intell. Property laws are weak. So the people who need energy most come last.


    • HanzJager

      January 15, 2012 at 2:40 pm

      Complaining because he isn’t doing it your way.

    • Dionysius John

      January 15, 2012 at 6:18 pm

      One cannot launch a product with the power generated by the needs of the third world… it requires capitol. While needy third worlders generate sympathy, they do not generate anything else; they must, perforce, wait until those who do, produce something for them.. and that isn’t sad, it’s just the way it is…
      Your anti Rossi bias sticks out, your logic is flawed… THAT is sad…

      • spacegoat

        January 15, 2012 at 10:30 pm

        China will reproduce it at a low cost to the whole world.

        I criticize AR’s monopolistic and damaging business model. I admire than man himself. Don’t be so presumptuous.

        “Third Worlders do not generate anything”. Well we certainly do not generate nuclear holocausts, one of which is about to go off very soon in your hemisphere not ours.

        Rossi in his demo’s was working with a bit of steam piping and small container. Publish his findings and we will take it from their thank you. Read the comments of Lu above.

    • Rockyspoon

      January 17, 2012 at 5:16 pm

      Rather than complain about it, why don’t you put several $billion of your money into the project, pick the bottom 5 countries that need it, volunteer to train everybody there (including their governments that will likely fight you every step of the way) and force the people to use an ecat to cook their food instead of charcoal or wood gathered from surrounding forests.

      But backing up a bit, have you EVER been to the most primitive 3rd-world countries? That would be a start–it would give you a completely different perspective.

  10. JNewman

    January 15, 2012 at 2:25 pm

    For an hour and a half, Andrea Rossi provided still more unsubstantiated claims about his e-cat technology. There is no point in arguing about them one way or another. It’s just his word to go on and clearly that’s good enough for most people here.

    Nevertheless, there are questions that arise that you would think could be answered by resourceful investigators if people actually wanted to learn the truth rather than just blindly accept what they are told.

    1) Bringing any industrial product to market is a massive undertaking. It takes a good-sized team of people with many disparate skills to do it. No one person is capable of doing it himself or herself or even really managing it. Where is this team? They can’t be totally invisible. This isn’t a CIA operation; this is a bunch of Italian and/or American engineers. Surely they can be found if they exist.

    2) On the same subject: Rossi is always talking about his 16-hour days, toiling away to reshape the world. Where is he doing this work? During the interview, he said he was in Rome. Is his operation there? If not, what work was he doing for 16 hours in Rome? He claims that all the work is on getting the factory ready. But the factory will be in Florida. Who is in Florida getting the factory ready if not Rossi et al?

    3) On that subject: if a factory is being set up in Florida to mass produce e-cats, that is also not a CIA operation. Where is it? Somebody should be able to find it if by no other way than through business licenses, health and safety certifications, operating permits, and so forth. You can’t run a factory in the United States in secret. You can’t build and operate a factory without employees. Where are they coming from? Who is recruiting them? Is this a secret operation too?

    4) Rossi says his device is undergoing UL certification. That’s not a CIA operation either. Who has the e-cat for testing? He spoke of “working with somebody at UL”. That’s not how it goes. Whether you are Joe Blow or Apple Inc., there is a process for UL certification and it isn’t done in the dark.

    It is unfortunate that the legitimate media have not gotten involved in this story. Before people jump on that, one guy blogging at Forbes does not fit the bill. Any journalists worth their salt would be digging into the answers to questions like those above. The dedicated e-cat news sites seem to believe that the development of the e-cat into a mass-produced, world-changing product is simply going to happen behind closed doors and magically e-cats will appear for sale at Home Depot in a year without any evidence of their origins visible anywhere other than as described in the flow of words from Andrea Rossi.

    In the spirit of optimism, that seems to be what we are supposed to believe. Sorry, but at least some of us need more.

    • Johan Börjesson

      January 15, 2012 at 11:08 pm

      Good points. It is points like these that still keeps the sceptic in me alive.

      If there is a big partner to Rossi, I think this partner now actually “runs the show” and is in charge of the development. Big companies that “goes to bed” with an inventor like Rossi often wants full control to make sure the inventor does not cause any problems.
      That might explain why Rossi have time to answer a lot of mails and doing interviews. He is not involved in the actual work. Maybe he had to agree to this to get the deal with his partner.
      Just an idea…

    • GreenWin

      January 15, 2012 at 11:17 pm

      Mr. Newman makes very good points. Where IS everybody? If this isn’t a CIA operation. Hmmm.

      NOTE: there is zero publicity on the NASA video confirmation of LENR. Hmmm. Spooky?

    • Tony

      January 15, 2012 at 11:23 pm

      Thank you, JN! All important, legitimate, easily verifiable paths that that no one can find. Ergo, there is no path. No path means no e-cat.


    • Dale G. Basgall

      January 16, 2012 at 3:48 am

      JNewman; that is a very clear post and very well written, I felt a little tension going into that one. I have experienced the UL and CSA certifications and there is no pregudice to who you are and they have to have the product or schedule their mobile lab to come visit your factory and it costs a few thousand bucks.

      The only thing I could add to this post are some manufacturing “rules of thumb” which I am sure quite a few readers of this site know.

      When you have $50 consumeable costs and 1-hour factory labor (old prices) = 50+70=$120 actual costs and this includes shipping out the door and packaging. So rule of thumb = 120×3=$360 wholesale. Marketing and distributor set up price to distributor = $360×2=$720.

      The distributor sets up a set up and service crew for the product and gets the manufacturer to sell the product to them for $720 each plus the swinging deal for $620 if you buy alot of them.

      Now the distributor wants to make at least what he paid plus equal back in markup. The customer could potentially get the product delivered and set up for $1,399.00. This is only close based on past experience from manufacturing, and you have to keep the factory going and repair crews maintaining and calabrating the machinery on a daily basis.

      So if Rossi is intending to sell the e-kittens for $500.00 to the consumer, that means general by rule of thumb the original parts cost and factory labor should not exceed approximately $60.00 each at the manufacturing level. That sounds pretty light weight for the energy claimed.

      • Rockyspoon

        January 17, 2012 at 5:19 pm

        You should use a factor of 2, not 3. That’s been my experience on a number of items starting with raw materials, manufacturing, wholesaling, retail distribution.

  11. Dale G. Basgall

    January 15, 2012 at 2:26 pm

    Now there is a believable post, AR is finally telling a somewhat clear story of facts. Those that have also been working on LENR in the U.S. have already realised this process.

    If you look at the posts back, we knew this six months ago however I don’t believe his company will dominate the U.S. markets.

    However this comes down in the patents or final products regarding price, size and claims and will definitely show to be either false, close, or right on the mark. Any three ways will not prevent competition in business which is all good for the consumers.

  12. Harry Perini

    January 15, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    Do I understand this correctly?

    Single reactor is the size of a packet of cigarettes.

    It will cost about $500.
    It will be a stand alone unit not requiring connection to a water supply?
    It may require connection to electrical supply to power a fan to blow air over fins surrounding the reactor?

    It will be similar to the electric space heaters we see advertised on TV such as the Edenpure or the Amish heater but more powerful. The plug in electric space heaters are limited to 1500 watts because that is all typical house wiring can deliver. The portable Ecat will be maybe 5kw?

    At $500 each I can afford to buy several and place them all over my house and in the basement.

    Thank you Andrea Rossi.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 15, 2012 at 3:22 pm

      some corrections: Reactor core cigarette pack size, whole unit laptop size, water connection needed, nominal power 10 kW.

      With air cooling alone, a laptop sized 10 kW unit would overheat I think. Or at least the fan would be noisy.

    • psi

      January 15, 2012 at 4:29 pm

      No, you don’t understand it correctly.

  13. nartau

    January 15, 2012 at 3:20 pm

    the reactor inside the e-cat is about the size of a packet of cigarettes. The e-cat its self is said to be the size of portable computer. I don’t know if he means notebook with that.

  14. Alberto Medici

    January 15, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    Never been so, but lately I’m so proud to be italian….

    • admin

      January 15, 2012 at 4:16 pm

      Alberto. Good to hear you are proud and rightly so. I am sure it was just a slip and not deliberate but copying my summary (which took two hours to do) without attribution is rude. Sharing is fine and you are most welcome.


  15. arian

    January 15, 2012 at 3:38 pm

    Report on Cold Fusion at WSEC2012 from Haiko Lietz

    Report from the World Sustainable Energy Conference 2012 in Geneva, 10-12 Jan 2012

    Thanks to the invitation of conference chairman Gustav Grob, Francesco Celani and I, representing the International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, had the opportunity to introduce the state of research in the field, recent developments regarding Rossi/Defkalion, and offer a glimpse into a possible future where energy is provided by Cold Fusion.

    Francesco told how he and his group tried to disprove CF in 1989, found neutrons, decided to spend some time to see what is happening, and over time became convinced that it’s neither fraud nor error, instead something difficult but quite solid. After a very turbulent beginning with poor reproducibility of experiments, the field had by now improved the quality and reproducibility of the results obtained and the most innovative experiments were cross-checked by other groups. He criticized that a confirmation of energy production by NASA in 1989 was not immediately made public, because publication could have helped the feld gain support and funding.

    The occurence of transmutations was reported and work by Iwamura’s group at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which has developed a method for the controlled transmutation of elements, was stressed. But the presentation was focussed on energy production.

    A history of excess heat production and breakthroughs was given. Two different systems have been studied extensively: the Palladium/Deuterium system, pioneered by Fleischmann/Pons, and the Nickel/Hydrogen system, pioneered by Francesco Piantelli. Both systems have been shown to have potentially large power densities. In designing a working reactor, the materials issue is central. The biggest breakthroughs, according to Francesco, were the use of nano-particles and alloys, both pioneered by Yoshiaki Arata. Excess heat production using a ZrO2-Pd alloy (Arata) was independently reproduced by Akito Takahashi/Akira Kitamura, even though the latter used material from a different, industrial provider. This is remarkable because in CF not all materials behave similarly, not even from the same producer.

    Recent important results include the finding by NASA that heat was produced not just when Deuterium was loaded into Palladium, which is expected, but also when it was unloaded. Takahashi/Kitamura found a temperature dependency of excess heat prouction using Cu-Ni-Zr alloy. Francesco reported own work in progress that excess heat production in a thin, micro-nano coated Cu-Ni wire was positively correlated with a slight decrease in electrical resistance at room temperature but with a strong decrease at higher temperatures (300-500°C). All in all, experiments using nano-sized materials are highly reproducible. Operation in the gas phase enables higher temperatures which further improves reproducibility.

    The facts that no greenhouse gases are produced, dangerous radiation or residual radioativity can very likely be completely eliminated, and energy sources are small, are good preconditions for commercial products. Recent, extraordinary claims by Andrea Rossi and Defkalion Green Technologies, who claim to produce energy in the kW-MW range, had to be regarded with both attention and caution. The field was not considering the Rossi/Defkalion claims to be impossible in principle, but they should be verified independently as soon as possible.

    Apart from the Rossi/Defkalion claims, the quality of experiments worldwide was so high and the results obtained so widespread, that an international program, well funded and based on a multidisciplinary approach, had the possibility to build a device producing even electricity with very low, overall, emissions.

    I gave an overview of claims by Rossi/Defkalion. Rossi has publically demonstrated a plant generating 1MW heat power and claims to have already sold 14 devices to a military customer and another one to a non-military customer. Within 2012 or 2013 he wants to put one million 10-20kW devices on the market to be able to push the price below 1ct/kWh. As a matter of fact, National Instruments, a company also providing control systems to tokamak Hot Fusion systems, is cooperating with Rossi’s US company. The Greek company Defkalion wants to put reactors producing 5-45kW thermal power on the market, starting with the Greek market probably in 2012. Rossi/Defkalion claim to receive safety certificates within 2012. No party has an international patent, Rossi has protection in Italy.

    According to a trusted source of Jed Rothwell, Defkalion’s science, engineering, and equipment are first rate and the upcoming products revolutionary. I concluded that, even though there was no indication of fraud, neither Rossi nor Defkalion had lent their devices for independent testing and that there was no certainty that their devices work as claimed, including long term reliability.

    If Cold Fusion devices can be turned on and off with the push of a button and work reliably over a long term, they would quickly replace existing heat and electricity sources. Relying on prospects by Rothwell and Arthur C. Clarke, I said that oil and gas used for heating and cooling would be quickly replaced by CF. Much of the energy currently consumed as electricity in water heaters, clothes washer and dryers, and dishwasher, would be supplied directly as heat from CF. A 10kW Cold Fusion heat generator should be sufficient, even for a large house. CF would be an ideal energy source for facility management. A new era of steam engines may be looming on the horizons, with obvious applications like locomotives. Even if CF turned out to be „only“ 10% of the world’s energy supply, it would be important.

    Desalination, the removal of salt from sea water to be used in e.g. agriculture, was an obvious application that could be realized early on. Since it has been shown by Iwamura and others that radioactive elements can be transmuted into stable elements, remediation of nuclear waste is another potential application in the also not too distant future. Because of this potential, some people in the field believe that CF will cause the return of fission power plants. But others, like Rothwell, argue that centralized power production will not be able to compete with home devices on the market.

    Because of demands for plastics the oil industry would probably have a future until industry is completely turned upside down by the controlled synthesis of desired elements, which Clarke envisions for 2040. Finally, NASA sees CF applications in space travel and for the military.

    To see if these prospects are realistic, a coherent explanation of the nuclear process was required for mainstream science to take notice. Science policy should be informed about the state of research and fund this kind of research to speed up research and development.

    Other presentations on the conference dealt with the state of research on other energy sources, the work of NGOs, or the energy strategies of governments. Within the next days recommendations will be worked out to be submitted to the UN’s Rio+20 conference held in June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro.

    Haiko Lietz, 15 Jan 2012

    • daniel maris

      January 15, 2012 at 5:09 pm

      I do wonder about the future of oil in the plastics industry…If you have enough cheap energy available how cheaply could you manufacture plastics from hydrogen (from water) and carbon (from CO2 in the atmosphere) – with a few bought in additives? The economics might change completely, when you consider that you avoid transportation, refining and oil/import duty costs.

      Personally I think if electricity is being produced at, say, a 50th of the cost of electricity today then all bets are off. You might be able to throw a lot of energy at the problem of polymer production.

      • Quax

        January 15, 2012 at 6:54 pm

        As long as you have existing pipeline infrastructure transporting oil and gas is not that expansive.

        Keep in mind the profits of the oil industry are so ridiculously high because demand dictates the price – the current demand is very inflexible. Production cost on the other hand is low (unless you have to boil the oil out of tar sands like in Alberta).

        Existing oil fields – especially the ones producing sweet crude – will still be cost efficient even if only supplying input for the chemical industry.

        Switching to energy extensive CO2 harvesting will only become a factor once the dirt cheap oil runs out. The prohibiting factor in this regard will not be the cost of energy but the required sizable investment in new CO2 processing infrastructure.

        • daniel maris

          January 16, 2012 at 3:38 am

          I don’t accept much if anything of that.

          Oil is not dirt cheap. But water (if by the sea say) and air are.

          The issue then is how expensive is it to manipulate carbon and hydrogen.

          All that matters is the cost comparison:

          Would an E cat be capable of producing plastic more cheaply than via the traditional methods of shipping oil thousands of miles, breaking it down and then building it up again (not exactly energy free processes).

          • Quax

            January 16, 2012 at 4:13 am

            The assumption here was that the ecat becomes a reality and energy very cheap. At this point only sweet crude that can be delivered at very low cost remains competitive.

            In an ecat world oil will become very cheap. Cheap enough for the chemical industry not having to look for an alternative carbon source for a very long time.

            Does this spell out the logic a bit more clearly?

        • Peter Roe

          January 16, 2012 at 9:41 am

          CO2 harvesting needn’t be energy intensive – plants do it all the time. Genetically modified algae that produce diesel from sewage are already being developed, and the diesel (or some similar molecule) could be used to manufacture plastics and many other organics.

          The ecat would make growing algae for this purpose in large tanks economically feasible by providing very cheap heat and light. The side benefit of sewage processing that pays for itself would also be worth having.

          Other plant-based and fermentation (fungal or bacterial) products might be developed to replace oil feedstocks as well.

  16. Mahron

    January 15, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    Colfusion is dead, get over it. Its antimatter now.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 15, 2012 at 5:21 pm

      Indeed, Rossi says in the interview that copper production is a “side effect”. If one would take that sentence literally, then the main reaction should be something else. How about p+Li7->He4+He4+17.3 MeV? Lithium would be the “secret catalyst”, although actually not catalyst but fuel. The Coulomb barrier of lithium is a lot less than nickel and the process would be more reminiscent of F&P Pd-D, although simpler in the sense that two input nucleons are enough since there are two output alphas to balance energy and momentum. Besides, many electrolysis F&P experiments contained lithium salts in the electrolyte.

      I don’t actually find this suggestion very likely, but for as long as we don’t know which isotopes turn to which, there is room to speculate.

      • Mahron

        January 15, 2012 at 5:34 pm

        It seems he will be giving his theory before launching the product. He seems very confident that his device is very optimized. But I think someone will eventually come up with a way to make that baby spit out some more gammas per nickel hydrogen grams.

    • Rockyspoon

      January 17, 2012 at 5:27 pm

      In general terms, “colfusion” (sic) in this case combines hydrogen and nickel to form copper (and a few other elements, including iron?), which fits the classical, non-specialized definition of fusion. And since it isn’t taking place at the extreme temperature condition inside the sun’s core or in a hydrogen bomb as it detonates, it is considered “cold” by comparison.

      Hence, “cold fusion”.

  17. Tomas Douting

    January 15, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    Those 512 keV [sic] (actually 511 keV) gammas detected from positron (beta+) emission are a small problem. This is the first clearly identified energy noted that isn’t shielded by a “few mm” of lead. WL theory contends that most of the emission is beta- and those are captured in the lattice. In any case, even if not absorbed in the lattice the beta- are stopped effectively (attenuated by many many orders of magnitude) by a few mm of lead.

    The gammas at 511 keV resulting from the positron annihilation are a slightly different matter. Its not a show-stopper at all, and I find it a positive sign of reality at work. With that many LENR interactions it seems reasonable to assume there would be some small fraction of X( ?,beta+) reactions occurring.

    But the 511 keV gammas are a little bit more difficult to attenuate. The linear attenuation coefficient for lead is 1.64/cm which can give a *very* rough calculation of attenuation by factor of 100 by 2 cm and attenuation by 1000 requiring 3 cm of lead. The calculation does NOT include buildup which would increase the flux at the surface. This amount is not at all unreasonable, but it does make the system seem like it must be no smaller than the cigar box size mentioned by AR.

    Many things in our natural environment are radioactive of course, the additional dose that one receives simply from sleeping next to one’s spouse is easily measurable over a lifetime, but the current best practice is to maintain dose as low as reasonably achievable. The flux and thus the dose is of course dependent on the production rate of those positrons and so the overall magnitude of this minor issue awaits quantitative measurements. There is always a tradeoff of risk versus benefit to consider.

    • Peter Roe

      January 15, 2012 at 9:25 pm

      I’m a bit confused by the suggestion that positron-electron annihilation is taking place in the Ni-H reactor and causing a 511 keV signature. Wouldn’t this be a secondary process following from collision of a high energy photon with a nucleus? If so, where is the high energy photon coming from? Or is Hawking radiation being suggested as the source of the particle pairs? I lost track of suggested mechanisms for LENR a while back. Any help appreciated!

  18. Scotty15

    January 15, 2012 at 5:27 pm

    2.9 kW for an hour to start it up? If you pump that much heat into a cube of any material that’s about 1 cu ft, wouldn’t the whole cube be glowing red hot? This seems excessive to me. Something doesn’t add up. If you pump that much heat into a cigarette box sized reactor in the middle, it will FOR SURE melt down.

    • Mahron

      January 15, 2012 at 5:43 pm

      Thats whats killing the cop then. I hope that can be brought down to something more reasonable. Otherwise a generator is needed to start it up in remote places. Or a vehicle.

    • Tomas Douting

      January 15, 2012 at 6:20 pm

      You’re right – this doesn’t add up calometrically. Off by a factor of an order of magnitude too high. It would involve a very high forced air cooling system – or likely water cooling, but still, I think a decimal point has moved.

      • Nicholas Payne

        January 15, 2012 at 6:33 pm

        You need to assume that water is flowing through it. I mean the object of it is to heat water

        • Scotty15

          January 15, 2012 at 7:37 pm

          This doesn’t make sense. Why would you initially heat all the water with a resistance heater? The Ecat has a micro controller. The sequence should be start heater > core lights off > start pump. Maybe even ramp up the pump speed. 2.9 kW for an hour is a tremendous amount of heat, just think how much heat a 60W light bulb gives off as waste. This is almost 50 times that, and all concentrated in a very small area.

    • Peter Roe

      January 15, 2012 at 8:38 pm

      @ Scotty 15
      Extremely good point. Actually it’s even worse than you state, as only the ‘energy stick’ would need to be heated, rather than the whole shielded reactor unit. From what Rossi is saying, this is just a metal (stainless steel?) tube containing a few grams of the fuel/hydrogen donor mixture. It would be glowing at red heat in minutes, and the lead shielding would melt shortly after.

      Not only that but how do you fit a 3kW heater element into something the size of a cigar box, and leave room for the ‘energy stick’, RF coil and 2-3 cm of lead shielding? As you say, dumping the excess to the water system doesn’t make sense either.

      Something is definitely amiss here. Another Rossi ‘red herring’?

      • JNewman

        January 15, 2012 at 9:08 pm

        Yes, if anybody who knows even a modicum of thermodynamics does the math, they would immediately see that the description of the home e-cat is utter nonsense. But such skepticism is a no-no. Sorry Daniel Maris wherever you are.

  19. Bob Johnson

    January 15, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    The only real issue is if LENR is a real phenomenon. If it is then the engineering and cost are insignificant variables.

    • spacegoat

      January 16, 2012 at 6:34 am

      Yes, Bob, that is my outlook too. I hope the science committed cooperative scientists attending the World Sustainable Energy Conference 2012 continue there work to bring the science and engineering to the world, for all to benefit.

      The era of money-grubbing is over (money stays), and Rossi is its last blast.

  20. James Rovnak

    January 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm

    Nice article with great comments section.Hopefully will satisfy the Worlds energy needs and outlook for the better sooner rather than later. Search Web for song “I Believe in the E-Cat” Oct 5 by Canadian Talk show host who later interviewed Rossi in Dec 2011. Video shows early development pictures, Nickel to Copper via hydrogen process and prognostications etc for the clean fullfillment of the future energy needs of the World.

  21. AB

    January 15, 2012 at 6:30 pm

    “Hydrogen cannister? Big surprise. Very likely will work without seperate Hydrogen cannister. Resolved problem by putting a substance inside reactor to produce and recycle Hydrogen.”

    What could he be referring to here? A substance to produce and recycle hydrogen?

  22. Nicholas Payne

    January 15, 2012 at 6:31 pm

    This all could in the end be very dangerous, since it appears there is a lot we don’t know about nuclear physics and if it turns out to be possible that someone can make a nuclear device that can demolish an entire city using common materials and common equipment in their kitchen, what do we do then? All I am saying is that we don’t know what we don’t know.

    • GreenWin

      January 15, 2012 at 11:27 pm

      And conversion from horse and buggy to the explosive combustion engine was also fraught with danger.

  23. Quax

    January 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm

    Assuming for a second that this is the most elaborate scam imaginable. If Rossi was truthful about just one thing: That he only accepts money from large corporations and hedge funds then he’d still be a hero 🙂

    • Peter Roe

      January 15, 2012 at 8:55 pm

      AR said only “amounts that are small for them”. Probably just the kind of chump change that could buy Belgium then. Not enough to really hurt – unfortunately.

  24. ostap@

    January 15, 2012 at 6:55 pm

    95% stupid people, 5% thinking people.
    I am among the stupid because I’m following this ecat bs.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 15, 2012 at 7:48 pm

      I think, where are the rest 95%

  25. Pekka Janhunen

    January 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    Rossi quote from the interview “1 gm of matter (Ni or anything) 23,000 MWH of heat energy – if all global energy is eCat, still only 1% world production of Ni”.

    These numbers seem to match for E=m*c^2 annihilation, i.e. if 1 gram of matter is turned to energy one gets 23000 MWh. I calculated earlier (although only approximately since one doesn’t know the details) that all global energy produced by E-cat would need a significant fraction of world nickel production (i.e. it would turn that fraction of produced nickel into some alloy of nickel and copper). If the process is Ni-H fusion, the 1% seems to be an underestimate.

    • georgehants

      January 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm

      Pekka, from your quote,
      “1 gm of matter (Ni or anything) 23,000 MWH of heat energy”

      The operative word could be “anything”, as the Physics of this reaction is unknown it could work with Si, Al or Fe in which case the available Energy is for all intents infinite.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        January 15, 2012 at 7:55 pm

        In principle yes. Anyway it’s pretty large with nickel already, at least if one considers the 200 km iron-nickel asteroid 16 Psyche as a resource.

        • georgehants

          January 15, 2012 at 8:00 pm

          I can see it now a Saturn V with a couple of E-CAT’s tied on the back towing your asteroid back to the moon for processing. Ha

      • Tomas Douting

        January 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm

        I think that if the availability of nickel is limited by the costs of mining and processing then the availability of low cost energy to power the mines and the processing plants would ease that limitation considerably.

        • GreenWin

          January 15, 2012 at 11:33 pm

          Nickel is convenient due to its lattice geometry. Materials with similar geometry can be used or invented if necessary.

        • Rockyspoon

          January 17, 2012 at 5:45 pm

          About 1.5 million metric tons (tonnes) of nickel is mined annually, and it’s currently priced in the $8/lb range. This increases to the low $20/lb range when demand increases, which is typically for use in steel alloys and fluctuates depending on the economy (hence such a low current price).

          There’s enough nickel in identified reserves to last the world a million years, so no need to go mining asteroids or the Moon (not that any deposits have or will ever be found on the moon as the ore-forming processes, generally driven by those involved in plate tectonics, haven’t been extant on the Moon for most of its history).

          And if nickel mining isn’t sufficient, we can always recycle a bunch of existing alloys and regain the nickel we put into them in the first place.

  26. daniel maris

    January 15, 2012 at 7:20 pm

    For any remaining “guerrilla” sceptics left behind after the main army has fled the scene:

    Wouldn’t National Instruments as a reputable company dissociate themselves entirely from Rossi’s public statements if they thought for one minute he was perpetrating a fraud on the public and that they might become legally liable through their association? Let us be clear the working relationship Rossi is describing is a v. close one, not just buying stuff off the shelf.

    • Al Potenza

      January 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm

      “Wouldn’t National Instruments as a reputable company dissociate themselves entirely from Rossi’s public statements if they thought for one minute he was perpetrating a fraud on the public and that they might become legally liable through their association?”

      Yes they would but if they are simply selling equipment to Rossi, even if it’s designed to his specifications, they would not be liable for how Rossi uses it.

      “Let us be clear the working relationship Rossi is describing is a v. close one, not just buying stuff off the shelf.”

      So far, we only know this from Rossi. NI’s statements on and elsewhere have been very carefully worded. They indicate that NI supplies equipment and software to Rossi just as they do to other energy technology researchers and providers. They do not say they are partnered with Rossi in any other way. They said they have not bought anything from Rossi. They never said they had received a sample of or even tested Rossi’s ecat. At least, that’s what I read into their press releases about the matter.

      • daniel maris

        January 16, 2012 at 3:23 am

        Two points:

        1. NI have made it clear they are working with Leonardo Corporation. It is not just an off the shelf relationship.

        2. Rossi has indeed given us this insight into what is goin on – NI are free to contradict this.

        Aren’t you little unsettled by the fact that NASA’s technology seems so close to Rossi’s?

        • Al Potenza

          January 16, 2012 at 7:03 am

          “NI have made it clear they are working with Leonardo Corporation. It is not just an off the shelf relationship.”

          Can you find where NI says that this is a different relationship from all the other thousands of clients that they help find suitable NI products and software for and to whom they teach the best way to use the products?

          “Aren’t you little unsettled by the fact that NASA’s technology seems so close to Rossi’s?”

          Unsettled? Not sure what you mean. Why would it be unsettling?

  27. GreenWin

    January 15, 2012 at 11:37 pm

    Al, you’re back in the shadows trying to make this a fraud any more. Rossi is just setting direction – others are making the wheels spin.

  28. Stringbustr

    January 16, 2012 at 12:04 am

    I hate to put a damper on this, but does anyone really think that the big energy company’s around the world well ever let ECat happen.
    With all their money and power.
    Look what’s happend with other inventors of alternative energy.
    I’m a believer in ECat.
    just very concerned.


    • Rockyspoon

      January 17, 2012 at 5:48 pm

      Too late. I suppose Big Oil could buy up Home Depot, Lowe’s, etc. and prevent them from selling ecats. Or Big Oil could threaten them with no fuel oil or however they heat their buildings. Their response? “Power up the ecats and cut the gas/electricity lines.”

      I’m thinking they’re not going to take Rossi seriously until it’s way too late to do anything about it.

  29. Roger Bird

    January 16, 2012 at 12:21 am

    Rossi has to be just as excited as we are, perhaps 100 times more. So, if he miss speaks now and then, I can understand that.

  30. JNewman

    January 16, 2012 at 1:21 am

    For a clarification of the “NASA position” on LENR, take a look at:

    I suspect his words this time around won’t be quoted so much over here.

    • daniel maris

      January 16, 2012 at 3:44 am

      Well this is the next big story isn’t it!

      Here’s a guy who a few days ago was singing the praises of LENR and who filed a patent for a device, now trying to send out a very different mood music.

      Only an idiot could have read his video as support for Rossi’s device, but he is taking us for idiots.

      This stinks to high heaven. Did you notice all those “mays”. There’s an Executive Order that NASA inventors have to make known their inventions and they “may” do that via a video etc etc.

      May! He DID and you only get to do that if there is a strong impetus to do it within the organisation.

      I think this (together with the closure of the Cold Fusion experiments) is evidence of a desperate struggle over cold fusion/LENR.

      Please note Zawodny does NOT at any point resile from his previous declarations that LENR is a real phenomenon (he could hardly do so, or he would convict himself of lying to the US patent office).

      His sly barbs aimed at Rossi are truly pathetic. No wonder he closed down the comments. That’s great transparency and openness isn’t it?

      The guy’s been leant on.

      • Mahron

        January 16, 2012 at 3:58 am

        May the force be with him.

      • JNewman

        January 16, 2012 at 4:54 am

        A purely hypothetical question Mr. Maris: is there anything that could happen that would shake your confidence in the reality of Rossi’s claims? I’m just curious.

      • Neil Taylor

        January 16, 2012 at 7:19 am

        “The guy’s been leant on.”

        Maybe by some of the same forces that killed P & F.

        “Only an idiot could have read his video as support for Rossi’s device, but he is taking us for idiots.”

        Like you say Daniel I too did not take his little video as endorsing Rossie, but rather supporting LENR research in general and his own patent application of course.

        Hmmm, very strange indeed!

  31. Bernie Koppenhofer

    January 16, 2012 at 5:10 am

    I don’t understand those who characterize Rossi as a scrooge or selfish. The real economic world is one of eat or get eaten. Rossi did not make those rules, he is trying to bring a new technology into existence working within that system.

    One question I would love answered is where he is getting his capital, it is going to take a huge amount of start up capital to do what he has planned. I would like to know the source, for several reasons.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 16, 2012 at 5:57 am

      At least one source of capital for him are his 1 MW customers, 14 reactors $2 M each.

      I agree, Rossi tries to bring new technology into existence working with the existing eat-or-get-eaten system, like Zawodwny is fighting by different rules within his system. Neither has an easy time.

      • Peter Roe

        January 16, 2012 at 10:10 am

        I’m still very confused by the price differential between industrial 1MW units, and the home units.

        If you only need low grade heat (c. 120C) for process heating or space heating, wouldn’t you just wait for a year or so for the ‘new’ (domestic) ecat technology? After all, all you would need to do is connect 100 of the domestic cores in parallel to output 1MW, and this (according to the latest pronouncements) will only cost $50,000 plus pipework etc., rather than £2M (a factor of 40).

        • Al Potenza

          January 16, 2012 at 7:51 pm

          I’ve read an explanation which says that the expensive version works at much higher temperatures, uses liquid metal coolant and thus facilitates the generation of electricity. Thus the industrial ecat is different from the home version in many ways and you can not connect 100 home ecats to get the same megawatt output at the same temperature that you get from the industrial version.

          This is, of course, entirely hearsay, as usual. Sorry but I don’t recall where I saw it.

  32. Loonyman

    January 16, 2012 at 6:38 am

    I did say on the previous page that just because a scientist is investigating something, it is not an endorsement, and if a scientist says something is interesting it doesn’t mean it works. It’s strange, but when I watched the NASA video as a sceptic, I did not see it as any sort of confirmation that ANYTHING was proven to work, only as a slightly excitable scientist postulating a few “could”‘s and “if”‘s
    As such it is no supprise to me that he has issued a clarification to stop the likes of most of the users of this site using his words as “proof” of their own agendas.

    ( Anders, I am still waiting for confirmation of that bet for charity )

    • Johan Börjesson

      January 16, 2012 at 8:58 am

      I agree. The video itself dont say much, not more than that they are performing research in the field. However, it proofs that at least some scientists within NASA truly belives that the LENR phenomena is real and worth investigating. That, for me at least, gives some credit to the field and may influence how the rest of the scientific community looks at the field.

  33. georgehants

    January 16, 2012 at 9:47 am

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 16, 2012 at 2:50 pm

      The journalist has a bit forgotten that the basic function of media is to transmit information, not act as a channel for the journalist’s frustration. I’d read the story as carrying the message “Forbes says nothing useful”.

  34. georgehants

    January 16, 2012 at 9:51 am

  35. Billkt4ye

    January 16, 2012 at 4:32 pm

    I wanted to put my name on the list (as suggested by the interview/transcription) to reserve purchase of some home e-cats.

    But my email to “”, the email suggested in the summary, Bounced.

    A little research shows that “” is a US company making Green power devices from bio-fuels. No apparent relationship to Rossi.

    Does someone have a correct email?

    • Pekka Janhunen

      January 16, 2012 at 6:12 pm

      It’s info at leonardocorp1996 dot com

    • Neil Taylor

      January 16, 2012 at 6:35 pm

      Just go to:

      This is Rossi’s official website, and fill out the form they have there…

  36. Bob

    January 16, 2012 at 5:59 pm

    Some have inquired about does the Florida facility exist? I do not know other than a quick search for Florida business licenses confirm:

    Leonardo Corporation.
    Andrea Rossi PD
    James Travis SD

    1331 Lincoln Rd Apt 505
    Miami Beach, Fl

    Lincense applied for 11/8/2010
    Annual report submitted 4/29/2011

    So at least a business license was granted,
    however the primary location seems to be
    an apartment building.

  37. Paul Stout

    January 16, 2012 at 10:52 pm

    $10 for a recharge equates to less than a quarter (US $.25) for one Megawatt hour of heat. At that price, everybody I know will go out and buy one. I will figure out how to put one in my garage shop to heat it in the winter, another one to heat the house and preheat the water going into the water heater. Maybe even figure out a way to preheat the air going into the clothes dryer. My winter time electric bills would plummet.

    The next step would be to invest in a absorbtion cooler for air conditionging – I understand that Carrier has them on the market.

  38. john29302

    January 17, 2012 at 7:17 am

    Jeez whod a thunk the details down to this resolute small details? he is delusional or really has the holy grail. does anyone really know if brick and mortar in Florida is happening and are they assembling a plant? flux capacitor? lol….if its a delusion or scheme its surreal and never precedented by such a tale. never has a technical device ever been constructed and not have to be real. it has to be real. even tesla obsessed about world energy solutions to the brink of insanity. oh he just invented the radio, the flourescent bulb, poly phase ac and several in use today dynamos….in his head and for real!!!

    • Neil Taylor

      January 18, 2012 at 4:13 am

      He probably would have also gotten around to the “Flux Capacitor” had he been given more time…

  39. Ian Macmillan

    January 17, 2012 at 8:11 am

    The focus is on home heating and hot water storage as needed in colder climates.

    The 2.9kW for 1 hour startup correlates to heating 30 litres of water to 100C.

    A system pressurised to 15 psig would boil at about 120C.

    I do not like the idea of domestic heat generated by the absorbtion of gamma radiation by lead shielding. I am amused by the nanny state reaction to the use of (gasp) lead shielding!!! Gamma? Whats that?

  40. john

    January 17, 2012 at 8:20 pm

    I have heard this same thing over and over. I dont think that there is a single thing to any of it. There is to much intrigue to this whole senerio. Show me the MEAT!!!!!!!

  41. STK

    January 19, 2012 at 3:12 am

    25,000 MWHr is indeed the approximate E=MC^2 conversion for 1 gram of matter. Hence, it does not make sense for mere picograms of H2 to provide even a fraction of the “fuel” for making this work.

    A picogram is 1e-12 grams (-12th power). 25k MWhr (25,000 megawatt hours) is 25e9 kWhr (kilowatt hours – the most common form of measurement). 1e-12 * 25e9 = 25e-3 kWhr or only 25 _watts_! That is how much energy would be released with just a single picogram of H2 converted to pure energy.

    Even if the consumption was measured in nanograms (1000x more) that is not enough (it would be used up within 2 hours tops). Not even close. Hence, the H2 must NOT be the major conversion element if the statement is true that only picograms of H2 are “consumed”.

    There MUST be another reaction taking place, perhaps in the bulk solid and the H2 is itself a kind of catalyst, providing easily freed electrons and protons for interaction.

    That is why the “catalyst” (noted above as possibly lithium) and the presence of a likely RF field makes this so plausible. When you dig into WLT and the idea of nano particles with an enormous amount of “reaction sites” it starts to make sense.

    It also makes sense if the H2 is a small but important player. There is where the metal hydrides come into play. They are an efficient store of the apparently tiny mass of H2 needed and are very controllable via thermal mechanisms. They have been studied for years for the “H2 economy”.

    Rossi is a practical, problem solving engineering type. If he ever caught even a whiff of some anomalous behavior while doing various research he’d be on it immediately if he recognized it. According to other accounts, this is indeed what may have happened. He may have stumbled into this and his sense of attention was already attuned to an oddity.

    Rossi has himself said that when reverse engineered, it will be readily understandable and repeatable. His approach to getting to market is I think exactly right and will provide the greatest benefit to the largest number of parties most quickly. Spacegoat has it exactly wrong but is ideologically unable to see why (and perhaps never will).

    Technology adoption often goes through four stages and Rossi is effectively planning on skipping two of those stages. He’s going straight to mass market, make his pile and simultaneously unleash a revolution that will be even further commoditized until is is modified, adapted and utilized by every sector of every economy, likely down to the lowliest of the low (except for political and cultural limits). Even Spacegoat’s utopian sentiments cannot overcome those kinds of hardships imposed on the poor and marginalized. But I digress…

    Many other’s comments here are very pertinent.

    Where is the mfg. plant? Excellent question. We should have some idea in a few months and if nothing pops up, well it was a nice thought.

    The startup energy input numbers don’t seem right – it’s too much in too small a space unless there is a much larger heat sink being prepared for stable operation. That is a possibility but the math doesn’t work for a solid object, say made of copper.

    If the reactor core was the size of a carton of 100mm cigarettes it would be about 10cm X 28cm X 4.6cm or about 1290 cm^3. Solid copper weighs about 9gm/cm^3 so a solid block would weigh about 9*1290 = 11.6 kg or about 25 US lbs. (That has the right density feel to those who handle semi-large chunks of various metals – heavy but not impossible to lift. Gold would be another matter…)

    Approx 3 kWh (kilowatt hours) of energy is about 10,800 kj (kilo joules).

    The sensible heat of copper is only 0.39 kj/kg per degree C so 11.6 kg * 0.39 kj/kg = 4.5 kj needed to heat the solid copper block by 1C. We’ve got 10,800 kj so the thing would rise in temp by 10,800 / 4.5 or over 2,400C or over 4,000F! Yep, it would melt for sure and be yellow to white-hot.

    The point is that it’s another possible inconsistency unless there is another explanation. If I had to heat an entire _system_ to a startup point so that I had a circulating fluid that wouldn’t be cold somewhere in the loop I’d have to heat the whole thing.

    If I used a heat exchange oil like Exceltherm CA it has a specific heat of about 3kj/kg at 100C (close enough). To raise this stuff (per kg) by about 100C (20C cold basement to 120C working temp) requires 300kj/kg. If it was the only thing I was heating those 10,800 kj would heat about 36 kg of oil (about 80 lbs worth) and it would be over 11 gallons of the stuff!

    Yes, that is possible and it almost makes sense in a closed loop heat exchange system where in some jurisdictions you will allow 120C water vapor systems (about 14-15 lbs gauge pressure steam). Anything higher than that is a highly regulated industrial heating application. You use a transfer fluid to drive a larger boiler – the 120C point is really the limit if you transfer to water.

    (Someone run over the math and please correct if off significantly. I’ve done enough quick conversions to have missed something.)

  42. RedRyder

    January 19, 2012 at 3:56 am

    Yes I agree show me the MEAT! and I hope it is tenderloin!
    I have been aware and watching since Feb 2009
    this subject. It is now 14 below zero outside my office and 62 degrees inside. Propane is $2.85 a gallon. All of us in the northwoods do hope this does come to the marketplace. I do have troubles talking about this subject at present to my customers. I have tested the subject on a few, they all are very much in the dark about the subject.

    I do feel if I were to try and get the subject out to the public at large in my area, they just may think I had lost my mind and had fell off the boat hit my head. Hard!!!

    I have done much research on this subject and maybe too much. I have seen the progression of the subjects advance from:

    This is happening YA RIGHT!!! when PIGS can FLY!

    To: The Great postings I am reading today on this site.

    I would like to thank everyone from all over the Web for enlightening my Brain on such an interesting subject and most of all, all of you on this site, I have been reading your conversations for a long time. I do think many more should take a long look at this so they may not be so lost “if” this product hits the marketplace.
    thank you for the many teachings.

  43. RedRyder

    January 19, 2012 at 4:18 am

    I keep coming back to one thing some might be missing. I think there may be photons being created when the barrier has been weakened to account for some of the transformations.

    In the hydrogen pressure reactor these photons just might be in excess to the point they are making the reaction unstable.

    May I suggest you need to bleed off these excess photons to in a way have a throttle control for the reaction. or have I missed something?

    Like an adjustable window in the reaction chamber maybe to expell the excess photons as needed

  44. Buffalo

    January 19, 2012 at 11:45 am

    Guys guys.there is minuscule evidence that the Ni-H2 reaction is of nuclear origin.i am a scientist,i should know.there is plenty evidence of excess heat yes but radiation? Non-contaminant isotopes? We are talking bowt traces here.why does rossi say in one of his patents that copper powder can b used instead of nickel powder when the nickel powder is supposed to transmute to copper end-product??? confusing

  45. Gaute Norway

    January 22, 2012 at 12:14 am

    This unit will end up with that people have to buy big isolated water tank, let say 500 liters or so, then they just have to turn the E cat on, probably 2 times a month or so. Or here in Norway once a week.

    But this will of course reduce the need of electricity very, very much.
    Remember we are at the very beginning og this technology. There might be other materials also that could be used that generate even more enery and enough too produce electricity.
    YES , this is the technology that will bring us out of global warming.. Thanks a lot Andrea Rossi, you will be in the history books 🙂

    • Alain

      January 22, 2012 at 1:12 pm

      Once a month, 500l…
      hum your numbers are strange for me.
      in france with low cost of night electricity, we use water storage boiler that warm 50-150l of water at night, and use it in the day.

      since e-cat can run many times a day, one can use a smaller storage, or simply call the cat when watter is cool, without waiting for night prices.