10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[ladajo]

Mats Heijkenskjold
April 17th, 2012 at 4:08 AM
Dear Mr Rossi

I have may be a stupid question:
What will happen with the lead shield when the reactor overheats by accident?
If there are no cooling water flowing and no control system working. The reaction will stop because the temperature goes high and the nickel starts to change composition. There have been mentioned temperatures up to 1500 degC.
The lead melting temperature is about 330 degC.
Is the lead shield existing during the above described conditions? Are there any danger for the gamma rays?

Please could you explain?

God luck with your further work!

Mats Heijkenskjold

Andrea Rossi
April 17th, 2012 at 2:03 PM
Dear Mats Heijkenskjold:
Good question.
The lead will not be affected, because it is not put in the area where we have 1500 Celsius and in the area where it is put the temperature remains below 200 Celsius, also if the nickel goes up to its melting point. Remember that whern the nickel melts, the reactor immediately stops its operastion, because it works onlyu with nickel powder. This fact makes the E-Cat intrinsecally safe.
Thank you for your useful question,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

All this in a device a couple of centimeters across (external measure).
I wonder how he decouples 1500C to 200C in less than 2 centimeters, and where (according to his patent drawings and verbal descriptions) the fluid flows around the outside at pathetically slow rates (from his demo videos)?

That is quite the Delta-T.

I am a 1000C hot piece of metal. I have a stable amount of water flowing over me, say, 5cc/sec, assuming perfect transfer, how hot would the water get, if its initial temperature was 25C? Now, how hot would the water get if the flow was 1cc/sec? 10cc/sec? Assume my temperature does not change, and atmospheric pressure as the water is pulled from an open reservior, heated, and deposited to an open reservior.

Bonus Questions:
Where was that thin layer of lead again? And why did we need the lead?

And 10CFR31/32 is applied how?

[ladajo]

G Singh
April 18th, 2012 at 12:19 AM
Dear Mr Rossi,

I have another stupid idea. If I understand the mechanism correctly. At some point heat is not transfered quickly enough from the lead to the water. At that point the reactor becomes unstable.

Conservation of energy would suggest that the lead will not be able to absorbed more gamma rays until it has transfered it’s energy to the water. This might create a sort of gamma ray saturation where whatever mechanism in the nickel/hydrogen molecule that creates gamma rays is not capable of functioning and the non release of energy in that molecule destabilizes the reaction.

If you could double the surface area of lead/gamma ray contact area you might significantly increase absorption. If you could double the surface area of the lead/water contact area you might also significantly increase heat transference to the water.

Don’t know if this is useful. If not please accept my hope for your success.

G Singh

Andrea Rossi
April 18th, 2012 at 5:03 AM
Dear G Singh:
The situation is more complicated: we have very good stability below 200 Celsius, then we get problems, indipendently from the mass of lead. Thank you anyway for your attention and your attempt to help. Anyway, we are close to the solution, I hope.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Apparently the lead has independant criticality issues

[303]

rossi e-cat cant even cook a jacket potato without a diesel generator

[D Tibbets]

G Singh
April 18th, 2012 at 12:19 AM
Dear Mr Rossi,

I have another stupid idea. If I understand the mechanism correctly. At some point heat is not transfered quickly enough from the lead to the water. At that point the reactor becomes unstable.

Conservation of energy would suggest that the lead will not be able to absorbed more gamma rays until it has transfered it’s energy to the water. This might create a sort of gamma ray saturation where whatever mechanism in the nickel/hydrogen molecule that creates gamma rays is not capable of functioning and the non release of energy in that molecule destabilizes the reaction.

If you could double the surface area of lead/gamma ray contact area you might significantly increase absorption. If you could double the surface area of the lead/water contact area you might also significantly increase heat transference to the water.

Don’t know if this is useful. If not please accept my hope for your success.

G Singh

Andrea Rossi
April 18th, 2012 at 5:03 AM
Dear G Singh:
The situation is more complicated: we have very good stability below 200 Celsius, then we get problems, indipendently from the mass of lead. Thank you anyway for your attention and your attempt to help. Anyway, we are close to the solution, I hope.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Basically to adsorb a given dose of gammas at a given energy to an acceptable degree requires a certain thickness of lead. Assuming the gammas are not absorbed by other materials (air, insulation, etc.) there are reverse square law issues. If the lead is further away, the thickness may be thinner, but the surface area would be larger. The weight would be the same. Having a greater standoff distance would result in more surface area for cooling though. As for the gamma absorbing characteristics changing with temperature- I don't think so. The lead would heat up and perform the same shielding function until it melted and got out of the way. There are certain situations where absorption might change at select energies- this can occur with neutrons in some materials, but I don't know of any situation with gammas, and the consideration is the KE of the incoming radiation or particle. The temperature of the target is so tremendously low in comparison that changing its temperature slightly is insignificant. Consider the limited operating temperature range of solid lead , perhaps ~ several hundreds of degrees Centigrade (you want to heat the water). That is equivalent to ~ 0.01 to 0.03 eV change in energy. Not much space for a resonance peak to fit, if it existed. As mentioned above the penetration of gammas (or X-rays) is dependent on their energy. At 500,000 eV the ~0.02 eV change in the lead KE (as vibration back and forth which would still average ~ the same relative velocity to the incoming gamma as cooler lead) the effective change in closing KE/ velocity is ~ 1 part in 50 million, so it can be ignored, even without the vibrational consideration above. At a fantasized gamma radiation of ~ 10,000 eV, the possible differences are still limited to ~ 1 part in a million.

Actually I don't think anything would change for the gamma ray absorption in any significant way (except for the standard increased penetration with increasing gamma ray energy) until the gamma ray energies reached several million eV. Photo disintegration (atom smashing) reactions would then set in and change things for the worse. This is because the gammas only interact with the electrons until the wavelength of the gamma becomes short enough that it can begin interacting with the nucleus.

Dan Tibbets

[ladajo]

Andrea Rossi
January 21st, 2011 at 4:45 AM

Dear Mr Moho:
1- I do not know
2- We are giving solid scientific information, apart the detaols inside the reactor which will remain industrial secret at least untilthe patent is granted
3- We made an important test with the University of Bologna, with whom we are going to make a 1 year research program also.
4- Our next step: presentation of the 1 MW power plant we are manufacturing in the USA for our European Customer.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
March 3rd, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Dear Alan De Angelis:
Again, thank you for the important information regarding the very interesting interview of Prof. Chu, Nobel Prize and Secretary of the DOE.
I agree with his point of view. I think that Barack Obama is one of the best Presidents of the History of the USA, and the fact that he has chosen Prof. Chu as the Secretary of the DOE is a demo of what I said.
I am honoured to have manufactured my reactors in the USA. Warmest Regards,
Andrea Rossi

Andrea Rossi
March 23rd, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Dear Mr Claudio Eterno:
The first plant of 1 MW will be installed in Athens, in October.
We are manufacturing it in the USA. Also in the USA we are making tests with an extremely important Customer preparing a similar plant in the USA which will be, very likely, our second job.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
April 16th, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Dear “HRG”:
You are perfectly right, I agree totally with your comment, as for concerns the incompatibility and the unacceptability of entities which work and get financing from Oil Companies, Nuclear Companies, Hot Fusion Research centers as “indipendent third parties”,as well as of competitors, who since years try to make useful LENR apparatuses and are not able to: they cannot present themselves or their consultants as “indipendent third parties”. This is why, after the tests we made with the University of Bologna and with Prof. Kullander and Prof Hanno from Sweden ( they are considered worldwide as scientists of the maximum level in the field) we will not make further tests. We will, of course, continue our R&D with the University of Bologna. We will give to the University of Uppsala and to the University of Stockolm our devices to allow them to use the same devices 24 hours per day, to get data regarding the energy production. We trust them, and we know they are really neutral, without binds with competitors of any kind. I personally knew them and I have in them total trust. The same is not for “indipendent parties” that have been proposed to me, regarding which I discovered they have got a bunch of millions to make research for the hot fusion (producing nothing so far), or “indipendent parties” made by consultants which are paid money by the shovels to sustain nuclear power plants, fossil fuels and the forth, or consultants of our competitors in the LENR field.
This is why we continue to repeat that the market, only the market will be the final judge: if our E-CATS WILL RESPECT THE GUARANTEES OF ENERGY PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY, WE WILL BE PAID. This is the sole validation that counts really, at the end.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
By the way: in our factories there are reactors in operation 24 hours per day, just to test their safety reliability.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Luke Mortensen
April 28th, 2011 at 1:09 PM

AR,
Some good E-Cat trivia for the fans:

1. How many e-cats are in continuous operation today?
2. How many geographic locations are e-cats running today?
3. Are there any e-cats running in the US with businesses you own or individuals you trust?
4. Any estimate on how much fuel has been spent over the life of your research?
5. Is there anything confidential about how you use electrolysis for the reactor is is that industry standard technology?

Thanks,
~Luke Mortensen

Andrea Rossi

April 28th, 2011 at 3:37 PM

Dear Mr Luke Mortensen:
1- 97
2- 4
3- yes
4- less than if I was taxist
5- I do not use electrolysis
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 3:22 AM

Dear Mr Vergassola:
Our E-Cats are manufactured in two factories in the USA.
What you have seen in the videos is our Italian laboratory.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
June 21st, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Dear Paul Segers:
The 1 MW plant will work 24 hours per day fro the Customer of Defkalion. It will not be a demo-plant, it will be a regular productive plant.
In the USA we are manufacturing other 2 plants of 1 MW of power.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
June 28th, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Dear Bill Conley:
The poles of this tech will be:
USA, Greece and Sweden.
I reside in the USA and The 1 MW plant for Greece is manufactured in the USA. I confirm that a very important plant of 1 MW will be ready to be put in operation within the year in the USA: our men are working on the authorizations. USA,. Sweden Greece are the sole Countries where I am making real work and where I will mke real work for the next 2 years, apart Bologna (Italy), where we made a Research and development contract with the University.
Thank you ,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
July 17th, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Dear Maryyugo:
Why have I to? I do not understand why this issue has to be of your interest. Anyway: we have presently plants working in the USA and in other locations. What’s your problem about this?
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 3:22 AM
Dear Mr Vergassola:
Our E-Cats are manufactured in two factories in the USA.
What you have seen in the videos is our Italian laboratory.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Sterling Allan
August 7th, 2011 at 9:05 AM

More questions:

- Where, now, will the first 1 MW power demonstration take place? US? Will the date be changed?

Andrea Rossi

August 7th, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Dear Sterling Allan:
The 1 MW plant will be installed in the USA,:please read the answer I geve to you few minutes ago.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Sebastian
August 7th, 2011 at 8:13 AM

Dear Mr. Rossi,

thank you for making this split-up public. I have a few questions.
1) What are the implications of this on the contruction and delivery of the 1MW reactor?
Is the last week of October still a date to consider? Will you keep testing the 1MW plant in Florida or in Bologna? Will there still be a public demonstration? 2) When Defkalion stated that they produced their “Hyperion” products, were they lying?

Thank you.


Andrea Rossi

August 7th, 2011 at 9:06 AM

Dear Sebastian:
1- Of course! When I say a thing that depends on me, I maintain it: the 1 MW plant will be started upin October, in the USA. Please read the answer I gave to Sterling Allen
2- Defkalion never got any information about our technology, for what concerns the reactors.
Warm regards,
A.R.

32.Andrea Rossi
August 7th, 2011 at 9:00 AM
Dear Sterling:
I prefer that the reasons will be cleared by a judge by a verdict. Facts, not chatters, as usual with me. Our attorneys have filed a suit.
I confirm that our 1 MW plant will be put in operation in the USA, after an agreement we made last week with one of the most important entities of the USA; the tests will be made by the highest level scientists you can think of. I cannot give the names, until after the test. To the test will attend the highest level scientific journalists I know.
Thank you for your kind attention,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi

August 9th, 2011 at 7:32 AM

Dear Alessandro Casali:
1- Ampenergo is a our commercial organization
2- Our factory in Miami is not available for visits, therefore I maintain covered the address.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
August 15th, 2011 at 4:49 PM
Dear Peter Heckert,
I think I have understood well what happens in the reactor and after the start upof the 1 MW plant the theory on the effect inside the E-Cats will be released, probably.Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
August 17th, 2011 at 5:35 PM
Dear Mr Claudio Caprara:
The tests with the modules of E-Cats have been already made. The test criteria have been correct and have been confirmed by our daily operation with our E-Cats. Now we are starting the delivery of industrial plants to the market. In october the first 1 MW plant will be delivered. This is not to show to the public that it works, this is because we have to deliver a 1 MW plant.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
August 31st, 2011 at 3:01 AM

Dear Paolo:
We make in Italy R&D, the manufacturing is in the USA.
About the other question: Leibniz, the great phylosopher-mathematician of the eighteenth century, used to say that there is always the better possible world, considering the actual possibilities in the place under consideration…
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
October 9th, 2011 at 1:31 PM
Dear Vinnie Jones:
The E-Cat weights so much because the reactor has a huge shield of lead. Please read the Nyteknik Report (google Nyteknik report E-Cat October 6) and go to the part where is explained that the components have been weighted before and after the test: you will see that the E-Cat weighted some gram more after the test ( due to some water remained). Should the weight be made by a fuel, at the end of the test, burnt the fuel, the E-Cat would have weighted much less than before the test. The reason why the E-Cat and the calorimetric system have been weighted before and after was exactly to dissolve these fears.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Vinnie Jones
October 9th, 2011 at 1:10 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi,

Weighing in at 90 kg the new Fat-Cat certainly earns this nickname. In spite of having been allowed to peek into it I fail to see where most of those kilograms reside. The lid is fairly thin and so is the edge of the chamber itself. Using a part of this unaccounted for weight to build a heat storage out of a suitable phase change material it would be possible to bridge the self-sustained period. Could you please explain away these fears?

Kind regards, Vinnie Jones

Andrea Rossi
October 31st, 2011 at 9:21 AM
Dear Prof. Lino Daddi:
Dr Bianchini, of the Bologna University, has only measured the radiations outside the reactors, for safety issues, and compared them to the background: there have not been significant differences between the background and the measured radiations outside the reactors during the operation.
I do not give any information about the radiations inside the reactors, because such radiations are confidential.Warm Regards,
A.R.

Fyodor
October 31st, 2011 at 2:07 PM
Mr. Rossi

I hope that all is well with you. I had a few questions I was hoping you might answer if you have the time.

1. From my understanding, the testing of the 1 megawatt plant involved reasonably active supervision from you during the test. Can the commercial products run successfully without supervision?

2. Can you tell us more about how the new products are being assembled? I understand that you made the first unit by hand. How are the newer units being assembled?

3. Have your new customers also requested a similar verification process for their 1MW reactors (i.e. all day tests)?

Thank you for taking the time to answer

Warmest Regards
Fyodor

Andrea Rossi
October 31st, 2011 at 6:09 PM
Dear Fyodor:
1- yes
2- industrially
3- yes, it is in our standard contract
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Luca Salvarani
October 31st, 2011 at 7:59 AM

Dear Andrea Rossi

1- Can you confirm the second sale of the 1 mw plant to another customer?
2- So far have you sold 2 plants, or even more?
3- Could you reveal the identity of this second customer or it’s confidential (if so I can undestand)?

Andrea Rossi

October 31st, 2011 at 9:23 AM

Dear Luca Salvarani:
1- yes
2- more
3- I want not our Customers assailed by the puppetts moved by their puppetteers. Let the plant go to work, then they will reveal themselves automatically. Probably you did not understand that there is a war against us.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Iggy Dalrymple
October 31st, 2011 at 9:16 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi,

When do you intend to start production in the USA?

Sincerely,
Iggy Dalrymple

Andrea Rossi
November 1st, 2011 at 3:35 AM
Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
Already did. The charges are already made in the USA. Of course the work is in progress.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

T.R.
October 31st, 2011 at 9:47 AM

Dear mr. Rossi
when the second customer will recive his plant?

Andrea Rossi

October 31st, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Dear T.R.
3 months,
Warm regards,
A.R.

April 14th, 2012 at 4:00 PM
Dear Frank Acland:
We have already made all the engineering of the production line in the two factories we will set up (one in the USA, one in Europe) and we will have just to set up the software of the robots and fix the drawings after the requirements of the Certificators. I think that it will take from 6 to 12 months afer the certifications will be done to start the production.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

April 14th, 2012 at 3:50 AM
Dear Daniele Poponi,
I agree with you.
The certification process is going on. By the way, yesterday I spent all the day with the certification engineers and we made substantial progress. In this very moment I am working at my desk to make the paper work they asked me yesterday. It will take all today (Saturday) and tomorrow (Sunday), just to give you an idea of our endeavours on this issue.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

And, we now know, there were no factories, and only one 1MW was built, and it is probably still in the garage in Bologna.

We shouldn't speak of the REPEATED references to work with UoB that never happened. It was really just a pathological slip of the toungue, when Rossi really only meant to say he worked with some guys worked worked there in their real jobs.

And what ever did happen to those multiple 1MW plants that Rossi stated were in operation in the US long before his test of "The First 1MW" in Bologna on 28 October, 2011?

It really all is just a simple one off misunderstanding.

[ladajo]

Luke Mortensen
April 28th, 2011 at 1:09 PM
AR,
Some good E-Cat trivia for the fans:

1. How many e-cats are in continuous operation today?
2. How many geographic locations are e-cats running today?
3. Are there any e-cats running in the US with businesses you own or individuals you trust?
4. Any estimate on how much fuel has been spent over the life of your research?
5. Is there anything confidential about how you use electrolysis for the reactor is is that industry standard technology?

Thanks,
~Luke Mortensen

Andrea Rossi
April 28th, 2011 at 3:37 PM
Dear Mr Luke Mortensen:
1- 97
2- 4
3- yes
4- less than if I was taxist
5- I do not use electrolysis
Warm regards,
A.R.

Rémi André
May 1st, 2011 at 8:24 AM
Dear M.Rossi
Recently you said,on this blog, that 97 E-cats were already built in 4 different locations. Each one of them would be able to produce 4,4 kW (if the model correspond to the one which was used during the test with the swedish physcicists). So, today all existing E-cats would be able to produce 97*4,4 = 426,8 kW = 0,427 MW. If I choose to take a consumption of 6 kW per house (that’s what we have here in France), you should be able to give enough electric power to supply approximatly 70 houses (a little village). In fact, I’d like to ask you few questions :
1/ Why are you focusing on a 1 MW plant ? You almost reached the half of this power… what will it change to just double it ?
2/ Why does it take so much time to build those devices ? Is it a problem of enrichment ?3/ Is it more a problem linked with the patent you are looking for ?
Despite the fact that surfing on your blog is my daily vitamin C dose, I must admit that it becomes difficult to wait a so long time…

Thank you very much for your attention
RA

Andrea Rossi
May 1st, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Dear Mr Rémi Andrè:
1- the 97 E-Cats ( today are 105) are just the modules of the 1 MW plant we will start up in October, and that we are testing separately.
2- It is our first plant, and the lines to make a serial production are not yet ready. I make them one by one and I have to be very careful: have you an idea of what will happen to me if the 1 MW plant will not work?
3- No, the patent has nothing to do with the production. Patent or not patent, we will produce our E-Cats. Of course, if the patent will not be granted we will maintain the industrial secret.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Luke Mortensen
May 4th, 2011 at 3:29 AM
AR,

How many reactors are we up to?
What percentage of the required reactors for the 1MW is this? It’s good to hear about your progress in the factory.

Thanks for continuing the short periodic demos. Letting the skeptics “kick the tires” is good PR for the ecat and hopefully won’t keep you out of the lab/factory too much.

Best,
Luke

Andrea Rossi
May 4th, 2011 at 5:06 AM
Dear Luke Mortensen:
1- up to now we have in operation 170 modules of the 300 that will compound the 1 MW plant.
2- Thank you: You cannot imagine how much in this moment I need moral sustain.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Joseph Fine
May 16th, 2011 at 5:45 AM
Dr. Rossi,

1) How many E-Cats are operating now?

2) If you have a number of E-Cats operating together in a power plant and want to turn some of them on or off, can you do that remotely ( almost certainly ) or do you have to do it manually (turning valves and throwing switches)? Can you control the E-Cats individually or only in groups or sections?

3) Can you refuel a module after several months without completely removing it for service, that is, by pouring Nickel (kitty food) into the device. That is, you don’t have to ship it back to the factory by Federal Express. (That would make it easier to use in Ships, for example.)

J.F.

Andrea Rossi
May 16th, 2011 at 6:43 AM
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
1- We have completed all the 330 modules of the 1 MW plant. Now goes on the testing of each of them and the construction of the container.
2- Remotely- Singularly
3- No, we have to change the modules, eventually refueling them at home (so far). Ships do not stay away from ports more than 6 mo.
Warmest regards,
A.R.

Roberto Vergassola
May 18th, 2011 at 2:38 AM
dott.Rossi,

se e’ vero che , allora non siete solo in due-tre persone a lavorare qui a Bologna!
Per fare migliaia di test (in due anni) ci vuole una squadrona di tecnici ben organizzata. E dal filamto che avete messo su questo sito non sembrava…. o mi sbaglio?

Sembrava che dietro alla vs. organizzazione ci fossero solo un paio di ricercatori universitari convenzionati con la ditta ECAT.
saluti
Roberto

Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 3:22 AM
Dear Mr Vergassola:
Our E-Cats are manufactured in two factories in the USA.
What you have seen in the videos is our Italian laboratory.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Simone
May 18th, 2011 at 6:10 AM
Dear Ing. Rossi,
I recently read comments doubting that you will be able to produce and sell the machines before the end of this year, because this new technology, basing on nuclear reactions, has to pass inspections, security checks, comply with regulations, etc…. before it can be put on the market.
Beside the fact that it’s funny to note how some skeptics are already moving from “it’s impossible ” to “yes, but it will take a long time…”, I wanted to ask you if you fear possible delays for bureaucracy or legal obstacles.
Thanks and best wishes for the coming months

Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 9:20 AM
Dear Mr Simone:
We are respecting all the laws regarding safety and authorizations.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Luis Vaccaro
May 18th, 2011 at 5:16 AM
Dear Mr Rossi:

some other curiosities:

1) Do you already know if only one version (3kW) of the eCAT will be sold?
2) It will be sold as an steam generator?
3) what will be the maximum presure and temperature of the output steam?
4) can you tell us, what are the main difficulties in obtaining electricity, so we can try to aid you for free at Bologna or at Genoa simulating the system in some way?

thanks for yours answers!
I hope I will be able meet you some day!
L.V.

Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 9:24 AM
Dear Dr Luis Vaccaro:
1- no
2- maybe
3-550 °C, 50 bars
4- efficiency
Warm regards,
A.R.

Christian SCHOLL
May 23rd, 2011 at 1:37 AM
Dear Mr Rossi,

All my congratulation for your work.
I have read all your blog and some technical questions arise.
You estimate the energy ratio output/input 7 to 20.

1 Is the input energy used to heat the powder and adjust the output power ?
2 Is the power regulation automatised or manual?
3 Is there any retroactive regulation to avoid short circuit, excess output energy and explosion?

Best regards

Andrea Rossi
May 23rd, 2011 at 7:07 AM
Dear Mr Christian Scholl:
1- I cannot give info of the reactor’s operation
2- automatised
3- also
Warm regards,
A.R.

Charlie Zimmerman
May 23rd, 2011 at 12:29 PM
Dear Mr Rossi,

Congratulations on your momentous achievement. Future generations will owe you the highest debt of gratitude.

I am most disheartened when talking with friends about your device to still find such a high degree of skepticism. Some of it is based around the confusion over some of your United States businesses. Specifically, some people seem to be confused about Leonardo Corporation and where the production of the power plant is happening. It would be great if you could shed some light on these issues to help in these conversations. Having a little back story information could help me in silencing these doubters.

Is your US Company Leonardo Corporation or Leonardo Technologies Inc?Is the production at a Leonardo Corporation owned factory or is it outsourced to another production facility?
What is LTI-Global.com and what relationship do they have with Leonardo Corporation and yourself?
Is this a different Leonardo Technologies Inc. from the one in the September 2004 report on your TE device from the US Army Corps of Engineers?
Warmest regards and best of luck in the future.

Thanks,
Charlie Zimmerman

Andrea Rossi
May 23rd, 2011 at 2:40 PM
Dear Mr Charlie Zimmerman:
1- I am absolutely not interested to the skepticism, since we are manufacturing the reactors which in october will start their operation in the market
2- there is no reason why I have to disclose where we manufacture our reactors. Our Customers will receive the reactors in their factories, they are not interested about the manufacturing sites. Our NON-Customers have no reason to know anything at all about this issue.
3- The reactors are manufactured by Leonardo Corporation, while LTI (Leonardo Technology Inc.) is the company with the exclusive commercial license of Leonardo Corp. in the Americas and Caribeans.
For any info about LTI, please coontact them directly:
ccassarino@lti-global.com
Warm regards,
A.R.

David Roberson
May 24th, 2011 at 5:37 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

I appreciate the timely response you submitted to my last question. It appears that you have achieved fantastic results with your invention and I expect to see the skeptics run quickly toward the exit when you complete the large project(1 Megawatt) for your first customer.

One question which has always been a serious issue with LENR may be answered by you at this point. How consistant is your ability to create large amounts of excess power? For example, if you made 100 E-Cat devices and began testing, how many would achieve the desired ratios of output to input power? My gut feeling is that your answer would be greater than 90, which would be wonderful. As you know, the original work in LENR was shot down because of the lack of abilitiy to reproduce results. I am sure many other science minded followers like myself would appreciate your kind response.

Thank you for your consideration,
D.R.

Andrea Rossi
May 24th, 2011 at 7:45 PM
Dear Mr David Robertson:
Our E-Cats are perfectly reproducible and their performance is standard. Out of 100 we guarantee that 100 respect the performance data.
Should not be so we could not go deliver in Greece a 1 MW plant, made by 300 E-Cats.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Alessandro Casali
May 25th, 2011 at 4:43 AM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

Thanks in advance for your patience, i have a simple question that i’m sure you can clarify.

You have recently stated that each signle e-cat (in the 1 MW Greek plant) will produce 2.5 kW so how can you reach 1 MW with only 300 e-cats? the total energy whould be 750 kW.

Andrea Rossi
May 25th, 2011 at 9:07 AM
Dear Mr Alessandre Casali: you are right, 300 is not the exact number, is an order of magnitude. Actually, the configuration of the 1 MW plant is complex, and confidential. I can’t give details: of course you are right: 2,5 x 300 makes 750. We will produce 1,000 and the Ecats inside are much more than the necessary number…
Warmest Regards,
A.R.

Alessandro Casali
May 26th, 2011 at 7:34 AM
sorry Mr. Rossi but the following statements are in open contrast, i want to trust you but i think we all need some clarification on this matter.

Andrea Rossi
May 4th, 2011 at 5:06 AM
Dear Luke Mortensen:
1- up to now we have in operation 170 modules of the 300 that will compound the 1 MW plant.2- Thank you: You cannot imagine how much in this moment I need moral sustain.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
May 25th, 2011 at 9:07 AM
Dear Mr Alessandre Casali: you are right, 300 is not the exact number, is an order of magnitude. Actually, the configuration of the 1 MW plant is complex, and confidential. I can’t give details: of course you are right: 2,5 x 300 makes 750. We will produce 1,000 and the Ecats inside are much more than the necessary number…
Warmest Regards,
A.R.

Best Regards,
AC

Andrea Rossi
May 26th, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Dear Mr Alessandro Casali:
It seems to me that there is no contrast; I repeat: 300 was an approx number, the reactors will be more than this number.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Alessandro Casali
May 26th, 2011 at 10:37 AM
thank you mr. Rossi for the explanation,

from simple calculation i assume there will be roughly 400 running e-cats and i guess there will also be another undefined number of back-up e-cats, am i correct?

warm regards,

AC.

no reply from Rossi.

Herald Patterson
May 30th, 2011 at 6:12 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

Thank you for refuting those two metropolitan legends. Unfortunately, there are other legends and unfounded rumors circulating around the internet as well. I will list a few of them here in case you would like to comment on them, and put an end to some ridiculous speculation that is taking place on the internet.

1) Other than the catalysts, hydrogen pressure, the special processing of the nickel powder, and the heat added to the system by the resistors there is some “other” factor that is critical to making the system work. For example, a source of radio frequency radiation to stimulate the processes inside the reactor vessel.

2) No gamma radiation is actually produced inside of the reactor vessel. They claim you will not let independent scientists measure the gamma radiation inside the reactor *not* because the signatures detected could reveal the patent pending catalysts, but because no gamma radiation would be found.

3) No nickel is actually transmuted into copper. They try to connect this to the lack of gamma radiation, to support their idea that some extraordinary but totally *non-fusion* process is taking place.

4) That you no longer think any form of fusion is taking place. They claim because you use the term Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, you non longer think a fusion reaction is taking place between the nickel and hydrogen.

5) Others claim there is no radiation being produced, except from beta-decay. Some push this idea to support a pet theory they religiously proclaim all over the net called, “Widom Larsen” theory.

I wish people would just take you at your word, instead of trying to twist the truth to support their own pet theories and ideas.

If you wish to comment on any of the above, I will do my best to spread your answers on the net to counter act the rumor-mongering taking place.

Thank you for all your work and willingness to interact with us.

I’m looking forward to October!

Herald

Andrea Rossi
May 30th, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Dear Mr Herald Patterson:
Thank you for your questions, here are the answers:
1- Yes: like Flash Gordon! Seriuosly: what happens inside the reactor is influenced only by what is inside; outside there is only cooling and thermalization
2- Gamma have been regularly measured by us
3- Analysys of powders are the evidence of the transmutation
4- Wrong
5-Beta decay has nothing to do with my process, Widom Larsen theory has nothing to do with my process
6- I am looking for October too, my friend.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Paul Esteban
June 5th, 2011 at 12:50 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi, how many people are working directly for you on e-cat construction?

Warm Regards
Paul Esteban

Translate

Andrea Rossi
June 5th, 2011 at 3:27 PM
Dear Paul Esteban:


18.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Khashayar Shatti
June 7th, 2011 at 9:31 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi
First of all thank you for your kind attention.
1- How much would be the shipping weight of a 100kw system as an example?
2- How much is the minimum distance for an operator when your system is on?
3- could your system be mobile while working?
Best regards
Khashayar Shatti

Andrea Rossi
June 7th, 2011 at 2:50 PM
Dear Khashayar Shatti:
1 MW weightd about 1.5 tonns.
No minimum distance from the op. is necessary.
The plant cannot be mobile.
Warm regards,
A.R.

90Kg * 400 units = 36,000Kg

1.5 tonns = 1500Kg = ~3.75Kg/unit

Andrea Rossi
June 21st, 2011 at 1:34 AM
Dear Paul Segers:
The 1 MW plant will work 24 hours per day fro the Customer of Defkalion. It will not be a demo-plant, it will be a regular productive plant.
In the USA we are manufacturing other 2 plants of 1 MW of power.Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
June 22nd, 2011 at 1:26 AM
Dear Jon Soderberg:
Yes, all of this is possible.
I think that something like this will be made in the R&D work of the University of Bologna (by the way: yesterday the research contract with the University of Bologna has been signed.Warm Regards,
A.R.

Marco De Leonardis
June 24th, 2011 at 8:15 AM
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Why the gamma rays (behind the shield) are not measured in the public experiments?
A simply energy measure (not the spectrum) will not release any confidential information, allowing the most skeptical to change idea.
This is the easiest way to monitor what is happening inside the e-cat.
Thanks
Marco De Leonardis

Andrea Rossi
June 24th, 2011 at 9:00 AM
Dear Marco De Leonardis:
Surely you are not a Physic: gamma rays are the fingerprints of their source.Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea Rossi
June 28th, 2011 at 5:34 PM
Dear Bill Conley:
The poles of this tech will be:
USA, Greece and Sweden.
I reside in the USA and The 1 MW plant for Greece is manufactured in the USA. I confirm that a very important plant of 1 MW will be ready to be put in operation within the year in the USA: our men are working on the authorizations.USA,. Sweden Greece are the sole Countries where I am making real work and where I will mke real work for the next 2 years, apart Bologna (Italy), where we made a Research and development contract with the University.Thank you ,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

http://rossilivecat.com/all.html

[ladajo]

Franco Ragazzi
July 2nd, 2011 at 3:51 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi.
the absence of gamma ray is due to internal shield or to intrinsic operating principle of the catalyzer?Best Regards

Translate

Andrea Rossi
July 3rd, 2011 at 2:53 AM
Dear Franco Ragazzi:
There are gamma rays inside the reactor during the operation.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

Riccardo T.
July 6th, 2011 at 6:19 AM
Dear Dott. Rossi,

The work that Uppsala will do, is totally independet from the recently signed R&D research program of University of Bologna or there will be some interaction between the two?

Thank You

Riccardo

Andrea Rossi
July 6th, 2011 at 9:37 AM
Dear Riccardo T.:
Prof. Giuseppe Levi is in strict contact with the Uppsala Professors, therefore there will be a full cooperation between the University of Bologna and the University of Uppsala and of Stockolm.
Thank you for your question,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

Andrea Rossi
July 11th, 2011 at 7:56 PM
Dear Dr. Mario Voltaggio:
The answers to your questions have been given in this blog already, anyway, repeating rapidly:
1- The isotopic composition of Ni after 6 mo is slightly different, but the difference is also compensated from the enrichment we make in the Ni
2- The Cu produced is 63 and 65, because only Ni 62 and 64 react in this sense
3- the heating is due to the gamma radiation, which is contained from the lead shielding. The gamma produced in the reactor have mainly low energy. The reason of this will be clear when I will disclose the theory at the base of the process.
4- the medium by means of which the heat is exchanged with the water is the wall of the reactor, properly designed.
5- The patent of the invention discloses enough information to allow an expert of the matter to replicate the effect. In fact , many persons have replicated the effect using the text of my patent application. A totally different thing is the industrial secret regarding information useful to make a product with best performances.
6- Public demos were opportune for R&D purposes, and also for commercial purposes. Patent processes can take up to 6-7 years, and a private industry, not financed by the taxpayer, cannot wait. Therefore, maintains the industrial secrets, while the production takes place and the patent application is cropped.
7- The Journal Of Nuclear Physics is not dedicated to my process: most of the articles are indipendent from it, sometimes alternative.
Thank you for your sincere critics,
Warm Regards,
Andrea Rossi

Translate

Mario Voltaggio
July 11th, 2011 at 6:37 PM
Gentile Dr. Andrea Rossi,
dopo aver letto con attenzione quanto riportato su questo sito, mi sfugge completamente l’utilità di queste discussioni(almeno dal mio punto di vista).
Comprendo che questi commenti possano esserle utili per avere dei contatti che possono aiutarla nella commercializzazione del suo prodotto ma come ricercatore ho letto molte contraddizioni.
Espongo brevemente quali contraddizioni ho rilevato:
1) non si comprende se la composizione isotopica del nichelio prima e dopo il funzionamento prolungato dell’e-cat sia cambiata o sia rimasta la stessa.
2) non si comprende se la composizione isotopica del rame prodotto sia o no uguale a quella naturale
3) non si comprende se il riscaldamento sia dovuto alla radiazione gamma dal momento che la schermatura di piombo dovrebbe essere insufficiente per schermarla completamente
4) non si comprende quale sia il mezzo attraverso il quale il calore viene trasmesso alla parete della cella a contatto con l’acqua immessa con la pompa peristaltica
5)non si comprende perchè la composizione dell’addittivo dovrebbe rimanere segreta se si vuole ottenere un brevetto da tale invenzione.
6)non si comprende perchè se si voleva arrivare al mercato prima dell’ottenimento del brevetto si siano anticipati i risultati con delle dimostrazioni pubbliche.
7) infine non comprendo perchè ha indetto questa specie di ricerca del santo Graal della teoria sul funzionamento della sua cella con questi articoli riportati sul Journal of Nuclear Physiscs che sa tanto di “vediamo chi si avvicina di più alla spiegazione avendo a disposizione pochi dati e ben confusi”.
Chiedo perdono per la sincerità, ma questo è ciò che penso (per il momento).
Cari saluti
Dr. Mario Voltaggio

[ladajo]

Andrea Rossi
July 11th, 2011 at 3:10 PM
Dear Carlos:
No more public tests will be made. R&D will be made by the Universities of Bologna and Uppsala, at our expenses,but this research will not be public.
After the start up of our 1 MW plant in October our products will hit the market.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

maryyugo
June 22nd, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

Thank you for the reply. I have difficulty understanding why the actual data used to calculate energy balance in the Rossi-Focardi paper (or in similar experiments in which the E-cat heated liquid water rather than produced steam) can’t be released now. Surely, the data exist and were preserved. Can you say why you won’t provide these data or encourage Dr. Levi to do so? And then I promise to leave you alone about this issue

Thanks and best wishes for progress with your work.

M. Y.

Andrea Rossi
July 12th, 2011 at 4:04 PM
Dear Maryyugo:
We did not sign any R&D contract with the University of Uppsala.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

H. Visscher
July 12th, 2011 at 4:11 PM
Dear Mr. Rossi,

On May 29 you answered a question from Ms. Rosie Andreasson in which you said that you were in Uppsala in July in order to get the University of Uppsala to participate in R&D on E-Cat. Have you been successful in that? The reason I ask is that -according to “snake” – the university denies there is agreement or any preparation of an agreement in this matter.
May be you can clarify this? Will this mean that the University of Bologna will work on his own?

Thank you!

H. Visscher

Andrea Rossi
July 12th, 2011 at 4:49 PM
Dear H. Visscher:
The object of the very important meeting I had in Uppsala with top level international Scientists is confidential. We did not sign any contract with the University of Uppsala:
I never said or wrote we had. Beware false statements of spies.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

H. Visscher
July 12th, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Dear Mr Rossi,

Thank you for your quick answer! However, I do not quite understand. This is what you answered on May 29:
———
Andrea Rossi
May 29th, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Dear Ms Rosie Andreasson:
Prof. Sergio Focardi is Prof. Emeritus of the Bologna University and Prof. Levi, Prof. Villa and Dr Bianchini of the University of Bologna made the tesp of the Jan 14th reported on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics.
Presently, we are making a contract with the University of Bologna to develope R&D for the technology related to my patent. We will ask to the University of Uppsala to participate: I will be in Uppsala for this reason in July.
About the patent: It has been granted in Italy (20 years validity) and is still pending for theInternational Application.
The Countries which respect the patents in the world are 90.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
——–
If I read it correctly it stated clearly that you will ask the University of Uppsala to participate in R&D. Has something changed from what you answered or did it not go through? May be you will have another meeting later this month?

Thank you for clearing this up!

H. Visscher

Andrea Rossi
July 13th, 2011 at 7:03 AM
Dear H. Visscher:
Of course I am sure that Professors of the Uppsala University ( and of the Stockolm University too) will participate to the work of the Bologna University, but this fact does not necessarily imply a contract, as well as it does not necessarily exclude it. It depends on the evolution. Nothing at all is changed respect what foreseen. I never said that a contract with Uppsala has been signed. What is sure is a free collaboration of scientific reciprocal interest. And I want to add one important statement: in the meetings with the Professors of Uppsala and Stockolm I learnt a lot.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

[ladajo]

H. Visscher
July 12th, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Dear Mr Rossi,

Thank you for your quick answer! However, I do not quite understand. This is what you answered on May 29:
———
Andrea Rossi
May 29th, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Dear Ms Rosie Andreasson:
Prof. Sergio Focardi is Prof. Emeritus of the Bologna University and Prof. Levi, Prof. Villa and Dr Bianchini of the University of Bologna made the tesp of the Jan 14th reported on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics.
Presently, we are making a contract with the University of Bologna to develope R&D for the technology related to my patent. We will ask to the University of Uppsala to participate: I will be in Uppsala for this reason in July.
About the patent: It has been granted in Italy (20 years validity) and is still pending for theInternational Application.
The Countries which respect the patents in the world are 90.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
——–
If I read it correctly it stated clearly that you will ask the University of Uppsala to participate in R&D. Has something changed from what you answered or did it not go through? May be you will have another meeting later this month?

Thank you for clearing this up!

H. Visscher

Andrea Rossi
July 13th, 2011 at 7:03 AM
Dear H. Visscher:
Of course I am sure that Professors of the Uppsala University ( and of the Stockolm University too) will participate to the work of the Bologna University, but this fact does not necessarily imply a contract, as well as it does not necessarily exclude it. It depends on the evolution. Nothing at all is changed respect what foreseen. I never said that a contract with Uppsala has been signed. What is sure is a free collaboration of scientific reciprocal interest. And I want to add one important statement: in the meetings with the Professors of Uppsala and Stockolm I learnt a lot.
Warm Regards,
A.R.