Andrea Rossi started the test of his 1 megawatt e-cat cold fusion device in Bologna today. The purpose of the test is to see if the low energy nuclear reaction device can generate a sustained reaction that can continuously make large amounts of heat. If it can it could theoretically be able to generate enough heat to run a steam engine to power a vehicle or an electric generator.
Rossi's 1 megwatt e-cat generator is being tested today
The test is apparently being monitored by Rossi’s US customer whose identity is still secret. This will be the first time an e-cat test is monitored by somebody other than Rossi which is important to verify his claims.
Rossi promised to release a non-secret report from this customer on his website sometime tonight. He did not say what this report would contain or whether it would finally identify his mysterious American partner. Internet speculation has named everything from Google to the US Navy as this partner.
The e-cat is also attracting quite a bit of online attention including another commentary at Forbes magazine’s website. In an intelligent piece Mark P. Mills, a physicist and venture capitalist cautioned people not to expect an overnight revolution from Rossi’s device. He also notes some fallacies that cloud individual’s thinking so it’s a good read. In particular he notes the length of time it takes to develop new technologies from ideas.
Mark P. Mills courteosy Forbes
Mills is smart enough not to discount Rossi only to counsel people not to expect too much from him. That’s an intelligent position that we should all take.
My take by the way is that Rossi is certainly onto something but it is going to take awhile to commercialize it and get a working practical energy source we can all use. The steam engine was invented in the early 1700s but it was not widely used for industrial purposes until the early 19th century 100 years later.
There is another excellent little piece in the British version of Wired magazine that provides a good one over view of Rossi annd his work.
The domestic policy blog of the famous US conservative journal the National Review has also noted Mark Gibbs’ earlier piece on Rossi and e-cat. Reviewer Reihan Salam reflected the ignorance of the mainstream media with a simple quote “this can’t be serious.” It sounds like the media reaction to the Wright Brothers airplane tests which was similarly dismissive.
History has proven that journalists make poor forecasters. Interestingly enough Salam’s rant got a large number reactions that indicate a lot of average people out there are following Rossi’s work and ignoring the wise men in the media and scientific establishments. Who are often the last to notice when things change.
Either way it’s an exciting time to be alive and I feel history is being made.
> The steam engine was invented in the early 1700s but it was not widely used for industrial purposes until the early 19th century 100 years later.
At first 1900 the horse was the usual way to move.
69 years later a man walked on the moon.
Some years ago the entire man’s genoma is sequenced.
Don’t put useless rocks behind the wheels of progress…
Back in 1900 most people walked. A few middle class people and cowboys had horses. People in the city rode the street car. It’s hard to see how long it will take us to develop a new technology or implement it. We were on the moon forty years ago where is the lunar city? What rocks am I putting in the way of progress.
I am skeptical, but I sure hope he is on to something. The world could use a “silver bullet”.
Mark P. Mills incorporates all the devices of a typical old school skeptic. One need only read his CV (IC engineer, Reagan Admin & Bank America adviser, defense work, etc.) to know his political agenda. That is to debunk any development that threatens conservative orthodoxy. He has no background in energy or nuclear physics and is blissfully unaware of the last 20 years research delivering more than 1200 peer-reviewed papers on excess heat from various LENR experiments (publicly available at e.g. LANL library.)
It is one thing to caution against over expecting commercial products – another to claim the phenomenon “magical technology.” Let’s recall that the Energy Chair of the Swedish Academy of Science Sven Kullander and fellow physicist Hanno Essen has seen Rossi’s process and written a report:
“Any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production.”
NASA’s Langley Research Chief Scientist Dennis Bushnell say:
“So I think were almost over the “We don’t understanding it” problem. I think we’re almost over the “This doesn’t produce anything useful” problem. And so I think this [LENR] will go forward fairly rapidly now. And if it does, this is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geopolitics of solving quite a bit of [the] energy [problem.]”
Nobel Laureate (Physics) Brian Josephson has gone on record suggesting possible mechanisms for the Ni+H reaction Rossi produces. Point being there is a HUGE body of research evidence confirming the LENR effect. The Italian team at U Bologna are demonstrating a commercialized 1 MW (heat) implementation of his process today. It strikes fear in the hearts of the establishment since it will rather abruptly (despite Mark Mills’ wishes) end the fossil fuel age.
It seems like Rossi is simply using this as a publicity stunt to get attention to his “journal”. But if this works, wow, it’ll revolutionize the WORLD! can you imagine having one of these small reactors in the car and never having to worry about gasoline again!!???
Sounds good or one in your house and not having to worry about paying a heat or light bill again.
There was an Associated Press science writer present throughout the test, and I am anxious to see his or her article. I have followed this intensively, and have my own article about it at
http://www.american-reporter.com/4,320/73.html
I thought the new Forbes.com piece was unnecessarily derogatory, CYA stuff, not reporting and certainly no more than an uninformed OpEd.
Since we have since learned after today’s test that without any power input the device produces 478,000 watts of power continuously in self-sustaining mode, and the customer was satisfied with it and closed the sale, I suspect it may move very quickly into the mainstream. We have all the latest on our ticker at the top of the The American Reporter.
Joe Shea
Editor-in-Chief
The American Reporter
Thanks glad to see you were there. Note any local newspaper reporter whose publication is part of the AP is technically an AP reporter. I actually thought the new Forbes piece was quite fair and honest. It was OpEd not reporting. Still it is better than nothing.
The question is irrelevant how much power it produces in “self-sustaining mode”…without knowing how much power the device needs for input first in this ominous “heat up phase”. What if they needed to “heat up” the plant for a week first? And did you ever wonder why the tests are always prematurely ending..only lasting for some hours…never for a long time like a day or longer, which would be inevitable proof that the device does indeed produce power? Would you heat up water in a pot on the stove, turn off the stove and then claim you found free energy because you will have hot water available without the stove being on? Rossi is welcome and free to prove this all wrong, but there is too much secrecy already…to be honest unless 100% proven working i am more and more tending to say there is something shady about it. Let this device running for a week and let independent scientists do the measurements…not do some alleged test and then turn off the device after 3 hours (while it took 4 hours to “heat” the device)….sorry people..common sense!?
I think Mr. Rossi opened a door to new inventions.
There is a invention that unites Rossi LENR reactor and a Stirling engine.
Advantage: no steam, also suitable for small motors below 20kWel
Using the averages it appears as though the claims are correct however I am concerned that steam flow rate was not measured. Also for input power it says 66 KWH. Was this total metered power or per hour? How do we know that the heated water was ever turned into steam and that they overcame the heat of vaporization?
The reason that I ask this is that it takes ~67 KW to convert 675.6 L of water from 18.3 degrees C to 104.5 in an hour. It takes an additional ~423 KW to convert it to steam. If they were using 66 KW/H and not converting to steam then they invented a very efficient water heater……
I’m not sure that any steam was generated. You might address this to Mr. Rossi himself at his blog. He does answer questions there. Oh well after looking at my last propane bill. I could use a more efficient water heater.
I’ve been following this for a while. Is this process ready to be commercialized or is there a lot more research that needs to be done to make it commercially viable?
Far more research and development work needs to be done. Right now this is about the equivalent of the Wright Brothers first plane he’s proved it feasible nothing more. Note it may not by Rossi.
Having looked for info on the Rossi and mystery customer test of the E-cat and having found only the other comment stating (478,000 watts) of power generated from a container the size of a small semi trailer truck cargo container, is (if true) IMPRESSIVE!
I reserve my enthusiasm for a later date once enough people of every persuasion has had a first hand chance to explore this new energy source.
I’m not selling my oil stocks yet, however it is tentative to me sometime in the near future (a few years). This development could have the same impact on mankind as the wheel did.
Watch NICKEL futures jump if it is as successful as stated. That will be the real indicator of success.
True nickel prices will go through the roof then fall when people realize how little it needs. This is impressive. I think the steam engine or gasoline would be a better analogy than the wheel
The price of nickel won’t change.
my estimation, using rossi’s numbers (1MW*6month=10kg nickel)
is that it would consume 300Tons of Ni per year for the whole energy production of today, thus 0.02% of Ni production.
it will dump solar panel, wind generators, coal mines, nuclear reactors, climate CO2 policy, malthusianists, and reduce the price of oil (oil is still good for vehicles, but not at any price… could be synthetized otherwise)…
but i don’ see the price of any commodities to grow…
it is not matter but work that is important.
It will take several years for that to begin. Let’s see a working generator first.
Just trying to generate some publicity for some other sites we have. It is a common practice.