Rossi has been granted US patent on the E-Cat — fuel mix specified

(Last updated on August 25, 9.17 pm CET). Today Andrea Rossi was granted a patent on his LENR based heating device the E-Cat. The patent, which has the filing date March 14, 2012, can be downloaded here: US9115913B1

As far as I understand, the patent describes the so-called low temperature E-Cat that Rossi showed in semi-public demonstrations at several occasions in 2011, and which is also used in an ongoing 350-day trial of a 1 MW plant, but since it describes core parts of the technology it is probably also valid at a certain extent also for more recent E-Cat models with higher operating temperature.

Note that LENR is not mentioned explicitly in the patent, but also note that the contents of the fuel mix are specified — lithium and lithium aluminium hydride as fuel and a group 10 element, such as nickel in powdered form as the catalyst. This is important since fuel and catalyst specifications are lacking from an earlier patent application by Rossi on the E-Cat.

The earlier application has widely been considered far to weak to have chances to be granted. It was originally filed in Italy in April 2008, and an Italian patent was granted in 2011 but the approval was based on old rules, basically not involving any validation of the claims.

The lack of fuel and catalyst specification was highlighted in October 2014 when the Swedish-Italian report on a 32-day test of the E-Cat in Lugano, Switzerland, was published, containing a chemical analysis of the fuel before and after the experiment. Being public from that point the fuel mix would not longer be patentable.

Now it appears that the experimenters were allowed to do the analysis because the patent application containing this information was already filed.

It also appears that the earlier application has been used on purpose by Rossi as a cover-up while working on the second application.

Since the Lugano report was published, several attempts at replication of the effect have been made, most notably by the Russian scientist Parkhomov, who seems to have obtained a few positive results.

We are now reminded that Rossi has been using this fuel and catalyst mix since at least 2012, giving us an idea about his lead. It’s also clear that he understood already at that time that nickel was the catalyst and not the fuel, which was an earlier hypothesis by Rossi and his scientific advisor, late Prof. Sergio Focardi.

On the other hand, the patent offers new detailed information that should be useful for those trying to replicate the effect.

It’s interesting to note that the only reaction specifically described in the patent is the chemical reaction releasing small amounts of hydrogen, avoiding the need for a hydrogen canister which was used in the early demonstrations of the E-Cat in 2011.

This chemical reaction cannot be the main heat source. The main heat source in the E-Cat is a strongly exothermal reaction, only mentioned as such in the patent, and the very core of the E-Cat technology – a reaction that is supposedly LENR based, thus nuclear, and that should consume very small amounts of hydrogen, but for which a theory and a detailed description is still lacking.

This is the controversial part of the E-Cat, and although the fuel and the catalyst are described in the patent, the reaction in itself is not.

However, it says in the patent that a wafer with two fuel layers and a layer with an electrical resistor, typically of the size 12x12x1/3 inches, will sustain about 180 days, providing kilowatts of heat. No chemical fuel of that size can provide anything close to that amount of energy.

The document was sent to me by Rossi who told me he knew about the patent being granted already  a month ago, but that it was officially published today. He had no further comments except that he thought it would accelerate commercialization of the E-Cat technology.

As a final comment I note that the patent describes several aspects of the low temperature E-Cat that I have observed myself or have been told about by Rossi or by witnesses.

– – – –

The website Ecat.com, that is run by Rossi’s commercial partner Hydrofusion, based in Sweden, has published a Q&A with Rossi with regard to the patent. One of the questions makes clear that Rossi has filed several other patent applications, but that he ranks this one as No. 1.

31 comments

  1. Wouldn’t it be better, at this point, to keep trying to replicate, rather than putting forth all of this talk about “tests?”

    Replicate what? Rossi has never given away any credible “secret sauce”. What would be needed would be truly “indipendent” testing in which Rossi is not involved. In all the years he has been working his scam, that has never happened. And nobody seems to be pressing him for it. How about it, Mats. Why not ask Rossi to have the ecat (just a plain old ecat like Levi said he tested in February 2011) tested by CERN, by ORNL, Sandia, MIT, CalTech, Lawrence Livermore, you know… the usual suspects?

    And of course, that February 2011 test yielded far more power AND energy (does Rossi know which is which?) than current ones. But that’s improvement in the Rossi world. Less and less power.

  2. What is this business that I’m hearing about “testing” Rossi’s invention? Isn’t that the wrong way (not to mention a bit of a silly way) to go about doing things, at this point? Before this patent was even released, publicly, Parkhomov was able to, at least partially, if not fully, replicate The Rossi Effect using information that he put together by himself, and The Martin Fleischman Memorial Project also seems to be getting positive results from their attempts to replicate Parkhomov. Now, with the release of this patent, there is more information made public about how to replicate, which should make replications easier. Shouldn’t this count as a “test?” Wouldn’t it be better, at this point, to keep trying to replicate, rather than putting forth all of this talk about “tests?”

  3. If you read this patent, as clearly tyy has done, you see that it makes no claim for LENR. It says (first para or two) that it is a novel invention in the field of heat transfer. That is, Rossi claims to have a better way of heating a liquid from an electric element.

    That takes it away from the enhanced scrutiny given to LENR/anti-gravity/PM claims and the default USPTO position on everything else is that unless it is clearly impossible it should be allowed if teh inventor claims it works. Understandable – who would want to patent a non-working invention?

    And there is the rub. Claims of anti-gravity etc come up quite regularly based on experimental evidence that is flakey. USPTO, if it applied normal “believe what inventor says” standards to these would end up with a whole load of non-operative fantastic patent claims.

    That is undesirable because inventors use such patents as proof that they have working product. Of course, the patents cannot be such proof. Nevertheless there is very significant PR value in having a patent. Look at this where gullible people like Mats view this patent on heat transfer as validation that Rossi has something that works!

    This, on the other hand, is a Rossi patent for LENR:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBeUdnZkprSlhPTWs/view?pli=1

    You will see that it exactly follows the details of the second Lugano test in its description. What it fails to mention is that the test results showed no excess heat. To be fair, it was submitted before my incontrovertible re-analysis was published. Rossi will just go on submitting patents hoping that the examiners will let something through. They are, for him, the best PR he can generate. I think trying to get another scientific test now would be very difficult. The Swedish team have had their fingers burnt and will be unwilling, I guess to test again except under much stricter conditions with better calorimetry.

    He could get NASA (Bushnell is enthusiatic) to test. But he won’t, because he knows they will do a rigorous test. Similarly other external organisations.

  4. Rossi apparently told Mats that T. Barker Dameron (on IH’s patent) works for IH. Perhaps. But the only internet records I can find for that name is a deceased (2004) but well known orthopedic surgeon and according to LinkedIn, an engineer who leaves no LinkedIn records whatever and only has one linked person. That sounds like a sock puppet. It’s just possible that, like the never seen “NATO colonel” supposedly named Domenico Fioravanti, this man either does not exist (is a fabrication of Rossi) or is a friend of Rossi’s playing a role. Of course, at this point, it’s merely a conjecture. Meanwhile, Mats keeps on adding up 2 and 2 and getting 5. Sad for me to watch really. I like the guy.

  5. @Timar

    What evidence do you have that a real LENR/cold fusion/whatever power plant REALLY “went to work” at all? Because Rossi says so? Rossi, the guy who brought us Petroldragon, money laundering, illegal gold transactions, thermoelectric devices which never worked, and a whole series of ecats which he never managed to test properly in more than four years? You know, the ecat which heated a whole factory in 2007? You mean you believe the existence of the megawatt plant because that Rossi tells you it’s real? Wow.

  6. Referring to timar’s comment below, can a patent be granted based on information (Rossi says …) that is not mentioned in the patent documents?

  7. Reblogged this on The Pathoskeptic and commented:
    LENR fanatics are getting technorgasms over this one. But the rest of the world couldn’t care less.
    Believe me, I would rather have this to be true, just that it is not.
    Who really knows what the truth is. However, very often it is easy to spot a falsehood.
    This patent adds nothing to Andrea Rossi’s credibility.

  8. LENR fanatics are getting technorgasms over this one. But the rest of the world couldn’t care less.

    Believe me, I would rather have this to be true, just that it is not.

    Who really knows what the truth is. However, very often it is easy to spot a falsehood.

    This patent adds nothing to Andrea Rossi’s credibility.

  9. If you actually read the patent, you will understand it means precisely dick.

    That is, as far as cold fusion and LENR are concerned. I am not saying it could not be a nice control system for an Italian water heater. I am not an expert.

  10. Hans-Göran is right. A US patent can only be granted if functionality can either be deduced from established theory or empirically proven. From a theoretical standpoint it is an “impossible patent”, which leaves the only possibility that Rossi has indeed convinced the examiners by providing empirical proof. The fact that the patent has been filed in 4/2012 (as well as Rossi’s answer in the Hydrofusion interview) suggests a long and tedious process of satisfying the examiners’ demands (if the examiners would simply have been fooled by the omission of explicit references to nuclear processes, like mary and others suggest, it certainly wouldn’t have taken that long). The 1MW installion that is supposed to provide heat in a productive context for more than 6 months now would have been the ideal showcase for the examiners for sure. It may be no coincidence that the patent has finally been granted just a few months after this plant went into work.

  11. AN IMPOSSIBLE PATENT.

    The patent contains a fairly good description for building the apparatus. But in total lack of proof that it works the patent should not have been granted. I mean, we are not talking about a new can opener. The patent implies that there is a hitherto unknown nuclear process with close to supernatural properties.

  12. Boy, these pseudoskeptics are pretty pathetic. Get a life, people. Do something, yourselves, rather than trying to tear everyone else down. I should complain about this in my lowbrow, swear-word-filled blog…

  13. No that Rossi finally got a patent on the E-Cat I wonder who will be the first to claim a patent on a troll-powered reality distortion field. Who may have filed first: mary, cimpy or tyy? My bet is on mary. Anyway, there are many people around here who are skilled in the art.

  14. Nice – as it cannot work for real, it will work by law…😀
    Rossi is a champion in this game: he made Petroldragon work for years before entering in jail.

  15. OK, Barty over at LENR Forum posted the link to the actual patent. I predict in a year, those patent examiners will be the laughing stock of their office.

    Interestingly, the patent says that a 1kW is typically used to “invigorate” a 6kW ecat. It’s not for safety anymore, now the heater is for invigoration! And no mention of isotopic shifts which convert the nickel all to nickel-61. Now, the nickel is somehow a catalyst! So the contradictions grow, as usual when Rossi is at work. People shouldn’t lie unless they are smarter by an order of magnitude than the people they lie to. Rossi has yet to learn that lesson but I predict that he will.

  16. Hey Mats, do you have a USPO web site link where this appears? Where did you get the copy of the patent?

    If nickel is not the fuel, what is? What is the presumed nuclear fusion reaction? Why is that not in the patent?

    IMO, all this means, if it’s even real, is that Rossi managed to bamboozle a couple of patent examiners.

    It also means he no longer has any excuse for not getting a proper test by a truly “indipendent” university officially, or a major country’s government lab like Sandia or ORNL. Believers have always used the lack of patent protection as the excuse for Rossi’s failure to get proper testing even once in the 5 years or so that this scam has been going on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s