Industrial Heat makes announcement

JT Vaughn

JT Vaughn

I just received this statement from Andrea Rossi’s US partner Industrial Heat, in an e-mail from its Vice President, JT Vaughn.

Industrial Heat acquired the rights to produce and sell E-Cat based products in South and North America, Russia, China and a few other countries, in 2012.

Update (March 10, 2016): I agree with Torkel Nyberg, arguing in his blogg Sifferkoll that this statement probably is aimed at building credibility and at defending IH and everyone involved with the one-year 1MW test, on which a third party report is expected within a few weeks, from expected attacks by people whose interests are threatened by a cheap, clean, carbon free, versatile and abundant energy source. And by people who have insisted on negating and obstructing every scientific claim regarding LENR or cold fusion in the last decades.

At a certain extent, I also think that IH wants to underline that it has undertaken a one-year test, controlled 24/7 by a respected third party institute (‘ERV’—Expert Responsible for Validation), and that this sets it a part from other companies and groups in the LENR field, from a competition point of view.


“Statement of Industrial Heat regarding LENR Industry Developments

March 10, 2016

Industrial Heat’s objective is to make clean, safe and affordable energy available everywhere, and in doing this we want to build a company that demonstrates respect for all. LENR is a key focus of Industrial Heat and we believe multiple technologies in this sector warrant further investigation and development.
Industrial Heat has licensed, acquired or invested in several LENR technologies from around the world. We have developed a group of LENR thought leaders, and we have built a world- class engineering team. We are pleased with the technologies we have assembled and with the group of scientists and engineers working on them. Presently, the Industrial Heat team is in the midst of assessing and prioritizing the technologies in our portfolio.
Our operating philosophy is to foster scientific and engineering rigor in the development of LENR. We will thoroughly assess data derived from sound experiments which we design, control and monitor. Embracing failure as well as success is important, because we learn from both.
Unfortunately, there is a long and continuing pattern of premature proclamations in the LENR sector. Because of this, we encourage open-minded skepticism. We believe society suffers when technological advances and innovative experimentation are stifled; likewise, society and the industry suffer when results are promoted and claims are made without rigorous verification and precise measurement.
We value credibility through sound LENR research. That’s why any claims made about technologies in our portfolio should only be relied upon if affirmed by Industrial Heat and backed by reputable third parties who have verified our results in repeated experiments.
Our portfolio of work has never been stronger and we remain excited about the potential we see. This optimism is grounded in more than just hope, yet a great deal of work remains. The energy challenges of today must be met with viable, clean, safe and affordable solutions.”


Side Note: The e-mail I received from JT Vaughn was sent in CC to an individual at the global public affairs and strategic communications consultancy firm APCO Worldwide. In Wikipedia, it says on this firm:

“Most public relations firms focus on corporate communications, but APCO is usually hired to handle sensitive political and crisis management issues. Many APCO executives are former prominent government officials, politicians and ambassadors. APCO’s clientele consists of multi-national corporations, governments, politicians, associations and nonprofit organisations.”

Update 3 (March 18, 2016): Also read this comment on APCO’s possible involvement: Something Really Bothers Me About the @ApcoWorldwide #LENR Connection! (‘Maybe IH got sort of an offer they can’t refuse…’). I need to underline that you should be careful with this kind of conspiracy theories. However, it’s interesting to note that there might be significant interests wanting to delay the introduction of commercially viable LENR based energy.


Update 2 (March 11, 2016): Here’s another thought worthy analysis of the situation, by Torkel Nyberg, in a comment at the website E-Cat World:

I believe IH are holding back for several reasons.

1. They value the information advantage. Although this one is not new. Still, there is no product in the market yet. It is work in progress, and the less other entities know, the better for them.

2. They are negotiating continuation of the Ecat series with Rossi and rights to the technology. We dont know the fine print between “manufacturing” and “know how”. Rossi comments supports this thesis.

3. To keep Rossi in line. Releasing report would boost his credibility enormously, possibly leaving IH for Leonardo/Hydro Fusion to build a plant in southern Sweden, with his core innovation team and know how. That would move focus from IH as main LENR player to Leonardo who has the IP. Ie. not good for IH investors; they certainly would like IH to have more control over IP than they have. Rossi comments support this thesis also. As well as IH letter stating only they themselves are credible.

4. Maybe there is an issue with the ERV [Expert Responsible for Validation] entity. Especially if the COP is really good. The downside is huge and upside limited. Negotiations going on here as well?

5. They realize that regardless of ERV report there will be multitude of attacks also on IH stating fraud/scam. The better report the more attacks. It’s easy to invent scenarios of fraud, not having to prove them. Harder to prove one self innocent. This thesis is also supported by the IH letter.

From these perspectives it is actually not difficult to see why IH is holding on to the report. Hopefully Rossi, who benefits the most from a release and is in the loop can put enough pressure on IH to release it anyway.



  1. Thanks Mats
    Rossi and the E Cat is a catalyst for disclosure
    by the by


    LENR NRNF Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Non Radioactive Nuclear Flight US and EU Applied Engineering

    I have watched extremely competent folks preparing this black swan’s flight plan for quite some time. LENR NRNF (non radioactive nuclear flight) is being developed by US and presented in the EU through government grants in civil aviation programs.

    Beyond this…

    I invite discourse


    Liviu Popa Simil – LENR

    Seldon Technologies – LENR

    Genie Reactor – LENR

    Interesting enough and blessings be!

  2. Focus on consequences? Consequences of what? The focus should be on why no adequate test or demonstration of Rossi’s ecat has ever been made. You should ask Rossi to bring one of his ecatX or quark or whatever fancy wonder from his fertile brain he is claiming now and to prove beyond a doubt that it does what he claims. You should ask Rossi who his “customer” is. You should ask Rossi who his mysterious “certificator” is– the one who refuses to certify the old steam temperature ecat and you should ask why, after more than five years of supposed sales, including more than 12 orders from the military, no megawatt plant has ever been shown to the world at large, scientists at large, and the press. Those are the questions that need to be considered before there are any consequences!

  3. Brian, you’re right. The focus will be on consequences. But making it a two-day event I will maybe be able to put some tech stuff in as well. You will see the program if and when the symposium is confirmed.

  4. Mats, congratulations on scheduling Rossi for an interview at the symposium!
    I have a question about the symposium. The symposium seems like it is mostly intended for industry leaders to discuss the impacts of this technology. Do you feel like the symposium will also be of interest and worthwhile for replicators and other layman just interested in the technology?

  5. Teemu, still no news on the report. 21-23 was a mistake, no corrected to June 21-22.

  6. Mats, excellent news!

    How confident did Rossi appear that the report would be released? Does his separate announcement also depend on it, or just the symposium?

    By the way, isn’t June 21-23 a three-day event?

  7. Ok, I can now confirm that Rossi will attend the New Energy World Symposium, not as a speaker but interviewed by me on stage.
    In connection to the symposium, at a separate event, he says he will have some important announcements to make. No date defined.
    The decision to hold the symposium, however, still depends on the result of the one-year 1MW test being released and positive.
    Plans are proceeding meanwhile and there are now more than 200 attendees pre-registered. I’m also considering making it a two-day event, June 21-22, with an option to attend one day only.

  8. Apparently, an inquiry direct to Darden and Vaughn, by Steven Krivit, was the reason IH made a statement. You can read all about that here:

    First part reads:

    “March 10, 2016 – By Steven B. Krivit –

    On Tuesday, New Energy Times sent a news inquiry to Thomas Francis Darden II, the founder and chief executive officer of Cherokee Investment Partners LLC, in Raleigh, North Carolina, which manages the Cherokee Fund. The company operates a group of private equity funds specializing in cleaning up pollution. Darden is also the manager, president and director of Industrial Heat, LLC, one of Cherokee’s businesses. Industrial Heat issued a statement today responding to our inquiry about its low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) activities.”

    … and it continues from there.

  9. I suggest reading the Wikipedia page linked in the article for APCO. Naturally it reinforces my pessimism with respect to the Rossi – IH relationship. Others might infer otherwise.

  10. All the negative posts.
    Yet Industrial heat continues to make business arrangements hire on additional engineers & scientists.

  11. If Rossi’s unnecessary test were a success, IH would have mentioned it. Sounds like they are preparing for a Rossi crash and burn.

  12. So, looks like an exist plan from the e-nut reality to me. Well, that’s not hard.

    In five years nobody would remember anyways.

  13. My interpretation is pessimistic. Rossi has been making flat public claims of massive success for months. Rossi is the guy performing the tests. Rossi is a critical business partner of IH. IH never made a peep. Only now their letter clearly states that any announcements other than those coming formally from IH should not be relied upon. That implicitly and necessarily includes anything Rossi, Matt Lewans, or anybody else says. The letter looks like the first step in disentangling IH from Rossi. BTW Rossi has again in his usual manner said that release of the test report is not his decision to make. So yet again it looks like the public will be left with an unidentified external validator, an unnamed client, and an unrevealed test report.

  14. From the few known facts and the Delphi Oracle like statement from IH I guess that:
    1. The 1 MW plant works. They must have known this for months.
    2. But for the E-Cat X it would have been set for quantity manufacturing.
    3. The E-Cat X is so much better this is the future. Rossi says so.
    4. How to contain the disappointment of further delay? Required because the E-Cat X has only reached its configuration recently. It still needs a long term test – possibly only six months this time as the basics are known. How to avoid competition meanwhile from others who would not bother with a long term test.
    5. If they have the guts, they could start building a manufacturing line without waiting for the test results. If the basic unit is only for 100 W it wouldn’t have to be big and expensive. It could have some built in flexibility.

  15. I agree with Robbie. And that this is the first step to give Rossi the boot he deserves!

  16. @Gunnar
    It was pure speculation on my part, but I originally interpreted the tone of the letter to be laying the ground work for an announcement of disappointing results of the Rossi test, while leaving the door open for some of their other efforts.

    Other explanations I’m reading recently are also plausible.

    IH’s appeal for people (like me for example) to stop speculating and deal with independently verified facts is reassuring. I think I’ll take their advice going forward.

  17. Where is tyy? its all so civilized. We definitely could use some hogwash in the comments…

  18. Maybe Industrial Heat are honest and not part of a scam. Unfortunately there are so many companies and individuals that have been sucked in by wishful thinking. I hope the outcome is not all bad for Industrial Heat,

  19. This is indeed a very strange letter. What is the point? What do they want? To me this is not a person trained in communication who is writing.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s