Let’s join forces to bring out the truth on Rossi-IH affair

truth

[Please continue the discussion on the #2 blog post. This post, with almost 700 comments, has become too slow to load for many users].

[I will update this blog post at the bottom with relevant and sufficiently confirmed information that can be published].

The Rossi-IH affair that broke as news when Andrea Rossi filed a lawsuit on his US licensee Industrial Heat, its representatives Thomas Darden and JT Vaughn, and Darden’s main company, Cherokee Investment Partners in the beginning of April 2016, is getting more and more interesting.

And I want to send out a call to everyone to let us join forces to bringing out the truth in this story, whatever it is, contacting me with any kind of provable information or indication you might have, or supporting people trying to replicate the effect and helping them validate their replications. The outcome is potentially far too important to the world to be settled by lawyers.

The information I have picked up so far is confusing and contradictory. Clearly someone is not telling the whole truth.

I have been elaborating a wide spectrum of hypotheses, ranging between scenarios such as:

  • Rossi not being rational, having nothing but yet insisting on running to the bitter end, convinced of the validity of the E-Cat, or at least of being able to convince others that it works, which would include several people, e.g. the ERV Penon, being either completely incompetent or bribed.
  • Rossi having COP > 50 and IH knowing this but not being able to replicate, even though Rossi according to the license agreement should have transferred this knowhow, implying that Rossi still has retained some essential part of the method.

As for the pieces of the puzzle:

  • It’s well-known that all documented tests of the E-Cat have flaws that potentially makes them include the possibility that it doesn’t work at all. Not much can be added here. However, most of these calculations have been made by people being seemingly convinced that LENR is impossible.
  • It’s worth noting that if Rossi was a fraudster and that the E-Cat and the 1MW didn’t produce any excess energy, it would be a piece of cake to take him to court and finish the story there. As Torkel Nyberg ‘Sifferkoll’ pointed out yesterday (well worth reading, indicating why it would be important for IH to save the license agreement, why it still cannot allow to pay $89M, and why it needs to proceed slowly), you certainly don’t need the number one Crisis Control PR Agency APCO Worldwide and the number one US law firm Jones Day to do that. It just doesn’t make sense.
  • The person at APCO who was cc:ed when IH sent out its statement was Mr. Brian McLaughlin, who is also mentioned by Sifferkoll.
  • I know that Tom Darden has recently met with people I personally know, not far away from me, claiming that the 1MW test was technically and fundamentally flawed and that COP was around 1, that there was no production in the customer’s factory, that the customer didn’t seem trustworthy to them, and that IH has not been able to replicate Rossi’s claims.
  • I have strong indications that IH already before the lawsuit knew that Rossi had a working technology but again claimed that they didn’t know how he did it.
  • At least one person [Dewey Weaver, see update below] with close connection to Darden, also financially, is contacting key persons around Rossi, trying to convince them that Rossi is a fraudster and that they would be wise to stop collaborating with him or at least be careful not supporting him in any way. The message also includes claims that IH through its investigation continuously discovers deceptive behaviour by Rossi.

This is part of what I know so far. I ask you to draw your own conclusions, and again I ask you to share whatever you know with regard to this story.

Even if we consider the probability very low for LENR to be possible, I urge that you honestly consider two things:

  • In case it really works, would you like a possible transition to LENR based energy in the world to be governed mostly by the work and actions of lawyers and lobbyists at APCO Worldwide and Jones Day?
  • Admitting that there might be at least a minor possibility that the E-Cat and LENR is valid, on which side would you prefer to be—those who fight for it to be used to get away from fossil fuels and provide cheap and clean energy to everyone on Earth as soon as possible, or those who are trying to stop it, referring to the possibility that Rossi is a fraudster, or at least slow down the transition in order to protect some powerful people’s interests?

Having answered these two questions, you can make up your mind on how you would like to contribute to the outcome of the affair that’s going on. And whatever decision you take, I strongly suggest that we all join forces to bringing out the truth and make this affair and its implications as visible to the world as possible.

I also suggest that all people who are working with replications attempts and believe that they have a positive result, try to validate the result with the help of independent institutions and make them public.

Lastly, I guarantee that I will protect the identity of people who contact me to share sensible information, if that is required. 

We need to do this together.

§

UPDATES to this blog post here below.

April 20. Today a comment was published on Rossi’s blog, regarding an individual called John Dewey Weaver, working at the venture capital group Deep River Ventures, in Raleigh, North Carolina. I can confirm that Dewey Weaver is the person I referred to above, with connections to Darden, contacting key persons around Rossi, and I have proof of his activities. We also know that Dewey Weaver signed a document regarding a resolution in the UK based company IH Holdings International Limited, apparently indicating that Deep River Ventures invested in that company. I also have got some specific comments on some of Weaver’s earlier activities in the LENR field and I will try to confirm this and report on them. I would say that what I heard is not very flattering.

April 23. Several companies have been formed in connection with Industrial Heat. This is discussed in Rossi’s lawsuit, and has also been noted on forums and blogs, e.g. E-Cat World. The example discussed there, and also brought up in a comment below, is that a request was filed on October 6, 2014, for Applicant Organization Change from Industrial Heat, Inc. to IPH International BV, regarding the patent application that IH filed for Rossi’s E-Cat on May, 2, 2013 (correct me if I got this wrong). IPH International BV is a Dutch company and one of the defendants in Rossi’s lawsuit. It’s owned by UK based IPHBV Holdings Ltd, which has Francis Thomas Darden II as the enterprise’s solitary managing director form March 26, 2015. IPHBV Holdings Ltd has the same address as IH Holdings International Ltd in the update above.
More (added later April 23): Before being owned by UK based IPHBV Holdings Ltd, IPH International BV was a subsidiary of Texas based NRG Energy Inc, a Fortune 200 company with  business in conventional, solar, wind, thermal and nuclear energy. IPH International BV has the same address, and possible connection to First Names Group and Boart Longyear International BV, which is in turn connected to NRG Energy Inc.
NRG Energy Inc also happens to be a client of Jones Day, the law firm chosen by IH.
All this should, among other things, be seen in the light of the approx $50M investment by UK based Woodford in IH, and that the IH license didn’t cover Europe.

April 23. I have been talking to people having visited the 1MW plant and meeting with the customer during first half of 2015, showing them pictures taken at the registered address for the customer JM Products—7861, 46th Street, Doral, Fl 33166. They say that it looks very much like the place they visited, noting details such as the stairs leading up to the entrance at the back of the building—an area where trucks can load and unload cargo. I and other persons have tried to call the telephone number listed for JM Products, (786) 631-4676, a number that was also written on a business card I have seen, but there was no answer.

April 23. Thought worthy interview with David French, patent attorney from Ottawa, Canada, by Marianne Macy for Infinite Energy Magazine, on Rossi’s lawsuit. Read more here.

April 24. I have received a copy of an electricity statement by Florida Power & Light Company, issued on JM Chemical Products Corp., for the period February 2 until March 2, 2015. The total amount of energy consumed is 7,251 kWh. Depending on when the plant was put in operation for the one-year test (assuming at the latest February 16) this indicates an average consumption of about 10 to 20 kWh per hour. The Service Address on the statement is 7861 NW 46th Street, Doral, FL 33166-5470, which is the same as the official address listed for JM Products, and also where photos were taken that according to visitors to the plant looked like the place they visited. The amount charged is $1,266, while the amount for the previous month was $309, which is about a quarter, possibly indicating some early test activity.
This statement proves that electricity corresponding to what the 1MW plant should have consumed at a successful COP of about 50 has been consumed at the address reportedly being where the test was undertaken. It doesn’t prove any production by the customer, nor anything about the amount of energy produced by the MW plant, and consequently nothing about the COP. My source is not Rossi.
Added (April 25): There was a handwritten note on the bill saying: ‘~1MWh/day, COP 24’.
This could mean that the 28 day statement referred to a situation where electricity was consumed only for about seven days of effective operation in that period.

Advertisements

671 comments

  1. I find what is happening now no surprise, I was involved in the days when Defkalion were Rossis agents and there was a battle going on then Defkalions intentions were noble enough in the begining but shadow corporates slamed the brakes on back in 2010

  2. Mats –

    There are many technical issues where probabilities come into it, and it is a judgement call. The issue over the Lugano emmissivity is simple math and no judgement call. They got it wrong and have no evidence, neither the COP value nor the acceleration show excess heat.

    I find it shaneful that semi-technical people like you cannot identify such a clear issue.

    Where a judgement call comes into Lugano is that actually the method used is likely to be inaccurate for reasons that Lugano testers did not consider – alumina goes translucent. That is impossible to quantify and does of course not show excess heat, but means that you cannot on the basis of this experiment rule out quite large errors and hence maybe COP=1.5 excess heat.

    But then with no experiment at all you cannot rule out COP=100!

  3. Cimpy – apologies for this late response. I’m busy and don’t have time to stay on this highly entertaining site. It would great if Mats could figure out how to improve performance of the blog.

    If you’re asking whether I would consider suing Darden over the IH investment then the answer is no.
    He made it clear that this was a long term, high-rsk, cause oriented mission. He was clear and firm regarding the risk profile. We might lose our money, we might crush it, we make make a small return.

    IH will move into applied engineering once something verifies. If that doesn’t happen in a reasonable time line then IH is not giving up – the focus becomes more R&D oriented. Many promising signals have manifested and I actually have great hope that LENR, or some derivative therein, will become a useful energy source for all strata of humanity, perhaps in our collective lifetimes.

  4. @darden_men nckhawk
    As any of our student knows powders have MUCH more reactive surface than any bars.
    For your records Focardi left Piantelli for Rossi because he had verified himself that the reactor of Rossi was producing energy while all the “cells” that Piantelli was sending to Bologna were NOT.
    In fact Piantelli had never sent a working device to Bologna and his experiments were never verified.
    @Cimpy Eng means Engineer . Do not insult others. Mats please act as a moderator and remove insulting posts.

  5. This what woodford funds said on there
    blog on March 2016 regarding I.H.

    With regard to Industrial Heat, we were, and have been, very aware of the scepticism about LENR technology. The company is currently working with numerous scientists and is acquiring both the technology and teams required to maximise the potential of this, and other, new energy technologies.
    The company recently said that it is willing to invest time and resources to see if this technology might be an area of useful research in its quest to eliminate pollution.

  6. Mats – if you give me names at Bologna U who disagree with my analysis I’ll happily communicate with them privately and explain to them why they are wrong. it is quite a subtle issue. Or – better – do they have any written disagreement with my paper? I can then follow their thoughts and identify what they are missing.

    As I’ve said – the issue is easy to miss.

  7. With only a handful of exceptions, this posse is not putting many IQ points on the board. That needs to be part of the post- combat study as well. P&F were accused of being frauds and fled the country. History is going to prove them to be heroes. Thankfully, a determined remnant survived and stayed at the grindstone. As a result, with applied resources from private capital because no one else would step up, LENR has a chance at solving some big problems in our lifetime. In due time, we’ll see how history treats them as well as the present hero of a dwindling bunch of hard core fanboys.

  8. @darden guy aka nckhawk. Powders have much more reactive surface then bars. This is a very basic concept that any student knows.
    Focardi left Piantelli for Rossi because Focardi has verified himself that Rossi Ecat was working while the “reactors” that Piantelli was sending to Bologna ware NOT. In fact Piantelli NEVER sent a working reactor to Bologna and Piantelli experiments, were NEVER verified.
    @Cimpy Eng means Engineer. I would like to ask Mats to reject this kind of insulting posts.

  9. “Rossi continues to behave like a man with something to hide. He has chosen the court of public domain with his decision to litigate.”

    Good plan. If ever I need somewhere to hide I’ll do it in the witness box of a state court.

    What about testing carried out in NC?

  10. @NewGuest

    I don’t care whether the license agreements granted by Leonardo remain valid or not, because I believe that they are worthless anyway.

    Ok. So in your opinion. It would be a great way to solve the issue to hand back the license to Rossi in a settlement, since it is worthless to you and may have a value to Rossi?

    @nckhawk

    I might be wrong about this but my interpretation is that the IH license with Leonardo is a valid paid-up license.

    That might be so, but what about the future? Do you want it to still be valid? If that is not the case, a very easy and cheap path for IH to get out of this mess would be to hand it back to Rossi? Right?

    (but, the fact that you do not dare to state it to be worthless, in combination with all your other slandering of everything involved, says a lot. Dont you think?)

  11. Mats – IH decided to padlock the 1MW container after observing and documenting many disappointing actions and facts. Rossi decided to put his padlock on as well. Both padlocks better still be in place.

  12. Guest – a very nice summary and interpretation of the Lugano / replication efforts. While you have missed on a couple of points, for the most part you nail it. I look forward to figuring out who you are as we soljourn along. The IH risk factors for qualified and interested investors basically scream out – don’t invest unless you can stomach the risk and will be okay if you lose your investment. IH has done a good job with disclaimers and made it clear to investors from inception that they have never believed everything that Rossi said. There was hope that what Rossi had was real but sadly, what he provided to IH didn’t work. Rossi continues to behave like a man with something to hide. He has chosen the court of public domain with his decision to litigate. Based on what many folks now know, he will not be able to hide much longer.

  13. Sorry – corrected response to Timar – not Bob:
    Timar – Please correct me if I’m wrong – I thought Piantelli’s experimental success was in working with Ni bar, not powders. That was one of the reasons that Focardi abandoned Piantelli for Rossi. Rossi wanted to use larger masses of powders and higher power inputs and Focardi liked that idea. My reference was to NI-H powder experiments. We’ll all be very happy if one of these verifies. Your thoughts?

  14. I don’t claim to know which emissivity value is the right one to use (Thomas has strong opinions on that, and as Mats mentioned if you’re interested you should read his paper rather than have him repeat here).

    I am simply stating that as I understand it there was some contention within IH that a different value should be used. For whatever reason, I believe they then decided to explore alternative test setups where thermo imaging was not required.

    The detailed technical stuff here actually explains how IH and I expect Woodford could have been convinced by the Lugano results even though there was this disagreement about emmissivity and many people, including andrea.s, had noted this. See my post below.

    @Mats – sometimes the more subtle technical details do actually help to explain otherwise weird business facts, so I hope you will be patient with the post below that seems off topic and technical but is actually to the point. from nckhawk’s comments below (and also I think what Rossi said at the time) the Lugano test was quite influential in persuading parties to go ahead.

  15. Bob – Please correct me if I’m wrong – I thought Piantelli’s experimental success was in working with Ni bar, not powders. That was one of the reasons that Focardi abandoned Piantelli for Rossi. Rossi wanted to use larger masses of powders and higher power inputs and Focardi liked that idea. My reference was to NI-H powder experiments. We’ll all be very happy if one of these verifies. Your thoughts?

  16. @Thomas I was not going to write this, but since you already seem to have taken peoples advise to focus less on those first tests details, I dare try again to make you think even further of the following:

    You end by sentence *The focus should be on the quality and honesty of his evidence, not speculation about whether he really has what he claims.* In practice I agree, especially latter part, but as we most understand since so much conflicting semi-info, there is no way we would know what the reality is before we get hard independent evidence to direction or other. That could happen by hard evidence to surface, or in court hearings or later or by working devices publicly available for independent investigation. Because there is so much obfuscation of, and by, competition etc, we cannot find final truth by looking data of early technology tests or even more recent postings, which could be pure exaggeration and misleading to keep competition on their starting pit, or keep believers on believing etc. if you like.

    Until that, I would add one important item to your list. And that is, even not direct topic of this thread, we should have responsibility to make sure any kind of astroturfing or conspiracies does not succeed on planting ‘wrong truths’ on public opinion supporting court case to direction or another. More transparency we have and bigger, active community we have, ‘they’, if ever exist, have less chance to make wrong info affecting outcome of development of this technology and business, in court case and after.

    If you don’t believe this pls, start reading this thread from the oldest post, focusing how some comments started on pretty massive insinuating, threatening, bashing, proving or even with direct ‘shut up’ messages. Without careful watchdogging by many here, we could already all have prematurely agreed that e-cat cannot be real. In my opinion community has already proven its power against possible new attacks, and open uncensored forum is good platform for that. You may want to comment what your role is in this light.

    Until next twist, vuh.

  17. Gunnar,

    The authors stated that the “dots of known emmissivity” would detach from the hotter body so they only used them on the colder side rods. Why not use a thermocouple for at least a ballpark confirmation is a mystery.

    Plus, their use of total emmissivity is a mistake. They should have used the spectral emmissivity integrated over the Optris camera range of sensitivity 7 to 13 μm which happens to be a region of high emmissivity for alumina. Total emmissivity is the integral of spectral emmissivity over the entire spectrum of blackbody radiation, and elsewhere the spectral emmissivity is much lower.

    Absolutely, but the result errors, even without the expected control, hinge on a subtle technical argument. For example the Lugano authors (aware of their weakness in temperature controls) point out that the acceleration in calculated COP (from 3.2 to 3.6) over a small range of temperatures (1250C to 1400C) is evidence; a 100W input change leads to a 900W output change, surely too large for any emmissivity error to generate.

    That is untrue, but only because of a very subtle issue: the miscalculation due to emmissivity issues is highly nonlinear with temperature. In fact in my paper I calculate this, and give a hand wavy explanation, but do not fully explain this and many people still reading that write-up would remain unsure it was correct without completing the calculations for themselves – which is why I included the code. You can do the same thing with careful use of a web calculator giving band spectral radiance and that in the end was how, after this paper was written, I best managed to explain it.

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ClarkeTcommentont.pdf

    This artifact, which is what got me particularly interested in Rossi’s stuff, is impossible for a non-technical guy to evaluate and indeed even technical guys would need a lot of work from first principles to understand it fully. So I can imagine IH and Woodford having the emmissivity issue in their minds but still seeing the acceleration in COP (where a small change in temperature leads to a large change in COP) as very strong evidence the device works. I myself thought that until I did the detailed calculations. I then had to spend a good deal of extra time understanding why the calculations did what they did.

    It is worth also noting that I had some confidence in the (surprising) calculations because without fudge factors and independent of the various numbers that must be approximated they always showed that the COP acceleration vanished. The real calculated COP was identical to within 0.5% for the two different temperatures.

  18. I’d like to give my opinion about this attempt to ridicule those of us who are convinced the Rossi Effect is an indisputable reality: there is no doubt the potential of the Energy Catalyzer could persuade certain parties to conspire together!

    As one of those raising this issue I’m not ridiculing you, just indicating why your proposition is unlikely. It is easy to construct any theory that fits the facts if you allow an arbitrary number of the principals to have a secret agenda and be deceptive.

    You claim in defence of this that given proven disruptive technology, conspiracy is likely.

    The problem with that indirect argument is that given proven disruptive technology, massive interest and investment from any number of major players who want to make money out of it is also likely, and keeping international secrets is difficult. If you up the stakes for evil forces wanting to suppress a new thing you also up the stakes for entrepeneurs with major resources wanting to exploit it.

    At any stage in the last 5 years, including now, Rossi has had the option of harnessing those major positive forces, and has not done so.

    The “major forces” arguments are all speculative, but in any case cancel each other out.

    We are left with the likelihood of a simple solution to the evidence.

  19. @DNI

    if the e-cat do work …..

    or

    if the e-cat is a fraud ….

    Your argument is an example of where I think the speculation here goes off-beam. There are possibilities where the e-cat does not work, but is not completely or even perhaps at all a fraud. You might see this as, for example, as a matter of technical incompetence (proven by Mats over the electrical measurement issue), and an exceptional inability to listen to others and correct errors (shown in many tests). For those like me who tend to see incompetence as more usual than conspiracy or deceit these possibilities are real.

    Many here will call this “incompetence, delusion, and over-enthusiastic claim” option fraud. I’m not interested in whether that is true or no. It is not easy to determine, everyone agrees here that lying is not identical to fraud. The point is that it appears from the outside very different from “cynical, calculated, rational fraud”. It may be (in parts) irrational, emotional, passionate, and can easily be confused with a genuine but suffering inventor committed to his cause.

    And the take-home from this is that a binary “either-or” tree analysis can easily lead you astray.

  20. The replicators and other scientist and companies that claim working LENR don’t have to be involved in Rossis fraud. They can either be mistaken, trying to make money on their one fraud or actually have something working.

    This is an example of why support for Rossi is so poisonous for LENR research generally.

    Rossi is an outlier. A very eccentric and unusual individual with an extraordinary ability to create enthusiasm for energy ideas that if they were real would be transformative. Unfortunately his promise is not matched by technical success.

    Rossi’s take-up of LENR is remarkable only in that there is a hope within the LENR community (it seems to me from the outside) for the breakthrough everyone feels should happen given the science. This has been longer coming than anyone expected and so there is perhaps a willingness to believe claims that fit what is hoped.

    That makes LENR a naturally good area for Rossi to generate enthusiasm, and it leads some of those who support LENR research to the lose their natural skepticism of anyone with Rossi’s claims and behaviour.

    However, Rossi’s antics have no parallel with genuine LENR research. When this is of high quality it will be resolving anomalies and understanding more about these complex metal/hydrogen systems. if that leads to ways in which LENR can happen that will indeed be transformative. If it leads to a better understanding of these systems without evidence for LENR that will be less interesting but still good science.

    These comments remain true whether Rossi has something that works (a bit) or not. After all many others claim to have something that works (a bit). His ability to generate repeated false tests and refusal to adopt good test practice even when this is as clear as using the right voltmeter is a problem and makes his contribution very negative. The focus should be on the quality and honesty of his evidence, not speculation about whether he really has what he claims.

  21. Hank Mills said:

    ‘Conspiracies are REAL folks. They happen all the time. And I’m not talking about more “exotic” claims of alien abductions by little gray guys with big black eyes from a galaxy far away. I’m talking about men and women covering up evidence of marriage infidelity, employees hiding their track when they steal from their employers, companies paying accountants to manipulate their financial data in a beneficial way that may be less than fully legal, government leaders withholding damaging documents, etc. Conspiracies big and small happen all the time.’

    And he is quite correct. There was a time when corporate lies were a fringe part of the business model, things like ‘our washing powder is superior to all others’. These days these are merely considered to be ‘spin’. But now there is a new corporate model -the lie as the central plank of a business plan. And if you get caught, blame it on the Janitor.

    Recent clear examples? VW, and now almost every other motor manufacturer (most recently Mitsubishi) has admitted to systematically lying about emissions. And they must have initially agreed together to do this -otherwise they would have called each other out on it – which indeed is what happened after VW got caught. “It wasn’t just us, everybody doesit’.

    So for lies to be central to the business model of any business sector dominated by flows of investor capital and huge companies should never be a surprise. Lies often aided and abetted by governments.

    And btw – I still want to know if there were tests carried out by IH in NC before WPCT were on the scene? An important question – but it appears that nchawk or guest don’t want to answer that one.

  22. Not much new information, but since purpose of this thread. In march 2, 2015
    M.Eng Fulvio Fabiani was CEO of USQL LLC, so it all has been public already.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/05/06/domestic-heater-e-cat-photo/

    -If new fire logo there looks familiar, it is same, with text and all, as official in ecat.com. Only dot has different color.

    -What comes to my opinion, I have always considered Fabiani being man trusted by Rossi, today we can not be sure either way, since he went back to USQL. Rossis recent answer in JONP when he was asked about move was ‘No comment’. If IH would have not known of their relation, that would mean only that they did not their homework or in the beginning they were so highly trusting Rossis technology that it didn’t matter. Title is not main question IMO.

    @Matts Many has complained that page loads slow, maybe you could consider to simply add new page ‘bringing out the truth #2’ just to make browsing easier. This page will remain search able history anyway.
    I also think some versions of WP had limit on comments section size.

  23. Hank Mills,
    Excuse my bad English.
    There is an article in the Russian patent law on the basis of which the state has the right to do absolutely any patent secret, if it considers it necessary for national security and military purposes.
    I think there is a similar article in the American patent law.
    When registering the patent and technical expertise, experts consider any patent in terms of military purposes.
    And if there is an interest of the state, this patent makes a secret and are removed from public access.
    The question is, if there is a “conspiracy theory” why patent Industrial Heat was no secret to the US Navy and the US Army?
    it would be easier to classify the invention than a conspiracy theory.

    Here is an example from his practice.
    I have applied for invention patent in Russian society on the device with sodium borohydride, platinum and heat-emission electric drive based on cesium.
    But in the patent was denied, technical expert claimed he did not know the word “absorption” and my device will explode. Complete nonsense! However, I have a year to appeal against this decision but without a positive decision.In private conversation I was told that I might have repeated military patent.

  24. Ok folks, thanks–we won’t get any longer regarding conspiracy and engineers. If you don’t have something essential to add, please continue look for more useful info.

  25. I once met a man who had a goose that lays eggs of pure gold. That may sound impossible, but the implications if it is true are huge, and the benefits to humanity immense, so this needed to be investigated. He showed it to me in a huge dark hall. I wasn’t allowed to come within twenty feet of the goose. I was not allowed to touch it. The man occasionally switched the light on and off. It was undeniable that once thick smoke had disappeared from the stage, there was a goose and an egg that glimmered just like gold.

    He sold the goose to me together with a scientific spell to whisper into the ears of the goose for it to lay its precious eggs. I have now whispered the scientific spell for one year without seeing any golden eggs. Considering the humungous profit if I can make it work, I will continue to whisper the spell for as long as I live.

  26. @Hank Mills

    If the E-cat is a fraud:
    It don’t have to be that many people involved in what you call a conspiracy. I would say Rossi, Levi, Penon and Fulvio would be enough. And I’m not even sure all of them has to be involved. Some of them might be fooled. I would not call that a conspiracy. The replicators and other scientist and companies that claim working LENR don’t have to be involved in Rossis fraud. They can either be mistaken, trying to make money on their one fraud or actually have something working. But even if more than one person is trying to commit the same type of fraud this does not make it a conspiracy.

    If the E-cat do work and IH knows this:
    Then I can see three possible scenarios. But only one of them involves what I would call a conspiracy.
    – Scenario 1. IH think they can make more money on E-cat and/or LENR by in some way trick Rossi.
    – Scenario 2. This is the only case that I would call a conspiracy. This is where numerous companies and in some hypothesis also governments are involved in trying to delay and/or stop LENR. This scenario I think is silly because I think a working E-cat would be impossible to stop. At least without killing Rossi because if it works he could prove this in a week and since Rossi is still alive I rule this one out.
    – Scenario 3. One could perhaps argue that IH/Cherooke/Darden is trying to stop E-cat because they have money in competing technologies like sun and wind. But if they are convinced about the E-cat they could of course sell those assets and go all in on the E-cat making enormously much money. So I find also this hypothesis unlikely.

    If the E-cat do work but IH don’t believe it or at least they are not sure.
    This would also explain the present situation in a reasonable way.

  27. The English language definition of engineer is…”A person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
    It has nothing to do with the pre-nomial title of ‘Ing’. used in parts of Europe

    I am sure you’re right, mr Smith, and this should be also the reason because of Fabiani declared smene else sted a fake profile of his degrees on lnked in where it remained for years) – and it should account also for same title Rossi buied for himself: it was only a matrer of language – english, against all the other part of the world, including Usa and most of Europe…

  28. Someone recently stated that those individuals who still think the E-Cat works after Industrial Heat’s condemnation of the technology must now resort to “conspiracy theories” to explain the current state of affairs. Without trepidation, I’d like to give my opinion about this attempt to ridicule those of us who are convinced the Rossi Effect is an indisputable reality: there is no doubt the potential of the Energy Catalyzer could persuade certain parties to conspire together!

    If the E-Cat works like several successful replicators and Andrea Rossi have determined, the technology is nothing short of the most fabulous treasure ever revealed to mankind.

    — It’s worth trillions of dollars.

    — It’s capable of toppling all other energy industries.

    — It’s capable of changing the world in many fundamental ways.

    — It’s the closest thing the world will probably ever have to a near zero cost energy technology.

    These are FACTS. If the E-Cat really produces a kilowatt of thermal power per gram of fuel, uses no radioactive materials, produces no nuclear waste, emits no significant ionizing radiation, provides ultra high temperatures of over 1480C (the operating temp of the “Quark”), and is capable of long periods of self sustain no one can dispute the above points.

    Deny the reality of this technology all you want! But even in the most hypothetical of situations, if it were real, the technology would be a paradigm shattering bull capable of trampling over all existing forms of energy production. Oil, gas, solar, wind, and conventional nuclear technologies would be like fragile ceramic tea cups about to be shattered.

    They say money and power corrupts. I believe this is true, but I don’t know first hand. I’m the opposite of influential or wealthy. However, if I were someone with a large financial stake in the energy sector, I’d be shaking in my boots right now: especially if I were involved in solar or wind. These two industries (along with others) depend heavily on tax breaks and grants from governments and large amount of investment capital. If any technology with the performance and capabilities of the E-Cat emerged on the scene (regardless if it used nickel and lithium or green eggs and ham) and was accepted as an absolute reality by the “mainstream” science community and media, these benefits would come to a screeching halt. To hold stock, provide grants, invest money, or give a tax break to a solar power company would be like investing in the kerosene lamp instead of Light Emitting Diodes. Doing so would be completely illogical and irrational.

    So, lets apply this logic to the scenario that the E-Cat works as claimed, third parties have successfully replicated the technology, and the one year test of the 1MW plant performed acceptably.

    If the technology works and Industrial Heat allegedly (we haven’t really received much direct communication from them) claims that the E-Cat technology has never produced excess heat and the one megawatt plant didn’t function, then they would be saying something untrue. Pick you’re word. Spreading false information, baring false witness, being deceitful, or flat out lying. Nothing else would fit.

    And if they were intentionally being less than honest — knowing that the technology did work — there must be a reason for them to “conspire” together to perpetuate the falsehood. Most likely, because not telling the truth would benefit them in some way.

    That is why most people lie: they think being dishonest will protect them or bring them some benefit.

    This fits the definition of a conspiracy.

    Conspiracies are REAL folks. They happen all the time. And I’m not talking about more “exotic” claims of alien abductions by little gray guys with big black eyes from a galaxy far away. I’m talking about men and women covering up evidence of marriage infidelity, employees hiding their track when they steal from their employers, companies paying accountants to manipulate their financial data in a beneficial way that may be less than fully legal, government leaders withholding damaging documents, etc. Conspiracies big and small happen all the time.

    And, to be fair to the cynics, if the E-Cat never worked, the one megawatt plant never worked, and no replicator had ever “really” produced excess heat, the skeptics and cynics of the world would POUNCE and have a FIELD DAY over how Andrea Rossi illegally and criminally “CONSPIRED” to fool journalists, investors, researchers, customers, etc.

    You can’t have it both ways. The “C” word (conspiracy) can’t be implied as “dirty” and “scandalous” some of the time and perfectly acceptable other times. However, the cynics want to make it seem that anyone who claims the possibility of a conspiracy in support of an exotic new technology is nothing but a woo woo filled nutcase. But they don’t seem to have a problem with throwing accusations of conspiracy — even if they don’t always use the exact term — at these inventors.

    I am not ashamed one tiny bit that I feel it is much more probable that I.H. has perpetuated a conspiracy rather than Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation. By trying to attack the concept that people in this world do indeed work together to conceal truth and lie for their own benefit, while making the same accusations of alternative energy inventors, you are the definition of hypocrite.

    It doesn’t matter who is right and who is wrong. From my point of view, twenty years from now Rossi will be recorded as one of humanities most important inventors. The cynics think that he’ll be in the same record books as a criminal fraudster. Either way, we both supported the idea that SOMEONE or a GROUP of individuals were conspiring together.

    So grow up and stop trying to launch sly mocking attacks. State your opinions and say what you think. Be honest, open, and truthful. But don’t call the kettle black when you’re a cast iron frying pan. We all believe in conspiracies. When you recognize that, we’ll all get along a little better.

  29. Hello Everyone,

    If Industrial Heat did indeed attempt to replicate, I wonder if they tried to build not only Rossi’s newer reactors, but did they test replicas of his older systems. As an example, take the reactor that Dr. Levi tested that used pressurized hydrogen from a tank that produced an average of 15 kilowatts for 18 hours (with a spike of 130 kilowatts). This system only utilized a little over a kilowatt of input for less than ten minutes to trigger the reactions. Afterwards, the reactor self sustained, consuming under a hundred watts — only the electricity needed to power the control box. From what I’ve read and heard, the reaction was so powerful Dr. Levi was told by Rossi to vent hydrogen pressure to slow the reaction rate.

    According to the agreement between IH and Leonardo Corp, ALL E-Cat IP was to be transferred after the ten million dollars was paid. Either IH checked to make sure this IP contained FULL DETAILS of this early device (which seemed to have absolutely amazing performance) or they were negligent in not asking for the information. In my opinion, before they built and tested any other system, they should have attempted to replicate this reactor with nearly INFINITE COP.

    If they have the details to replicate this device, then I URGE THEM TO DO SO IMMEDIATELY.

    If they have the details and do not attempt to replicate this device ALONG WITH HIS OTHER EARLY PRE-HOT CAT reactors, they cannot ethically claim they were unable to replicate the technology.

    To give IH the benefit of the doubt, maybe there were CERTAIN reactors they were unable to replicate (I should note here that Rossi claims they were successfully able to replicate). However, I think this early reactor should have been replicated first.

    Please, IH, if you have not already attempted to do so, replicate this reactor!

  30. Sorry, Mats & all – I’m afraid it ain’t anything new either, but please don’t forget axiom #9:

    😉

  31. @Cimpy. Mats twisted nothing. The English language definition of engineer is…”A person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
    It has nothing to do with the pre-nomial title of ‘Ing’. used in parts of Europe. I certainly found it confusing when I first started doing business in Italy, for here we would use the post-nomial term ‘C.Eng’ -after the name and not before it. Just ‘engineer’ can be the guy who fixes your car.

  32. How nany here know Fabiani paid Levi after TPR2 with a ridiculous excuse like find some students to prepare a thesis on pinball machines?

    How many know Fabiani curriculum was filked with a fake engineer title, and later – when investigation on fake started, he declared that infos hd been falsely added to web by someone else – a couple of years after an ECW article on Fabiani citing same fake infos?

    Mats himself, the man loking for truth, spoke of engineer Fabiani. when questioned, he started twisting again definition of engineer as “a man with mechanical ability” or the like…

  33. Gunnar,

    The authors stated that the “dots of known emissivity” would detach from the hotter body so they only used them on the colder side rods. Why not use a thermocouple for at least a ballpark confirmation is a mystery.

    Plus, their use of total emissivity is a mistake. They should have used the spectral emissivity integrated over the Optris camera range of sensitivity 7 to 13 μm which happens to be a region of high emissivity for alumina. Total emissivity is the integral of spectral emissivity over the entire spectrum of blackbody radiation, and elsewhere the spectral emissivity is much lower.

  34. It should be interesting to know why the Lugano professors choose to measure the temperature with a camera and nothing else. If it was Rossi’s decision, they could have included a reservation in their report stating that the method was not optimal.

  35. Hermano Tobia wrote:

    @Guest
    I find it quite incredibile that the doubt about emissivity has not been sorted out in the simplest and most straightforward way: take an empty dogbone, put an electric heater in it… etc.


    This should astound and amaze everyone who knows the most basic principles of scientific measurements. But it doesn’t seem to. For example, Mats, the Swedish professors, Levi, Dr. Josephson, the principals at IH and Woodford, and virtually every Rossi enthusiast on LENR Forum and Ecatworld.com, all seem to take this absurdity in stride. The whole controversy could have been settled in one or a few afternoons in the lab.

  36. @Timar

    I am not disputing that Fulvio Fabiani submitted bills and got paid by IH.

    I am not sure that that legally makes him their representative (if so, then would anyone doing contract work for a company be considered a representative of that company?), but that’s up for the courts to say.

    I’m just pointing out that if Fabiani continues to be under Rossi’s employ in some form or another, he probably shouldn’t be viewed as an IH spokesperson.

    I understood the point of this effort to be to find the facts, not to determine who will win a lawsuit.

    I think this is a reasonable fact to include – Fabio Fulviani who was asserted to be the IH representative for the one year test is a long-time Rossi associate who has no ongoing affiliation with IH, was apparently not viewed by IH as their representative (per NCKhawk’s comments), and who does have an ongoing business affiliation with Rossi.

  37. Hermano Tobia,

    What else is needed to convince you that emissivity was flawed in the Lugano report?

    MFMP ran a dummy replica of the hot-cat and measured its temperature with the same optris camera, and temperature error was outrageous when using the Lugano testers’ emissivity data.

    There were quite a few white papers explaining the mistake, including mine:

    http://cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123579764_1.pdf
    http://cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123579764_2.pdf

    The heat computation method by thermography was questionable but not wrong. What was outrageously wrong was the temperature, because of the mistaken emissivity.

  38. randombit0 what do you think about the current lawsuit? I think your opinion might be relevant in this discussion!

  39. @Randombito and @Hermano

    I make no claim to know anything about emissivity – I don’t.

    I am not trying to introduce false information.

    I don’t claim to know which emissivity value is the right one to use (Thomas has strong opinions on that, and as Mats mentioned if you’re interested you should read his paper rather than have him repeat here).

    I am simply stating that as I understand it there was some contention within IH that a different value should be used. For whatever reason, I believe they then decided to explore alternative test setups where thermo imaging was not required.

  40. Ok, I think the issue with emissivity is going to kick start Thomas again. So please, keep it short. I suggest you refer to your paper Thomas, and accept that everyone doesn’t agree with your analysis (the people at Bologna U for example).

  41. @Guest:

    If claim 67 is true (and Rossi would have to be insane if it wasn’t, moreover as you should know Fabiani had already confirmed to Mats that he was paid by IH), Fabiani was a “representative” of IH simplty because they set up a contract with him and payed him for his work. That makes him their representative. It doesn’t matter technically nor legally whether Rossi was his former employee, brother-in-law, war comrade or partner in crime.

  42. Dear IH Guest, please don’t mess up with thinks you don’t know or better to say do not try to spam false information as real. If you were well informed you should know that for the alumina emissivity the research committee has used a) calibration dots where possible, b) a valid source of data was used for alumina emissivity c) the group has done an X.Ray analysis of the reactor material confirming that was of pure alumina……The report is still available from the UniBo AMS acta site http://amsacta.unibo.it/4084/ after more then one year, for you to read,

  43. @Guest

    I find it quite incredibile that the doubt about emissivity has not been sorted out in the simplest and most straightforward way: take an empty dogbone, put an electric heater in it and measure what input power is needed to reach the same temperature setpoint of the LENR powered one, eventually cross checking both with a thermocouple.

  44. @Timar

    These “inconsistencies” are comprehensible. The patent situation seems to be very difficult.

    EP 2754156 A2 covers the EU, not the US.

    Acquiring a license from Piantelli would not change the situation for markets outside the EU in the first place.

    The corresponding WO2013/008219 A2 has the same priority date but no references for a national US phase and the patentability for the US would be doubtful.

    Piantelli is and will remain the father of Ni-H LENR and that eats Rossi alive.

    Not only Rossi. It would “eat everyone alive”, who wants to secure E-Cat-IP outside the EU and then eventually has to accept that the enforcement is impossible.

  45. Mats:

    “I don’t think it’s surprising that Fabiani’s loyalty has been with Rossi. It appears fairly clear from the interview I made with him, when he told how he first got into contact with Rossi and started to work with him. That he was paid by IH seemed more to be a formal agreement for invoicing.”

    While it’s not surprising to you, I think it’s really important to clarify for the rest of us given claim 67 in the lawsuit:

    “67. During the Guaranteed Performance Test period, IH and/or IPH engaged and paid
    two of their representatives, Mr. Barry West and Mr. Fulvio Fabiani, to monitor, maintain, take
    part in, and report on the operation of the E-Cat Unit being tested.”

    Rossi claims Fabiani is a representative of IH, but per this latest information (and NCkhawk’s comments) this appears to be misleading.

    (also important given that Sifferkoll blasted NCKhawk for making this same statement as being “an ad hominem attack” which now has a proven factual basis).

  46. Well, never mind, it’s hard to get not confused at comment 614 and counting.

    I think we all should try harder to comply with Mat’s request and keep the discussion centered on facts.

  47. The USQL website (http://www.usqlengineering.com/) indicates that USQL was founded as a spin off of QLT-SRL in Europe.

    I can’t find much about QLT-SRL other than it was founded by Piero Magnaghi, is anyone aware of any connection between QLT and Rossi?

  48. @Guest great detective work. I realize in my earlier comment I mixed up Rossi’s attorney and the other lawyer that heads JM Products so parts of that is not relevant or wrong. Since you seem to know a thing or two about looking up things regarding US companies, is there any way to get financial statements from JM Products, USQL and any other Rossi/IH-related entities?

  49. I don’t think it’s surprising that Fabiani’s loyalty has been with Rossi. It appears fairly clear from the interview I made with him, when he told how he first got into contact with Rossi and started to work with him. That he was paid by IH seemed more to be a formal agreement for invoicing.

  50. Sorry for my excitement, I just came across these items after looking at “Jacky’s” posting of Fulvio’s new employment.

    I think this might actually provide a factual basis for NCKhawk’s comment that Fulvio was Rossi’s guy not IH’s.

    Whatever that means in the long run is TBD.

  51. @Timar
    No, I’m not associated with IH or Rossi or any other player in this e-cat affair in any way. I’m just an observer and follower of this story.

    Sorry that my last comment is confusing you.
    I quoted sifferkoll two times in that comment, but the quoted text was not marked as intended. [quotes and italics now fixed — Mats’ edit]

  52. Oh also, per USQL’s 2015 annual filing their are two authorized entities for the corporation:

    Fabio Fulviani and “Florida Energy Trust”

    The interesting thing is that “Florida Energy Trust”‘s mailing address is listed as Andrea Rossi’s apartment (same mailing address as for Leonardo Corp): 1331 Lincoln Road Apt 601

    (http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/GetDocument?aggregateId=flal-l13000119832-3ff1d247-9313-4e15-863b-58465a13f349&transactionId=l13000119832-5084b6a7-a14d-4348-a6bb-393da5e98d72&formatType=PDF)

  53. Thanks, guest!

    USQL LCC. also has a website: http://www.usqlengineering.com/ Their mission statement is to:

    “Bring support and technical direction to companies who need technological innovation outside the normal industry standards.”

    What may fit to that description? Hmmm…

    Makes it seem unlikely that Fabiano turned away from Rossi.

  54. New information on Fulvio

    Somebody brought up that Fulvio Fabiani is now working for USQL LLC. That stands for “United States Quantum Leap LLC”.

    It is a registered business in Florida (http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=UNITEDSTATESQUANTUMLEAP%20L130001198320&aggregateId=flal-l13000119832-3ff1d247-9313-4e15-863b-58465a13f349&searchTerm=United%20States%20Quantum%20Leap%20LLC&listNameOrder=UNITEDSTATESQUANTUMLEAP%20L130001198320)

    And it was also set up by Henry W. Johnson (lawyer for Rossi, president of Leonardo, president of JM Products).

    So it at least appears that Fulvio is still working for Rossi associates. Does support NCKhawk’s assertion that Fulvio was never really an IH guy, but rather Rossi’s guy who happened to be getting paid by IH as part of Rossi’s team.

    I am in no way trying to question Fulvio Fabiani’s qualifications or accusing him of anything. I’m just pointing out that while Rossi claims he is IH’s guy, it appears that the opposite is more likely the case.

  55. @New Guest: And who exactly are you and what connection do you have to all of this? You make it sound as if you were some sort of an IH renagade… (now THAT would be interesting!)

  56. Timar – honestly I wouldn’t be able to interpret what Fulvio told me, or how, in any particular direction.

  57. @Mats: I think maryyugo raised a sensible question regarding Fabiani. I understand that he is under NDA and that you won’t speculate about him, but that shouldn’t prevent you from giving some short assessment on whether you got the impression of a fundamental change in his personal attitude towards Rossi and his technology? After all, he gave an enthusiastic description of the E-Cat X in his interview with you a few months ago and now he seems to be looking for another job…

  58. Piantelli is and will remain the father of Ni-H LENR and that eats Rossi alive.

    Never mind that just a few hours earlier and before I brought up Piantelli he wrote:

    Sadly, I’m not aware of any Ni-H powder replications that have been verified with positive results.

    Quite contradictory, isn’t it? First, in his response to Hank Mills, he gives the impression that NI-H is a dead horse, then, as soon as I bring up Piantelli, his tune changes completely. If there is nothing to NI-H, than obviously there is nothing to Piantelli’s work, “the father of NI-H”. So what would let him “eat Rossi alive”?

    Surely its just what most LENR people would say. Lots of good results but no verified replication. If there were verified LENR replications someone would be getting a Nobel. MFMP can hope…

  59. Looks like what @guest says is in line with my answers!
    But interesting that the interpretation of the Lugano results ends up key. They should have read my paper earlier… 🙂

  60. @sifferkoll
    “Do you want the Leonardo License Agreement to be valid in the future, or do you think it is worthless?”
    Supposedly you addressed this question to NCkwhak, but just in case that you asked for my opinion as well:
    I don’t care whether the license agreements granted by Leonardo remain valid or not, because I believe that they are worthless anyway.
    “So I will continue to defend Rossi who I consider the David in this fight, because it is THE RIGHT THING TO DO, primarily from an ethical, but also hopefully from a business perspective.”
    Since you did not answer the question ‘Do you hold shares in Hydrofusion or any other entity with LENR related business?’ with a straight NO, I take this as that you are not only emotionally invested in the e-cat affair.
    Feel free to correct me if that is a wrong understanding.

  61. @Thomas Clarke you keep dancing around this one important fact: IH was *never* able to substantiate Rossi’s claims (i.e., replicate the e-cat). Not by his testing method or any others. And that fact which Mr. Weaver has now clarified for us gives my questions new relevance.

    OK – I guess its new for you but not for me because I was pretty certain of this before they said it.

    I’m not dancing around it, you will see my scenario (which I’m not allowed to repeat) incorporates this.

    One way to think is this. Imagine you are Darden knowing what ECW readers knew 18 months ago, with views like ECW readers e.g. sure LENR is real.
    + you had access to the Penon, Penon, Ferrara, reports + you had access to the Swedes who said Ferrara was sure fire definite LENR. And then you had Lugano Report – with Swedes even happier, added.

    Rossi offers you the license. Would you pay $11M for the IP? With $89M later only if it all proves good? Would you pay attention to doubters like me? Surely those reports (and the new even better Lugano one) are enough?

    You know LENR is real and Rossi seems to have it from all these reports. How long would you tell your tech guy to keep on trying to get Rossi’s stuff to work before giving up? When it does sort of work in Rossi’s setup (well – it would in the Lugano setup using their calculations but by now they will realise that even though it seems to be working it is not really working, and similar with other tests)? You’d at least wait till you had full access (the $11M). And then you would reckon problems were you not yet doing it right because you know from the independent reports it works. It takes a long time to believe it has never worked…

  62. @Tom Paulsen

    I already posed this very question to nckhawk, and his response, although clearly evading an answer to my question, is nevertheless interesting. He concluded:

    Piantelli is and will remain the father of Ni-H LENR and that eats Rossi alive.

    Never mind that just a few hours earlier and before I brought up Piantelli he wrote:

    Sadly, I’m not aware of any Ni-H powder replications that have been verified with positive results.

    Quite contradictory, isn’t it? First, in his response to Hank Mills, he gives the impression that NI-H is a dead horse, then, as soon as I bring up Piantelli, his tune changes completely. If there is nothing to NI-H, than obviously there is nothing to Piantelli’s work, “the father of NI-H”. So what would let him “eat Rossi alive”?

    Btw. his posts seem to abound in such rather revealing inconsistencies (see Sifferkoll’s blog).

  63. Hi, just a quick clarification – I am NOT an IH insider as Alan Smith writes.

    I do have connections to a few IH insiders though which has given me opportunities to ask a few questions (certainly not all of the ones I have) and hear of a few developments in real time, but I do not know anything first hand and am still confused about many of the developments and moving parts in this story.

    Personally, I agree that there have been some poor decisions (particularly around speed to action) on the IH side given what has been made public, but knowing some of the people I think their motivations are pure and I believe they have integrity (that is my bias). I understand most people don’t have the benefit of having met the folks involved and being able to personally judge character, so theories on both sides are certainly justified at this point (though vitriol shouldn’t be).

    So this doesn’t become just another personal post that doesn’t move the conversation forward at all…

    The following is my impression of what was happening leading up to the Lugano test which I’m hoping NCKhawk can confirm (at least from IH’s perspective) if possible:

    – Prior to Lugano there was some disagreement within IH over whether excess heat was truly being demonstrated by tests in which Rossi actively participated/demonstrated for them

    – At least one of the sources for disagreement was around what was the right emissivity value to use in interpreting thermal imaging data from the test setup (apologies, I’m not a scientist so hope I’m not using terms incorrectly)

    – Some IH insiders felt a higher emissivity value should be used than what Rossi instructed them to use, which when applied resulted in no calculated excess heat

    – Going into the Lugano test, there was legitimate uncertainty about whether the reactors that were about to be tested worked as claimed or not

    – Based on the Lugano test report, where the experts used a lower emissivity value in their calculations, apparently validating Rossi’s assertion of the right emissivity value, those internal disagreements were put to the side with great excitement evoked by the unexpected transmutation evidence

    Now what happened after that point is still not entirely clear to me. I believe IH brought in additional resources and made efforts to prove the technology worked via other test setups that didn’t rely on emissivity/thermal imaging. In parallel, patents were filed at the time based on the apparent success of the Lugano test and similar tests performed with Rossi’s participation. Subsequently, IH had problems confirming the results via other test setups, which they initially chalked up to the sensitive nature of the reaction.

    At some point in time they started to consider that either all the previous independent tests were systematically flawed, or that Rossi was purposefully holding back some ‘secret sauce’ that allowed the tests to work when he performed them but not when he wasn’t involved. I think there may still be some within IH that believe the latter explanation could be true, especially given their overall belief in LENR.

    Either way, when IH reached out to Rossi asking for his help in resolving their difficulties replicating the claimed results, he declined to help despite a contractual obligation to do so. I believe this is where goodwill between the parties began to finally crumble.

    Finally, I believe IH was open and honest with all investors that they weren’t certain Rossi had what he claimed, and that those choosing to invest did so with open eyes around the concerns surrounding Rossi – perhaps NCKhawk can confirm as he is an investor. Those investments were also made based on a portfolio of LENR assets that extend beyond Rossi, and of which some may still offer a potentially happy conclusion to this story.

  64. @Mats
    While we wait for nckhawk answers, I have two questions for you about pre – IH test:

    – in your book you write about a positive test on the ecat performed by ENEL (italian main electric company) , do you have any further detail about that?

    – there is a rumor of an important test performed by Rossi and Focardi in ENEA nuclear facility of Brasimone … do you know anything about that?

    By the way, I think it would ne nice if you can paginate older comments because the page is now quite slow to load expecially on mobile devices.

  65. Cimpy – close to cancelling that comment.
    If you read what I wrote I was referring to the fact that Weaver can answer those questions with knowledge on what really happened. Thomas cannot. Rossi has nothing to do with that (in Italian: Rossi non c’entra!).
    Next time I will not answer, just cancel.
    Use your intelligence, please.

  66. “I don’t consider Thomas’ answers to be other than speculation”

    “Rossi says”, instead, is pure truth. And even Argon or sifferkoll are really informed and good contributors to discussion, with indubitable facts on their side. like Fabiani being a IH man and not a Rossi fellow. For sure your secret informer (Fabiani himself?Or did you exchange some more mail with some Uppsala professor? Or was he Levi?) told you the E Cat does work, despite any evidence of fraud.

    After 5 years you ‘re now looking for truth? But you were there, in 2010/2011, weren’t you? You should already know from years.

  67. nckhawk/Weaver – thanks for confirming that you are Dewey Weaver.

    One question from me – could you tell us who padlocked the heat plant – IH (or its representatives) or Rossi (or his representatives) or possibly someone from the court?

    And again – I think it would be interesting to see answers from you on questions below from Josh G and from Alan Smith.

  68. I would like to put a new aspect in your focus.

    As we all know there are different aspects of the Leonardo/IH affair. One of these aspects is the question if the technology really works as claimed, but the most important factor is the ownership of the intellectual property.

    Rossi claimed, in the license agreement between Leonardo and IH, that he is the “sole owner” of all E-Cat-IP.

    That has now to be seen in a new light.

    The European Patent Office finally decided to grant a patent to Piantelli, which clearly covers the E-Cat, as far as we know about its conception. The intention to grant (20151211) has already been published, but the final decision is new (20160421).

    EP 2754156 A2
    “Method and apparatus for generating energy by nuclear reactions of hydrogen adsorbed by orbital capture on a nanocrystalline structure of a metal”

    The decision (grant) is dated April 21, 2016 an will be published May 18, 2016. The decision document shows the date of filing as July 13, 2012 and a priority claim of July 14, 2011!!!

    https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=EYU89OTD0404DSU&number=EP12778404&lng=en&npl=false

    Rossi’s Patent US9115913 B1 shows a priority date of March 14, 2012 and the license agreement between Leonardo and IH is dated October 26th, 2012.

    What is the relevance of these facts?

    a) License Agreement
    Did Rossi know about Piantelli’s claims when he signed the license agreement with IH?

    b) Patent Enforcement
    I’m no patent lawyer but i know that owning a patent is not the same as the ability to also enforce this patent. Would it be possible to enforce a US Patent when there is an European patent, which covers the invention and has former priority date?

    If the patent/IP of Leonardo/IH is not enforceable, it is commercially worthless.

  69. Thomas – the thing with Josh G’s questions is that I have not seen them answered directly by Weaver, who should be able to give fact based answers and not just speculations. If he chooses to answer.

    That’s also why I ask you to avoid answering, since speculation takes away the focus from real answers.

    This is also a message to nckhawk/Weaver, that I don’t consider Thomas’ answers to be other than speculation, and that I would still be interested to see those questions answered from someone who knows the answers.

  70. @Thomas Clarke you keep dancing around this one important fact: IH was *never* able to substantiate Rossi’s claims (i.e., replicate the e-cat). Not by his testing method or any others. And that fact which Mr. Weaver has now clarified for us gives my questions new relevance.

  71. I can hardly imagine that this was an armchair exercise with Neil Woodford sipping a G&T while reading E-Cat world.

    Where do you have this insider information from? I’ve heard that they were on the verge of discovering the Wikipedia article on Rossi, but unfortunately the G&T didn’t last quite long enough.

  72. could Rossi’s law suit against IH actually be a strategy by Rossi to escape prosecution?

    A so honest and genius scientist, a man able to find a new physic while otrageus imprisoned? Impossible, like his miracle

  73. Still would like an answer to this – apologies for the repetition by things move on (in circles) pretty fast here.

    Re the Woodford fund’s 30 months of ‘due diligence’ I can hardly imagine that this was an armchair exercise with Neil Woodford sipping a G&T while reading E-Cat world. As IH have admitted to having sufficient technical resources in the US to build at least one reactor for the Lugano tests, and having by that time cherry-picked some good ol’ American LENR experts of their own (how you doin’ Dennis?) – it defies belief that they never gave their own or Woodford’s experts a demo somewhere in Rayleigh.
    Can insiders like nchawk or guest confirm that no Rossi reactor was ever tested/demo’d in NC – for WPCT or indeed anybody else?

  74. This might be “out there” and i do not know but could Rossi’s law suit against IH actually be a strategy by Rossi to escape prosecution?

  75. How is Rossi able to get anything done (working 16 hours a day), if he spends so much of his time posting comments on the Journal of Nuclear Physics?

  76. The issue is this. We can all speculate on these matters. Mats is right that repetition is boring.

    But JoshG’s speculation (those 5 questions) was posed as an argument that if not answered would sway people to think IH was acting improperly. It was not new, all those points had been raised before. It was repetitive.

    And, Josh’s questions have all been answered before. Mostly by guest and nchkhawk.

    I only posted because Mats implies he had not heard those answers.

  77. Fairly obvious who’s not really paying attention here.

    I apologise, esp to Italians (ascoli?) about mis-spelling Itailan names.

    I think your comment means you disagree with my comments below. Remember I’m not claiming these are correct, merely that they could be correct and wpould explain the stuff that others seem to think so hard to explain without conspiracy theory.

    So: if you disagree: why are they, or something like them, not plausible?

    Mats said:

    Warning Thomas, we have heard this scenario hypothesis a hundred times now. Next time I cancel.

    I agree that my answer was repetitive, but I was replying to questions that YOU SAID were interesting (and therefore not repetitive:

    Thomas – the questions were directed to nckhawk/Weaver. Next time, please wait for the person being asked to answer, in this case probably with knowledge on the questions. We have already heard your hypotheses.

    Mats – if you look at my answer you will see it was actually encouraging an answer/correction from nckhawk. Sometimes it is easier for people to comment on a version of what they have previously said than redo the whole thing again.

    Can I ask:
    When JoshG recycles old questions (actually a set of questions composed as an accusation) you do not censure but say they are “interesting”.
    When he recycles old arguments in his reply to me you do not censure that.

    When I paraphrase old answers (from the two known IH insiders here, spread over some 1000 comments) I am repetitive and must be censured.

    It is weird and seems like a double standard where repeated views are interesting only if on what would appear to be your favoured side of this matter?

  78. Sorry, I do not understand. Explain to those who can do it.
    1. If the plant is built and Industrial Heat plant belongs to them, that then sell to their customers A.Rossi 1 MW?
    2. A.Rossi all the time he lived in a trailer and followed the work of the plant?
    3. How could A.Rossii then build three plants, if he had no production site, except Industrial Heat?

  79. @LuFong

    Rossi’s answers have to be parsed very carefully and while I believe there is an element of truth to all of them it’s not always clear what he means.


    Two questions:

    1) What elements do you think are true that bear on the general picture currently and why do you think Rossi ever tells the truth about his claims?

    2) Why in the world would a legitimate businessman, prestigious inventor of a world class technology, and a man about to become a billionaire, behave in that way? Why not simply be clear, tell the truth and help the world?

  80. @Engineer48 : I don’t recall Rossi stating that the plant has been refueled. He stated a) that if it is refueled it will take a long time b) that it is down for refueling but then the next day the test was over. And given that the IH plant appears to be padlocked I find it difficult to believe that the plant is operational even of the customer continues to lease the property (may be a long term lease, who knows).

    Please be aware that Rossi has been known to a) change questions posed to him b) change his replies c) delete his replies d) submit his own questions under aliases. Rossi’s answers have to be parsed very carefully and while I believe there is an element of truth to all of them it’s not always clear what he means.

    Please don’t misinterpret this–I do appreciate your efforts at fact finding. Every little bit helps getting us closer to what happened and whether the E-Cat works (substantially as claimed) or not.

  81. Warning Thomas, we have heard this scenario hypothesis a hundred times now. Next time I cancel.

  82. Just how “late in the game” do you think they began to realize that if they couldn’t get it to work, it probably doesn’t work?

    When the relationship soured. Late. For a long time they would think what many on ECW have said, which is they could not get it to work because Rossi had not given them correct instructions, or they were doing something wrong. You must realise that those test reports would have seemed very powerful evidence, until they started doubting them.

    To do that you need a mindset shift that nearly all on ECW are unable to make. So why reckon it is easy for IH, who had so much more to loose, and to gain if the Rossi effect were real?

  83. @LuFong,

    Rossi has stated the 1MW plant has been refueled, the customer is still at 7861 46st street Doral & the unit is not for lease.

    One would assume the plant is operational. IH personal are on site to manage it & JM Chemical Products Inc are paying IH $1,000 pervday for the heat.

    Google Street view shows a JM logo on the front door.
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/24/mats-lewan-receives-an-electric-bill-for-1mw-test-customer/#comment-2642981380

    @nckhawk any comments?

  84. Your answers assume that IH only started testing the e-cat themselves very late in the game. I don’t see any reason to go with that assumption, and many to go against it. To name just one — After they forked over the second payment of 10 million dollars, Rossi is said to have given them his IP and shipped them the e-cat. Don’t you think they would have been eager to take out their new toy and play with it a bit? In your scenario, they had it in their lab but never tested it out for themselves. They just relied on the previous testing.

    No I don’t assume that. I imagine until after they paid $11M they used Rossi’s testing methods, and got similar results. Or, if they had problems, tehy would dismis it as because they did not have full access to the knowhow which $11.5M would give them. You must remember that initially Rossi was supposed to be CSO and would I expect have been with them masterminding the testing. Then their tech guy Fulvoni would be the go-to person – but he was Rossi’s person and no doubt would test the same way.

    They would be as carried away by Rossi as many other fans on ECW, convinced he had it because of the independent tests. And you don’t know when the first realised the various tricks that Rossi’s tests used to make it seem like there was high COP. But you can be pretty sure it was:
    Never with Rossi i/c testing
    Not likely anytime soon with Fulvione in charge of testing

    I agree, had they been me, or had someone like me as trusted tech guy, things would have been different. In their situation you could see that trusted tech guy would be first Rossi and then Fulvioni. Or else an LENR non-skeptic much more likely to try everything under the sun and more before thinking Rossi did not have working product.

    When devices they were testing did not work they would contact Rossi, Rossi would (I guess) make excuses, suggest the powder needed different processing etc. A bit like MFMP when the get null results. There is always some detail that might be wrong. So the failure to substantiate could go on for a long time until they began to think the unthinkable – that those 8 independent tests were all wrong.

    All this speculation might be wrong. But it shows that your speculative “this is not possible” argument makes assumptions which are unwarranted.

  85. Thomas Clarke said, “Cherokee may or may not have a dirty reputation. However IH is not Cherokee.” If there is one consistency about all the principals that are part of Cherokee, it is they create a new company whenever they want to be separated from whatever that new company will be doing. They do it exactly for the reason you state above, so they can say, “IH is not Cherokee”. In truth the principals of Cherokee ARE IH and all the other companies they create to confuse. Morally, the principals of Cherokee ARE responsible for the new companies they create. Crony Capitalists, Wikipedia definition.

  86. Jacky – I already had a follow-up contact with Fabiani. He couldn’t comment anything specific regarding the situation, due to NDAs. However, he said that he was just waiting to send his last invoice to IH and then start look for new opportunities/work.

    What do you think that says about Rossi’s tech, Mats?

    Would a man abandon the opportunity to work with a world-saving multi-billion dollar technology?

  87. @NCKHawk : From the sound of it, since it’s padlocked it’s no longer operational and remains the property of IH.

    It was interesting to me that the plant suddenly needed refueling exactly when the test stopped, after the 350 operational days (plus 2 maybe to be safe). From Rossi’s statements, it also doesn’t sound like the system just stopped but rather slowly diminished in COP, but with a COP of 50+ there seems to be a lot of room for degradation (to a little more than 1MW/300kW max power available = 3). When you mention “disastrous” are you referring to refueling actions at this time? This sounds very coincidental to me.

    Also what exactly happened to the plant? It seems Rossi built the first version (or first one) in Italy and shipped it to IH where it must have sat for a while since there was no customer. But Fulvio Fabiani talks about he building it in an interview with Mats. Was this the first one in Italy or the reconfigured one with the 4 x 250K reactors, or both? Also it seems that Fulvio Fabiani is now looking for a new job. Does that mean Barry West (the other IH technician) will be operating the system if it is still operational or planned to be operational?

    I’m just throwing these questions out there because we know so little about the 1MW plant but it is the crux of the entire test. Rossi has strung us along so long with changing stories and put offs that we’ve forgotten many of the initial questions we had with the plant. (In effect he’s trained us to not ask questions). Someone once asked Rossi what was going to happen to the 1MW plant after the 1 year test and Rossi said that it was going to continue to be used because it was doing real work. But then he later mentioned it needed refueling and reworking. Thanks for your replies.

  88. Engineer 48 – I saw JM Company on YP. com as well. But this is what my Google search results show. I went to this FB Places page and it said that the business had been removed.

    Chemicals & Gasses in Doral, Florida | Facebook
    Facebook › places-in › places › intersect
    Avery Dennison · Chemicals & Gasses … Chemicals & Gasses. (786) 631-4676 · 7861 NW 46th St · Get Directions.

  89. @Thomas Clarke

    Your answers assume that IH only started testing the e-cat themselves very late in the game. I don’t see any reason to go with that assumption, and many to go against it. To name just one — After they forked over the second payment of 10 million dollars, Rossi is said to have given them his IP and shipped them the e-cat. Don’t you think they would have been eager to take out their new toy and play with it a bit? In your scenario, they had it in their lab but never tested it out for themselves. They just relied on the previous testing. They spent a great deal of manpower and money to develop a new model (the Lugano model), but instead of testing it out themselves to see if it performed similarly to the $10 million they had bought, they just shipped a few over to Lugano and crossed their fingers? Nah. Sorry. Doesn’t make sense. They didn’t just develop a new model without many iterations of testing and checking to see if all all their modifications were OK.

    Just how “late in the game” do you think they began to realize that if they couldn’t get it to work, it probably doesn’t work? It couldn’t have been all that late. According to Rossi, there was a year long delay in getting the 1MW test started due to IH not finding anyone. All that time, according to Weaver, IH was begging him to prove it works. Under your assumptions, they never tried to get one working themselves and relied on the Lugano test. Why would they have been pressuring Rossi to show that it works all that time?

  90. nckhawk

    Thanks for confirming the 1MW plant is owned by IH.

    Was it also built by IH?

    Is it still installed at 7861 46th street Doral?

    Is in operation?

  91. @nckhawk

    As for dismantling, I was referring to the plant area (production, measurement setup, etc.). So if the container is still at IH disposal, Rossi may be confident he can make it work again, maybe re-fueling it …

    Can you tell us something about the confidence IH engineers have about the test they performed / oversaw ?

  92. If the 1MW unit has been dismantled then somebody is going to have a lot of splalning to do. That remains an IH asset and was padlocked on inspection day after a disastrous experience with Rossi. That would be a good thing to verify for you folks interested in the truth.

  93. @nckhawk

    Sorry for late answer, but today I am in a customer factory surrounded by “animals” 🙂

    Can you expand your “the plant has been dismantled” statement?

    The industrial area where the 1-year test took place is for rent now, so it has been dismantled. As I said, I have no confidential informations about these issue, so mine are only speculations, positive or negative of course 🙂

    Do you think that Rossi wants to make his stand on a 2011 experiment?

    I think Rossi is likely confident he can replicate before a court appointed expert the test made in Ferrara in mid 2013 and oversaw by IH engineers. The only [unlikely IMHO] alternative I can think of is that Rossi is a crazy kamikaze, maybe bluffing to raise the stakes.

    I think it would be interesting to know what level of confidence IH has about the reilability of those tests, they were there and had free access to reactor, setup and instrumentation, after all.

    Anyway I met Rossi only once in a public convention here in Italy (in Pordenone), and I exchanged a few words with him and his fellows. They seemed quite enthusiastic and sure of what they had, but this was only my impression. I also watched Tom Darden’s speech at ICCF, seems a good guy to me [only impression also here, of course].

    Apart from this specific case and its speculations, in general I think that if income statements had an item to account for “cost for misunderstanding and characterial problems”, be sure that the cumulative figure would skyrocket to the billions.

  94. I’m pretty sure I saw Sifferkoll plaster my name all over the place here previoulsy unless Mats made him take it down. Yep – I’m Dewey Weaver. The Fanboys are working overtime and making a bunch of errors though. I had no idea I was so effective.

  95. Thomas – the questions were directed to nckhawk/Weaver. Next time, please wait for the person being asked to answer, in this case probably with knowledge on the questions. We have already heard your hypotheses.

  96. Josh – please be careful with your tone next time. Your way of turning to Weaver/nckhawk is on the limit of what I want here.
    Yet, your questions are relevant, and I would be glad to see Weaver/nckhawk answer them.

    Mats – I was not going to reply to Josh – since my memory is that his questions have been asked before, and answers given to them. You said no repetition. But if josh’s questions are not repetition then these answers i guess are new too.

    nckhawk may well be able to amplify, but the questions have expected answers which imply no wrong-doing from IH and are compatible with all facts as follows. Also, these answers have already I think been stated by nckhawk (he will correct me if wrong) or guest (another – or same?) close to IH source.

    (a) IH initially were very enthusiastic because Rossi’s tests proved the tech worked and they did not imagine these could be wrong.

    (b) When the LTT started (at Rossi’s independent instigation) IH wanted to maintain good relations with Rossi, but were uninterested in the test. They wanted to get even one Rossi device to work when tested by them. They did not however jump to the conclusion Rossi was fraudulent but thought they must be doing something wrong. IH went along with the test because Rossi wanted it, but it was not importatnt to them for validating the technology. (And it was in the license agreement only because Rossi required it). IH reckoned if teh tech worked it was worth $89M.

    (c) IH asked rossi for help several times and did not get it.

    (d) After a long time in which reactors that had tested good for Rossi turned out to be electric heaters for them, they started considering the possibility that all Rossi’s tests thus far were suspect, and at that point listened to tech people who could validate all the well known things we have been saying for years.

    (d) This Damascene conversion was far into the testing, at the point when relations obviously soured.

    (e) Throughout this process IH/Darden have never wavered in the idea that LENR works. Even though Rossi’s reactots do not work they still think it possible Rossi’s stuff, based on Foccardi, might have some merit hidden in it somewhere and so would hold onto the purchased IP as a matter of principle – though maybe now they have doubts about whether it will ever be worth anything.

    Given this (mostly disclosed by IH but and slightly guessed by me) scenario:

    In response to the question:
    “Do you want the Leonardo License Agreement to be valid in the future, or do you think it is worthless?”
    We get this answer:
    “I might be wrong about this but my interpretation is that the IH license with Leonardo is a valid paid-up license. Of course I wanted that licensed technology to work – it would have accelerated a breakthrough clean energy solution by years. Whether the technology works or not is now another matter entirely.”
    Which is a bit weird, if you consider nckhawk has been “contacting key persons around Rossi, trying to convince them that Rossi is a fraudster and that they would be wise to stop collaborating with him”
    Surely a more consistent reply would be “the technology doesn’t work and the license is worthless”, no?

    No. The devices could be non working, and never have worked, with no measurable COP but nevertheless there might be elements in the technology of value

    1. Spent a good deal of manpower and money on R&D to develop and produce a new iteration of the e-cat, which they sent to Lugano for testing. If they had never gotten Rossi’s older version of e-cat to work, why invest a dime in R&D on it?

    The old version did work when tested by Penon etc. They at that time trusted Rossi’s tests.

    2. If they never got an e-cat to work and didn’t believe the Lugano results, why on Earth would they agree to give Rossi the go-ahead on the 1MW test? You say he insisted, so fine, maybe they couldn’t stop him. But why would they willingly spend a dime of their own money to pay for (at least) 2 technicians (Fulvio plus another person you always conveniently forget to mention), as well as 1/2 the costs of the ERV plus who knows what other costs? How did Darden get so wealthy by being so willing to piss money down the drain?

    When they paid teh $11m they were thinking Rossi’s tech worked. When the 1MW test started they still believed it would work and wanted to stay on good terms with Rossi – especially because he might be able to help with problems. He wanted to do the 1MW test as per the license agreement, and is a requirement of it. But they would expect his stuff to be working within one year, or else obviously not working.

    3. If they caught Penon and Rossi early on trying to engage in fraud by switching flowmeters, then why on Earth would they agree to continue the test? Why on Earth would IH continue a test (which they were paying for half of + personnel + who knows what else) when they had just caught Rossi and Penon red-handed trying to commit fraud?!? Does that count as due diligence where you come from? Again, you think it makes Rossi and Penon look bad, but it also makes Darden look like an easy mark. As our exalted former El Presidente George Bush the Younger once said, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice … you can’t get fooled again!”

    Darden was an easy mark – he gave money to Rossi. But he like many believed those many independent test reports, and was sure Rossi had LENR+. A big prize. He would not worry about test integrity – I’m sure rossi has an excuse for switching flowmeters – until he started to doubt Rossi’s tests.

    As for agreeing to continue – this is written into the license agreement. I don’t know want is the legal situation but if Rossi wants to continue maybe waiting till there is proof positive from the final report etc is the best thing to do. Not enough info here. But in any case if they start to doubt Rossi tests late in the day they cannot stop the long-term test, I guess.

    If they never got the e-cat to work, then they also had no reason to believe the 1MW plant would work.

    They had Rossi’s 6 independent tests, documented in 4 reports from two different sets of testers, all proving that his reactors work. Why would the 1MW test not also work?

    The issue is that all this collapses when you no longer believe Rossi’s “independent tests” and at that point it is clear the long-term test is no better (in fact worse). they would then want to protect themselves by discovering problems in the test – and it seems they are confident they have done that.

  97. “Thomas – from now on: Let the readers judge for themselves. You have already used significant space to expose your arguments. You don’t have to repeat them.”

    That’s where you are wrong Mats. It’s a compulsion with him I’m afraid. He’s posted the same stuff literally hundreds of times across the web. He’ll never stop.

    Mats, do we know yet for sure who owns the 1 MW plant? It seems IH does, but Rossi appears to maintain that the customer using the heat is still at the location in Miami, possibly still using the heat in their production. I haven’t read all the comments yet so perhaps this has been talked about some more this morning. Got 90 emails in my inbox from this Blog and ECW. Thanks.

    @everyone, please check out my LENR CHAT room and say hello at http://www.chatwing.com/LENRChat.

  98. Interesting speculation by Hermano Tobia. I hadn’t thought of the possibility (speculation) that Rossi has found a new partner and wants to dump IH (versus IH wanting to dump Rossi for the same reason.) It makes a lot of sense as do a number of other speculations.

    In it Hermano Tobia also speculates that with regard to the the 1MW plant “We probably will never know, as the plant is dismantled.” This reminded me that it is my understanding that the 1MW plant is the property of IH and is being leased by the customer for the heat. If it is dismantled it would be IH doing so wouldn’t it? And it still should be completely operational, even if at a somewhat reduced rate since evidently the fuel was losing its punch. Also there are something like 52 extra 20K reactors embedded in the plant. Surely IH would have these at their disposal for whatever testing they want to do, customer contract for additional heat notwithstanding.

    At this point this should be just another question to add to the list of things to find out but maybe somebody (NCKHawk) knows something more about this.

  99. Mats – Interesting, that is certainly new information for the rest of us at least! I will shut up now as not to clog up the comments, but again @nckhawk (spelled that wrong last time), do you have any comments on this situation? What is your motive for contacting people around Rossi? Who did you contact? Are you trying to affect the outcome of the trial by contacting people directly? If yes, are you sure you did so in a legal way (no threats)?

  100. Forgive me for speculating, this will not be new to you Mats (since you are sitting on the information, this is not a request for denial or confirmation). You have your journalistic ethics to think about. Key people I can think of right now are:

    Fabio Penon, the ERV
    JM Products, the customer
    John Annesser, who also heads JM Products
    Fulvio Fabiani, Rossi’s engineer

    Out of those I think Annesser is the most likely as he is handling Rossi’s lawsuit (and could probably make him withdraw it, or at least leave him without a lawyer) and he himself could be in hot waters if JM Products and it’s supposed mother company becomes a focal point of the trial (IH argues that there is none, this makes Annesser an accomplice in a fraudulent activity). He sits on a lot of information and could possibly swing the outcome of the trial considerably of his loyalties shifted, and he has a lot to lose.

  101. @Mats, ok I must have missed that.

    Another question, from the post:

    “contacting key persons around Rossi, and I have proof of his activities”

    Is this as much as you can spill on that situation without exposing sources or things of that nature? Who are the key people, what is nature of the proof? E-mails? Recorded calls? Frankly I don’t know of any key people around Rossi except Penon, he seems like he works almost exclusively alone.

    @nchawk any comments on this from you?

  102. Jacky – I already had a follow-up contact with Fabiani. He couldn’t comment anything specific regarding the situation, due to NDAs. However, he said that he was just waiting to send his last invoice to IH and then start look for new opportunities/work.

  103. @Josh G, As well as the 5 inconsistencies you pointed out, there is also a 6th…

    In response to the question:

    “Do you want the Leonardo License Agreement to be valid in the future, or do you think it is worthless?”

    We get this answer:

    “I might be wrong about this but my interpretation is that the IH license with Leonardo is a valid paid-up license. Of course I wanted that licensed technology to work – it would have accelerated a breakthrough clean energy solution by years. Whether the technology works or not is now another matter entirely.”

    Which is a bit weird, if you consider nckhawk has been “contacting key persons around Rossi, trying to convince them that Rossi is a fraudster and that they would be wise to stop collaborating with him”

    Surely a more consistent reply would be “the technology doesn’t work and the license is worthless”, no?

  104. Re the Woodford fund’s 30 months of ‘due diligence’ I can hardly imagine that this was an armchair exercise with Neil Woodford sipping a G&T while reading E-Cat world. As IH have admitted to having sufficient technical resources in the US to build at least one reactor for the Lugano tests, and having by that time cherry-picked some good ol’ American LENR experts of their own (how you doin’ Dennis?) – it defies belief that they never gave their own or Woodford’s experts a demo somewhere in Rayleigh.

    Can insiders like nchawk or guest confirm that no Rossi reactor was ever tested/demo’d in NC – for WPCT or indeed anybody else?

  105. I am not sure if this has been mentioned anywhere but ECN:

    Fulvio Fabiani changed his VK profile: http://m.vk.com/ffab2012
    Now it says Company: Director of USQL LLC .
    Before it was Company: Tech. Director Leonardo Corp.

    I am not sure if this indicates Fabiani has left Lenoardo altogether, if he no longer believes Rossi or what it means at all but the timing is very “suspicious”. Maybe you could contact him for a follow up on the last interview to see where he stands now, Mats? After all he has been/is deeply involved with Leonardo and Rossi.

  106. Josh – please be careful with your tone next time. Your way of turning to Weaver/nckhawk is on the limit of what I want here.
    Yet, your questions are relevant, and I would be glad to see Weaver/nckhawk answer them.

  107. No Argon, I am not here to prevent investors to lose their money. However, I do react when i see what I perceive as useful idiots supporting a clever con man. I have already given my reasons to distrust Andrea Rossi and will not repeat them here.

  108. Cimpy – please, this didn’t add ANYTHING new. We have heard you say this a hundred times. Please avoid, or I will have to start cancelling.

  109. @NCkhawk (alias John Dewey Weaver, III)

    Instead of worrying about our credibility, as the managing director of an investment fund with investments in IH and as a business colleague of Darden (and representative of IH at the recent Airbus conference), you might try spending more time being worried about your own reputation as an honest and savvy businessman (assuming you do).

    With all the FUD you and others are spreading around here, it’s hard to cut through the thick layer of fog, but I will try.

    Both you and IH have stated clearly and unequivocally that IH has never (not once!) been able to substantiate the E-cat produces excess heat. And yet despite this fact, IH/Darden:

    1. Spent a good deal of manpower and money on R&D to develop and produce a new iteration of the e-cat, which they sent to Lugano for testing. If they had never gotten Rossi’s older version of e-cat to work, why invest a dime in R&D on it?

    2. If they never got an e-cat to work and didn’t believe the Lugano results, why on Earth would they agree to give Rossi the go-ahead on the 1MW test? You say he insisted, so fine, maybe they couldn’t stop him. But why would they willingly spend a dime of their own money to pay for (at least) 2 technicians (Fulvio plus another person you always conveniently forget to mention), as well as 1/2 the costs of the ERV plus who knows what other costs? How did Darden get so wealthy by being so willing to piss money down the drain? Maybe he didn’t care because it was his investor’s money. This shows very poor business acumen and an appalling carelessness with other people’s money. You may think that Rossi’s insistence on going ahead with the 1MW test under the circumstances makes him look bad. But if Darden thought the e-cat didn’t work, his willingness to go along with the test AND fork over money for it makes him look like a chump and a pushover.

    3. If they caught Penon and Rossi early on trying to engage in fraud by switching flowmeters, then why on Earth would they agree to continue the test? Why on Earth would IH continue a test (which they were paying for half of + personnel + who knows what else) when they had just caught Rossi and Penon red-handed trying to commit fraud?!? Does that count as due diligence where you come from? Again, you think it makes Rossi and Penon look bad, but it also makes Darden look like an easy mark. As our exalted former El Presidente George Bush the Younger once said, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice … you can’t get fooled again!”

    4. If they never got the e-cat to work, then they also had no reason to believe the 1MW plant would work. But according to Rossi (and apparently he can document this for the courts), IH had Woodford and the Chinese and who knows who else visit the 1MW plant as part of their effort to raise investment capital. We don’t know at this point if the reason they invested in IH is because of the e-cat (though Woodford capital says they spent 2 1/2 years on due diligence, so we assume that was the primary reason they were investing, since that was IH’s first investment). So what you’re saying is that Darden had no reason to think the e-cat worked, but went about raising money for it anyway on the pretense that it worked? Do you realize that you’re basically accusing your own friend and colleague of fraud?

    5. And as others have pointed out, if they have no reason to think the e-cat works, then why file a patent on the e-cat claiming to get a COP of 11? Did they just make that up? Lawyers are expensive and filing patents costs a lot of money. Why would they pay all that money to file several patents if the technology is bunk?

    So you see, the position you’ve staked out is full of inconsistencies and internal contradictions.

    I don’t know exactly when you learned of all these details or when you invested your clients’ money in IH. But if you knew before you invested that IH had never gotten the e-cat to work, then it doesn’t seem like you made a wise investment on your clients’ behalf. Even if you believe in LENR’s promise, based on all your claims, I honestly don’t see how you can continue to have faith in Darden’s business acumen and IH’s competence. I do know that if you had invested MY money in IH and then came out and told me everything you’ve said on this blog, I would insist on getting my money back, and I’d never give you another dime. So you don’t exactly come out of this with your reputation intact, either.

    In the course of spewing FUD and trying to bully us into keeping our mouths shut, you’ve only succeeded in damaging your own reputation, as well as that of Darden and IH. You’ve dug yourselves into an enormous hole, and I don’t see how you can emerge unscathed.

    I doubt you’ll respond to this. And if you do, I can’t imagine you’ll offer a thorough, logical response to explain all of IH/Darden’s absurd and inexplicable actions in this case — because there is no way to logically explain them. I definitely expect more ad hominems against the ‘Rossi faithful’ and attempts to bully me and others into remaining silent to protect our reputations. Mr. Weaver, as much as I truly enjoy watching you embarrass yourself, at this point I really think you should take your own advice.

  110. Now, from the point of view of those who never believed, Rossi’s shows sounded like a farce from start – and even an easy one to spot from the beginning.

    In spite of incredible miracle he spoke about, he showed nothing at all but a boiling water heater, and even poorly crafted. The only thing that drove attention to the whole stuff was Sergio Focardi swearing it worked- same Focardi who theorized copper as ash, and to which Rossi made it appear.

    Ruled out the ridiculous Rossi-Focardi paper (hope none here -neither the most fierce Rossi supporter or fellow – would take it seriously anymore), the story went on jumping from a story to another, while the man crafted different devices – each time more valuable than previous ones – and changed setup and test (while keeping testers, as long as he could) so that the marvelous device (not the same he started with, and next year not the same he swore was “stable, stable” one year ago) has always been in R&D.

    From this point of view there is no “desire of attention”, there is only a big fraud for money, realized by a man that lived last 30 years thanks to scams, and that has always been able to escape major legal issue.
    And who can always count on people ready to believe you cannot say to a scammer he is a scammer as this would be an ad-hominem argument – it would be like saying to someone you spot stealing he is a thief: you cannot, because in this story there are not only clever people who can believe anything, there are also those who surf the wave of the scam and who need believers to remain as long as possible believers or at least in doubt miracle (of a criminal inventing the new fire while in jail) could really happen.

    I am quite sure you know this: “a stupid and his money are soon departed”.

  111. I try to minimize flooding this blog with multiple posts of secondary arguments, so i collect them in one post.

    – Many args here and elsewhere seems to be reasoned by ‘we want to stop Rossi to steal any more investors money’-thinking (or …to ruin LENR reputation…). After all this shitstorm, do you really believe any investor would put any money on him,without watertight prove or TTP-secured contract, which has all payment and bailout conditions in place? Or CF/LENR reputation, what more harm he could cause, that he have already done, if he would be fraud? His story ends or starts this year for sure anyway.
    – I think background and motivation for @nckhawk has become clear to all already especially considering he is one of the few who apparently had made his bets on LENR/IH – with real money. I don’t feel nice for anyone continuing any pure bashing on him. Counter args on his or anyones posts are good of course.
    – On this one don’t need replies, but just my note. More I read Marianne Macy:s article(s), more it looks like she first wrote her typical nice drama arc, until she come to law suit part. Then the rest of the article looks like some testosterone or …. had kicked in on proof reading phase and ideas like ‘lets add diarrhea things to emphasize Rossis evil moves’, ‘lets add proof of other LENR-list’. (almost half of the article, with seemingly wrong quote of Celani.). To me either she become emotionally really disappointed on what Rossi did, or she had agenda to emphasize good work of other researchers, which she felt threatened as coming public court case is torn apart in interwebs. Question for me remains, how would she, as objective journalist, know so sure who is lying. Well this would fit also to IH &Co willing to steal whole market scenario, but lets wait how things unwind soon.

    PS. @Hermano Tobia your theory is interesting. Especially #3 would make sense with many public statements of Rossi during the years. Contracts are not always enough.
    PS2. @Matts Probably there is no herding all this flood, and last thing I would like to see is any censorship. It could lead this site to become typical Fan club instead of neutral truth seeking (like JONP censorship policy clearly did). I think all parties have done good enough job to make sure misleading arguments gets questioned. So lets instead continue good community watchdogging and point out if someone still tries to bring up what was Lugano [I think you mean Levi. Mats’ edit] 2011 pump max ratings.

  112. @nckhawk

    you know that I have no idea how to hack anything. You should also not address direct correspondence in the public domain without answering or attemptinig to engage in what would have been much more helpful exchange.

    In some circumstances I might have chosen as you say, but in this case I found it valuable for the audience to know since it brings clarity to the situation with your identity (and accusation of Rossi employing a hacker).

    I have no idea about your ability when it comes to hacking. However this was not very complicated so a number of people in your vicinity could probably do it.

    Especially since I found the connections to other Deep River Ventures investments and connections

    https://www.facebook.com/heiner.prahm

    Both Industrialdefender.com and stacsolutions.com seams to know this stuff … ?

  113. you know that I have no idea how to hack anything.

    I have no idea about your personal abilities. But since the hack was not very complicated it could probably have been done by a large number of people in your vicinity. It has stopped now anyway, after going on since beginning of April, culminating on April 14th.

    Also I found it interesting to note some of the investments in Deep River Ventures

    https://www.cbinsights.com/investor/deep-river-ventures
    https://www.cbinsights.com/company/industrial-defender
    http://www.industrialdefender.com -> http://cyber.lockheedmartin.com/
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/roy-w-mall-227850
    http://www.stacsolutions.com/

    So, in that light, I do not take your statement on hacking that seriously.

  114. nckhawk – just for the record, can we officially confirm that you are Dewey Weaver? I prefer having users who identify themselves, rather than being anonymous.

  115. Sifferkoll – Thank you for your response. I might be wrong about this but my interpretation is that the IH license with Leonardo is a valid paid-up license. Of course I wanted that licensed technology to work – it would have accelerated a breakthrough clean energy solution by years. Whether the technology works or not is now another matter entirely.

    You should clean up some of the slander against me – you know that I have no idea how to hack anything. You should also not address direct correspondence in the public domain without answering or attemptinig to engage in what would have been much more helpful exchange. I apologize to you for anything that I said or did to offend you. We’re both caught up in our passion for LENR to be a workable and useful solution for our ailing planet.

  116. @newguest

    Do you hold shares in Hydrofusion or any other entity with LENR related business?

    @nckhawk
    You’ve shown the world your passion as well along with glimpses of what you are made of and how you operate. You should consider cleaning some of that mess up as well. I do have one question for you, have you invested in any clean tech start-ups with your own funds or the funds of others?

    If you read my blog you know the answer is yes. I do some start-up investments (but mostly algo stuff), not funds of others though. But more than that I’m passionately and emotionally invested, as you obviously noticed reading my blog, in the potential of LENR. I also have a strong urge to contribute to it happening on a industrial scale, even better contribute to make it happen as a future production facility in Sweden. To achieve this goal, at this point in time, all my intuition and facts gathered screams to help defend Rossi against entities flashing Apco, JonesDay and whatknows … (whom I consider core dark force entities).

    So I will continue to defend Rossi who I consider the David in this fight, because it is THE RIGHT THING TO DO, primarily from an ethical, but also hopefully from a business perspective.

    And no. I don’t think I need to clean up my blog. Maybe fix some typos …

    And since I answered your question, maybe you could answer mine:

    Do you want the Leonardo License Agreement to be valid in the future, or do you think it is worthless?

  117. Ok nckhawk and Josh – thanks for your comments. This is good example of when it’s time to stop and let readers judge for themselves, unless you have new facts to add.
    Opinions on who is wrong and right, and why, have already been expressed enough.

  118. Good one Josh G – you had that one all ready to go. As I’d previously stated, not every investment works and in the case of the Meadowlands project in New Jersey, some genius sold the same fill dirt twice. A question for you – why all the effort to continue and vilify the first motivated funder of LENR research in years?
    If you guys are serious about seeing LENR move forward then you need to realize what you’re doing is wrong. Rossi is apparently now attempting to start yet another cycle of his specialty. That is the story.

  119. Hermano – Some of your post is very interesting and important information if true. Can you expand your “the plant has been dismantled” statement? Do you think that Rossi wants to make his stand on a 2011 experiment?

  120. Thanks Hermano. Interesting.
    Again – I would like readers to judge for themselves. Please refrain from lengthy discussions putting forward arguments that have already been exposed many times. Only post if you have new information.

  121. Thomas – from now on: Let the readers judge for themselves. You have already used significant space to expose your arguments. You don’t have to repeat them.

  122. Mats, in the interest of “bringing out the truth” about Darden and Cherokee investment partners, a couple of of your readers in other threads have brought to our attention Cherokee’s dirty dealings and questionable reputation.

    Cherokee may or may not have a dirty reputation. However IH is not Cherokee.

    Also, however dirty Cherokee might be (and I have no idea whether this slur is well founded), that background cannot be anything like as relevant as Rossi’s background making free energy claims (twice with completely different products) for which he gets money from technology that proves not to work. That is the issue here – another free energy claim for which he has been paid which IH say does not work.

    Personally, I don’t think this stuff is terribly helpful – but if you are going to do this type of “bringing out the truth” let us not forget the directly relevant bits?

  123. @Mats

    Maybe you are interested in a hypotesis which stems from my discussion in italian forum cobraf with one of the smartest (IMHO) Rossi-saga followers and information hunters [Nevanlinna].

    Just a few premises:

    #1 What follows is pure speculation based only on publicy available facts, but fits more or less all of them.

    #2 Rossi is what I would call a “factory animal”, that is one whose workaholic life is all focused on manufacturing, production, delivery, inventory, logistics, purchases, customer orders, plant expansion, ecc. The biggest enemies of those animals are competitors, taxes and banks / speculators. In Italy a lot (if not most) factories are run by this kind of “animals”. And believe me, those of “animals” can be very difficult to deal with, expecially if you don’t understand the beast [The term “animal” and “beast” used in this context have obviously no negative connotation].

    #3 In Italy [but also elsewhere i think] there’s an “universal law” that every “factory animal” knows very well, and is called “Legge di Corfù” or “Articolo Quinto”, that can be translated as follows: “who has the money in hand has won”. So, according to that law, if you have an important delivery for a customer, and you are not sure you will be paid in full, it is not unusual [at least here] to “forget” to deliver a small but fundamental detail, that [if missing] makes the whole delivery useless. Of course the missing detail is exchanged with the final check in hand.

    #4 The possibilities about e-cat (it works, measurement errors, deception): it is possible that they are NOT mutually exclusive. The above “animals” could well use [when needed] all of them to protect their trade secrets. Machiavelli was italian, remember: “il fine giustifica i mezzi”.

    So let’s start with the first two test performed / oversaw by IH, the one that unlocked the first 10M USD payment and the one relative to the provisional patent application 61/821914 (1).

    What is [more or less] known about these two test in Ferrara (nckhawk will correct me if I’m wrong):

    – The first setup was designed by both parties, performed by Penon and owersaw by IH engineers (fig. 2, those plaid shirts are a bit unfashionable here …)
    – The second was designed and performed by IH

    About the second test, there was an interesting discussion with my friends at GSVIT about the flow meters, and the final conclusion after my observations [only in their italian report for now] is that using the right type of pump reported in patent application, no error was found [if pump is operated correctly of course]. Besides, every italian reader would laugh at the idea that Rossi could have signed that application …

    Anyway those test [performed / oversaw by IH engineers] were OK, the payment was unlocked and evidently IH had no doubt that all was working fine [they patented one of them].

    But after that problems began to arise:

    IH replication attempts failed (probably because of #3, I would be surprised to the contrary).
    IH was not interested is 1MW factory test (but Rossi was, because of #2).
    IH seeked helps of experts in the fields [which are by definition competitors, remeber comment about “Dog Professor” ?] to find, if it exists, that missing detail. This is the worst type of betrayal you can do to #2 animals.

    So maybe Rossi in the meantime found another partner [the lark himself ?], probably an industrial one and not a “speculator”, and began an industrial venture with him.

    And finally the controversy about ERV 1-year test: it could be a FUD move by IH to avoid or delay a payment to whom is now a competitor, or it could be that Rossi resorted to #4, maybe to avoid unnecessary risks of information leakage, and maybe after he found the new partner. We probably will never know, as the plant is dismantled.

    I suspect the publication of the ERV report [if it ever happens] will be almost useless [apart for generating a lot of discussions in the blogosphere], as the only way to settle the issue is with a test in front of a court appointed expert.

    So in this scenario, it makes sense for Rossi to sue IH for the missed payment, as he is probably confident he can replicate Ferrara tests in front of a Court expert, and for IH it makes perfect sense to hire the best law firm available, in the case that Rossi pulls out of the hat the missing “detail”. Or maybe they will arrange a private “definitive” test and settle out of court accordingly.

    So has Rossi a working device ? I think “yes” is more likely than “no”, but you decide! Maybe he is merely self-persuaded of that, or he’s bluffing. Let’s say that, in this scenario, IH may be as puzzled as we are, and probably can’t rule out the possibility of another “stellar” performance.

    That’s my 2 cents.

    (1) https://gsvit.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/document.pdf
    (2) http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3538/9701/original.jpg

  124. @nckhawk @Matslewan @Sifferkol

    @nckhawk wrote: “It’s interesting that one of Darden’s companies cleans up toxic waste sites.”

    Yet Cherokee’s investments in brownfield remediation are questionable and some mired in controversy and accusations of dirty dealing and poor management.

    Mats, in the interest of “bringing out the truth” about Darden and Cherokee investment partners, a couple of of your readers in other threads have brought to our attention Cherokee’s dirty dealings and questionable reputation. When Cherokee invested in IH/Leonardo/Rossi and Darden gave a speech at ICCF, we were all more of less convinced that Rossi had found a savior and that Cherokee and Darden –a savvy businessman — had the best interests of LENR and the planet at heart. Well, the links below strongly suggest that Cherokee and Darden are probably not what we thought, and I think it’s an important piece of the puzzle in terms of bringing the truth to light. It might also be a productive avenue for an investigative journalist to pursue. What it shows me is that it was actually Rossi who didn’t do enough due diligence on Cherokee.

    [Compiled from posts by @Trump it and @Stephen Suriano on the ‘alternative hypothesis’ thread:]

    2004
    http://articles.philly.com/2004-11-26/news/25380356_1_landfills-brownfields-remediate

    Andy Willner, executive director of the NY-NJ Baykeeper, an environmental watchdog group, is waiting to see how successful the remediations are.

    “The confluence between brownfield redevelopment and dredge disposal is certainly a niche Cherokee has taken advantage of,” Willner said. “Give credit where credit is due: They’ve found a niche market and exploited it.”

    “Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, is skeptical. “I think, quite frankly, they are much better at playing politics than anything else,” Tittel said. “If you look at the company and how they make their money, they don’t build anything, clean up anything. . . . They just flip the property. They’re like the middleman.”
    Cherokee-related firms and officers have contributed at least $267,600 to state legislative and political campaigns and at least $80,700 to federal candidates from New Jersey since 1999.”

    2008
    Here is a report from the State of New Jersey Office of the Inspector General and it details bad behavior and ineptitude by Cherokee and its shell corporations that is reminiscent to what see in this affair:

    http://nj.gov/comptroller/news/oig/pdf/Meadowlands%20Remediation%20and%20Redevelopment%20Project.pdf

    “In 2000, Cherokee managed two private equity funds, known as Cherokee Investment Partners Funds I and II (CIP I and CIP II). Cherokee subsequently created and undertook management of two additional private equity funds, Cherokee Investment Partners Funds III and IV (CIP III and CIP IV). The shareholders of the investment funds are primarily large pension funds. “

    “The majority owner of EnCap is Cherokee Investment Partners (Cherokee) through one of its four investment funds, CIP II. Cherokee has registered at least 27 business entities in New Jersey including Cherokee North Arlington, LLC, Cherokee Porete, LLC, and Cherokee Porete Urban Renewal, LLC. “
    “As discussed in Section III, after EnCap was awarded the project Cherokee Investment Partners II acquired a 65% ownership. “

    “EnCap’s main equity investor is Cherokee Investment Partners II (CIP II), which is managed by Cherokee Investment Partners (Cherokee) and has several affiliates and subsidiaries. Thomas Darden is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Cherokee”

    “On April 25, 2002, Thomas Darden contributed $25,000 to the New Jersey Democratic State Committee; • On November 15, 2002, Darden contributed $3,000 to the New Jersey Republican State Committee; and • On April 23, 2004, Darden contributed $15, 000 to the New Jersey Democratic State Committee.

    2012
    https://www.fbi.gov/newark/press-releases/2012/encap-president-indicted-in-connection-with-extortion-and-fraudulent-invoicing-schemes

    Encap won a contract in 2000 from the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission to cap and close four landfills in the Meadowlands and to sell the land for residential, commercial and recreational development, including golf courses. In December 2005, Encap received more than $300 million in publicly sponsored bond financing, including more than $200 million in loans from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust. Encap’s project in the Meadowlands was the subject of a report by the New Jersey Office of Inspector General in February 2008. Encap filed for bankruptcy protection later in 2008 and did not complete the project.

    Feb 2016
    http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20160208/PC05/160209426/1497/bankrupt-owners-of-large-charleston-neck-site-plan-to-sell-land

    “Two closely affiliated companies that own the site of an idled urban redevelopment project in the Charleston Neck Area filed for bankruptcy Monday with the goal of selling most of the 182-acre property.
    Bogged down by the last economic downturn and lengthy litigation, Ashley I LLC and Ashley II LLC sought protection from creditors in Columbia. Their debts total more than $23 million, with much of that owed to one lender, according to the filings.”

    “Ashley I and Ashley II, which began acquiring property in 2002, are owned by Raleigh-based Cherokee Investment Partners. Cherokee did not respond to requests for comment Monday.”

  125. A word about the Woodford invesment

    Woodford did, as they they are obliged to do, and do on every potential investment, due diligence.

    They may or may not have been deceived by any party. If there was any deliberate deception, they may have a claim. The success of any claim would depend on a) whether they had suffered an actual loss; and b) whether there still existed any liable entity which still had assets with which to pay

    In any event, the investment by any single Woodford fund is, in percentage terms, minor. The Patient Capital Trust investment in IH, for example, amounts to less than 2% of the total value of the fund. It would not be a mortal blow if that completely evaporated. Embarrassing, but not by any means fatal. That’s why we use these collective investment vehicles, we hope the bad is well diluted by the good.

    I declare my interest – I invested some money in the WPCT in late February, partly because they had invested in IH, but mainly because Woodford and his team have an excellent track record.

    Regardless of the current hilarity surrounding Rossi, IH, and supporting cast, I am well satisfied with the return of over 13% in 2 months; if only all my investments so performed!

    Thus it will be unlikely that investors in the Woodford funds will be grumbling over-loudly if IH went completely bust.
    We investors are a sanguine lot, and KNOW we are taking risks.

  126. Sifferkoll – I guess you haven’t seen the same pictures of the Petro Dragon site that I have. My point was that somebody was going to have to clean that mess up and that it was interesting that one of Darden’s companies successfully fills that very need. I bought into Rossi’s story and had great hopes for the E-Cat. What I’ve learned since has been disappointing but it’s okay, not every start-up investment makes it – that is the model. Rossi is a very unusual and interesting situation and it is going to be fascinating to see how this all plays out. I’m actually encouraged for the big picture and continue to concentrate my time, efforts and resources in that regard. You’ve shown the world your passion as well along with glimpses of what you are made of and how you operate. You should consider cleaning some of that mess up as well. I do have one question for you, have you invested in any clean tech start-ups with your own funds or the funds of others?

  127. Guest – Thank you for your words – you got a lot of that right. Folks on both sides of this present unpleasantness are passionate and fired up. Sifferkoll has bought into the “rage against the machine” distraction which doesn’t have legs and will peter out soon enough. Sfferkoll and some others will continue to believe in some element of Rossi’s story no matter what the outcome. The good news is that the mission to find a characterized and verified LENR solution continues. Concerned and motivated people are putting their time and money where their mouth is and walking the talk. Thank God for Tom Darden who bravely went first and put his own resources at risk for this cause after decades of no one taking material action to support this sector. Most folks here share a passion for a low cost, zero carbon energy source that can leveraged to mitigate pollution and improve lives in all parts of our sick (in more ways than one) planet. This chapter of the story is only a small part of the big picture and may only be a mention when the history books are written. Back to the front.

  128. @Mats
    Re “pseudoskeptics” comment. my apologies. It was “Mat” who said this.

  129. Finally, @Thomas, if you really think someone can be so deluded that they deliberately add copper (and pure nickel-62) to supposed ecat/hot cat ash, then you are the one deluded. It is a conscious and premeditated act of fraud

    Just two corrections: I’m not saying Rossi has never deliberately deceived others; even believers here would agree that. Just that the simple “it is all a calculated fraud” does not do justice to Rossi’s love of adulation. I suspect he believes his own story while also (provably) at times deceiving others. That technically leaves the issue of fraud open. That leaves the extent to which the bad tests are knowingly bad open. At the end of the day I am both less certain about and less interested in Rossi’s exact frame of mind than you.

  130. New Guest – I don’t hold such shares. In fact, I don’t hold shares in any company at all.

  131. I understand that NCkhawks comments should be seen now under the light that he is connected with IH.

    @Mats, @sifferkoll,
    No offense, but just to rule out from your side a bias in the e-cat story because of potential financial interests:
    Do you hold shares in Hydrofusion or any other entity with LENR related business?

  132. One point to consider with the 1MWt ECat plant is the primary coolant flowing through the reactors is probably not water / steam. More than likely it is a heat exchanger fluid that stays liquid over the operational range and warms the primary circuit of a heat exchanger designed to generate steam in the secondary circuit at the temp and pressure required by the customer.

    If a non boiling primary circuit fluid is used, then doing the flow measurements and coolant temp rise from input to ECat to input to heat exchanger should be fairly simple as the issue of dry versus wet stream does not factor into the thermal gain versus electrical input to the ECat measurements.

    Of course the ERV could also monitor the thermal content in the steam, giving him 4 data streams. MWe input to the reactor, MWt out from ECat (input into heat exchanger) – MWt into ECat from returned coolant from the heat exchanger & MWt steam output from the heat exchanger’s secondary circuit.

    There are much better fluids than water to act as coolant and drive a heat exchanger. As example cars gave away water as their coolant a long time ago.

  133. Hi everyone – you know I stand for openness, but I’m sorry, this is getting boring. Stick to facts and information you pick up, stop long discussions and personal attacks (BTW Thomas, you referred to something I said about pseudoskeptics, but it was not me). Comments that have bad style, or that are repeating standpoints that have been put forward many times, or that are unnecessarily long, will be cancelled.

  134. @nckhawk

    It’s interesting that one of Darden’s companies cleans up toxic waste sites such as the one likely left behind at PD. Another potentially fascinating twist of the tale.

    Oh. I seam to remember that you had a very clear standpoint on what happened in Italy. Did you forget?


    If you think about it, the Italians have been thought and invention leaders for centuries – perhaps this is another in a long line of blessings to the planet. I think that Rossi left to avoid similar treatment from his last round of invention there. The Italian Gov’t / Mafia plays rough if you don’t do things their way and that may have caused the (potentially) most important invention of this/last century to walk out their front door. The Italians are presently trying to put the former heads of their main power group’s nuclear division and their leading fashion company in jail as we type. Anyone can be “convicted” of tax evasion there if the Gov’t wants something from you and needs leverage – the place is a mess on one hand and remains a font of invention on another.

  135. @guest

    NCKhawk appears to be under significant attack for presumably being an IH insider and trying to steer opinions. Keep in mind that all that is known about Dewey Weaver (if that is NCKhawk) is that he appears to have invested in IH. That does not mean he would be knowledgeable about everything that occurs within IH, so his opinions may be developing just as ours are with new information as he incorporates other facts that he has access to that the rest of us don’t.

    I personally think Sifferkoll’s public posting of private correspondence without permission is despicable, whatever the facts in this saga turn out to be.

    (I truly hope Sifferkoll can clean up some of the accusations and personal disparagement that’s now prevalent on his blog re: Mr. Weaver).

    Of course I disagree. I believe it is essential for the audience to know that nckhawk clearly admitted being Mr Weaver in the mail (which was not known before) and that blatantly accuses Rossi of employing a hacker. (in a response to my question about the possible correlation between Deep River Ventures and Namecheap hosting).

    As to the knowledge of Mr Weaver; we can now read all his posts en ECW and here, to get a very clear picture on what he seams to know and have known. And spinned as an insider of IH.

    Mats wrote:

    At least one person [Dewey Weaver, see update below] with close connection to Darden, also financially, is contacting key persons around Rossi, trying to convince them that Rossi is a fraudster and that they would be wise to stop collaborating with him or at least be careful not supporting him in any way. The message also includes claims that IH through its investigation continuously discovers deceptive behaviour by Rossi.

    I can confirm that Dewey Weaver is the person I referred to above, with connections to Darden, contacting key persons around Rossi, and I have proof of his activities. We also know that Dewey Weaver signed a document regarding a resolution in the UK based company IH Holdings International Limited, apparently indicating that Deep River Ventures invested in that company. I also have got some specific comments on some of Weaver’s earlier activities in the LENR field and I will try to confirm this and report on them. I would say that what I heard is not very flattering.

    I have no idea why you are trying to cover these important facts in FUD. It’s a bit suspicious.

  136. It’s interesting that one of Darden’s companies cleans up toxic waste sites such as the one likely left behind at PD. Another potentially fascinating twist of the tale.

  137. I think the rough and tumble
    business Petrol-dragon is we’re
    A.R would have learned a lot and
    then used that experience for the
    Ecat project.

  138. I sent a private email to Andrea Rossi and asked him if it was true the warehouse unit occupied by his 1MW customer JM Chemical Products Inc was available for lease as the internet seems to indicate. His reply was very clear:

    “tHE 7861 46TH STREET IS NOT FOR RENT BECAUSE IS THE ADDRESS OF OUR cUSTOMER.”

    Thank you Andrea Rossi for your very clear reply.

  139. @psi2
    Thanks– you are right and I misread “Russia” for “Rossi”. I am not sure what difference it makes that Russia had “thermionic converters” in the 1960’s or whatever.

    —–

    If it is just a fabricated fabricated company at the hands of AR and his attorney, with the intention of getting $89MM for fraudulent results, then they are going to be facing some potentially serious legal issues.

    One would hope and financial issues also –but it is far from assured. As several people have noted, IH and Woodford may wish to settle out of court, allowing Rossi to keep at least a small part of his illbegotten fees. In return, they would avoid more legal costs, and would prevent or minimize their negligence and incompetence from being paraded in all the newspapers for potential future investors and share holders to see.

  140. Oh, and I would also ask that NCKhawk stop returning fire or referring to Rossi as a fraudster.
    Let’s keep it civil.


    You mean a present fraudster or a past fraudster? Let’s look at the past: In the case of Petroldragon, all the considerable evidence collected by Krivit and others, including translations of news article from the period, confirm that Rossi was indeed a very unpleasant and destructive fraudster. The only opposition to this mass of evidence is stuff that Rossi says. If you don’t think Rossi’s invention to convert extreme industrial waste to fuel was a fraud, then you also have to believe that in all the years since Petroldragon, neither Rossi nor anyone else has been able to profit from such an amazing discovery.

    The same reasoning applies to Rossi’s dealings with DOD in the period around 2000. Rossi claimed to have a super efficient thermoelectric converter prototype. But nobody who will be interviewed ever saw it. It has never been seen or replicated since. I have looked at all the papers I can get my hands on including my own FOIA request and Gary Wright’s and there is absolutely no evidence that the prototype ever existed. The actual items which Rossi delivered to DOD were useless junk, probably rejects made in Russia. None did what Rossi claimed. Again ask yourself, if Rossi had super high efficiency thermoelectric devices in 2000, why are these not in evidence today? Rossi said they were hard to make. OK– that’s a simple engineering issue. The only credible explanation is fraud.

    So why be civil with an obvious fraudster?

    Finally, @Thomas, if you really think someone can be so deluded that they deliberately add copper (and pure nickel-62) to supposed ecat/hot cat ash, then you are the one deluded. It is a conscious and premeditated act of fraud and can not be anything else and is additional evidence that Rossi is a flaming fraudster. So did we catch Rossi with the nickel-62 in hand in the act of adding it to ash? Of course not. But there is no other credible explanation for it other than fraud nor has Rossi ever offered one.

    How all this escaped IH and Woodford is the most interesting part of the whole mess in my estimation.

  141. @ Thomas Clarke,
    This stuff is all in the public domain and provable – you just have to work through the data to find the issues. Ascoli here could lead you through the Levi can’t report flowrate correctly issue, and the Oct 6 2011 issue.

    Sorry, Tom, that’s really naïve. You can’t lead any one where he won’t go.

    As I already told you, it seems to me that we are in the middle of the set of The Truman Show. Did you see the movie? The “stuff” you talk about is in the public domain since the first day. It has always been well visible … if you look in the right direction! Suppose this stuff are the spotlights on the roof of the movie set. You can easily see them as soon as you rise your eyes, realizing at once that you are on a scene. But this scene is crowded with people who insistently invite you to look elsewhere, mainly farthest in front of you. Because they want you looking at what is enlighted by their spots, and not the spots themselves.

    BTW, did you get an idea on who may have been to define the numbers used to express the pump flow rate in the calorimetric report of the January 14, 2011, demo (1)?

    (1) https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/04/12/and-heres-the-opposite-hypothesis-on-the-rossi-ih-affair/#comment-4808

  142. “I personally think Sifferkoll’s public posting of private correspondence without permission is despicable, whatever the facts in this saga turn out to be.”

    I must have missed that. Don’t tell me it was that one about having sex with a budgerigar – I did think it was really for enthusiasts only.

  143. Oh, and I would also ask that NCKhawk stop returning fire or referring to Rossi as a fraudster.

    Let’s keep it civil.

    I think we’re all smart enough to understand that however strongly we believe in whatever position we currently believe in, right now there aren’t enough facts for any of us to be 100% sure of the truth.

  144. I can’t help myself from saying this, even if I get jumped on for it.

    NCKhawk appears to be under significant attack for presumably being an IH insider and trying to steer opinions. Keep in mind that all that is known about Dewey Weaver (if that is NCKhawk) is that he appears to have invested in IH. That does not mean he would be knowledgeable about everything that occurs within IH, so his opinions may be developing just as ours are with new information as he incorporates other facts that he has access to that the rest of us don’t.

    I’d also point out that if NCKhawk is indeed an IH investor, then he’s done at least one thing most interested parties should praise him for – he put his own money behind LENR.

    Who else here has contributed significant amounts of money to LENR research? Everyone is pleading, begging for more money and attention for LENR research, yet one of the people that’s actually done exactly that is getting hounded for suggesting Rossi doesn’t have what he says he has. Now whether the facts end up bearing that out or not it’s too early for us to say, but taking a critical stand should be valued, and it truly does appear that NCKhawk believes what he’s saying to be true just as vehemently as any Rossi supporter believes the opposite.

    I personally think Sifferkoll’s public posting of private correspondence without permission is despicable, whatever the facts in this saga turn out to be.

    I hope NCKhawk continues to post and share information. We can all evaluate it knowing that he has a strong POV, and should reserve judgment until facts come out either supporting or challenging his positions, but let’s put away the pitchforks (I truly hope Sifferkoll can clean up some of the accusations and personal disparagement that’s now prevalent on his blog re: Mr. Weaver).

  145. We’re not talking about some trivial compartmentalization here, mind you–a little illogical thinking slipping through the cracks of an otherwise rational creature. The amount of mental gymnastics it would take to construct such a persistent and systematic illusion in one’s mind is a staggering, and quite frankly, reaching proposition.

    Teemu – do you have personal experience of such delusions to say this? I only go by what Shakespeare and other great writers teach – irrational obsession runs through the heart of humanity, and can express itself, cloaked as sense, in new and ever-surprising ways.

  146. “E-cat has been shown to be a dude.”

    Funny, I always viewed her as a ‘she’.

    Levity aside, you make absolutely no sense to me and I will not engage with you further.

  147. “Most people are sometimes rational, sometimes irrational. Some people have very specific areas on which they are irrational, while otherwise normal. For example, a “Apollo never landed on the moon” conspiracy theorist. And such cases are no less common amongst clever people.”

    We’re not talking about some trivial compartmentalization here, mind you–a little illogical thinking slipping through the cracks of an otherwise rational creature. The amount of mental gymnastics it would take to construct such a persistent and systematic illusion in one’s mind is a staggering, and quite frankly, reaching proposition. Even if Rossi convinced himself, how could he consistently keep on convincing others? Remember, he wouldn’t engage in fraud under the scenario of being a ‘true believer’ in his own make-believe.

    While we can’t totally discredit the possibility, common sense suggests there must be a far simpler explanation.

  148. @Teemu

    “You fail at basic logic. If the E-Cat X works, it means that older iterations of the E-Cat must have worked, too; if it doesn’t, it means that Rossi has been lying all along. There is no strain on credulity here.

    At no point did I make an assertion on whether E-Cat works or not.

    Are you being wantonly dense? It seems like you have an agenda to discredit Rossi at all costs.”

    Sorry but what you fail to realize is that logic is a very low standard to meet especially when you have no, questionable or underspecified premises or theories. When you do you can virtually make anything seem logical. Maybe theology is a better field for you where you can make up logical “proofs” for the existence of God.

    Your other blinder is that you keep ignoring all those bad Ecat tests, that when properly analysed, demonstrate nothing. E-cat has been shown to be a dude.

    So maybe you have the agenda to credit Rossi at all costs.

  149. The only people who really have a rational basis to be upset about this possibility are a few managers of IH who got took (in that case) for 11.5 million (which they can easily afford as a cost of doing business), and other LENR researchers or supporters, who after all would not want the dishonesty of any one person discredit their own work.

    Anyone who cares about scientific truth, whatever their views on LENR, has a rational basis to be upset by Rossi’s high profile flouting of this and its adverse effect on LENR scientists. It is just that many people don’t see “caring about scientific truth” as a plausible rational motivation.

  150. Mats said:

    It’s weird that the pseudoskeptics no longer seem to be making the argument that LENR isn’t real as they have sided with IH in this fight. But IH is very much claiming that LENR is a real effect.

    .

    Mats – it is only weird if we are pseudoskeptics. And by the way I think that is an unmerited insult, and the word shows your bias.

    If we are true skeptics you’d expect us to side with IH. IH, after all, is not claiming to have working LENR, and not lying. It wants to research LENR in the hope of finding working stuff which is very different. Further you will remember IH’s recent PR saying that it realises rigorous testing is needed before any announcement of LENR success. Any (real) skeptic would like that. True skeptics are happy for lab experiments to claim LENR-like effects. Maybe there are real anomalies, maybe there is LENR, maybe the papers are flaky, but the beauty of science papers is they can be evaluated and the value of claims properly analysed. My position is just that the odds seem stacked against LENR and the many papers I’ve read have a standard that does not make me change that view.

    guest said:

    I also know, and which was corroborated by Marianne Macy’s article, that IH appears to have a pretty good reputation with other business partners, while a number of Rossi’s previous business relationships have ended acrimoniously.

    I also believe, that IH is likely in a very precarious position even if the full truth is on their side. They have acknowledged investing in other LENR researchers (also corroborated by Marianne Macy’s article) and even in their latest PR items have expressed optimism that LENR research continues to be worth pursuing. If that is their position, bringing down the hammer on Rossi could be bad for their broader interests. Right or wrong, but right now must outside observers believe LENR and Rossi are the same thing. IH has to tread very carefully, otherwise the headlines quickly becomes “Cold Fusion 2.0 a hoax!” (not “Rossi a fraud” because that won’t get attention outside this small population). That could be bad news for their other investments even if they are legitimate and promising.

    That is how it seems to me. It is sort of IH’s fault they have this difficulty, but I’m still sorry for them, and they have learnt a hard lesson. Not surprising if they turn to APCO for crisis management.

    Hank said:

    Please note that I’ve been trying to some degree, so far, on this forum to give I.H. the benefit of the doubt. In the following highly speculative scenario — which could be totally off — I erase that benefit.

    Hank, your efforts to treat IH fairly have been hampered by your incorrect evaluation of past Rossi tests. Clearly if his stuff works it is difficult to excuse IH who say it does not work, and your “best efforts” will be grossly unfair to IH. It is also difficult for you to make sense of things without elaborate conspiracy theories.

    If however Rossi’s stuff does not work there is no such difficulty…

    Hank said:

    I also agree that the 18 hour Levi test is the best demo of an E-Cat. The two best replications, in my opinion, are Parkhomov’s first tests heating water and Songsheng’s three hours of self sustained operation at around 1300: but those are the only two that are heavily documented. There are others I’ve heard about which have not been made public.

    The Levi test is Levi’s unsupported recod. Ascoli, who has studied these early tests in more detail than me, will say whether it is the one with the impossible flowrate. We have hard evidence that Levi has reported an impossibly high flowrate from at least one of his 3 claimed sole tests, and therefore his evidence from these tests is known to be unreliable. Or do you find fault with ascoli’s flowrate issue? It is pretty compelling.

    If Parkhomov’s first test was real why do you think he has not replicated it? His later tests use worse calorimetry. It is usually the other way round. When something works you repaet precisely with better calorimetry.

    Song’s claim of LENR + a broken thermocouple is more elaborate than the more obvious answer of no LENR + working thermocouple?

    Both these ‘replications’ are fragile, but Song does not pass first base and Parkhomov has had a long time to replicate and get a Nobel Prize if his initial (sketchily reported) results were correct. His silence now speaks volumes.

    Teemu said:

    I’m not buying one bit of it. Nothing is impossible to understand if you have the whole picture, which we clearly lack, presently. However, Rossi is far from deluded. It would be impossible to have run such a calculated fraud operation for so long without being sane

    Most people are sometimes rational, sometimes irrational. Some people have very specific areas on which they are irrational, while otherwise normal. For example, a “Apollo never landed on the moon” conspiracy theorist. And such cases are no less common amongst clever people.

    Guest said:

    I think Teemu’s point is just that the announcement of the E-CatX makes the possibility unlikely that Rossi is innocently mistaken that he has a working technology and this is all purely a case of Rossi making errors in his calculations that are telling him it works when it really doesn’t.

    Why does Rossi have to be 100% calculated rational, or 100% insane? Could he not be something in between? I’m not claiming I know he is this, but how can you rule out the more likely “shades” in between the two extremes. I am skeptical that any of us can be confident about the mind of somone like Rossi. As for innocence – that seems unlikely given his ability to distort evidence, but there are many different levels of non-innocence.

    @Mats – if you really are interested in the truth you need not to come to binary decisions about all these unknown issues – and not base conspiracy theories on such a binary tree case analysis. The world comes in (not I’m sure 50, but many) shades of grey. And the simple solution, which you know well here, is usually the correct one.

  151. @Mats: “but you know, until the truth is established, not just argued about, I will not give in.”

    I agree. I find the moderate skepticism of Rossi to be fully justified. The hateful and malicious talk, not so much. If Rossi is committing a fraud, then he will be caught and punished for it. The only people who really have a rational basis to be upset about this possibility are a few managers of IH who got took (in that case) for 11.5 million (which they can easily afford as a cost of doing business), and other LENR researchers or supporters, who after all would not want the dishonesty of any one person discredit their own work. Due diligence in considering motivation is needed all around. We have recently seen, even that associates of IH have been posting under assumed names to attack Rossi and his supporters.

  152. “You have to now imagine that nothing existed before this supposed EcatX but all of a sudden there was a breakthrough based on what? Sorry but that just strains credulity.”

    You fail at basic logic. If the E-Cat X works, it means that older iterations of the E-Cat must have worked, too; if it doesn’t, it means that Rossi has been lying all along. There is no strain on credulity here.

    At no point did I make an assertion on whether E-Cat works or not.

    Are you being wantonly dense? It seems like you have an agenda to discredit Rossi at all costs.

  153. @ Deleo: “But still, we either have a real customer with a commercial operation that contracted with IH to supply heat to their operations, or we don’t. If it is just a fabricated fabricated company at the hands of AR and his attorney, with the intention of getting $89MM for fraudulent results, then they are going to be facing some potentially serious legal issues. If the customer is real, then they will provide direct testimony on the heat they received from the e-cat.
    We don’t know which one is true, but we can likely surmise that AR’s litigation attorney, link below, does. He had to look at all of the information that AR presented before he filed the suit.”

    Very well reasoned.

  154. @Mary: “In the 1960’s Russia utilized thermionic generators with a heat to electrical efficiency of 10% using lower temperatures than the the E-Cat X.

    Rossi did WHAT? Is no silly lie too preposterous for you, Hank?
    How about these? From E-catworld.com…”

    You seem to have confused Rossi and Russia in your reply to Hank Mills.

  155. @Guest:

    “Mark S.

    I think Teemu’s point is just that the announcement of the E-CatX makes the possibility unlikely that Rossi is innocently mistaken that he has a working technology and this is all purely a case of Rossi making errors in his calculations that are telling him it works when it really doesn’t.

    I think that’s a reasonable observation. …”

    No! Not at all if he is still making measurement errors. Whole pseudo-sciences like alternative medicine, parapsychology, UFOology keep themselves alive this way. They keep the hamster wheel spinning to nowhere. I still believe Rossi is “full of it” but am will to think he is just incompetent and repeating or creating new mistakes. His history shows just that.

    You have to now imagine that nothing existed before this supposed EcatX but all of a sudden there was a breakthrough based on what? Sorry but that just strains credulity.

  156. In the 1960’s Russia utilized thermionic generators with a heat to electrical efficiency of 10% using lower temperatures than the the E-Cat X.


    Rossi did WHAT? Is no silly lie too preposterous for you, Hank?

    How about these? From E-catworld.com…

    ‘Well-Known Companies’ Have Placed Orders for E-Cat Plants: Q&A With Andrea Rossi

    Any idea which companies, Hank?

    Andrea Rossi
    February 20, 2016 at 12:53 PM
    Pietro F.:
    Yes, the new factory of Leonardo Corporation in which the E-Cat X will be manufactured is in Florida. I must repeat F9, but I can add that in these very days we are making exponential progress. We are very close to be ready to make 1 million pcs/year, technologically speaking. From the moment I will decide that we are ready to start to the moment in which we will start the production line, it will take not more than 3 months. All is already organized. Now that I can give to this concern my full time, we are advancing very fast.


    Know when Rossi made an almost identical promise, Hank? In 2012! In free energy scams, this sort of time line is called SooN.

  157. Mark S.

    I think Teemu’s point is just that the announcement of the E-CatX makes the possibility unlikely that Rossi is innocently mistaken that he has a working technology and this is all purely a case of Rossi making errors in his calculations that are telling him it works when it really doesn’t.

    I think that’s a reasonable observation.

    So as Teemu points out, the only remaining options if you assume Rossi is rational, are either that Rossi has a working technology (which he may or may not have shared appropriately), or that he is intentionally misleading others into believing he has a working technology.

    I tend to view the rationality condition as not yet fulfilled, but assuming it is then you’re left with another logic tree with regards to IH, and based on what I know/have read I believe IH has more to lose by purposely misleading in this case than Rossi does.

    I also know, and which was corroborated by Marianne Macy’s article, that IH appears to have a pretty good reputation with other business partners, while a number of Rossi’s previous business relationships have ended acrimoniously.

    I also believe, that IH is likely in a very precarious position even if the full truth is on their side. They have acknowledged investing in other LENR researchers (also corroborated by Marianne Macy’s article) and even in their latest PR items have expressed optimism that LENR research continues to be worth pursuing. If that is their position, bringing down the hammer on Rossi could be bad for their broader interests. Right or wrong, but right now must outside observers believe LENR and Rossi are the same thing. IH has to tread very carefully, otherwise the headlines quickly becomes “Cold Fusion 2.0 a hoax!” (not “Rossi a fraud” because that won’t get attention outside this small population). That could be bad news for their other investments even if they are legitimate and promising.

    One thing I think we can all agree on though is that we need real evidence, and as of now we’re stuck with partial truths, obfuscation, and a high stakes game of he-said vs he-said.

  158. Interesting discussion tonight everyone. Thoughtworthy points made by Teemu, Hank Mills and Deleo.
    Mark S, I think you missed Teemu’s point. Read again.
    Hank – I tried to contact Cures a few years ago but never got any answer. It sure would be interesting to talk with him.
    I had great difficulty to research the Cobraf forum website since permalinks never worked. A really substandard website! If you have saved posts that you think I should read, except for those quoted in my book, send them to me.
    Let’s keep discussing.

  159. Cures wrote dozens of posts of Cobraf — maybe a hundred or more — over an extended period of time

    Oh, well, if Cures, named Fioravanti by Rossi himself from JonP, wrote a lot in a thread of Cobraf – proving nothing at all – the whole story must be true, especially copper production from E Cat and the agreement with a secret military customer in early 2013. This is why a 1 MW plant has been sailed by an anonymous cargo ship among bananas instead than travelling of military airplane: the secret customer wanted to remain secret, and this accounts also for the sudden disappearing of Cures from Cobraf blog: he must have been imprisoned in some military jail due to his yearly leakage – or might be Strong Mutants Powers simply killed him…

    Or might be Cures was only another nick playing a game as long as it seemed useful. But for sure some believer in Rossi miracle can prove me false simply showing where Cures has been in last two years…

  160. “Clearly you fail to realize that hypothetical sources/evidence is not evidence. You have nothing here. I could also say that ecat-x is what is used by aliens on their star-ships. So there must be something to e-cat otherwise aliens would not use them. LOL”

    Rossi claiming that a working E-Cat X exists is evidence of Rossi claiming that a working E-Cat X exists. Therefore, he is either knowingly committing fraud (=a working E-Cat X does not exist) or believes that a working E-Cat X does exist.

    By your hypothesis, it would be possible for Rossi to simultaneously believe that a working E-Cat X exists while having arrived at that conclusion through _incompetence_ (=a working E-Cat X does not exist). Due to the nature of its direct electricity production, it would be extremely hard to fail at a proper validation of whether said technology produces excess energy or not. Therefore, I view your scenario as improbable enough to be considered irrelevant for the purpose of our discussion.

  161. I think that the grant of EP 2754156 A2 (Piantelli – Effective grant date: 20151211) was the real game-changer.

  162. @Teemu

    ““A hypothetical device which no one has evidence for … is no evidence.”

    It is evidence that Rossi is either:
    a) definitely committing fraud
    b) definitely in possession of a working technology

    Clearly, you must realize this.”

    Clearly you fail to realize that hypothetical sources/evidence is not evidence. You have nothing here. I could also say that ecat-x is what is used by aliens on their star-ships. So there must be something to e-cat otherwise aliens would not use them. LOL

  163. A tungsten tube at 1480C, the claimed operating temp of the E-Cat X, will produce copious light and will be capable of thermionic emission. The device, by its very high temperature, will be capable of emitting electrons that can be collected by another metal plate and, hence, form a closed circuit allowing for current flow. In the 1960’s Russia utilized thermionic generators with a heat to electrical efficiency of 10% using lower temperatures than the the E-Cat X. Now, in 2016, I’m pretty sure Rossi can do much better. I doubt he is hitting 40% or 50% percent yet, but that could be possible in the future once according to the latest cutting edge research I’ve been reading on new variants of experimental thermionic generators using graphene and other materials. The E-Cat X might be producing electricity directly via some other means, but even a traditional “hot cat” (if using suitable materials) could be pushed hot enough to produce electricity semi-directly this way. NASA is even becoming more interested in thermionic systems as of late, because they claim the technology offers huge benefits in terms of weight, volume, and complexity.

  164. “A hypothetical device which no one has evidence for … is no evidence.”

    It is evidence that Rossi is either:
    a) definitely committing fraud
    b) definitely in possession of a working technology

    Clearly, you must realize this.

  165. @Deleo

    Again, you have another incompetent person related to the testing situation, the attorney. The attorney will just believe his client but gets paid either way this goes.

    The “customer” is again another unknown source/entity. This means nothing since it could be at worse a fictitious source/entity.

    So far we experiments in the public domain have shown nothing after all these years.

  166. Mary Yugo,

    Cures wrote dozens of posts of Cobraf — maybe a hundred or more — over an extended period of time. They were in a style of writing (even after translating from Italian to English via Google) that was very different than Rossi’s. They gave a detailed account of his relationship with Rossi, his interactions with him, his role testing reactors, their behavior, and even gave an account of how his relationship with Rossi eventually came to a close. In case your curious, since Cures was NOT working under a written NDA, Rossi was encouraged by his colleagues to clamp down on his access to the E-Cat reactors.

    I know how Rossi speaks and communicates. Cures was NOT Rossi in disguise. That is absurd.

    However, in my opinion, Cures is the absolute best witness to the Rossi Effect other than Andrea Rossi himself.

    I wish he would verify his identity with Mats and make a few posts on this forum.

    He could share a wealth of information.

    Sincerely,
    Hank

  167. @Teemu
    “The hypothesis of incompetence is easily ruled out by the (purported?) miraculous electricity/light producing E-Cat X. The mere suggestion of such a device existing leaves no middle ground to play with.”

    A hypothetical device which no one has evidence for … is no evidence.

  168. Mark, I am not sure that your theory of bad measurement can hold if the customer is real. You may be right that it is gross measurement error. It’s possible, and Jed Rothwell and others here have pointed out how it could happen.

    But still, we either have a real customer with a commercial operation that contracted with IH to supply heat to their operations, or we don’t. If it is just a fabricated fabricated company at the hands of AR and his attorney, with the intention of getting $89MM for fraudulent results, then they are going to be facing some potentially serious legal issues. If the customer is real, then they will provide direct testimony on the heat they received from the e-cat.

    We don’t know which one is true, but we can likely surmise that AR’s litigation attorney, link below, does. He had to look at all of the information that AR presented before he filed the suit. And he had to determine if he felt the lawsuit was frivolous, or even worse, a blatant attempt to perpetrate fraud to get $89MM. People have pointed out that AR has a B level law firm compared to Jones Day. Ok, but looking at the attorney’s profile below, he appears to be professional, and I doubt he is going to do anything to violate the code of conduct with the Florida Bar. If this attorney, John Annesser, has discovered anything that could potentially incriminate his client or immediately get the suit thrown out, he would in all likelihood withdraw the suit and tell AR to find another attorney. He has not done this as of today or we would hear about it. And this attorney knows he is going into battle against top flight attorneys from Jones Day.

    Even if AR’s attorney decided to hang with the case, if the customer were fake, you would expect a quick and clean response from IH to the suit stating so a week ago. A statement like that with substantial proof would likely cause AR’s attorney to withdraw the suit and he would tell AR to take a walk. At the least, doing this would save IH a bunch of expensive legal bills from Jones Day. One letter like that could literally kill this lawsuit, and it would probably take all of a few hours to draft.

    But we haven’t seen this yet. IH could be concerned about publicly admitting to being taken by AR, (doing this could open a can of worms for both them and Woodford). But still, I think IH would show quick proof of a fake customer to stop this thing in its tracks, and they would deal with the other ramifications later.

    http://silverlawgroup.com/attorneys/john-annesser/

  169. Amusingly, Hank Mills refers to “Cures” who supposedly saw violent thermal runaway in ecats! So who is “Cures?” The going hypothesis among believers is that it’s “Domenico Fioravanti,” who, according to Rossi, is a “NATO colonel”. Leaving aside the consideration of what the heck a “NATO colonel” even is, try looking up the name in Google. There is no reference to it anywhere except with respect to Rossi and the ecat. Try looking up any person with the rank of Colonel in the US military and there will be all sorts of things — awards, ceremonies, promotions, projects — all sorts.

    BTW, one real “Domenico Fioravanti” is a retired Italian competitive swimmer!

    Cures or Fioravanti has never been interviewed and has never been seen or talked to outside of the one time he appeared as the mysterious customer’s agent to accept the megawatt plant Rossi said he sold in 2011! BTW, where is that wonder of the world, five years later?

    My best guess is that Fioravanti is a made up name, and that the man who appeared in 2011 was a friend of Rossi’s, perhaps from a contact made in prison. Further, I think that Rossi wrote the “Cures” posts himself. As you might not know, Rossi is clearly writing posts under assumed names on his JONP blog and is answering them. This was deduced by noticing the same exact spelling and grammar errors that Rossi usually makes in English as well as noticing unusual and incorrect spacing with parentheses. For an example, check out “Jacky” posts by searching for them here:

    http://www.rossilivecat.com/

    So you are relying, Hank, on unsupported statements from “Cures” and Rossi? ROTFWL! Lots of luck with those sources of information. Laughable!

  170. Mark S,

    The hypothesis of incompetence is easily ruled out by the (purported?) miraculous electricity/light producing E-Cat X. The mere suggestion of such a device existing leaves no middle ground to play with.

  171. @ Teemu
    “I’m not buying one bit of it. Nothing is impossible to understand if you have the whole picture, which we clearly lack, presently. However, Rossi is far from deluded. It would be impossible to have run such a calculated fraud operation for so long without being sane. If one believes Rossi to be a rational agent, which I readily admit to (IH and countless others wouldn’t get conned by a friggin lunatic, right, nckhawk?), he would never sue IH, unless:

    1. there was a real customer AND the e-cat technology was real
    (<– because those two points will certainly be contested in court)

    OR

    2. it was all fabricated, BUT Rossi were certain that IH would settle for whatever reason, even though they had the truth on their side and nothing to gain from the deal. Wouldn't IH love to squat the annoying little fly that duped them out of $10 M?? Clearly, IH must have some terrible skeletons in their closet if that's the case…

    So, which is it? Don't you dare play the "Rossi is insane" card, it is the biggest insult to intelligence imaginable."

    There is another very commonly occurring possibility which has nothing to do with Rossi being crazy or knowing committing a fraud. He and his coterie are simply incompetent at doing good enough experiments in this area and have to large a confirmation bias. Over and over again the experimental issues have been pointed out and over and over again they have been in different ways ignored. IH finally woke-up to these and realize there is "no there, there" there is nothing. So both believe they are right but only one really is and it looks so far like it is IH.

  172. Mats,

    Thank you for your honest and too the point (black&white) replies, I think it’s safe to say we ALL appreciate it.

    My concern is that we really don’t know anything about the customer where the 1MW unit was tested, who ran the testing or the results of the tests.

    So basically all we know so far is what Rossi and Industrial Heat tells us, plus a bunch of added hearsay and rumors.

  173. Hank – I keep a few hypothesis open and unfortunately this is one of them. There’s still important work to do to uncover the truth, especially if it is what you suggest.
    Yes, I know what a number of persons will comment now, but you know, until the truth is established, not just argued about, I will not give in.

  174. MisterMittens – the only thing we know is that the person who is Rossi’s lawyer (or attorney – I’m never sure of the right title in English) was appointed president of the company, according to Rossi to keep the real owners protected. According to others that means it’s a shell company controlled by Rossi.

  175. “Timar – It is impossible to understand why Rossi chose the courts to play out the next act in his play. A settlement goal is the only objective and logical conclusion if you’re a clear-minded individual and don’t know much about Rossi’s previous history. Elements of grand delusion continue to surface – he does seems to be able to absorb some of the truth when he reads it. His JNOP postings continue to be very revealing and helpful in that regard. He lives on Planet Rossi but is now going to have to deal with the consequences of his actions on Planet Earth.”

    My name is Teemu, not Timar. Anyway…

    I’m not buying one bit of it. Nothing is impossible to understand if you have the whole picture, which we clearly lack, presently. However, Rossi is far from deluded. It would be impossible to have run such a calculated fraud operation for so long without being sane. If one believes Rossi to be a rational agent, which I readily admit to (IH and countless others wouldn’t get conned by a friggin lunatic, right, nckhawk?), he would never sue IH, unless:

    1. there was a real customer AND the e-cat technology was real
    (<– because those two points will certainly be contested in court)

    OR

    2. it was all fabricated, BUT Rossi were certain that IH would settle for whatever reason, even though they had the truth on their side and nothing to gain from the deal. Wouldn't IH love to squat the annoying little fly that duped them out of $10 M?? Clearly, IH must have some terrible skeletons in their closet if that's the case…

    So, which is it? Don't you dare play the "Rossi is insane" card, it is the biggest insult to intelligence imaginable.

  176. @Mats

    That is a plausible hypothesis. I’ll share my current working hypothesis with you. I could be wrong, and I hope I’m wrong. This hypothesis would mean that very powerful, wealthy, and “evil” forces are at work. Please note that I’ve been trying to some degree, so far, on this forum to give I.H. the benefit of the doubt. In the following highly speculative scenario — which could be totally off — I erase that benefit.

    1 — The Rossi technology works as claimed and has been successfully replicated.

    2 — When Andrea Rossi transferred the IP, he gave them ALL the information needed to produce working reactors of every kind. The low temperature units of every design and the high temperature units of every design.

    3 — Industrial Heat successfully replicated the Rossi Effect repeatedly: inside their lab with Rossi present, at demonstrations to acquire investment, and in private locations that they disclosed to no one.

    4 — In one of these private labs, they performed a long series of tests. The results were phenomenal. The bursts of excess heat were enormous and could last in self sustain mode for extended periods of time. However, they were also difficult to control precisely, which is a moot point; they had the money to hire engineers to design, build, and test a variety of control mechanisms.

    5 — Darden showed these highly successful experiments to a wide array of individuals. Not only investors and stock holds in IH, but also government, military, and large corporate interests.

    6 — More than one startled, alarmed prominent persons made statements such as…

    a) “Tom, do you realize what you have here? This technology can never get out.”

    b) “We can’t let Rossi introduce this to the market; this is the definition of a disruptive technology.”

    c) “If the truth of this technology gets out, my company will go under — all our investments in solar power will be worthless.”

    7 — Tom Darden and the “powers that be” came up with a plan. Continue working on the technology privately while publicly buying up all the LENR intellectual property they could find. Meanwhile, they would work to do three things: come up with a plan to introduce a very weak version of LENR (perhaps a modified version of Brillouin’s technology) to be used sparingly to clean up the emissions from the dirtiest power plants, figure out a way to control the entire LENR field, and find a way to slow down or stop Rossi.

    8 — The test of Rossi’s 1MW plant was turning out to be a huge success. They decided that paying him wasn’t an option — directly funding the proliferation of the E-Cat technology would make enemies of all their allies in the energy industry and upset other major “powers” that wouldn’t want every nation in the world to have access to an unlimited source of dirt cheap energy. So they decided the best option would be to not pay and spend a couple million over a few years to fight Rossi in court. This would only cost a fraction of paying Rossi the 89 million while keeping everyone on the “inside” somewhat pacified. More importantly, it might buy them time to coordinate their CONTROLLED introduction of LENR to the world.

    9 — The last thing they want to see now are multiple successful replications of the E-Cat technology by third parties. They hope that by mocking, attacking, and belittling Rossi in every way possible (personal visits by IH, emails, posts on blogs) they can at least dissuade individuals from focusing on the Rossi Effect and convince them to turn their attention to lesser LENR technologies — THAT THEY CONTROL.

    10 — Their greatest fear is the E-Cat X Quark. If Rossi can scale up production to the billions of a product that can produce a very high thermal COP while producing some level of electricity directly, all current energy industries will start to shake and topple like a 9.0 Earthquake would shake New York City. All solar power companies, wind power companies, and even fossil fuel companies would be severely impacted. Many would flat out collapse.

    FOR THE RECORD I AM NOT SAYING THIS SCENARIO IS TRUE. I COULD BE COMPLETELY WRONG. IT IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS. ALSO I SHOULD STATE THAT I DO NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS NEEDED TO GO UPON SINCE NEITHER IH OR LEONARDO CORP ARE SHARING PERTINENT INFORMATION.

  177. maryyugo
    “There is no evidence that Rossi ever had a customer…”

    I totally agree. The customer will be a big problem for Rossi, either there is one or not.

  178. It’s weird that the pseudoskeptics no longer seem to be making the argument that LENR isn’t real as they have sided with IH in this fight. But IH is very much claiming that LENR is a real effect. At this point all the skepticism is directly at Rossi without acknowledging how interesting it is that two groups are fighting about LENR which supposedly isn’t a thing at all.

  179. Mary Yugo,

    I do not believe every claim! Over the years I’ve been contacted by and talked to all sorts of inventors making bold claims about their inventions. I’m talking about all sorts of devices: magnetic, electronic, mechanical, LENR, etc. Yes, I thought many of the inventions could indeed work. The evidence for some of them looked very convincing to me. Others were less than convincing, and the inventors refused to perform simple and easy tests to provide evidence their systems worked. I’ve had inventors become very angry at me and stop communicating because I’d propose simple tests that could be performed to prove their claims. I am more open minded than you. I’d so so far to say that we’re far apart on the spectrum. But for you to say I believe every claim is by no means true. And I’ll swear on my grandmother’s grave that the number one thing I have asked for repeatedly is more evidence and more testing.

    I also agree that the 18 hour Levi test is the best demo of an E-Cat. The two best replications, in my opinion, are Parkhomov’s first tests heating water and Songsheng’s three hours of self sustained operation at around 1300: but those are the only two that are heavily documented. There are others I’ve heard about which have not been made public.

    When it comes to runaways, “Cures” of the Cobraf forum saw countless thermal runaways when he worked with Rossi on the earliest hot cat systems. He tested hundreds of reactors and saw them repeatedly shoot up several hundreds of degrees to self destruction. He said they changed the formula (the ingredients of which were not revealed to him except as perhaps chemical “A”, “B”, “C” etc) countless times to find a balance that would allow significant excess heat without the sudden destruction of the reactor. He saw reactors runaway with direct current, pulsed direct current, and alternating current. It has also been reported that during one of Rossi’s hot cat tests a reactor went from 1000C to 2000C in ten seconds, going from glowing red to pure white and melting the ceramic like “hot wax.”

    I’m convinced the E-Cat effect works. But I’ll be the first to say that I want to see more testing. I’d love to see many variants of the E-Cat tested again. The good thing is once we figure out what parameters are missing in the unsuccessful replications, then we will all be able to see the massive spikes of power that can lead to runaways.

  180. Hank – I would say that IF IH has been able to replicate Rossi, it would be logic, given that they claim that they have not been able to replicate, for them not to tell us about it. That would fit into their apparent strategy to acquire LENR patents and initiating collaboration with LENR experts, in order to build a dominant market position, while getting rid of Rossi.
    Just a hypothesis of course, among others.

  181. There is no evidence that Rossi ever had a customer other than himself, his own lawyer, and of course, Darden and Vaughn (and by extension Woodford and some nebulous Chinese entity). What evidence is there Rossi sold any plants, much less three? Or were you just being sarcastic? One can’t tell these days.

  182. I’m sorry Peter Ekström, but I really think you should dedicate a week discussing with knowledgable LENR researchers and then I would let you come back and review your statement on published LENR research.

    “I will let you come back when your views have been corrected.” A minor brain-was is what you recommend! You were wrong about E-Cat, so there is no reason that you should be right about the others. I have studied a number of them, and most of them are really bad. Have you studied them? You still do not understand the main point: No science and no progress without criticism.

  183. nckhawk,

    You may think that I’m nothing but a die hard Rossi fan that’s obsessed with seeing him prosper and overcome his enemies. In fact, to a certain extent, that is the truth. I think his technology works and he should be reap a huge reward for his invention and all the work he has put into pushing it towards commercialization.

    However, my primary objective, above all else, has nothing to do with Andrea Rossi. Instead, it has everything to do with the technology itself. Although you claim to disagree, I view the technology as being very close to the pinnacle of what can hoped to be achieved by LENR — at least when the production of thermal energy is the objective. A kilowatt of power per gram, capability to operate at ultra high temperatures, long lifespan of the fuel: no other exotic “alternative energy” technology comes anywhere close. And I’m not just talking about the field of “Cold Fusion” either. There is no technology of any kind that produce this sort of sustained output, at least that has been disclosed publicly.

    My number one goal is to see this technology emerge into the mainstream to the point it is every bit as accepted as “real” as the solar panel. To be clear, I’m not talking about LENR technology in general. I’m talking about the E-Cat. There’s no other LENR technology that impresses me at this time. Although many fascinating effects, reactions, transmutations, radioactive emissions, and perhaps even production of exotic states of matter have been accomplished by other inventors working in the field, none of them have a reactor that can sit and glow at 1300C or higher for hours at a time without external input using no radioactive fuel without emitting any significant amount of radiation.

    If Industrial Heat knows about another technology that compares to what I’m claiming about the performance of the E-Cat, please inform me! I really want to know.

    I’ll become every bit as interested and obsessive about it as I am the Energy Catalyzer!

    I doubt there’s another technology as impressive out there, but I could be wrong.

    Unified Gravity Corporation has done a lot of amazing work on proton-lithium fusion events. They’ve performed hundreds of tests showing massive production of alpha particles — hundreds of thousands of counts through a one millimeter aperture covered with a tiny film of mylar. Getting down to basics, they’ve discovered a sweet spot of proton energy of around 200kEV that allows a proton to be gravitationally (according to their theory) pulled into a lithium atom. I’d really like to know if they’ve ever attempted to make the same reactions take place inside the lattice of a metal. If so, they could produce a pretty awesome LENR technology. For some reason, though, I doubt they are even close to that.

    Now, to get onto the topic I want to discuss with you. If Industrial Heat has not went all out — hiring a team of researchers to test the Rossi Effect 24/7 running simultaneous experiments — they need to do so. My thinking is that there must be a few very basic parameters that are not being met by most replicators. If we can figure these out, which might be tricky to do, the excess heat will become rapidly apparent. The replicators who are apparently meeting these parameters, such as Songsheng and Parkhomov, are able to achieve the excess heat effect more or less on demand, repeatedly. When the true Rossi Effect is produced the reaction is extremely powerful and cannot be overlooked.

    Here is one possible variable among many. There is a wide variety in the quality, purity, and hydrogen content of LiAlH4. A couple years ago I found a paper in which several brands of LiAlH4 from different manufacturers were analyzed. The amount of hydrogen release, level of contaminants from the manufacturing process, particle size, degree of oxidation, and other features varied dramatically! I think there may be a benefit to studying the properties of a number of different samples of LiAlH4 before testing them in E-Cat replications. The same goes for brands of pure elemental lithium.

    There are many other variables that need to be studied and tested. Individual replicators or small teams on shoe string budgets don’t have the means or resources to do so. But Industrial Heat has the money to hire the skilled labor, rent the facility, buy the equipment, and finance hundreds upon hundreds of tests.

    Maybe this has happened. Rossi claims that you WERE able to successfully replicated. I actually believe and agree with his assessment: because if Parkhomov and Songsheng can replicate I think IH must have done so. But I’m a human being, can error, and I can be WRONG. So for the benefit of the doubt, I’m making this plea. If you have not given replication a serious and concerted effort, please do so.

    If you have only performed a short series of tests and then given up, please perform more. You paid Rossi TEN MILLION DOLLARS. For a fraction of that cost you can run ten times more tests than all the other replicators I’m aware of, all put together.

    If Industrial Heat really cares about the LENR community, the reduction of pollution, and cleaning up our world, then I think launching a FULL SCALE replication effort is called for.

  184. @deleo

    I don’t know if Darden is aiming for an out of court settlement but I can tell you why he might. He may not want the newspapers and magazines writing in detail about the way in which Rossi bamboozled and flummoxed him and Vaughn and their supposed “experts.” He may not want the negligence and incompetence that both IH and Woodford demonstrated in “due diligence” exposed widely. He may not want publicity about how these two large funds were easily fooled by a convicted criminal who went from the Petroldragon disaster to rip off a government project (thermoelectric converters), who never previously produced a single invention or product in his life, and who bought his PhD from a diploma mill.

    Then again, he may wish to show how believable and crooked Rossi was and how anyone could fall into Rossi’s trap.

    We don’t know the strategy and I bet you Darden won’t tell us.

  185. We are never going to agree on the merit of Andrea Rossi’s multiple tests of the E-Cat technology. I’m not going to argue about each and every individual test…

    …However, I’ll stand by my assertion that the tests were more than good enough to show excess heat was produced…


    No, they were not. And the express reasons why not have been gone over many times, some would say ad nauseam to no avail. The main reason is that the tests were not independent and thus were subject to deceit by master deceiver and convicted criminal, Andrea Rossi. The second reason was that even the tests Rossi allowed, *never* (NOT ONCE) included a proper calibration. This is despite the huge electrical heater built into each one which could have served easily and quickly for that purpose.

    So: not independent and not calibrated means the results are not credible or reliable when they easily could have been made so, any time within the last five years (back to 2007 if you believe Rossi heated a factory with an ecat back then!)

    A bonus reason is that the tests Rossi promoted were completely unnecessary to prove the ecat works. There is no need whatever for high temperature hot cats measured strangely with a thermal camera. There is no need for megawatt “plants” and certainly none for an absurd, non-independent one year test.

    All that is need is a couple of independent tests with the best ecat ever tested (if you believe it)– the one tested by Levi in 2011:

    http://www.nyteknik.se/energi/cold-fusion-18-hour-test-excludes-combustion-6421304

    The claims for that test are >10kW average output for >18 hours at a COP > 10 for a device the size of a tennis ball with no fresh fuel. using mass flow calorimetry! That would be spectacular except it was uncalibrated, badly done, and Levi would never repeat it, even when asked to by Brian Josephson!

    In some tests, I think the excess heat was massive and obvious. In a few tests, there was evidence of infinite COP while reactors “ran away.”


    That is what “Rossi says”. Who ever saw a reactor run away? I have often asked for Rossi to put a reactor in the desert, set it up for the most violent possible runaway, disconnect external power and go for it! The yield could be measured and also could prove the ecat real. Think he has ever allowed anyone to do it? Of course not.

    Hank, basically you tend to believe, like Sterling Allen, that whatever someone tells you is true. Please at least learn this from Rossi: CLAIMS ARE NOT FACTS!

  186. Nckhawk – I understand your comments about AR being delusional and on Planet Rossi, but it’s hard to reconcile that with what you say about the games that were played regarding JM Products. They are either a real independent entity or they are not.

    Perhaps AR is hoping for an out of court settlement, but if there is not a legitimite customer and AR fabricated some entity to help him secure the $89MM, then why would Darden entertain any type of out of court settlement?

    So, either AR withdrawals his case or this goes to court (AR has repeatedly said that he wants this to go,to court).

    In the trial the customer will surely be called to testify. They will be asked who they are and how they were brought into this test in front of a judge. Everything about the customer’s validity will be scrubbed and verified in court. I think this will be potentially the most important testimony of the trial.

    If the customer is not legit then AR opens himself up to a counter-suit by Darden for the $10MM he has received already, and AR could even open himself up to criminal prosecution by the state of FL (see the FL statute for fraud and cheating below).

    I am not asking you to predict AR’s endgame, but I agree with what others have said, much of the case will hinge upon the customer. Either JM Products is a real company or not. If they are not, then AR cheated and he made it up with his attorney. And again, how could Darden not have full confidence that the entity was real when the test started (I will again mention the Fortune Mag article 6 months into the test where Darden said he is optimistic and that things look promising). If he had any hunch that the customer was not legit would he have said this?

    Just going beyond this, it wouldn’t only be AR who would be on the hook, his attorney would as well. He would likely be disbarred and face criminal prosecution. Given that AR’s attorney set up the corporation I understand that we may ultimately see some underhanded activity, but this is all a big leap to take. Who does AR plan on having take the stand on behalf of JM Products to testify in the trial? His attorney?

    2011 Florida Statutes
    SECTION 29
    Cheating.
    817.29 Cheating.—Whoever is convicted of any gross fraud or cheat at common law shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
    History.—s. 54, ch. 1637, 1868; RS 2475; GS 3344; RGS 5187; CGL 7290; s. 860, ch. 71-136.

  187. The thing about excess heat is, it really does not matter what happens – there will always be a blah blah blah why it is no more than 1 by those positioned and minded to come up with hypothesis focused to that end. What is curious is that most of these know it all, do nothing practical analysts don’t get involved with making suggestions BEFORE the experiment is run – they just wait and pounce afterwards.


    Specifically with respect to Rossi claims, are you saying that if Rossi really had a COP of 50 or even 6, as he claimed in the past, that he could not prove it to the satisfaction of people like Thomas Clarke, and Jed Rothwell and Peter Ekstrom and me? That, of course, is preposterous!

    As for suggestions made before the experiment is run, I remember asking you on your web site to focus on the one thing which could prove that Celani wires make heat — heating more wires with the same heater and approximately the same energy. And all MFPM did was find excuses not to do it.

    I also pointed your group to a stable and easily calibrated, water cooled, high temperature, mass flow calorimeter. Did you use it or something you made which was comparable? I mean this:

    https://gsvit.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/misura-del-calore-emesso-da-una-lampada-ad-infrarossi-da-2kw-tramite-calorimetria-a-flusso/

    How many times have LENR experimenters been told to use isoperibolic calorimetry only for screening purposes? That isolated point temperature measurements do not constitute definitive calorimetry? And yet, claims to excess heat are still based on it.

    So one could make the argument that no matter how good the suggestions for better measurements are, LENR enthusiasts ignore them.

  188. Thomas,

    We are never going to agree on the merit of Andrea Rossi’s multiple tests of the E-Cat technology. I’m not going to argue about each and every individual test. After each demonstration took place, I collected as much information as I could find, studied to understand the reports to the best of my ability on my own, read the comments that everyone was making (pro and con), discussed each test at length with contacts of mine (many of whom have much more knowledge than myself), and then attempted to come to a conclusion. You are absolutely correct that many of the tests had flaws, but any scientific experiment can be conducted more rigorously — reducing the margin of error, being more precise in measurements, measuring the input/output by different methods, etc. However, I’ll stand by my assertion that the tests were more than good enough to show excess heat was produced. In some tests, I think the excess heat was massive and obvious. In a few tests, there was evidence of infinite COP while reactors “ran away.” In other tests, the excess heat was still large compared to the tiny minuscule levels detected in most LENR experiments, but the COP was probably lower than reported — as with the Lugano test. If you wanted to debate every single test with me I couldn’t. I have many different areas of interest that I research and study online (anti-aging technology and radical propulsion technologies for two examples) and I don’t remember all the details of each and every test, all the arguments that were made, etc. And, to be honest, I don’t have the energy to go back and study each test for a week.

    The reason I desire so much for the community to determine a “recipe” for the effect is so we can run top notch tests (not necessarily the most significant but the most convincing with the least possible problems) that anyone can perform for themselves that can prove the Ni-LiAlH4-Li combination works to anyone: even the most skeptical individuals that view every flaw as a stake in the heart.

    I’m actually stunned beyond measure that you think the first Parkhomov tests produced excess heat. In my private circle of contacts, I’ve told many people his original tests were the most impressive. I think his follow up tests demonstrated excess heat as well, but they don’t compare to his original calorimetry work heating the water and allowing it to evaporate. I wish he had never changed his testing style. His excuse that constantly adding water irritated me, slightly. Although I’m sure he has other things to do than sit and watch a test non-stop for hours and hours at a time so he can add water every so often. I wish he had developed an automated method to add water to the reactor. I’m sure something fairly simple could have been rigged up to detect when the water level dropped below a certain level so more could have been allowed to flow in.

  189. Mats,
    Many thanks for your blog and investigative reporting.
    As someone whose eyesight is slowly failing I beg you to use a font with more contrast for some of the poster’s names. I can’t read some of them.

  190. eetom wrote: “Mats – if you are saying that your search for truth requires that LENR must exist as an precondition then fine. I’ll stop posting here, and the very natural pro-Rossi bias will be one little bit greater.”

    tom, please stop saying you’re going to stop posting here. It really sucks when you don’t stop. my hopes go up and then get dashed. I accept you aren’t ever going to stop pooping on LENR. here’s an idea. instead of posting the same old, long winded comments about how there is no “good” evidence for LENR/LENR+ just use a shorthand like Rossi does. F7 is still available I believe.

  191. I’m sorry Peter Ekström, but I really think you should dedicate a week discussing with knowledgable LENR researchers and then I would let you come back and review your statement on published LENR research.

  192. Thomas – I was only referring to your discouraging comment on MFMP’s work. I think such comments are without merit here, or worse. Please avoid.

  193. Mats,

    Thank you for your reply.

    I think it would be very revealing to have a chart that identifies all the players along with their relationships.

  194. If you, as a researcher, conclude that this evidence is overwhelming, it’s obvious that your scientific, open minded curiosity leads you to make experiments to evaluate this situation, whatever the result may be. And if you believe that such a discovery could be important, you don’t give in, not even after series of negative results, because you know that your hard work could have a meaning for humanity.

    To give in, or discourage as you do, based on desktop reasoning, without even being curious enough to get some dirt on your hands and start working, doesn’t help anyone on this planet. Humanity’s progress has never been pushed ahead by that kind of thinking.

    I’m sorry Mats – I don’t know what you are talking about?

    I am one of the few guys interested enough in this stuff to look at it and willing to put (mental) effort into understanding what is going on. That is not getting my hands dirty but as Peter points out it is getting my brain cells dirty and just as valuable. Also, there are not many such looking at LENR. Criticism is tough but needed in science and especially in LENR where there are far to many people patting themselves on the back and not doing the critique that would make for stronger results.

    The fact that I think LENR unlikely does not discourage me from being interested in the details of experiments. Obviously if someone has come to the rational conclusion, based on their understanding, that LENR is likely, given the enormous rewards, they most certainly will not be discouraged.

    What LENR needs is less wild unsubstantiated claims, like Rossi, and more attention to understanding details. Good experiments help that. As does analysis of good (or even bad) experiments.

    My issue with Rossi is that he always has been a big distraction from the real science, skewing attention, and his claims are just not true. I don’t like lies. MFMP have proper aims, and while I may sometimes question their judgement, no-one is perfect, opinions can be variable, and that is OK. Rossi is quite a different thing.

    LENR world, with its fan-mentality, if not a very comfortable place for me but I like mysteries, and enjoy learning new things. It sort of works.

  195. Magnitogorsk Russia in 1994, opening a world scale has been done. Much more important A.Rossi device. It opened a special plasma formation self-burning in the water. An analog of ball lightning. The technology was tested and receiving hundreds of kilograms of metal powder is transmuted from the water. Powders have unusual properties.In powders, contained almost all the elements of the periodic table. Also starred electrical energy by means of a solenoid with this process. The process was self-contained with no external energy recharge. It is a fantasy in which nobody believed, until his eyes have not seen. And when they had seen, made applause. But the secret of the inventor of the startup process is not open to anyone.
    The inventor of the patents do not disclose the secret of. The reason for preserving the secret was in the fact that the inventor felt a responsibility to future generations and did not want the Earth turned into anhydrous Mars. I have personally seen and powders have them in stock. Therefore, I believe in LENR and explore its 10 years.But I do not want to speculate on the topic LENR how does A.Rossi. He turned science into a circus tent and clowning. Now, in the bell fool all laugh.

    Excuse my bad english

  196. Thomas Clark said:-

    “Mats – if you are saying that your search for truth requires that LENR must exist as an precondition then fine. I’ll stop posting here, and the very natural pro-Rossi bias will be one little bit greater.”

    Go on Mats, I dare you. Not that TC’s comments have no value, but because he could do with getting a life and finding some new LENR things to criticise. We know his usual objections by heart now. A sift though the ICCF papers perhaps?

  197. Mats: To give in, or discourage as you do, based on desktop reasoning, without even being curious enough to get some dirt on your hands and start working, doesn’t help anyone on this planet. Humanity’s progress has never been pushed ahead by that kind of thinking.

    Peer review and criticism are very important components of scientific research. Mistakes are spotted and a reviewed paper is of higher value. Everybody is not an expert in everything, so scrutiny of different aspects is of great value. Also, when it comes to LENR: nuclear reactions are normally connected with dangerous ionizing radiation, so a working LENR devise would be illegal and thus useless if we do not understand how it works. So we need theoreticians to work out theories which are both in accordance with established physics (physicists are not as ignorant as they are sometimes made out) and can explain possible new phenomena.

    Another problem is the fixation to net-energy production. That is of course important for a useful device, but to learn what is going on we need radiation detection and isotope analysis of the fuel. This is partly to know how safe a device is, but it would also be useful for efficiency optimisation.

    And Mats: hundreds of bad unreviewed papers do not qualify as evidence of LENR — one good, replicated experiment would! I am sure that if we would dedicate the same effort to scrutiny of all LENR papers as we have for the E-Cat, most (if not all) would be pronounced dead. This is exactly the reason why LENR is in such a sorry state: lack of criticism from knowledgeable people like Thomas and many others. A believer saying “this is good and exactly what I expect” has much less value than a sceptic saying “i have tried everything, but I cannot find anything wrong”. There are more ways of getting your hands dirty than to grab the spanner!

  198. Mats, excuse me, but I consider you a serious journalist. How. can you permit that your blog is transformed in a Circus of harsh personal attacks against Rossi and LENR by the same “negationist” people that for years has done that in every blog in the world ? This is very far from the “search of truth”. And also, belive me, many commentators seems “professional dis-informers” . How all that is compatible with you and your high professional profile ?

  199. Not trying to be negative, but are you saying that a photo taken of someone’s electric bill, that we can’t see, proves some type of COP?

  200. Mats – I may have deserved that little quip by claiming that this thread will not lead to the truth. It is not necessary either. It is enough to have followed Andrea Rossi for five years, seeing him systematically avoiding any situation (one exception, the SP test that failed) that could prove to the scientific community that there is a Rossi Effect.

  201. Thomas – my search for truth doesn’t require that LENR must exist.

    To me, however, it’s obvious that LENR effects have been proven to exist beyond doubt. Please have that discussion with series of people in the field that could dedicate days and weeks showing you evidence.

    But that’s not even the issue.

    If you, as a researcher, conclude that this evidence is overwhelming, it’s obvious that your scientific, open minded curiosity leads you to make experiments to evaluate this situation, whatever the result may be. And if you believe that such a discovery could be important, you don’t give in, not even after series of negative results, because you know that your hard work could have a meaning for humanity.

    To give in, or discourage as you do, based on desktop reasoning, without even being curious enough to get some dirt on your hands and start working, doesn’t help anyone on this planet. Humanity’s progress has never been pushed ahead by that kind of thinking.

  202. Gunnar – it’s good to have people like you who know things.
    In any case, if the truth is good for Rossi, meaning that his technology is real and has COP>50, then it’s obviously good for all of us, in the sense that it would save the planet.

  203. I said:

    As far as the MFMP experiments with radiation detectors it is fascinating but a separate issue from Rossi’s devices. And, either you will end up with a Nobel prize, which we all hope, or (as being a pragmatist I strongly expect) you will discover a lot more about how your equipment works and what artifacts can exist when measuring radiation.

    Mats summarised this as:

    But honestly, lazily noting that you don’t expect much from the work of MFMP, a group that dedicates large amounts of time and work in its attempts to look for results that could solve fundamental global issues, while you are just sitting down, making non-encouraging comments, has really little value in my eyes. Please avoid that, or start using your time investigating LENR effects yourself before continuing making such comments.

    Mats – if you are saying that your search for truth requires that LENR must exist as an precondition then fine. I’ll stop posting here, and the very natural pro-Rossi bias will be one little bit greater. Otherwise, since there is currently no good evidence for LENR (I realise that is a contentious statement here, but anywhere else in the world it is contentious to say there is good evidence for LENR) I do not expect MFMP to succeed in their goal. It is a noble goal, and if they stick to it their results – negative or positive – will be valuable.

    By equating “negative results” with “don’t expect much from the work” and “non-encouraging comment” you are showing a biased and profoundly anti-science attitude where the only worthwhile investigation is one which leads you in the direction you would like to do. In fact science is best only if it is followed without bias in whatever direction it leads, and negative results are as valuable as positive. In the end it is better understanding of a system that counts.

    Please rethink this attitude. And also correct your erroneous summary of my post.

  204. nckhawk – I’ll be patient too 😉
    Did you have a comment on Piantelli/MFMP/IH?

  205. Mats – you need to expand the scope of your thinking by at least an order of magnitude – I hope that you’re capable of taking that step. Planet Rossi is a toxic place to hang out – this may take some time but we’ll be patient.

  206. Timar – It is impossible to understand why Rossi chose the courts to play out the next act in his play. A settlement goal is the only objective and logical conclusion if you’re a clear-minded individual and don’t know much about Rossi’s previous history. Elements of grand delusion continue to surface – he does seems to be able to absorb some of the truth when he reads it. His JNOP postings continue to be very revealing and helpful in that regard. He lives on Planet Rossi but is now going to have to deal with the consequences of his actions on Planet Earth.

  207. nckhawk – your comment on Piantelli is interesting — I also think that Piantelli’s work on Ni-H LENR could be very important.

    And maybe it contains a clue to Hank Mills’ question why IH hasn’t been able to replicate Rossi’s effect (if it exists). The group that works most intensely with experiments based on Piantelli’s theories and models, also with the greatest direct exchange with Piantelli, is MFMP. And I believe that MFMP’s model, insisting on performing all its work publicly, also preventing anything to be patented, could be difficult to combine with IH’s business strategies, no matter the money available.

    Let me know if you could comment on this.

  208. nckhawk – you wrote: ‘Mats is in the process of figuring out what to do next.’
    I know what I’m doing next, if you haven’t noted. I want to bring out the truth, whether it’s good for you or for Rossi.

  209. @DNI

    I think your quotes from nckhawk shows clearly that he has changed his mind. From believing in Rossi to understanding it’s a fraud. Maybe also you one day will realize this. It will be interesting to see if you then admit your new insight as nchawks done or if you will turn silent.

    That is true of course. But you fail to digest the fact that nchawk is an insider and the information he has been pushing with the pretense of being an independent observer in reality has been the IH agenda played out. With this context it gets a lot more interesting to read his comments.

    Look at his schizofrenic comments on Penon. Remember that he was actually the one who “leaked” Penon as ERV on ECW, and this after a full year of testing and previous engagements with IH.

    Digging thru Frank’s archives, I wonder if this could be the ERV?
    http://www.paginegialle.it/aba… He’s listed as M Eng in Nuclear Power in an Elforsk LENR summary document in 2013. Lots of speculation but If it is this guy – is he qualified?

    Is he a true PhD? Now really wondering how IH feels about the ERV if this is the guy?

    Regarding the Penon report, my guess is that Rossi is going to release it when he feels the need.
    I suspect that IH is going to preserve their response for the court.

    I do wish that Rossi would stop his prolonged bluffing and go ahead and release the Penon report.
    That is the only information that he is keeping secret and don’t you wonder why?

    Mats – You should ask Rossi to release the Penon report for your review. It is my understanding that IH has no need to release that document at this point in time.

    Having said that, the present reviews of steam flow and flow meters are very good preparation for when the Penon report gets released.

    unfortunately, Penon removed the flowmeter details from the final report that was sent to IH and Rossi.

    Now let’s ask Rossi why Penon did not respond to the IH engineering questions about the problems with the draft report before publication

    Rossi is going to have to wait and find out what Penon sent to others prior to the “final report” in court.

    Regarding your question about Penon – I’m not sure about him. He’s been Rossi’s tool for so long – it could be that this is the last time he gets abused.

    First he seamed to aim for discrediting on lack of an american PhD … Then the report became important and he wanted Rossi to leak it … Then he was asking Mats to ask Rossi to leak it. (Q: If he really wanted it leaked. Why not leak it himself ? He obviosly read it) … So when this didn’t happen he needed to leak som stuff himself … So we get random pieces on flow meters, and imaginary “drafts” and spin on under the table communication between IH and Penon (that Rossi dont know about) taking place. So now he has to cover his tracks and raise the credibility of Penon a little bit again to piece his agenda together. Suddenly Penon was in the team of IH instead… Strange isn’t it?

    As for myself, I’ll keep on doing what I do, for as long as I find it inspiring and interesting. Nothing more to it.

  210. nckhawk,
    what’s your hypothesis as to Rossi’s game plan here? If what you’re saying is true, suing IH seems like a completely irrational move of him. For all one might think of Mr. Rossi, no one can deny that he is an extremely shrewd and cunning individual. In your estimation, does he honestly expect to win? Or is he fishing for a settlement?

    The clock is ticking…

  211. Timar – sorry that I am not able to answer all of your questions. You do bring up a good point though – folks around should look into Rossi’s attempts to invalidate Piantelli’s issued EPO patent. Piantelli is and will remain the father of Ni-H LENR and that eats Rossi alive.

  212. Thomas – you are putting great effort and time into your analyses, and I think that you’re assessments of E-Cat tests have a value. But honestly, lazily noting that you don’t expect much from the work of MFMP, a group that dedicates large amounts of time and work in its attempts to look for results that could solve fundamental global issues, while you are just sitting down, making non-encouraging comments, has really little value in my eyes. Please avoid that, or start using your time investigating LENR effects yourself before continuing making such comments.

  213. @sifferkoll

    I think your quotes from nckhawk shows clearly that he has changed his mind. From believing in Rossi to understanding it’s a fraud.

    Maybe also you one day will realize this. It will be interesting to see if you then admit your new insight as nchawks done or if you will turn silent.

  214. It just came to my mind that given the current patent situation and nckhawks unwilligness to answer related questions, it would be of great interest to know whether Francesio Piantelli has been approached by investors recently, particular concerning his recently granted European patent, predating Rossi’s application but published (coincidentally?) only shortly before the conclusion of the EVR report and the break between IH and Rossi. Maybe someone in contact with Piantelli could ask him discreetly?

  215. people criticising Parkhomov have no idea what they are talking about – I can only assume they are allowing their politics to cloud their judgment – yes he made a foolish attempt to cover up the inadequacy of his laptop – but unlike other researchers – he did come clean and apologise.

    Bob – Parkhomov’s first results showed (using relatively simple bomb-proof calorimetry) a lot of excess heat. Since then he has not been able to replicate and his later calorimetry has been much less direct and results not clear.

    No-one is saying he is of bad character – but he I’m sure would be open to the possibility that any unreplicated result of his could be a mistake. That is what it looks like. If he can get repeated results as significant as his first result then that will be a new ball game.

    As far as the MFMP experiments with radiation detectors it is fascinating but a separate issue from Rossi’s devices. And, either you will end up with a nobel prize, which we all hope, or (as being a pragmatist I strongly expect) you will discover a lot more about how your equipment works and what artifacts can exist when measuring radiation.

  216. @nckhawk

    Sifferkoll – Is anyone going to believe that Fulvio shifted loyalty to IH after years of working with Rossi just because his paycheck source shifted? You’ve attached your name to the wrong flagship. Your eagerness to post slander and lies on behalf of Rossi have destroyed your credibility on the internet. Mats is in the process of figuring out what to do next – I suggest you do the same..

    I have no doubt that is what you are experiencing … But it does not make it a universal truth. So you can safely stop swinging the “credibility” thingy, it’ll only hit you back.

    Fact is that your going ad-hominem on Fulvio. Everyone can see that.

    And BTW. If anyone wants to have a real world example of cryptodenialism, check out this link with complete coverage of @nchawk disqus comments.

    https://disqus.com/by/nckhawk/

    Here is an before / after example regarding Rossi:

    When IH announced agreement (2014):
    If you think about it, the Italians have been thought and invention leaders for centuries – perhaps this is another in a long line of blessings to the planet. I think that Rossi left to avoid similar treatment from his last round of invention there. The Italian Gov’t / Mafia plays rough if you don’t do things their way and that may have caused the (potentially) most important invention of this/last century to walk out their front door. The Italians are presently trying to put the former heads of their main power group’s nuclear division and their leading fashion company in jail as we type. Anyone can be “convicted” of tax evasion there if the Gov’t wants something from you and needs leverage – the place is a mess on one hand and remains a font of invention on another.

    And now:
    Why all the noise, fury and blatant lies in defending a convicted felon who has cornered himself while trying to pull off one more con?

    Well, it is really interesting to follow these writings and connect to the overall timeline from the point of view of a true insider.

  217. Thanks for suggestion bbck7. But even though I have reported on Rossi and the E-Cat for years, mostly in an optimistic tone, I’m glad that I always let everyone, independently of opinion, post comments on this blog. Sometimes it’s flooding, and at this very moment I should do some other work, trying to earn my day, but I believe openness is very important.

  218. nckhawk wrote:

    “Regarding Lugano – IH produced the reactors and some fuel that was sent over. Rossi insisted that there be no pre-test on anything. The chain of custody for both items was lost after they were shipped from IH.”

    Thanks for the reply but it only partly answers my questions. Based on your answer as above, here are a few more:

    1) As IH built the Lugano reactor & supplied the fuel, what was the in house COP test result?

    2) Were the in house test protocols & methods the same as used at Lugano? If not what was the in house test method for the IH Dog Bone reactors?

    3) Did IH also supply the control electronics used in the Lugano test?

    4) If the in house test results were COP < 1, why would IH ship their Dog Bone reactor to Lugano, knowing it would fail?

    5) Please confirm no IH people visited Lugano nor were involved in the trial?

    6) What happened to the Lugano reactors & the fuel sent over & ash at the end of the test?

    Thanks for your answers.

  219. Mats: About the postings on this site; I don’t know about you but I cannot tell the difference between the IH paid propagandists and those truly interested in LENR. One possible clue that he/she might be a paid propagandist is the number of posts they make, the tactic of simply drowning out your adversary. Maybe limit the discussion to one topic, like “the customers” and one, two or three post per day?

  220. Mats – thank you for the response. We’ll see who’s world holds up best once the facts are all in the public domain. Rossi should have thought about that as well when he chose the courts as his battlefield.

  221. @ Timar

    IH had nothing whatever to do with the Lugano test

    I understood that Rossi said the reason so little ash was obtainable was “the internal structure ” of the reactor

  222. Timar – I don’t know the answer to your question regarding custody of the Lugano ash.

  223. nckhawk – my source had no intention to make the bill public. It was all my initiative. My source is simply concerned for having spread a piece of information that he or she received in confidence. The world and its people are not always as you believe, either 😉

  224. Wow – I step away to take part in some real hands on research – rather than just explaining stuff and all hell breaks loose.

    First and foremost, it’ll all come out in the wash, patience.

    Secondly – If you are to believe Piantelli, UGC and the known fact that in 1932 1H+7Li led to 2 X 4He – so proving E=MC^2 then practical LENR is not out of the realms of possibility using Ni + Li + H2.

    For those that would claim otherwise, the MFMP is about testing the claims of others – independently – hopefully with hands off guidance, but with insight and determination regardless. We are not about proving, we are about demonstrating – ideally LIVE.

    LENR has been notoriously hard to make useful, reliable excess heat from – and so we have not focused on that aspect – but we do monitor it. The thing about excess heat is, it really does not matter what happens – there will always be a blah blah blah why it is no more than 1 by those positioned and minded to come up with hypothesis focused to that end. What is curious is that most of these know it all, do nothing practical analysts don’t get involved with making suggestions BEFORE the experiment is run – they just wait and pounce afterwards.

    Our focus is on either statistically significant element or isotope transmutations AND/OR radiation.

    To that end, we are the only organisation in LENR history to conduct double blind tests of fuel and ash samples to multiple organisations. The material was from very short runs with inconclusive results. We currently have a sample with another body from the Padua cell, which was designed for a long run NOT looking for excess heat at all and exclusively with Parkhomov’s exact fuel, which we analysed as part of that double blind study and other studies.

    We are the only organisation to have had X-Rays broadcast live in *GlowStick* 5.2 – a data signature that no commentator has YET been able to find an alternative explination for.

    What is more, soft x-rays have been seen before by the MFMP (From our Celani wire in 2013) Ed Storms in his 2012 paper that also sites many other researchers, Piantelli, Vitorio Violante et al in 2003, Celani (who has also seen stimulated gamma in the past half year also), Karabut, etc etc… just too boring to list everyone (sorry if your name is not identified). No to mention that Randal Mills SunCell largely relies on the production of soft X-Rays and other high energy photons.

    Piantelli gave us the knowledge that we would see this signature when we got things right and the reason why.

    Then we see a small number of Neutrons in *GlowStick* 5.3 – something predicted by Stoyan Sarg more than 18 months ago with an explicit mechanism. In the same experiment – after we had did our replication attempt of GS 5.2 (still being analysed) we went back down to low temperatures where we had seen them, and we saw more again. We saw the extremely clear signature of the bubbles appearing live – I even saw one in front of my eyes when I was showing skip that one had previously appeared. The crowd has even identified an EXACT moment when one thermal neutron signature appeared.

    For clarity, we never saw any detected thermal neutrons in the same room since we got the detector, and not during the week of calibrations, de-gassing and hydrogen loading with the detector in the exact same position. Only with the addition of Lithium did we see the neutrons – precisely as predicted by Stoyan Sarg. We also only saw a few and in a specific temperature range – not at the claimed temperatures for excess heat production.

    Now I hear you saying – yeh, but, you only replicated it within the same experiment once, (2 bubbles initially – 3 bubbles on attempt at observing them) : Well… what you don’t know, is we had already been informed by our collaborator me356 of his observation (though no idea when in his experiments) of neutrons on multiple occasions…. and that is not all, someone even wrote to us mocking that we had only seen 2 when in their Rossi fuel experiments, they had seen 3 (that was before we tried in-experiment replication and also saw 3 in one reset detector).

    So, you have 3 different, independent groups, testing Rossi patent fuel – and seeing small levels of neutron emissions.

    With so much evidence of X-Rays, and now Neutrons (something that is now very easy for people to test given that the MFMP has shown LIVE what device, fuel, temperature and stimulation is needed to see them) it is becoming harder and harder to maintain the position that LENR is not possible.

    As for excess heat – well – we cannot support the claims of Rossi or any other researcher claiming more than about 1.1 – 1.2, having said that, people criticising Parkhomov have no idea what they are talking about – I can only assume they are allowing their politics to cloud their judgment – yes he made a foolish attempt to cover up the inadequacy of his laptop – but unlike other researchers – he did come clean and apologise. He is well respected by the head of the Russian Nuclear authority and top theoretical physicists – he is a meek man.

    There are many ‘big wins’ that the MFMP has identified to work through to establish if high COP is possible in this type of system – with our increasing collective understanding we will get there if it is possible. It is going to be a LOT of work though.

    There seems to be a whole host of emerging google search armed desktop analysts coming forward – hiding behind pseudonyms and slinging mud that have clearly never done a serious bit of scientific research in their lives. Frankly, I don’t understand why they are seen as, or believe they are, any more credible than Rossi when it comes to passing judgement on LENR. If you want to be respected for what you say – let’s have your real name, qualifications, experimental or engineering experience and character reference – all the things that are RIGHTLY demanded of the ERV.

    Just because you have money, does not mean you are an expert on anything – believe me I worked for 9 years at the highest end in the city of London and there were people lording it over the masses that were frankly incompetent or willfully negligent. Just because you are able to pull things apart does not make you an expert on doing, it just makes you an expert on undoing. I’d like to welcome all of the best undoers however, to the data we published LIVE from GS 5.3 in addition to the Youtube videos

    https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0Bz7lTfqkED9WSGcyZkcyUlRsY00

    There is very many gigabytes of it!

    Over the next few weeks we will capture your best deconstruction efforts and your ideas to make better our next experiment – as guided by Vitorio Violante et al and Piantelli/Focardi – GS with the addition of 62Ni and separation of the H2 source. The design for a microwave / RF generator is already underway.

  225. Thats okay Mats – All of the power bills will be in the proper hands soon enough or maybe already are.
    It is interesting that whoever sent you this bit of data was so concerned that they asked you to remove the image from your blog. They wanted the power metrics posted – what else did they want to remain hidden?

  226. @nckhawk: The Lugano testers reported that the fact that they were allowed to sample only 0.2% (2 mg) of the ash was a restriction imposed to them by IH. It would be interesting to know what IH did with the rest of the ash and what their analysis results were (they must have performed comprehensive analysis, otherwise said restriction would have made no sense).

  227. Hank – you seem like a nice person. You are working very hard to defend the beliefs that are deeply locked in your understanding of all things Rossi. It is admirable but your cause is lost. With all due respect, you and some others may not be able to filter truth from fiction even when the answer is right before your eyes. You’re going to have to piece together the rest of this yourself. Unfortunately, you’re also going to need to wait for the court case to get most of your answers. You can thank Rossi for that.

  228. Regarding Lugano – IH produced the reactors and some fuel that was sent over. Rossi insisted that there be no pre-test on anything. The chain of custody for both items was lost after they were shipped from IH.

  229. If anyone did capture a copy of the bill image, I would kindly ask you to respect the request by my source not to spread it.
    I made a mistake publishing it for a few minutes.
    Nckhawk, I understand you wouldn’t listen to that since you seem to be a stakeholder.

  230. Wow – did anyone capture a copy of the JM Products power bill image before it was removed?

  231. Sifferkoll – Is anyone going to believe that Fulvio shifted loyalty to IH after years of working with Rossi just because his paycheck source shifted? You’ve attached your name to the wrong flagship. Your eagerness to post slander and lies on behalf of Rossi have destroyed your credibility on the internet. Mats is in the process of figuring out what to do next – I suggest you do the same..

  232. To everyone—thanks so far for your contributions to this discussion. I think that good points have been made from all perspectives that people have on this affair, and that valuable information has been exposed, although we still lack detailed evidence in any direction, and therefore it’s understandable that most of those discussing stick to their prior conviction.

    Personally I have reason to regret again, as I pointed out also in my book, not having performed some crucial measurements on the E-Cat when I had the chance, even though I did perform others, specifically to investigate possible issues, for example exchanging Rossi’s power supply cables with my own. Jed, for example, mentions some measurements he would have used, and probably he’s more experienced than I am, but often the problem was that every time I got the chance to do measurements, the set-up and the conditions had changed which made it difficult to be prepared. Of course, I could, as Jed did, have declined to participate, and maybe my interest as a journalist to report what can be reported on stories with potentially public interest made my situation different from people like Jed.

    In any case, thanks for your contributions, and please keep posting to this discussion.

    Questions that I think would merit an answer now are those from Engineer48 to nckhawk, regarding the dogbone reactors used in the Lugano test, reportedly being produced by IH.

  233. @Eldering_G – I removed the photo on request by my source, which I have to respect. It was my mistake publishing it.
    The handwriting you mentioned said: ‘~1MWh/day, COP 24’.
    I cannot make that fit with the numbers unless the 28 day statement referred to a situation where electricity was consumed only for about seven days in that period. Thanks for raising that question.

  234. @nckhawk

    Rossi keeps hiding behind the fact that Fabiani worked for him but was paid by IH. Fulvio was and is Rossi’s guy and Rossi continues in his attempts to claim that he is the man on the scene for IH.

    What exactly are you spinning here? Is this the beginning of ad-hominem attacks towards Fulvio… If he was paid for by IH, then he was the IH man on the scene. Right? Or are you making random accusations?

  235. @Mats Yesterday you said “I have received a copy of an electricity statement” and then published a photo(electricity-bill-jm-products_.jpg) of that statement as well. That photo has now been removed from your site. Why? Because of the handwriting on it? Because of privacy details?

  236. Mats himself tried to convince Rossi that the electrical mismeasurement giving excess in Penon’s reports shpould be avoided, by using true RMS meters, and Rossi claimed this was unnecessary. Mats put it down to rossi’s lack of understanding of electricity! The error gives X2.5 COP (actually could be anything up to 4, depending on Triac waveform). Either Rossi is lying, deliberately, or more likely he is deluded and has been thinking he has X2.5 COP using this erroneous measurement error!

    These things are attested facts. It is only massive confirmation bias that allows people to ignore them. Each plank of that confirmation has something wrong with it.

  237. Hank,

    Have you looked in detail at the technical details of the Rossi tests? None of them stack up! The first Swede test is the best of the bunch with no obvious issue except that it was conducted by Levi, who is known to report flow rates from a dosimetric pump 2X higher than its maximum rate – just not possible (and it was not under stressed over-pressure on input conditions – I checked).

    And when you look at the electrical measurements there are (easy) ways that mis-measurement could generate the results.

    With the other tests:

    Penon – we know the electrical mismeasurement mechanism that exactly accounts for the COP and it is there in the report, if you look closely.

    Lugano – the thermography error is undisputed by anyone serious and moves the COP to 1.07 +/- a large error. (See the lenr canr page).

    Oct 6 2011 (the large boiling samovan) ascoli’s hoit core model, when you crank the figures, exactly explains the excess heat contrary to Jed’s intuition. Figures do always trump gut feelings, which are sometimes wrong.

    The early tests had issues with thermocouple siting, wet steam, etc that are proven from the data.

    No scientist in the world, paying attention to this stuff, could do other than say Rossi has a consistent long history of tests that give spurious positive results and zero evidence of real positives. You look at one report and it is easy to miss the fatal flaw. Particularly for the tests Levi alone was responsible, if you believe his figures there is LENR – but then if you believe his figures you have to reckon a dosimetric pump suddenly produces a higher flow-rate than is possible. He is known unreliable.

    This stuff is all in the public domain and provable – you just have to work through the data to find the issues. Ascoli here could lead you through the Levi can’t report flowrate correctly issue, and the Oct 6 2011 issue. I could talk you through the thermography issue at Lugano – where it is a possible error – but a clear mistake which when corrected makes the excess go away. (There is uncertainty as well).

    nckhawk has commented on the “replications”. I’ll just add – MFMP has a mission to find reproducible excess heat. It has not done this, and would do so if it were possible from these devices. Even MFMP know that an inferred +10% from temperature measurements is nothing. Temperature is a poor proxy for heat in these difficult to control experiments. Anyway the reactor they were replicating did not generate excess heat!

    You are doubting the integrity of Darden, Vaughn, serious people who have a mission to fund LENR. Surely you owe it to them and the otehr LENR scientists to do your own scientific fact checking. In detail.

  238. @nckhawk A question to you. How you are connected to IH ? There are only two possibilities OR all the “information” you are positing is false, because you have no connection with IH and in fact know nothing about this affair, OR is biased ( so is dis-information in fact ) because you are.

  239. Mats, is it worthwhile to elicit a journalistic comment from Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie and their Briarcliff Trust since they supposedly have an association with Tom Darden and IH Holding International Limited? I would ask them how they felt about their association with Tom Darden and IH Holding International, and the perception that Darden was potentially obstructing LENR progress. If I were high profile investor like them, and I truly cared about the potential of clean technologies like LENR, I would demand answers from Darden on the current status of the litigation with Rossi. My take is that Pitt and Jolie wouldn’t want to be associated in any way with an entity that was trying to kill off a clean technology like LENR and it’s potential to change the world. Not to mention the negative publicity this might bring them. If Pitt and Jolie didn’t care about what is going on, then I as a fan would be a little disappointed in them.

  240. nckhawk,

    I’m interested to know more about the Dog Bone HotCat reactors that were tested at Lugano.

    1) Were these reactors manufactured by IH as I have read?

    2) Did IH test the reactors COP prior to shipping them to the testers?

    3) If they were tested, what was the COP & info on any other tests that were performed prior to shipping?

    4) If they were not tested why would IH ship untested reactors to the testers?

    5) Did any IH people visit the test site or assist in the testing?

    As you seem willing to disclose other information, your comments here would be most helpful.

    Thanks in advance for your reply.

  241. Dear nckhawk,

    First of all, thank you for responding to my questions! I have a few thoughts and questions.

    1) What do you mean by, “Rossi and his attorney rep’d and warranted the JM contract as well – somebody is in big trouble there.” I do not understand the terms “rep’d” and “warranted” in that sentence.

    2) I agree there seems to be no candidate remaining for the customer’s parent company except for Johnson Matthey. However, I’m the first to admit that I have not done a super exhaustive search on chemical companies based in the UK. There are experts in the chemical industry that could provide a far better answer on that than myself. Rossi denies that Johnson Matthey is the customer. However, we know he can lie about non-technical issues when forced to by legal contracts: he denied there was any rift or issue between Leonardo Corporation and IH while he MUST have been preparing the lawsuit. To abide by the non-disclosure agreements I guess he must have signed with Johnson Matthey, his denial could be to protect his agreement. Also, technically, JM Chemical Products isn’t *exactly* Johnson Matthey. So in a roundabout highly misleading way he could be telling the truth. Or, I could be totally wrong, and there is another large chemical company in the UK that owns JM Chemical Products.

    3) The word “verified” when it comes to replications is a loaded with interpretation. Verified by whom? To what extent? By how many tests? By what standards? By what equipment? I’m all for replicators who claim excess running as many tests as possible, varying their configuration, measuring the input/output in as many ways possible, and providing ALL the information needed for third parties to replicate. I push for this ALL the time in my communications with replicators. Thus, I’ll say that I would like to see more tests by all the successful replicators in which they change parameters, perform different types of calorimetry, etc. However, I think the replications of Parkhomov, Songsheng, N. Stepanov, and others are conclusive enough to show that massive excess heat was produced. The multiple extended periods of self sustain that Songsheng achieved, the numerous control tests showing no excess heat that Parkhomov performed (when he did not load the reactor with LiAlH4), and the large excess heat detected by water flow calorimetry by N. Stepanov (including the fact that they experienced similar results in multiple previous tests until meltdowns occurred), all provide substantial evidence of the Rossi Effect. There are other replicators, as we speak, getting successful results as well. My hope is that they will publish their results very soon so that we can figure out the key parameters that must be satisfied to produce the exothermic reactions. There are a ton of possible variables that need to sorted through. The best verification of the Rossi Effect, in my opinion, would be a tsunami of E-Cat replications taking place across the world.

    4) You have mentioned that the LENR world will move on without Rossi, or statements to that effect. To be blunt, I know of no other technology that allows power production of a KILOWATT per gram of fuel material that remains active for a year. I know that this statement is in conflict with your opinion of the performance of the one megawatt plant. But if we accept, for the sake of argument, that this 1000 watts per gram of fuel is correct — allowing for self sustained operation and temperatures of 1370C or higher — then I don’t know of any other LENR technology that has advanced to such a level. The E-Cat technology, as Rossi and the successful replicators claim, is the HOLY GRAIL of LENR. Nothing else comes close. Do you know of powder based LENR technology with such high performance?

    5) If Industrial Heat made a serious attempt to replicate utilizing a FRACTION of the money already paid to Andrea Rossi, I believe there is no possible way they could have failed to reproduce the effect. I’m not saying this as a Rossi supporter. I’m saying this wearing my skeptics hat pretending to be Mary Yugo. When solitary researchers with limited time, far less than cutting edge equipment, tiny work spaces, scrounged up parts, and old oxidized chemicals for their fuel mix can achieve excess heat, Industrial Heat should have been able to if they spent even a few hundred thousand and hired a team of a half dozen staff to work around the clock for even one month. Again, this is with access to ALL of Rossi’s patents, especially the catalyzer and additive patent that probably has far more information than “Fluid Heater.”

    How do you explain their alleged lack of being able to replicate?

    Was the information in the additional patents lacking of much more detail than “Fluid Heater”?

    Did they perform exhaustive series of tests?

    This is the issue that bugs the heck out of me and makes me lean heavily towards Rossi’s claim that Industrial Heat did successfully replicate. Again, I realize we have a different view of these replication attempts and what the results meant. But I think they were successful and simply cannot fathom how Industrial Heat couldn’t have produced similar results.

    Thank you again for responding.

    Hank

  242. Hank – Your posts are are so steeped in your belief in Rossi that I’m not sure anything I say can be considered useful by you. You have cornered yourself on Rossi’s customer – there is no candidate left. Rossi and his attorney rep’d and warranted the JM contract as well – somebody is in big trouble there.

    Regarding your question about Penon – I’m not sure about him. He’s been Rossi’s tool for so long – it could be that this is the last time he gets abused. Ask the AEG guys about getting pumped and dumped by their “partner”. Rossi’s loyalties are to money and his overwhelming need for attention at any cost.

    Regarding the replications that you reference, I see problems with each of the attempts referenced and I am not aware of any verified positive results for any of the systems reference. Parkhomov seems like a nice person but his system never seems to work when someone is there with him. The Chinese systems are interesting but there are data and / or TC problems at the important junctions of each of those tests. Sadly, I’m not aware of any Ni-H powder replications that have been verified with positive results.

  243. T. Clarke wrote:

    “@Jed
    Your comment below does not make sense to me. Would you care to say what is wrong about the stored heat calculations in the link above? It is not very long. (Assuming we both reference the Oct 6 2011 test that Mats reported on).”

    Honestly, I have forgotten which test is which. I am using my small computer so I do not have the files at hand. Anyway, depending entire on memory (always a bad idea!) I recall that:

    During startup there were long periods with no apparent excess heat, and periods when the power was turned off. Rossi said there was no excess heat. I took that as a kind of crude calibration. I noted that temperature fell rapidly when the power was off. From that I estimated how much cooling there must be from both the flow and radiation from the reactor.

    (Why we have to have a crude calibration instead of real one is beyond me.)

    After the test, when power was turned off, the flow was left running, according to witnesses. I have no idea whether the flow rate was stable or not. As you would expect with Rossi, there was no damn flow meter and he did not allow anyone to measure the flow manually.

    Anyway, I assumed that the flow rate was stable. The temperature did not fall the way it did earlier in the day. I recall it actually rose somewhat. That’s impossible without some source of heat. The temperature remained high far longer than it should have. After a couple of hours they opened the reactor and found the water was still boiling.

    One thing I am sure of is that with a large iron pot full of water (which is what this is), when you turn off the heat, it cools down. It does not continue boiling hours later. The specific heat of iron is about 10 times smaller than water, so even if the iron is a lot hotter than the water, it does not heat it for long. The reactor was too hot to touch, so it was radiating a lot. The video showed that it burned a women who accidentally brushed against it an hour or two after the power was turned off.

    If it was fake, I suppose there was a hidden wire.

    Tests like this are so crude and poorly documented they mean little. It would have to be done dozens of times with proper instruments before I would take it very seriously. This was suggestive. At the time I hoped there would be properly done follow-up test, but alas there never was, so I stopped paying attention.

  244. KTD wrote:

    Jed Rothwell said: “Start with an empty bucket.”
    Jed Rothwell should have said: “Start with a perfectly insulated empty bucket.”

    Nope. That is not necessary. With 5 kW of steam sparged for ~3 minutes, you could not measure the difference between an ordinary bucket and a perfectly insulated one. You use a thermocouple which only measures to tenth-degree; and you stir the water with you hand; and the bucket is open to the air. These introduce more errors than the heat loss from an un-insulated bucket would. Here, do the math:

    Use a 5 gallon bucket, not quite full, with 15 liters of water at 20 deg C.

    The steam has 5 kW of enthalpy. Whether it is wet or dry, that’s how much it has.

    In 3 minutes (180 s), 900,000 J of energy is added. That’s 215 kCal. Divide by 15 L gives a 14 deg C temperature rise. The temperature goes up to ~34 deg C.

    The mass of water added to the bucket will depend on how dry the steam is. That is to say, it will depend on the flow rate of the water going through the boiler.

    Methods such as this are not precise, so there is no point to worrying about small losses. If you doubt this loss would be small, put 15 L of warm water (45 deg C) into a bucket and measure the temperature for 3 minutes. See if it falls significantly.

    You should try this at home with a teakettle of boiling water. You will see whether I made an arithmetic error above. I have done this sort thing often, in preparation for tests, and to make sure my thermocouples are working. (By leaving them in the bucket for a few hours with mercury thermometers.) You will get a better sense of how calorimetry works, what the range of errors are, and whether a “perfectly insulated” bucket (a large Dewar) is needed for a particular test.

    Getting back to Ekström’s analysis, he writes “Rossi claims that the [very high] losses result from radiative losses from the tube.” You can check that claim too. Bundle up the tube and submerge it in the water. Better yet, slice the tube 2 m away from the reactor and put the bucket next to the reactor. Except that Rossi would not let you slice the tube. He told me he would not allow me or anyone else to do any of this, and as far as I know, he never did it himself. Which made me suspicious, to say the least.

  245. @EEStorFanFibb

    If the company who owns JM Chemical Products is really a global large scale manufacturer with plants across Europe, then there is no way they were bamboozled into thinking a 20kW stream of heat was really one megawatt. They wouldn’t have been fooled, because they would know from vast experience how to measure heat output. Also, if they had even a hint that Rossi’s technology was not living up to the performance levels he claimed, they would have closed down the plant very quickly. There is no way a large company — regardless of the exact identity — would risk their reputation by remaining involved AT ALL with a potential con-artist.

    For those who claim that JM Chemical Products was only a shell company that produced nothing, I honestly do not think Andrea Rossi or anyone would be so insane to provide obviously false information into a legal complaint. Rossi’s comments on the JONP are on the record too. He specifically claimed that they had facilities across Europe and a need for multiple E-Cat plants. Anyone who thinks no manufacturing took place by JM Products is deluded, in my opinion.

  246. Hello nckhawk,

    Two questions.

    First, do you consider the ERV to be a scoundrel in league with Rossi or a benefactor to IH? Because in one post it seems you are claiming he is in cahoots with Rossi in the alleged scam. However, in another posts you claim he sent pre-prints of the report to Industrial Heat but never sent the same draft copies to Rossi — a major violation of the test agreement that could give unfair benefit to one party.

    Second, will you please answer my previous question about the replicators who have claimed to re-produce the Rossi Effect. Here it is for reference!

    nckhawk,

    Multiple replicators including Songsheng Jiang, Alexander Parkhomov, N. Stepanov, and others claim to have been able to reproduce the Rossi Effect with very little documentation to go on (unlike Industrial Heat who had access to Rossi’s entire patent portfolio) and have even posted data showing self sustained periods of operation. Does I.H. now take the position that all of these scientists are incompetent and deluded individuals who are simply fooling themselves?

    To be blunt, if IH was *really* unable to replicate with all of Rossi’s IP on hand — including his patent on additives and catalyzers — with all the financial means at their disposal (millions of dollars) then obviously none of these researchers have ever been able to produce a single watt of excess heat, according to the logical conclusion of this line of thinking.

    If I.H. was serious about advancing the field of LENR like you and Darden have claimed…

    1) They would have hired a large team of scientists to work on the Ni-LiAlH4-Li effect.

    2) They would have given them access to a top notch laboratory with room and the required utility hook-ups to run many simultaneous experiments.

    3) They would have been able to provide them with anything else they needed or thought could be useful. For example, if they wanted to have custom nickel manufactured with a specific surface morphology or levels of trace elements.

    The well funded and equipped I.H. effort to replicate the Rossi Effect should have made other attempts look like a elementary school child working with a chemistry set bought at a department store. Again, this is especially true since I.H. would have had MUCH more information to guide them than these poorly funded replicators who sometimes work out of their apartments. There is no logical and rational way that these other teams were able to replicate if I.H. was unable to do so.

    So do us all a favor, please. Confirm that all these other claims are completely and without a doubt totally bogus and without merit.

    I want to read it from you.

    Because if I.H. was unable to replicate, no one on God’s green Earth has been able to. And if Rossi’s alleged lies and deceptions are unacceptable, theirs are inappropriate as well.

    Sincerely,
    Hank

  247. @Guest Re: Rossi saying it’s not Johnson Matthey. Rossi could be lying because JM wants it that way and they have an ongoing business relationship (3 more plants on order supposedly). We just don’t know either way.

  248. Jed Rothwell said: “Start with an empty bucket.”

    Jed Rothwell should have said: “Start with a perfectly insulated empty bucket.”

  249. @randombit0 wrote:

    taking out an old ( 2014 ) letter of Proia is meaningless now

    Gee, I sure wonder who you might be and what your motive for posting is :^) Can you show some newer references from Proia that contradicts what was posted, to show that the one from 2014 is now meaningless?

  250. @ Hank Mills: “what are some other likely chemical companies that are global in scale, based in the UK, and have multiple manufacturing sites?”

    I have not heard any nominated. The only reason I have heard cited against this conclusion is that Rossi evidently told Mats Lewan that it was not Johnson Matthey. To me if I have to compare those two sets of facts I would have to go with you with Johnson Mathey being the parent company of the customer until someone comes up with a better argument.

  251. “taking out an old ( 2014 ) letter of Proia is meaningless now”

    Can you show us a more recent one from Proia? Because as far as I know that one is the first you can find from now back

    You claim false my statements – I am sure you can prove: start showing what Proia said/wrote on Rossi stuff after that one.

  252. This is Rossi’s previous comment about how JM Products Inc. was created.

    Andrea Rossi
    April 8, 2016 at 9:54 AM

    Teemu:
    I knew the Customer in the office of my Attorney Henry Johnson. They were enthusiast to test our 1 MW plant, to see if it really worked, because they were ( and are ) interested to buy more plants for their facilities in Europe. They wanted not to be exposed, though, therefore incorporated JM Products and made a plant for their production to make the test and appointed President their Attorney, who was also, as I said, my Attorney. IH knew all this and agreed, obviously, on this, making a rental agreement with JM Products to make the test in their factory. When IH met with the President of JM in Raleigh, I was present and I explained that he was also my Attorney. No problem has been raised by IH.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    His statement indicates a few things that are important towards identifying the customer:

    1) They had multiple facilities in Europe.

    2) They would have needed multiple one megawatt plants for multiple manufacturing sites.

    3) They agreed to allow JM Products to manufacture product for them via a rental agreement.

    And from other sources…

    4) We know from the court document this company is based in the UK.

    5) We know that the company produced metal sponge if the leaked information is accurate.

    6) We know that at least one step in the production process of sponge nickel requires heating water to high temperatures, perhaps to just below the boiling point, so sodium hydroxide can remove the aluminum. This would be in the range of temperatures that the one megawatt plant could produce — a maximum steam temp of 120C if I remember correctly.

    So knowing all this, what are some other likely chemical companies that are global in scale, based in the UK, and have multiple manufacturing sites?

  253. https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/04/20/lets-join-forces-to-bring-out-the-truth-on-rossi-ih-affair/#comment-4875

    @Jed
    Your comment below does not make sense to me. Would you care to say what is wrong about the stored heat calculations in the link above? It is not very long. (Assuming we both reference the Oct 6 2011 test that Mats reported on).

    Yes, if the device kept boiling for as long as this one did with no input power, that had to be caused by an anomalous source of heat. Chemical fuel can be ruled out.

  254. @Hank Mills

    There don’t appear to be any other UK-based companies that participate in that business.

    You’re completely disregarding the possibility that there is no major corporation behind the shell company Rossi’s lawyer set up, and no production in the facility (which per facts and observations previously shared looks to be the most likely explanation).

    Note that the document at the end of the contract you refer to says that JMC is owned by an “entity formed in the UK” and that Rossi et al. have no ownership in JMC. It doesn’t say that Rossi or Affiliates don’t have ownership of the entity formed in the UK though. That distinction likely wouldn’t hold up in court (too misleading), but perhaps it provides wiggle room.

  255. The contract between Industrial Heat and Leonardo Corp specifies, at the end, that JM Products is owned by a larger company in the UK. This is fact and indisputable. Rossi has just stated that Johnson Matthey has nothing to do with them. That makes another chemical company based in the UK that produces metal sponge a possibility. But the same basic idea would go for any established, large company. I don’t think any reputable company would have let their plant continue operations if their heat requirements were not being met and their production line slowing down. But I also don’t understand why they would need to buy products from Johnson Matthey — which he just stated they did on the JONP.

    Hank. This is perhaps a new idea but if you just hypothesise that none of Rossi’s stuff works, and the customer is mostly a Rossi creation, all these confusing things become clearer.

  256. Maryyugo wrote: “And Jed, I remember your writing that you absolutely believed that Rossi had a working reactor “from first principles” simply because his huge “Ottoman sized” reactor kept boiling with power off. Still think that from first principles, Rossi’s device works?”

    Yes, if the device kept boiling for as long as this one did with no input power, that had to be caused by an anomalous source of heat. Chemical fuel can be ruled out.

    It is possible there was a hidden source of electrical power (a hidden wire). I cannot rule that out. I am sure I said that at the time.

    It would be easy to rule out a hidden wire. You pick up the machine and look all around, then put it down on a new piece of plywood that you bring yourself. Whether anyone did this, I do not know. The so-called “cheese video trick” would also be simple to detect.

    If someone did check for a wire and found none, I suppose it is possible that machine worked but the present machine does not. Possible, yes, but that machine would have to be subjected to a lot more tests before I am convinced that it works. One test is never enough.

    I do not know of any incidents in which a hidden wire was discovered. I do not know if anyone looked. But let me address two real-world problems with large scale calorimetry that actually happened, because I want to point out that discovering such problems is not difficult.

    First, the claim made by Rossi that there was 5 kW of steam. Peter Ekström went to a lot of trouble testing that after fact, based on physics and computation. As I said, it is infuriating that Rossi himself did not test that then and there by sparging. I would have done that the moment I arrived. Except, Rossi told me he would not let me test anything, so I never went there.

    Second, the absurd problem with the flowmeter at Defkalion. That was such blatant nonsense, and they went to such trouble to cover it up — ripping out instruments overnight, and so on — that I agree with Gamberale that they were frauds. Again, I would have tested the flow rate right away, with a bucket and stopwatch. I would have discovered the problem instantly. I told the people at Defkalion I would do that, which I suppose is why they uninvited me.

    It would have taken me a few minutes to discover the cheese test problem as well. And I definitely would have looked for it. Even if I did not, I planned to install my own watt meter between the wall and the power supply, which would have revealed the problem. I told Rossi and Defkalion that is what I would do. One thing I am not well qualified to diagnose is a problem with input power, so I proposed bringing an expert with a good watt meter. (I never proposed to do any of this by myself, without expert assistance.) Which, I suppose, is why Rossi and Defkalion refused to let me come.

    The point is, these deceptions, or apparent deceptions, or idiotic mistakes — whatever the heck they are — which have been made so far have been easy to discover. We do not need sophisticated or complicated methods, such as systems run in parallel, to discover them. We need no originality or creativity. In fact, those should be avoided. We should NOT call in a university professor. Just do it by the book and the answer will be clear.

    In the case of a 1 MW reactor, you can be 100% certain the heat is real — or 100% certain it is fake. As I said, this is how you do it: You call in a licensed HVAC engineer. Someone who does this for a living. That person follows the procedures laid out Florida Statute 554, “The Boiler Safety Act.” Florida Administrative Code Chapter 69A-51. (The link to the detailed procedures is broken, unfortunately.) The engineer would check all instruments and do the performance tests described in that statute. I am certain that would reveal the COP. You can see from the lookup table divisions and instruments specs that the methods are imprecise, measuring to about 10%. That would be good enough to reveal the performance Rossi claims.

    The boiler inspection procedures will reveal stupid mistakes, equipment set up wrong, broken thermometers, clogged flowmeters, missing check valves, and instruments that has been deliberately changed to hide performance. All of these problems routinely occur. That is why there are inspections. That is also why boilers sometimes explode. Factory owners and apartment building owners run boilers with the wrong ratings, and they try to cover up the problems. You can see that in the statutes and accident reports.

    As I said, knowing what I know about the people at I.H., and knowing Rossi as I do, I think it is likely the people from I.H. did this right, and Rossi did it wrong. In other words, there is no excess heat. That’s what I.H. says. I will not speculate as to whether Rossi was being deceptive or stupid. Perhaps we will learn that when the facts are revealed. Let us wait to see what I.H. has to say. Either way, deceptive or stupid, if the thing does not work, Rossi has no intellectual property and the lawsuit will be thrown out of court.

    Granted, it is possible the people from I.H. are being deceptive or stupid, but it would be out of character.

  257. @Hank Mills

    To my point exactly (and there goes the credibility that you assume Johnson Matthey’s participation lends to Rossi’s claims):

    Andrea Rossi
    April 24, 2016 at 4:22 PM
    Hank Mills:
    Your comment contains a big mistake: Johnson Matthey has nothing to do with us. We bought from them some materials but that is all. Please do not diffuse false information.
    No further comments.
    Warm Regards
    A.R

  258. The contract between Industrial Heat and Leonardo Corp specifies, at the end, that JM Products is owned by a larger company in the UK. This is fact and indisputable. Rossi has just stated that Johnson Matthey has nothing to do with them. That makes another chemical company based in the UK that produces metal sponge a possibility. But the same basic idea would go for any established, large company. I don’t think any reputable company would have let their plant continue operations if their heat requirements were not being met and their production line slowing down. But I also don’t understand why they would need to buy products from Johnson Matthey — which he just stated they did on the JONP.

  259. @cimpy or whatever is your name….. taking out an old ( 2014 ) letter of Proia is meaningless now. From a Google search I see that you are one of the “professional” dis-informers and critics. I notice also that the other comment content is well far from the truth.

  260. @Hank Mills

    Your last comment builds a storyline where credibility for Rossi’s claims is shored up by the participation of Johnson Matthey, however there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE (other than the sharing of initials) of that company having ANY role in this story.

    In fact, Mats has already previously reported that according to his sources Johnson Matthey is DEFINITELY NOT the customer or the entity behind the customer JM Products Inc.

    I assume your comment was not designed to intentionally mislead readers, but in a discussion around “facts”, you should be careful not to inject this as a fact when it is in fact just your own poorly-supported guess.

    As you so mention, Johnson Matthey is a legitimate corporation. The likelihood of them happening to have a prior relationship with Rossi’s small-time lawyer (Rossi’s story) in Miami (where they have no business presence), and deciding it would be a good idea to have that same lawyer be responsible for testing and VALIDATING the performance of a highly controversial technology where that lawyer’s personal financial incentives would make objectivity impossible, is beyond belief.

    If you would like us to believe that story (which you believe lends credibility to Rossi’s story) I hope you have something better than shared initials and Rossi’s dubious claims about location of the mystery customer and type of product made.

  261. an open letter from Aldo Proia, CEO of Prometeon Srl., who bitterly complained that Rossi “demanded” the license back.

    That’s hilarious – Proia complained it was impossible to sell E Cat, as Rossi could not sell one for real to a real customer:

    from http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/24/prometeon-srl-addresses-e-cat-licensee-status/
    (bold mine)
    ” in fact, even if Mr Rossi/EFA sold the licenses for selling both the domestic and the industrial 1 MW E-Cat®, this latter theoretically available within three months from the date of the order, after more than one year and ½ after signing the sub-license agreement we all were still waiting to see a working 1 MW E-Cat and, without having a proof it was really ready for the market, as Rossi never stopped claiming, no one of us wanted to lose their reputation by offering the E-Cats® to the customers… The trust relationship with Mr Rossi/EFA was progressively losing steam and after the bad adventure of the above mentioned E-Cat® licensee, somebody also started talking about a possible legal lawsuit against both EFA and Leonardo Corporation.(…) For all of us it was extremely important to show a working E-Cat to the potential customers. So, at the beginning of Spring 2014, we proposed to EFA the purchase of an E-Cat®; we were in talk for selling the thermal energy to an Italian company having a big district heating network. It was the perfect client where installing the low enthalpy E-Cat®. We never got an answer from EFA/Rossi neither all the purchasing contracts we had been asking for months. Moreover, in September 2014 we (Prometeon) placed an order for a 1 MW E-Cat®; as far as we know, it was the first signed order ever for an E-Cat®! Before accepting the order we warned our customer that they had 99% probabilities not to see their E-Cat®, but they still hoped to get it as they trusted Mr. Rossi, despite everything. As we expected, instead of organizing a party and giving the good news to the world, EFA/Leonardo Corporation never let us have all the solicited documents necessary to close the order: e.g. a supply contract, a maintenance contract, guarantees about the E-Cat® and the future fuel supplies, a technical manual with a detailed description of how to integrate an E-Cat® in an existing industrial environment and with a SCADA,…
    Moreover, in one year and a half of work we found many customers seriously interested in buying the E-Cat, nominally already on the market, and we presented pre-orders and requests for demonstrations to both EFA and Mr Rossi, but we never had any kind of cooperation, we never received the purchasing contracts and it had never been possible to organize a demonstration. As far as we know, also other licensees had customers interested in installing an E-Cat® and they faced similar problems.(…) A few weeks later, in the month of December, we received a formal letter from EFA saying that our license contract was canceled because “we didn’t get enough orders, like it was written in the license contract”!! Obviously this was ridiculous and it was the final confirmation, if still needed, that it would have been impossible to see a working E-Cat®, probably for a long while”

    “Forever” sounds better.

  262. @nckhawk Ah ha ! YOU are trying to mess up things ! Everybody now knows that there ware other persons from IH present to the test and NOT only Eng. Fulvio Fabiani . Why you call him just Fulvio ? Have you worked with him at IH ?

  263. @Mats

    This statement proves that electricity corresponding to what the 1MW plant should have consumed at a successful COP of about 50 has been consumed at the address reportedly being where the test was undertaken.

    Can you prove there was not another electricity account at that premisses? In fact it seems necesary, because the plant would surely require power for lights. motots, AC, ect as well as the haat output from Rossi’s device.

    If there was another electricity account then your statement is wrong.
    If there was no other account then I’d expect no real plant.

  264. I see that in Rossi’s filed complaint, Fulvio Fabiani AND a Mr Barry West are mentioned

    “67. During the Guaranteed Performance Test period, IH and/or IPH engaged and paid
    two of their representatives, Mr. Barry West and Mr. Fulvio Fabiani, to monitor, maintain, take
    part in, and report on the operation of the E-Cat Unit being tested”

    Who or what is or was Mr Barry West?

  265. @nckhawke

    That is different from what most had been led to believe (IH observers being in the license agreement) and makes hideous sense if true. I guess that is why Rossi only mentions the non-technical inspections.

  266. I can’t stand it. Rossi thinks he was able to continue his ruse by allowing biz guy visits during the “test period”. Rossi would not allow IH engineers near the 1MW system for the entire year long test. Rossi keeps hiding behind the fact that Fabiani worked for him but was paid by IH. Fulvio was and is Rossi’s guy and Rossi continues in his attempts to claim that he is the man on the scene for IH. Rossi is going to have to wait and find out what Penon sent to others prior to the “final report” in court.

  267. I should add in reply to Hank’s comment.

    I don’t find it surprising that “Darden, Vaughn, other investors” did not notice the pump type or possibility for spoofing. Unless you are looking for such a problem you would be very unlikely to see it. Even if you were aware that Rossi’s tests might be bad there is no way that Darden or Vaughn could detect this. They would need tech guys to crawl over the tech reports and give you a judgement, and those tech guys would need to be aware of spoofing possibilities. The tech report has not been available till after the end of the test. And for most of the test it seems that IH were not expecting any spoofing.

    I also guess that once IH suspected Rossi was not acting in good faith they would not let him know of the test observations they were doing to check that unless they had to do so.

    Hank’s argument here just does not hold water.

  268. Jed: “What is worse, that analysis should not have been necessary.”
    I agree, but we movie professors have to use what we have got! Rossi is the director.

  269. @Timar

    I think you must be making leaps of inductive logic that are beyond me.

    nckhawke says:
    (1) the flowmeter model is not noted in the final ERV report.
    (2) It was in an early draft of the ERV report.
    (3) that (this is implied rather than stated) the real pump type and lack of no-return valve mean spoofing is possible as per the Defkalion test.

    Rossi has contradicted none of these statements?

    I think you are arguing that IH should have noticed this earlier and told Rossi. But we know they were not interested in this test – and nor would I be if I’d been unable to get even one of Rossi’s e-cats to work. Ever. In any case, which of Rossi’s statements contradict points (1) or (2)?

  270. Mats, May I make a question ? How all this people can comment an ERV report that is actually not disclosed to public ? The only persons that had it are Rossi, Darden and the Penon. I suspect that who criticize the report is OR inventing everything from his own mind OR connect to Darden ( and possibly paid by him ). NO serious professional would comment a document that is not public. Seems that there is a deliberate policy to discredit the report BEFORE it will be public counting on the fact that a few blog readers and commenters actually read the original documents and just few of the readers can understand the documents. But ALL can have a profound opinion on what they have not read and not understood.

  271. Thomas wrote:
    Rossi’s comments about the flowmeter comments seem remarkably vehement and also he does not precisely address the points raised…

    However, Rossi just responded to this comment by nckhawk cited in the JONP by Hank Mills:

    1- No flowmeter has ever been installed by IH in the 1MW E-Cat delivered to the factory of the Customer
    2- Only the ERV has installed his flowmeter and sealed it
    3- when the flowmeter has been installed by the ERV the technicians of IH and of Leonardo were there to assist
    4- for one year, I repeat for one year, IH guys, included Tom Darden, JT Vaughn and all their investors from UK (Woodford) and China have seen all the instrumentation of the ERV and they saw what the flowmeter was as well as they have seen it was sealed as well as they saw its trade mark and model. They had their technicians inside the plant for 352 days and they never noticed anything wrong

    I consider these four points to be remarkable precise counterstatements. As Mats said, it is word against word… and one side must be lying. No wiggle-room left.

  272. Johnson Matthey is in league with Rossi.

    This might be an issue if JM has ever stated that the claimed by Rossi plant, using 1MW of power, exists. But they have not done that. Have they?

  273. @Hank

    You assume:
    – First that all the plant power comes from the measured power input to Rossi’s system – we do not know this, there could be another power source (and to be fair there probably should be for AC etc).
    – Second that the production process exists in a realistic form requiring the normal power – we don’t know this. In fact we don’t know it exists at all at this factory.
    – Third that the test production in this Rossi-built trial plant was the same volume as what would normally require 1MW. We don’t know this.

    I’d agree that the s*** does appear to be well and truly hitting the fan, but not that such assumptions can be made.

  274. @Jed re the Oct 2011 test. I with MY am interested. You could read my meta-analysis of reports from you and the others Mats posted. I’d hope you now agree with my explanation of how ascoli’s “hot core” model can easily explain all the details that at the time you felt were definite proof of LENR?

    I can see nothing in the observations that indicates anything other than a large electric storage heater with an insulated high temperature core.

  275. Dear Mats and Everyone,

    Let’s look at the power consumption from another perspective — that of Industrial Heat and Thomas Darden.

    We will start with the figure that 20 kWh was consumed by the plant every hour and there was no other source of electrical input power. This is probably a high figure considering that other equipment used in the manufacturing process consumed at least *some* power in addition to lighting, people’s personal computers, etc.

    We will now assume that zero excess heat was produced. This means that in the best case scenerio the amount of electrical power converted into heat will be less than 20kWh, because there will be losses throughout the system. We know this because the plant itself required AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT to be installed. This means thermal energy is being LOST to the environment. Also, the air conditioning used up some portion of the 20kWh.

    At least point we have far less than an average of 20kWh worth of heat output being directed to the manufacturing process.

    On average, we are told the manufacturing process required one megawatt of thermal power. Even if a full one megawatt was not *always* required, we know that substantially more than an average of 20kWh was needed to keep the manufacturing process operating at a particular rate. This is because the customer knew exactly how much electrical power was required to produce the thermal power. My understanding is that the plant’s thermal power was being used to maintain vats of water at a high temperature near the boiling point. Johnson Matthey is a huge company that has produced Sponge Nickel for a very long time. There is no doubt they had used vats of the same construction before, used electricity to heat them, and knew how much power was consumed.

    To be very conservative, let’s assume that there were times when far less than the average of one megawatt hour per hour (1000kWh) was required for the manufacturing process. Let’s go down to 500kWh.

    To be as conservative as Donald Trump, let’s also assume that the steamy hot weather of Southern Florida, Andrea Rossi’s sometimes fiery and scorching personality, and the burning constant glare from the representatives of IH somehow helped maintain the temperature of the vats so even less thermal power was required. For this purpose, let’s drop down to 250kWh of heat being required, on average.

    250kWh divided by 20kWH equals 12.5.

    This means that the customer was only obtaining 1/12.5 of the thermal energy required to maintain the rate of production.

    Another way of looking at the numbers is that they were achieving the desired rate of production with only 8% of the normal required thermal energy.

    Now, Industrial Heat can either assume one of two things, if they steadfastly refuse to believe that any excess heat was produced:

    1) Johnson Matthey was testing out a radical new sponge nickel manufacturing process and only pretending to require thermal energy. This new process could be worth billions of dollars and be worth investing in, ASAP. In this case, we would know why they didn’t want to pay Rossi 89 million: they wanted to invest in Johnson Matthey!

    2) Johnson Matthey is in league with Rossi. This would mean something truly shocking: a global company with a billion dollars annually in sales would willingly risk their reputation to protect a deluded crackpot of a scientist that was costing them money every single month. Instead of immediately closing the plant after a couple of months in which buying electricity from the grid would have been more cost effective, they allowed the scandalous inventor to keep supplying them with enough heat to maintain only a tiny fraction of their full production.

    Either way, from the point of view of Industrial Heat, they are onto something HUGE.

    Or, perhaps from the perspective of many of us who have been following this saga from the beginning, the plant did indeed produce massive excess heat, the customer’s manufacturing continued right on track near full capacity, and like Rossi has indicated they want to purchase three more plants because the E-Cat technology has SAVED THEM A FREAKING TON OF MONEY IN TERMS OF ENERGY COSTS!

    Regardless who ends up being correct, this is going to be a media sensation.

    What seems more logical of a scenario to you?

  276. The fact of the matter is that we will not know if LENR (whether or not a la Rossi) is a practical proposition until either some unimpeachable institution confirms it and/or until LENR reactors are on sale and proven in use.

    Sadly, even then there would be some who will continue to deny its existence!

    Rossi is his own worst enemy. By consistently refusing or omitting in his early demos to take suggestions as to how to make his data credible, or to run parallel dummy reactors; and by generally acting as a stereotype of an eccentric and paranoid (if genial) fringe scientist, he has damaged the whole credibility of LENR

    So I guess the next few months will be marked by false assertions, rumours, trolls and flame wars.

  277. @Peter Ekström
    @Jed Rothwell

    While sparging the steam is, in theory, an excellent way to measure output power of a claimed reactor, it fails to rule out all the methods by which a skilled con man like Rossi could cheat. From example, by using trick input power wires — the so called “cheese video trick.”

    … and I am sure there are many other tricks possible which I don’t know about.

    A better method is to calibrate whatever measurement system is used by electrical (Joule) heating. Every reactor ever made by Rossi has a large heater in it. The original ecats had two — one in the middle and another around the device, which meant it could only heat the cooling water! (Go figure!)

    What the experimenters should have done with the early ecats was to provide their own power supply or at least their own power wires to be placed in series with Rossi’s. They should then have made sure that the output power measurement reflected the power put in accurately into Rossi’s own built-in heater. For some inexplicable reason, nobody did this.

    As to the complaints that Rossi would not allow sparging steam or basically anything else to insure accuracy, that runs against what any real inventor would do when conducting a demonstration. It should have been a giant read flag. Anyone associated with the demos (Lewan, Kullander, Essen, Levi) should have insisted on proper calibration and a proper output heat measurement, or they should have refused to participate. And they certainly should never have endorsed the device as working or even “most likely” working and providing “anomalous” heat.

    When Rossi said that the heaters were for safety, as he did many times, whoever interviewed him should have asked him how, exactly, that particularly stupid contention works. Rossi’s claim at the time, was that the ecat made 6 times the power out compared to the power in. How does removing 1/6 or less of the claimed output heat do anything to stabilize a reactor or to prevent runaway?

    And Jed, I remember your writing that you absolutely believed that Rossi had a working reactor “from first principles” simply because his huge “Ottoman sized” reactor kept boiling with power off. Still think that from first principles, Rossi’s device works?

  278. Well… it seems whenever you ask something substantial, both sides will deny the answer, refering to the lawsuit. How convenient for them.

  279. This is not anymore doing any good to any party. Would it be possible that @Mats would contact @nckhaw directly via skype or whatever means since you now know his name, or vice versa.

    Make interview and confidentality agreement following normal journalistic rules.
    Then we all get saved of this hate posting and drip drip leaking. On due schedule what you agree on, Matts may publish your view balanced with other information he possibly has got from other sources. You never know if mr Rossi is interested on giving his views also as interview.
    What we can say for sure there is already enough speculation already and June is soon anyway.

  280. Mats – with apologies – Your question is a good one – the answer will remain dry powder. In line with Mats request – that’s enough fun for today folks.

  281. nckhawk – just calm down please. I won’t take position in that fight anyway.
    But I asked you some questions, about the draft version of the report, and about how there could be hurry to deliver the ERV report when Rossi’s ‘5 day payment clock’ hadn’t started ticking yet.

  282. Thomas – for the most part I agree with you. The uberultra conspiracy theories of Rossi, using folks like Siffer as an amplifier, are all they have left. Where is the apogee? When does the asymptote to nothing begin?

  283. “I never considered the electric measurement to be an issue, since it could be verified with the electricity meter.”

    Not paranoid enough for me. I’d want to know who rented the units next door, and check their electricity bills too. Just because ‘excess’ power isn’t coming through Rossi’s ‘on the books’ meter doesn’t mean it’s not coming in.

  284. Sorry Mats – I’ve been slandered by Siffer and he will not engage directly – he continues to hurl lies and invective using his blog and yours. At the moment, it’s the only venue I have of defending myself. I’ll stand-down on the slugfest unless he has another dumbass attack and wants to keep going.

    Rossi continues to generate very useful discovery for his upcoming court case. The drip-by-drip strategy is exceeding expectations. We’re also starting to get a more complete picture of what is going on inside this man’s head as well.

  285. @nckhawk

    If as Sifferkoll seems convinced you are acting here as an IH disinformer you are doing a remarkably bad job of it. The wrangling with Sifferkoll here does you no good. When people post silly stuff much better to ignore it. Of course, I can’t say I always keep to this golden rule but I know that when I depart from it I weaken any intellectual case I might wish to make.

    The same applies to Sifferkoll of course…

  286. @Sifferkoll
    @nckhawk

    Well, personally I am all against this conspiracy theory stuff. Siffer’s blog comments are weird in the extreme, mainly I guess because he does not seem able or willing (not sure which) to process the known technical info about Rossi’s past tests. nckhawk goes in for conspiracy a bit too – this is an area where two wrongs do not make a right. Mats is in between the two – so uncommitted that every conspiracy theory must be given due consideration, but at least not claiming any one such is likely.

    The evidence we have from previous tests is damning. The evidence that Penon does not write accurate test reports on Rossi devices is damning. IH – with a reputation in the LENR world to uphold, claim Rossi’s stuff does not work for them. nckhawk’s comments are likely IH friendly spin but nevertheless are factual, and the basic facts are not contradicted by Rossi (other than for IH seeing an early draft of the report), and consistent with the Rossi/penon historic test record. So I give them reasonable credence.

    That gives me a simple baseline solution: and while I agree there are many permutations according to how much who at IH knew when, anything that departs from the simple baseline of Rossi has nothing real is IMHO much less likely.

    @Timar – perhaps you’d like to comment if you think that is biassed (it might be, but I can’t see it).

  287. nckhawk – please, I just asked you (and sifferkoll) to stop using that kind of language.
    And I asked you some questions.

  288. Please read “with” in place of “why” in the final sentence:

    “with the dispassionate search for controversial truth and seems more likely to be an expression of concealed self-interest of some kind. Just my 2 cents.”

  289. Siffer – I’ve got it figured out – you’re from the Topsy Turvy Kingdom. You post lies about me, don’t have the courage to directly engage by email and somehow expect a response to a question on this blog. You’re a coward with no shame or dignity. The internet allows impossible types such as yourself to have your moments in the sun. I’ve got a book for you to read – The Man in the Mirror. Everyone else reading along get ready for his most predictable response.

  290. nckhawk – Rossi claims there was no draft version. Could you develop on that?
    Also, before the report was delivered to IH and Rossi (not published, as far as I understand), Rossi’s ‘5 day payment clock’ hadn’t started ticking yet, right?

  291. nckhawk writes “Why would anyone every want to even consider a question from this guy [Sifferkol]? It’s what we’ve come to expect from many of those who back and support Rossi.”

    I’m not really sure what the antecedent of this almost existential “it” is supposed to be, and being an English prof I get bothered by such niceties of logic. Sweeping generalization closely tied to an ambiguous subject is a recipe for ideology, not truth-seeking. The extent of personality animosity expressed in such constructions is seemingly inconsistent why the dispassionate search for controversial truth and seems more likely to be an expression of concealed self-interest of some kind. Just my 2 cents.

  292. Mats,

    Please post the complete electric bill. The average consumption is important, but the maximum and minimum consumption will also be interesting to see. I’m interested in the absolute highest consumption spikes compared to the fact Rossi has stated the average output of the reactor was one megawatt. Any charts of graphs of power usage could be very interesting to see!

    Sincerely,
    Hank

    PS: NCKHAWK, please take a moment to answer the question I posted earlier in the comments.

  293. psi2 – yes, obviously the energy output is the crucial question. I never considered the electric measurement to be an issue, since it could be verified with the electricity meter. The energy output is a different question and we need much more info that we will probably not get anytime soon, if ever, depending on how the lawsuit progresses.

  294. nckhawk and sifferkoll – please stop your harsh tone against each other. That’s not what I want this comment field to be used for.

  295. Mats writes in a recent update on what certainly purports to be the customer’s electric bill, “The amount charged is $1,266, while the amount for the previous month was $309, which is about a quarter, possibly indicating some early test activity.

    “This statement proves that electricity corresponding to what the 1MW plant should have consumed at a successful COP of about 50 has been consumed at the address reportedly being where the test was undertaken. It doesn’t prove any production by the customer, nor anything about the amount of energy produced by the MW plant, and consequently nothing about the COP. My source is not Rossi.”

    Very interesting indeed, Mats. So now the real question becomes was the output really rated at 1MW?

  296. @nckhawk

    Siffer doesn’t have the decency to answer a direct email question and instead chooses to post it on his blog as part of yet another slander / attempted hit piece. Why would anyone every want to even consider a question from this guy? It’s what we’ve come to expect from many of those who back and support Rossi.

    Interesting take. Me being an a-hole prevents you from answering simple questions. As I said, I’m merely presenting the data points, and asking questions about them. And you go ballistic. Logical!

    In my part of the universe, your spin on Rossi/Penon is much worse in every single way. And I actually believe that the mail you sent me is of interest to our readers in asessing your behaviour.

  297. Deleo
    Darden is a fund manager, he was prompting Rossi’s invention to other investors..Once the process started he was in an precarious position. Rossi is now clearly fishing for a out of court deal..ANd is now the biggest obstacle for clarity when it comes to LENR

  298. Deleo – I realize that it is difficult to understand some of this. Rossi has deliberately chosen the courts as his main battlefield and, for that reason, most of the evidence has to be reserved for that fight.

  299. @nckhawk – maybe you are right that Penon turned out to be a total bust as the independent ERV, but IH and Darden did agree to have him to do it when this test started, and they knew that certain results from that test would potentially trigger an $89MM payment. If I had invested $10MM of my own money, with another $89MM on the line, I would not agree to a referee for that test unless I knew they were totally unbiased and completely competent – someone like Ed Storms. If AR didn’t agree to a referee of that caliber, then no test, and no more money.

    So I think Darden has some responsibility here. Why would he agree to a questionable ERV with so much money at stake? Why did Darden publicly say 6 months into the test that he was optimistic and that things were looking promising? Perhaps he just wasn’t clued into the details of the test until late last year. That’s hard to imagine but possible I guess.

  300. T – Siffer doesn’t have the decency to answer a direct email question and instead chooses to post it on his blog as part of yet another slander / attempted hit piece. Why would anyone every want to even consider a question from this guy? It’s what we’ve come to expect from many of those who back and support Rossi.

  301. @nckhawk

    Wow – hit a nerve with that one. Such incredible sound and fury. I see that the Slander Kings are not able to take the heat and can only respond with more spewage. Siffer has no decency and cannot answer a direct email asking him to explain his fabrications and only feels the need to attempt and drive internet traffic to his blog site with more fabrications and slander. We’ve seen what he is made of – no further questions your honor.

    Oh! Fury? Youd dont say … I guess our readers will decide on who is slandering here. I’m merely presenting some data points and asking some questions about them? For some reason you seam really disturbed about this. Wonder why …

    And you didn’t answer my question either.

  302. @Jacky: Not neccessarily, yes. Of course. I haven’t implied that. I just asked a question.

  303. @nckhawk: By the way, I’d be interested to hear your answer to Sifferkoll’s question as well:

    So. Mr Weaver. Do you want the agreement to be valid or not in the future? Very simple question.

  304. The final submitted report contains typos…

    Incredible! That is indeed the most damning fact imaginable. I’m affraid that after this shocking revelation we have no reasonable choice left but to consider the report null and void. No wonder Jed calls penon an idiot. Typos! Such an inexcusable sloppiness. I’m speechless.

  305. @Timar

    Doesn’t it seem just a little bit grotesque to assume that someone showing such an almost childishly-cute inability to deceive on such a basic level as the fabrication of fake questions on his blog is in fact the most shrewd fraudster running the biggest and longest-winding energy scams in all history

    Nope, his inability to speak and write English well does not necessarily mean his ability to deceive in other ways is equally bad.

  306. Wow – hit a nerve with that one. Such incredible sound and fury. I see that the Slander Kings are not able to take the heat and can only respond with more spewage. Siffer has no decency and cannot answer a direct email asking him to explain his fabrications and only feels the need to attempt and drive internet traffic to his blog site with more fabrications and slander. We’ve seen what he is made of – no further questions your honor.

    Now let’s ask Rossi why Penon did not respond to the IH engineering questions about the problems with the draft report before publication? Was it because Rossi had run out of time on his 5 day payment clock and couldn’t wait any longer to execute his long planned $89M lawsuit plan? The final submitted report contains typos and was obviously hurried along. Wonder why the hurry? Normal folks would think Penon would have been more interested in resolving the major issues and discrepancies that IH had with the draft report before sending his final report but alas, no.

  307. @Jacky: (or should I say Andrea? Mary recently suggested that you are one of Rossi’s alter egos as well 😉 possibly, but I think it brings up another interesting question (beware Thomas, fluffy psychological speculation ahead): Doesn’t it seem just a little bit grotesque to assume that someone showing such an almost childishly-cute inability to deceive on such a basic level as the fabrication of fake questions on his blog is in fact the most shrewd fraudster running the biggest and longest-winding energy scams in all history, maning to deceive not only dozens of academics, technicans, journalists but also to scam $11.000.000 from professional, hardboiled venture capitalists? Let this question sink in for a moment…

  308. @Timar

    Nooo, those comments are obviously written by the snakes/shills/APCOWorldwide employees that are trying to discredit Rossi by emulating his writing style… is what some of the more feverish supporters will say.

  309. so sorry – I’ve said “pump type” a few times below when I meant “flowmeter type”

  310. PPS

    Actually it is not smoking gun proof that Rossi is dishonest if the flowmeter type is missing from the final report. He and Penon could possibly both be very incompetent. If it were removed from an early draft it is very difficult to see an honest reason for the removal.

  311. PS – it may be difficult to prove whether some early draft claimed by IH to be real is a fabrication.
    However, whether the pump type has been omitted from the final draft is now a matter of record – and it would be an extraordinary omission.

    So if this is misinformation it can be proven or disproven pretty easily from the final report contents. I note Rossi does not say, as he could, that the pump type is in the final report and rather implies that it is not.

    I’m not myself sold on this possible error being all there is to it, but it seems plausible and Rossi’s response only makes it more plausible. (opinion).

  312. @Deleo: this comment by “Andy Stokes” – appearing just at the moment he sent the very same statements conveyed in his answer to Mats and Frank and serving as an obviously fabricated incentive for spreading his version of the story – was obviously written by Rossi, as was the recent comment by “H” and many other comments on his JONP.
    I just wonder whether he really can’t imagine that his peculiar use of spelling, syntax and idioms is easily identifiable not only to native speakers, but to anyone with some command of the English language, or if he just doesn’t care about it? I mean, it is so blatantly obvious it is almost funny…

  313. Thomas – I asked nckhawk to provide more details on this, since he raised the issue. No use speculating until he does.

  314. Rossi’s comments about the flowmeter comments seem remarkably vehement and also he does not precisely address the points raised…

    For example:
    IH may have these drafts without having been sent them officially.
    Omitting details of the pump type from a final report is no way explained by the large volume of results and remains a mystery

  315. @Thomas: Nice try, but you obviously haven’t read the link I provided. It was an open letter from Aldo Proia, CEO of Prometeon Srl., who bitterly complained that Rossi “demanded” the license back. It directly contradicts your hypothesis.
    I very much appreciate your detailed technical analysis of the Lugano report and I think it is entirely correct. That is undoubtedly what you are good at, evaluating hard technical facts – I think, however, you are not nearly as good in evaluating “soft” social evidence, as this is not the first time have seen interpreting you such a biased manner, completely ignoring crucial aspects.

    You will note that I’ve never claimed to be as good at evaluating the soft evidence as the hard. Specifically (and others may of course think they are much better than me, perhaps correctly) I believe the soft evidence to be too open to multiple interpretations and therefore worth much less.

    However in this particular case – I agree, the forcible reclamation could have been motivated by hopes at the time of some big deal from another investor who might demand monopoly license, and pay more, which then did not come off. The fact that IH don’t have Europe is not the point – somone else might have wanted it. I did not recheck your link when making my summary answer which was as you note inaccurate, and from memory.

    It is no guarantee against fraud that the fraudulent offering becomes more valuable. Though, as I said originally, Rossi’s weird by anyone’s accounts behaviour, to me, makes more sense if he is both dishonest and deluded, and I would not like to say precisely the proportion. I can be definite about the dishonesty because of the ash samples. I can’t prove that he is not 100% dishonest though tend not to think this. And I can’t prove that his dishonesty is fraudulent dishonesty.

  316. Below is more from AR on this. I think we can now see where the focus of the litigation may be:

    P.S. UPDATE AFTER 30 MINUTES:
    I SAW NOW THE GIGANTIC LIE OF THIS PUPPET: HE WROTE THAT THE ERV DELIVERED IN A FIRST MOMENT A DRAFT OF THE REPORT WITH DATA ABOUT THE FLOWMETER, BUT EVENTUALLY RETRIEVED SUCH DATA FROM THE REPORT: THIS IS A TITANIC LIE !!! NO DRAFT OF THE REPORT HAS EVER DELIVERED TO EITHER PARTY FROM THE ERV !!!
    HE GAVE THE DATA OF THE FLOWMETER TO US
    1- WHEN HE INSTALLED THE FLOWMETER
    2- WHEN HE DISASSEMBLED IT TO SEND IT TO THE MANUFACTURER FOR TO CHECK THAT THE MARGIN OF ERROR HAD NOT BEEN CHANGED DURING THE TEST
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  317. AR’s detailed response about what NCHawk is saying about the flowmeter.

    Just wondering NCHawk, is there anything in the report about the power bill with Florida Power and Light?

    Andrea Rossi
    April 24, 2016 at 10:40 AM
    Andy Stokes:
    Yes, you are correct: the ERV gave to IH one year of time, during the test, to get all the information they wanted about all his instrumentation; the men of IH, who attended the test every day for one year, has all the possibiliries to get all the data they wanted related to any instrument, flowmeter included.
    Nobody of IH, ever, had anything negative to say of the flowmeter ( that was sealed: I remember perfectly the opera ballet dancers of IH chant that all the instrumentation was of the ERV, made their investors of Woodford notice that the flowmeter was sealed, when Woodford’s specialists came to the plant ). When the ERV disassembled the instrumentation all the guys of IH were around, getting photos and any possible information; the ERV told us that he was getting back his instrumentation to certify with the manufacturers that their margin of error had not been modified during the year test, AT THE SAME CONDITIONS OF FLUID AND TEMPERATURE OF THE TEST).
    Obviously, evidence of all this will be requested in due time, in due place. The report is a short resume necessarily reduced: the 12 600 000 data taken by the ERV cannot be printed: 66 000 pages could be necessary.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  318. @nckhawk

    are you not man enough to respond to my direct inquiry to info@sifferkoll.com or are you not checking your email these days? You need to concentrate on the fabrication front for now though – your team is losing ground that it will not get back.

    Sorry. Busy today. However I made a summary on my blog now. It ends with a very simple question on your feelings regarding the License Agreement. Is it worthless to IH? Or do you want it to be valid in the future?

    http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/the-lenr-ecat-saga-dawey-weaver-goes-ballistic-after/

  319. @Thomas: Nice try, but you obviously haven’t read the link I provided. It was an open letter from Aldo Proia, CEO of Prometeon Srl., who bitterly complained that Rossi “demanded” the license back. It directly contradicts your hypothesis.
    I very much appreciate your detailed technical analysis of the Lugano report and I think it is entirely correct. That is undoubtedly what you are good at, evaluating hard technical facts – I think, however, you are not nearly as good in evaluating “soft” social evidence, as this is not the first time have seen interpreting you such a biased manner, completely ignoring crucial aspects.

  320. nckhawk,

    Multiple replicators including Songsheng Jiang, Alexander Parkhomov, N. Stepanov, and others claim to have been able to reproduce the Rossi Effect with very little documentation to go on (unlike Industrial Heat who had access to Rossi’s entire patent portfolio) and have even posted data showing self sustained periods of operation. Does I.H. now take the position that all of these scientists are incompetent and deluded individuals who are simply fooling themselves?

    To be blunt, if IH was *really* unable to replicate with all of Rossi’s IP on hand — including his patent on additives and catalyzers — with all the financial means at their disposal (millions of dollars) then obviously none of these researchers have ever been able to produce a single watt of excess heat, according to the logical conclusion of this line of thinking.

    If I.H. was serious about advancing the field of LENR like you and Darden have claimed…

    1) They would have hired a large team of scientists to work on the Ni-LiAlH4-Li effect.

    2) They would have given them access to a top notch laboratory with room and the required utility hook-ups to run many simultaneous experiments.

    3) They would have been able to provide them with anything else they needed or thought could be useful. For example, if they wanted to have custom nickel manufactured with a specific surface morphology or levels of trace elements.

    The well funded and equipped I.H. effort to replicate the Rossi Effect should have made other attempts look like a elementary school child working with a chemistry set bought at a department store. Again, this is especially true since I.H. would have had MUCH more information to guide them than these poorly funded replicators who sometimes work out of their apartments. There is no logical and rational way that these other teams were able to replicate if I.H. was unable to do so.

    So do us all a favor, please. Confirm that all these other claims are completely and without a doubt totally bogus and without merit.

    I want to read it from you.

    Because if I.H. was unable to replicate, no one on God’s green Earth has been able to. And if Rossi’s alleged lies and deceptions are unacceptable, theirs are inappropriate as well.

    Sincerely,
    Hank

  321. @Matts I think Rossi has said recently (few weeks ago) that ERV installed his meters, and Rossi went and bought same sets of meters and installed them. difference in meters were well in manufacturer limits. What that is worth when it is what he says.
    Below nckhaw indicates that things started to go southwest around time when Rossi moved back to Miami. This could fit to other information available, but still maybe worth reading again how different was the public image almost exactly one year ago, when Marianne Macy interviewed Darden, The pdf can be downloaded here:
    https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1405-%E2%80%A9New-Interview-8-page-with-%E2%80%A9Industrial-%E2%80%A9Heat%E2%80%99s%E2%80%A9-Tom%E2%80%A9-Darden-by-Marianne-Macy/

  322. Also – in an email to me and Frank Acland, Rossi states that there was no draft of the report, that the ERV gave all the data of the flowmeter to him and to IH when he installed it and repeated the information when he retrieved it. He also points out that the ERV removed the flowmeter, as well as all his other instruments, after the test, to send it to the manufacturer to check the the margin of error after the year of use at the exact conditions of flow and temperature of the test, adding that IH showed the instruments to visitors, highlighting that they were all sealed.

    At this point, it’s word against another, and I would suggest that nckhawk provides more details or evidence for his claim.

  323. Thomas –
    nckhawks claims are interesting since they start to getting close to real facts and details that could help bringing the truth out, which I stated was my aim. Therefore this is good. So far, however, these are only claims without evidence or supporting detailed descriptions. I would be interested to get more facts and details.
    One aspect that I find interesting is that nckhawk mentions a draft version of the ERV report. I never heard of that before.

  324. @Jed

    if you had a beetle collector who claimed to have in his collection the world’s rarest beetle, but provided only fuzzy photos which could be world’s rarest, or could be something much more common, you would not be convinced.

    If he then asked to be a member of the Royal Society on the basis of this find, or wanted to auction it for a large amount of money, you’d demand an unambiguous analysis.

    Why is it that when the same things happens with claims of new science that will revolutionise the world people do not demand the same level of proof?

  325. @”Jacky”

    “If you’ve gone through all the trouble of setting up a working production facility you don’t shut it down immediately after the test. This development also contradicts Rossi’s claims that the 1MW unit was re-fueled at the end of the test and that the customer is continuing to use it in their operations.”

    I totally disagree. If I owned the plant I would move that operation to my company’s secure location as soon as the test was over. It is the only sensible thing to do in this instance. The charges could have been refreshed before or after the move.

    This is just more inconsequential stuff Rossi haters like to cling to as damning evidence. heh! Until we learn more about the whereabouts about the plant and the production equipment it’s nothing.

    @nckhawk, you’ve avoided answering two of my questions for some reason

  326. Peter Ekström: “There has been some discussion on steam flow in the early E-Cat. Here is what convinced me that E-Cat did not produce net energy:
    http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3707appendixa2.shtml

    That is a careful analysis, but it is still open to question. What is worse, that analysis should not have been necessary. When Krivit got back, and I heard about this, I got upset with him and asked, “why the hell didn’t you sparge the steam in cold water?!?” I think I said that to Mats Lewan too, after a similar test. I recall they said, “because Rossi would not let us.”

    That is what find TERRIBLY ANNOYING about Rossi, and why I have never trusted him. Technical questions that could easily be resolved in a few minutes drag on for months. I concluded long ago that he wants them to drag on. I think Mike McKubre agrees with me.

    For those unfamiliar with boiler tests, let me explain what “sparge” means. Start with an empty bucket. Weigh it, fill it with cold water, weigh it again, and measure the water temperature. Now hold the end of the steam hose under the water, far enough under that no bubbles of steam emerge. All of the steam is condensed. You measure elapsed time. After a few minutes, you remove the hose, and measure the increase in the weight of water and water temperature. This gives you the flow rate and the enthapy of steam. You do not need a special instrument to measure steam quality. I and others suggested to Rossi that he do this. We made that suggestion dozens of times. He never even acknowledged us.

    This test eliminates all ambiguity with a steam boiler test. It makes the test as reliable as a hot water flow calorimetry test. You can do this with large equipment at high power levels. I wouldn’t know about a 1 MW test, I have seen people do this in a factory with 50 kW steam boiler, using a 55 gallon steel drum instead of a bucket, a fork lift, and an industrial platform scale.

  327. @bbck7

    If you pay attention you will see that in fact I did not say that, though nckhawk did.

  328. Thomas Clarke said, “Penon removed the flowmeter details from the final report that was sent to IH and Rossi.” You have seen the report? Why not share it with us?

  329. Mats – I have no idea whether nckhawk’s info is good. But if it is, it is the removal of pump type between early draft and final that is damning.

    The info from Rossi about long periods of SSM (which would be when the flowrate was spoofed) is sort of compatible with this method. You can also imagine Rossi doing this and resolutely refusing to believe there could be any problem – just as he refused to see the average vs rms measurement mistake when you pointed this out to him.

    But i would not jump to conclusions here on this evidence. There could be other errors as well.

  330. I think, for the Lugano refutation, I was “clown”. A pity, I was hoping for snake…

  331. But given that Leonardo/EFA apparently hasn’t resold the License since, it remains a fact that doesn’t easily fit into the theory that Rossi purports a deliberate scam.

    OK, Timar. i guess i have to do it.

    Suppose Rossi were a deliberate rational fraud (which I don’t for other reasons think is quite right). Suppose one of his licensees got fed up with no sign ever of working product, and said – either you buy the license back, or I will go public with all of the details I have of all your dealings with me.

    What would you, as a fraudster, knowing reputation was your most valuable asset, do?

  332. nckhawk – now it’s getting interesting, with concrete details on error sources, in this case the flowmeter as have been suggested many times (which apparently also was at the core of possible errors at the Defkalion demo once). So far it’s an indication made by you. If you have more details or evidence to share that would be valuable.

  333. @Thomas: Sure you can (and Mary and many others too). But given that Leonardo/EFA apparently hasn’t resold the License since, it remains a fact that doesn’t easily fit into the theory that Rossi purports a deliberate scam.
    I have to correct two errors, though: the license was bought back in early 2014, not at the end of the year from which the E-Cat Word article dates. And it wasn’t bought back by Leonardo but by EFA Srl., but AFAIK that is just Rossi’s (and his wife’s) other company.

  334. Timar – I’m afraid I can imagine reasons for such a buy-back consistent with Rossi being fraudulent. I’m sure others here can too, and will leave them to spell it out if needed.

  335. Another fact to remember is this context is that in the end of 2014 (presumably after Rossi received his payment from IH) Leonardo bought back Licenses offering a 10% return on the investment. We know that at least Rossi’s former Italian licensee Prometeon, Srl. finally gave in and accepted the offer. Given that Leonardo did not sell these bought-back licenses to IH, this conduct is hard to reconcile with the theory that Rossi is a deliberate fraudster (he could still be deluded, though).

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/24/prometeon-srl-addresses-e-cat-licensee-status/

  336. Sorry – I got the practical limit for electrical average/rms mismeasurement wrong. I guess were I doing it I could manage X10 pretty easily.

    Although in the new ERV year test that seems less likely – it does not work when you have proper true RMS electrical measurement, or power meter measurement, as would be the case here.

  337. @nckhawk

    That is interesting and opens the possibility that the missing voltmeter and ammeter type from a previous penon report – such very bad measurement practice, and would have immediately revealed the measurement error that from other indicsations seems most likley – was in no way the fault of Penon and because the report we saw was edited by Rossi?

    However, were I Penon, I’d be unhappy to have my name associated with such an edited report… or, on the other hand, if these final draft omissions have been made by Penon it is very difficult indeed for me to think of a respectable reason why he would do that for such crucial information.

  338. Thomas Clark – unfortunately, Penon removed the flowmeter details from the final report that was sent to IH and Rossi. Not to worry though, he had previously included those details in the drafts and IH was also able to gather more information re the flow meter from lots of pictures during final report inspection day. The truth is secure.

  339. Good one Siffer – are you not man enough to respond to my direct inquiry to info@sifferkoll.com or are you not checking your email these days? You need to concentrate on the fabrication front for now though – your team is losing ground that it will not get back.

  340. (why did this not post first time round?)

    1MW is a decent amount of power. If the factory is 6000sq.ft. this is 150W/sq.ft.

    See this domestic heating calculator:
    http://cadetheat.com/blog/right-wattage-heater/

    For large rooms that is estimating 10W/sq foot max required – and surely that must at least correspond to +10C heating 9otherwise you would get awful cold on cold days).

    Rossi’s 1MW in 6000 sq ft would therefore lead to +150C or more temperature rise.

    Ok – this is very approximate but it can be made more precise if we know how many external walls, ceiling U value, etc.

  341. @nckhawk

    Siffer – there are plans to hack the sun and take down the grid at the same time. You didn’t hear that from me.

    Well … Maybe you should take the mind control test you are offering yourself?

  342. Having said that, the present reviews of steam flow and flow meters are very good preparation for when the Penon report gets released. Or you can take advice from the man himself in a 2011 interview with Krivit – a boiler mechanic will be able to do the calculations.

    Just restricting ourselves to flow calorimetry, the known mistakes in Rossi or DFK tests have been:
    (1) miscounting enthalpy of vaporisation (X6.5 max error)
    (2) badly sited thermocouple (infinity max error)
    (3) flow meter backflow (inifinity max error, with somone on-site to jiggle the flowrate or else clever control)
    (4) average vs true RMS measurement of electrical input (infinity max error but practically limited to around 4)

    Even Penon’s report will give a fair idea of which of these are more or less likely. For example, flowmeter type and presence/absence of backflow control valve is pretty easy to check.

  343. I wonder how you can be so certain about what facts discovered on one day can mean on the next day, or the day after that. This is a general point, but one, I think, worth considering. I found the updates quite revealing. That doesn’t mean I form a conclusion yet about what they mean, but I’m open to the possibility that they could turn out to be some of the most pertinent facts in the case.

    Well I can’t be certain. But I’m making a category distinction between hard facts (does the customer factory exist – when was it re-rented – what does a report tell us about a test) and soft speculation:
    how many shell companies did Rossi/Darden/IH set up / how many condos has rossi bought / who are the other clients of APCO

    The soft stuff can be interpreted however you like. And people around here have biasses and like what they like. The hard stuff is has much less flexibility in how it is interpreted and therefore is more reliable.

    Thomas Clarke’s hypothesis, that IH and Darden concluded at a fairly late point in time of the one-year test that the E-Cat didn’t produce excess heat, seems more reasonable, unless you think that Darden and IH were hiding their insights when raising the funds. Which wouldn’t be advisable.

    @Mats –
    I agree “found out at late stage” is reasonable. I don’t agree that “strongly suspected before Woodward investment” is ruled out or even highly unlikely.

    No-one doing DD on Rossi could fail to realise he has a dubious past. And no-one observing him for 12 months (I think) could fail to realise his character is weird. How many inventors do you know who spend 12 months in shipping containers?

    The decision to invest therefore would be made on the scientific evidence for whether Rossi’s stuff works. It does not matter how flaky or deceitful Rossi is – if his stuff works IH and Woodford will want in – the license gives them room to develop and sell independent of Rossi. And IH will think that something half-working from Rossi could be looked at by a serious scientific team and developed.

    Rossi being flaky and unprofessional would make them think that – if he had something working at all – it could be usefully developed by others better able.

    IH, and other investors, could believe that Rossi’s tests are rubbish, that he is unreliable, that his devices do not always work. If they had confidence that the independent tests were good (specifically the two Swede tests) they would overlook a good amount of “don’t trust anything Rossi says” because they were buying attested working technology, not Rossi. $11m is not to high a price for a look-see given the very high potential.

    IH was probably set up with Rossi in mind as a quick route to glory, but Darden’s aim is to commercialise LENR, which he believes works, if Rossi cannot help that process then others will.

    So: IH could distrust Rossi entirely – and Rossi’s own tests – but if they trusted even one independent test they would still go forward, and be highly positive as the magnitude of the possible gains merits. The language in their last but one PR about “rigorous testing” and “believe no-one but IH” is perhaps indicative that they at that point had lost trust in all the “independent tests”.

    You never know – the straw that broke the camel’s back could even be when they finally got a competent person to review my refutation of the Lugano calculations…

    Anyway – speculation off. I’m saying variations here can’t be ruled out or even relegated as “highly unlikely”.

  344. Siffer – there are plans to hack the sun and take down the grid at the same time. You didn’t hear that from me.

  345. As if the IPH – NRG Energy connection via Jones Day wasn’t enough (thanks for very interesting research @lenrthenewfire ). Here is a Apco Worldwide connection. It seams the traditional energy business and solarpower lobby is involved for real. http://www.apcoworldwide.com/blog/detail/apcoforum/2015/04/19/earthrise-1968-to-earth-day-2015-solar-energy-continues-to-amaze and on highest levels: https://www.usea.org/event/2013-bloomberg-new-energy-finance-summit

  346. Some of you folks are so single-minded that it is beyond stunning. Rossi has sunk a hook so deeply into your jaws that you may never recover. Has it occurred to some of you that LENR is moving forward with projects other than your soon to be ex-hero and overlord? Perhaps it is time to start questioning IQ and / or do some type of mind-control study around this neck of the woods.

    Having said that, the present reviews of steam flow and flow meters are very good preparation for when the Penon report gets released. Or you can take advice from the man himself in a 2011 interview with Krivit – a boiler mechanic will be able to do the calculations.

  347. OK, I think we all need some comic relief at this point. If you google streetview into the given Florida adress (7861 NW 46th St, Doral, FL 33166, USA) and watch for the writing on the wall, you’ll find evidence that Rossi, after all, has not lost his marbles.

  348. I am very conflicted by what’s going on. I
    will admit I was a fan of Rossi’s but now I’m confused. Did Rossi
    ram lies down our throat? How could he have done this to us?
    Mary’s assessment of Rossi might have been right all along. He’s made an
    ass out of all of us

  349. @Mats the fog thins out a bit

    All evidence indicates that there is a ‘something’ bigger going on.

    From the relatively minor case Rossi (Leonardo) vs. Darden (Cherokee / IH) leads us the story, if we take Darden as a starting point for a network, more and more to an really important multi billion dollar case. It looks through all the fog, that is being produced at the moment, that several major US energy producer with a vengeance try to prevent Rossi LENR Ecat Technology, or at least delay the technology as far as possible, maybe for to find an exit strategy or better to completely usurp the LENR technology for their own purpose.

    The connections of Thomas Darden II are mostly clear, on the one hand, the connection to NRG Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRG_Energy via the Netherlands IPH International BV, Boart Longyear, IPHBV Holdings Ltd UK connection, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boart_Longyear (Drilling Equipment), but the role of First Names Group is unclear in this context.

    Secondly, out of the granted Microgrid US patent and the references cited therein (people and companies), the resulting new companies tangle, leading to the former Vice President of Constellation Energy Group (JT Thompson) and finally to Exelon that purchased Constellation, and also tried to purchased NRG and does hold shares in 19 nuclear power reactors in 11 nuclear power plants.

    http://causamenergy.com/
    https://www.linkedin.com/vsearch/p?company=Gridforce+Energy+Management+Services&trk=prof-exp-company-name
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/jim-szyperski-06b7b93
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-thompson-jt-b151652
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_Energy_Group
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exelon
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-constellation-exelon-idUSTRE73Q8BS20110428 (including NRG Energy)

    All are represented by (three times allowed to ask 😉 ) of course, Jones Day

    https://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=de&site=webhp&source=hp&q=site%3Awww.jonesday.com+Exelon
    https://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=de&site=webhp&source=hp&q=site%3Awww.jonesday.com+NRG Energy
    https://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=de&site=webhp&source=hp&q=site%3Awww.jonesday.com+Constellation Energy

    My conclusion is therefore that Darden itself is only a small cog in the machine and folows instructions from above. In the dust of all lays Rossi, he most likely has a COP 50 self sustain LENR reactor and working LENR Technology in general. This is even more plausible if we have a look at the currently incredible number of self-proclaimed saviors that, basically completely irrational, warn all the world of the dangerous and cheating Rossi, even though not a single extract from the 352 days test was published and Rossi obviously has not committed any fraud, but has fulfilled a contract.

    But one thing is certain, should the claim COP 50 Self Sustain prove to be correct, all the businesses of the above mentioned companies ‘immediately’ (where many are not clever enough to understand ‘immediately’ https: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania ) became obsolete and their shares got completely worthless and this can only prevent by preventing Rossi and his Ecat by all means!

  350. @Guest, @Mats

    This should certainly be added as a piece of data that is important to this puzzle, certainly it is important enough. I think Mats is showing more than a little bias in this whole story.

    “As previously pointed out, the address which you just confirmed as being the location of the year test, has already been put back up for rent almost immediately following conclusion of the test. If you’ve gone through all the trouble of setting up a working production facility you don’t shut it down immediately after the test. This development also contradicts Rossi’s claims that the 1MW unit was re-fueled at the end of the test and that the customer is continuing to use it in their operations.”

  351. Mats,

    I think you should include the following (which you posted to ECW) in your update regarding the test location:

    “The steam output was led in a tube going through a wall where the customer’s production supposedly was being run. The door to that space was closed and they never opened it. One of them, however, claims to have gleaned when the door opened for a moment, and saw what seemed to be production activity.”

    Three facts make it nearly certain there was no real production activity going on:

    1) The “production” area was physically closed off and not visible from the area visitors were allowed to see – if there was real activity going on you can be certain Rossi would have made it the highlight of their tour

    2) Visitors entered via the back stairs and were confined to the back area where the loading docks were – no real production operation would be set up in such a way that the active production / product storage area would be situated front of house and physically separated from the area with access to the loading docks. This would make shipping products incredibly operationally inefficient and no experienced operator would use such a set-up.

    3) As previously pointed out, the address which you just confirmed as being the location of the year test, has already been put back up for rent almost immediately following conclusion of the test. If you’ve gone through all the trouble of setting up a working production facility you don’t shut it down immediately after the test. This development also contradicts Rossi’s claims that the 1MW unit was re-fueled at the end of the test and that the customer is continuing to use it in their operations.

  352. NCHawk, given your proposed timing for things starting to deteriorate between IH and AR before the test started, why then would Darden have agreed to an interview with Fortune long after that? Fortune is one of the most prominent and widely read business magazines in the U.S. Surely someone as cautious and prudent as Darden (his own words) would have declined an interview if he felt like things with AR were the least bit off. As of last September Darden felt comfortable enough to talk on record and he definitely insinuated that things were going well at the time. If what you say is true I imagine that AR’s attorneys will use that interview to argue that Darden thought things were fine through last Fall, and they didn’t start to deteriorate more than a year ago when AR moved back to Miami.

  353. Maryyugo mentioned flowmeters. I have experience using 5 or 6 of them. Flowmeters are born to make trouble, like computer printers. A flowmeter without a backflow check valve was the cause of Defkalion’s mistake, described by Gamberale:

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf

    (Mistake or deception? I report; you decide.)

    This is the kind of thing that causes people to make huge errors. This also explains how a person might learn to cheat with a flowmeter, as I described elsewhere:

    Not all meters are susceptible to the backflow problem. But suppose your meter is. Read the manual carefully and you will see it says something like: “be sure to install a backflow check valve downstream from the meter to prevent false readings or damage.” Manufacturers do not want angry customers, so they are careful to point out all of the failure modes they know of. I am sure they would point out this one.

    If you are a nefarious person, you then induce backflow deliberately in order to inflate the flow rate.

    Manuals tell you how to use instruments correctly. In the course of doing so, they also tell you how to cheat.

  354. maryyugo – that’s old stuff. I mentioned both of these issues as possibles error sources in a comment one or two days ago:

    ‘Thomas – I agree with you, this is obviously one of the possible scenarios – flawed measurements, possibly by errors in measuring water flow, and/or uncertainty regarding whether all the water passing the plant was being evaporated or not. On top of that, tampering with the meter. Hopefully (not with certainty) the ERV report could answer these questions. If we’ll ever see it.’

    and it has been discussed for years. The interesting thing about your flow meter example is the reference to the photo of the plant. In the same way, we would need a detailed description of the plant configuration to confirm or reject the hypothesis of overflowing water. Hopefully in the report, but not surely. If we ever will see it.

  355. I mentioned Maryyugo only because she/he recently brought up a hands-on example of measurement error that I find interesting, but, as I said, that was only a hypothesis.


    @Mats

    If you like that one, you will love this one (last slide of the bunch):

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GrabowskiKrobustperf.pdf

    This one accounts for the COP of 6. All that is required is that enough of Rossi’s cooling water is not fully vaporized to steam. That paper appeared in February 2011 and was widely circulated including via Vortex. It should have been carefully considered and guarded against by you, Kullander and Essen.

  356. @ Thomas Clarke: “your updates here relate to speculative new facts about IH which frankly mean nothing definite, nor ever could.”

    I wonder how you can be so certain about what facts discovered on one day can mean on the next day, or the day after that. This is a general point, but one, I think, worth considering. I found the updates quite revealing. That doesn’t mean I form a conclusion yet about what they mean, but I’m open to the possibility that they could turn out to be some of the most pertinent facts in the case.

  357. nckhawk – that’s poetic, but I wouldn’t consider it an answer. Please try again.

    Meanwhile, in any case, my interpretation of what you earlier wrote is that IH had doubts on the validity of the E-Cat technology already before the MW one-year test started. This surprises me, since we have discussed at length the fact that IH raised funding from Woodford and for the Chinese Joint Venture during the one-year test, seemingly referring to Rossi’s E-Cat as an important part of IH’s technology domain. Thomas Clarke’s hypothesis, that IH and Darden concluded at a fairly late point in time of the one-year test that the E-Cat didn’t produce excess heat, seems more reasonable, unless you think that Darden and IH were hiding their insights when raising the funds. Which wouldn’t be advisable.

  358. Mats – with a clear feedback loop now established to Rossi and his disciples – drip-by-drip until it becomes time for a more tactical nugget. None of this matters in the big picture – the chosen battlefield that puts Rossi in the rearview mirror and stops him from any further shenanigans with other peoples money will be in the courts.

  359. Ok nckhawk,
    That’s interesting.
    I repeat:
    Was that (drip-by-drip, ‘health card’) your answer to my question, whether I should interpret your earlier comment as IH having doubts on the E-Cat and MW plant performance already before the 1MW one-year test started? I think what I asked could be of importance (also the other questions I repeated).

  360. I fully believed Rossi after first meeting him, studying the Ecat and reading the test results. We all did

    Nice that you changed your mind in around a couple of years, but no, not everybody trusted, after reading test results – someone saw mistakes and wrote about them.

    Never the less, it seems as if Darden opened his eyes only AFTER he had collect 5 time the money he spent. That is being part of the scam, and he should sit in court in flank of Rossi – this lawsuit is only a trying to be considered in a different position, offering an exit strategy without paying back full investments and without spending the due diligence time in jail with Rossi.

  361. Looks like a direct feedback loop to Rossi’s need / timing to post more slander has been established. This is going to be more fun than I originally thought. You heard it here first – once Rossi realizes the degree to which is truly cornered, which will not be in the too distant future, expect him to play the “health card”.

  362. @nckhawk Lets put it this way that I shouldn’t have used straightforward wording I did there, So I very much apologize if that can be read that way.

    Maybe I should have repeated same opening sentence “With all this conflicting info there is not clear truth available, so I just want to build scenarios and try to see how well different pieces (known facts or seemingly reliable information) fits to big picture”. I have said that few times and want to save readers from reading that in every posting again.
    That said that really does not prevent me considering overall writing and timing of her two articles and strong emphasis on other LENR activities at the last part of it. T-team is pure speculation and could as well have been left out.
    Fact is that we all should respect title of this page and what Matts has asked in top of page, and all stay calm. I have nothing against your postings totally opposite, since you are bravely standing your grounds, but don’t expect me to stop looking from different angles before this story gets final chapter.

  363. lenrthenewfire,
    Thanks for your research on IPH International BV.
    I have updated the blog post now with the info as synthesised as possible.

  364. And if someone ask why Jones Day as law firm, one of the ten largest law firms in the world and the largest in the US?

    site:www.jonesday.com “NRG Energy”

  365. nckhawk – was that (drip-by-drip) your answer to my question, whether I should interpret your comment as IH having doubts on the E-Cat and MW plant performance already before the 1MW one-year test started? I think what I asked could be of importance (also the other questions I repeated).

  366. @nckhawk, when you say Rossi insisted on a 1 year test. wasn’t the one year test a condition/milestone/significant part of the October 2012 licensing agreement? are you saying IH wanted to change that part of the agreement and Rossi refused?

  367. Thanks nckhawk, that’s interesting. Should I interpret this as IH having doubts on the E-Cat and MW plant performance already before the 1MW one-year test started?

    Also, my earlier questions were: could you maybe also tell us about:
    – IH’s attempts to substantiate Rossi’s claims
    – with whom these attempts were made
    – if they are still ongoing
    – what IH’s plan would be in case the attempts to substantiate the claims would become successful (with or without Rossi)
    – how many groups/inventors in the LENR field IH has tied up in collaboration or funding agreements so far

  368. Argon – let’s clear up something first. Do you withdraw your insinuation about Marianne Macy?

  369. Mattias – apologies for missing your question – I’ve been censored several times recently on ECW by the moderator and gave up posting on what is now a biased blog. I feel sorry for Frank as well – his brand and income are built on all things Rossi. He’s going to need to find another way to make a living.

    To answer your question, I fully believed Rossi after first meeting him, studying the Ecat and reading the test results. We all did. It was only after replications attempts failed to produce ANY results that the doubts began to creep in. IH didn’t want a 1MW reactor but Rossi insisted. IH offered substantial sums of money for Rossi to produce 10 watts and / or 100 watts of excess power from a single characterized and verified reactor as an alternative to the insanity of the 1MW test. Rossi would have nothing to do with it and insisted on a 1 year, 1MW test. He shipped out from Raleigh to Miami and it went down hill from there. That’s about all I can say on this for now.

  370. nckhawk – my questions were directed to you. Sifferkoll (Torkel Nyberg) and Argon have nothing to do with them. I mentioned Maryyugo only because she/he recently brought up a hands-on example of measurement error that I find interesting, but, as I said, that was only a hypothesis. If you have similar, detailed information as answers to my questions, I think such answers would be important and valuable.

  371. @nckhawk Since Rossi told it today in JONP. I wouldn’t be able to ask him, because he typically spams my questions, only fanboyish ones got through.
    I have uttermost respect on reporter, like Marianne Macy that have such gift on journalistic writing as she has. But as things clearly has turned out this way with LENR game, there is no writing I wouldn’t try to analyze from as many perspectives I can. Many times misfirnig, but sometimes not, you judge.

    About her article, would you mind to comment, why she as a journalist is so scientifically skilled that can explain and analyze nuclear theories way she did? Or maybe you would like to explain why she puts words on Celanis mouth that was actually written to forum by me356? Harmless slip on her notes, or did they think that nobody notices that?

  372. Mats – Siffer prints my name and incorrectly accuses me of being a hacker using your website to promote his while Rossi safely uses your blog to try and sustain his ruse. My comment had nothing to do with Maryugo and is directed at Argon. Perhaps Siffer should use his “skills” to try and find out who Argon really is – the syntax “somehow” seems vaguely familiar doesn’t it. A drip-by-drip release of some additional mundane facts might be the best treatment for Rossi and his ilk while he awaits the tactical nukes that await him in court. For Argon to slander Marianne Macy is beyond anything I’ve read or heard yet – do you support what Argon wrote about Macy?

  373. Mary, no one could pay me enough money to say this about another human being: “and crush him (Rossi) like the cockroach that he is.”

  374. nckhawk – calm down, don’t be upset. And please, for the benefit of everyone, provide detailed answers to my questions, if you have them. The flow meter issue described by Maryyugo is a good example of detailed info, but that’s only a hypothesis. You might have knowledge on real facts.

  375. Thomas – you wrote: ‘Why are you not similarly updating that the Rossi tests that had always most convinced you his stuff worked, and the various reports on it, have a mundane rational explanation.’
    This is the first piece of the puzzle I list in my blog post: ‘It’s well-known that all documented tests of the E-Cat have flaws that potentially makes them include the possibility that it doesn’t work at all. Not much can be added here.’
    Dedicate your time to other things to investigate now.

  376. maryyugo – this is the kind of info I like. Clear and concise, on a possible source for measurement error (regarding the flow meter positioning). Seems to explain a possible error of about 3x.

  377. bbck7: How do we know that IH spent millions on hiring paid commenters and propagandists?

  378. Addition:

    Same Address as
    Defendant IPH INTERNATIONAL B.V.
    First Names Group https://www.firstnames.com/locations/netherlands

    Boart Longyear International BV
    Keplerstraat 34 Badhoevedorp (Amsterdam, Schiphol Airport) 1171 CD Netherlands

    http://drimble.nl/bedrijf/badhoevedorp/16734327/boart-longyear-international-bv.html
    http://www.boartlongyear.com/company/corporate-profile/
    http://drimble.nl/bedrijf/badhoevedorp/16734327/boart-longyear-international-bv.html
    http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/20/207760/2007AnnualReport.pdf

    Don Newman – Boart Longyear – Interim Chief, Financial Officer, Vice President and Corporate Controller
    BAcc from Univ. of Minnesota.

    Don Newman joined the Company in October 2006 as Vice President, Corporate Controller. In October 2007, he was appointed the Interim Chief Financial Officer. Prior to joining Boart Longyear, Mr. Newman was Vice President and Corporate Controller of NASDAQ-listed Transaction Systems Architects for three years. Mr. Newman also worked twelve years for NYSE-listed NRG Energy in a number of finance leadership roles.

  379. Thomas Clarke: I cannot prove you are, or are not a propagandist for IH. We do know IH has found it necessary to spend millions to hire propagandists to convince people of IH’s version of the truth. I have no proof Rossi or anyone else has spent that kind of money to convince people of Rossi’s version of the truth. Therefore, anyone going to any popular LENR web site should be on guard for IH’s paid propagandists.

  380. @nchawk I found the below comment posted by you on E-CatWorld, about two years ago. What made you change your mind about Rossi?

    “If you think about it, the Italians have been thought and invention leaders for centuries – perhaps this is another in a long line of blessings to the planet. I think that Rossi left to avoid similar treatment from his last round of invention there. The Italian Gov’t / Mafia plays rough if you don’t do things their way and that may have caused the (potentially) most important invention of this/last century to walk out their front door. The Italians are presently trying to put the former heads of their main power group’s nuclear division and their leading fashion company in jail as we type. Anyone can be “convicted” of tax evasion there if the Gov’t wants something from you and needs leverage – the place is a mess on one hand and remains a font of invention on another.”

  381. Argon – how do you know so much about Rossi? Perhaps you should ask him about the flow meters that he replaced instead of the ones that IH spec’d and installed when the 1MW was built. That one is going to hurt when the truth comes out in court. The gig is up – the world is not going to wait for any more demos. The Lucy Peanuts football trick is played out.

    For you to insinuate that Marianne Macy is hired by anyone is completely despicable and outrageous. She has worked harder than anyone, probably with very little support, to tell the story of cold fusion and help it move forward. Do you imply that David French is also paid for by others? You are out of bullets – its time to face the truth.

  382. Siffer – You are falsely attempting link to my ISP (which is?) with the registering company for my domain name to some kind of hack and think that you have something newsworthy? Why all the noise, fury and blatant lies in defending a convicted felon who has cornered himself while trying to pull off one more con? You are either on a mission or are delusional and obviously have no shame which fits the patterns of some others on the wrong side of this story. I have noticed a pattern everytime that additional unfavorable facts are posted about Rossi and his ruse – notice that he attempts an even grander mistruth / distraction everytime facts that are too close to the bone pop-up. The gig is up for Rossi and his spawn should stay tuned.

    As you are unable to present any truth around your tall tale about the supposed hack – what will you try next on Rossi’s behalf?

  383. Having a look into the Lawsuit:

    Defendant IPH INTERNATIONAL B.V. (“IPH”) is a Netherlands company having its principal place of business at Kepler 34,II7ICD Badhoevedorp, Netherlands.

    …leeds to this fund

    The Netherlands | First Names Group https://www.firstnames.com/locations/netherlands
    First Names Group
    Keplerstraat 34
    Badhoevedorp (Amsterdam, Schiphol Airport)
    1171 CD
    Netherlands
    https://www.firstnames.com/
    with companys in every
    https://www.firstnames.com/legal-and-compliance

    …furthermore IPH INTERNATIONAL B.V. was, before it changed the address and was past to Dardens IPHBV Holdings Ltd in London UK (same Address as Ih Holdings International Limited 1, Finsbury Circus, Liverpool Street, London, EC2M 7SH, property of European Generating S.a.r.l. Rue des Maraîchers 102 L2124 Luxembourg (https://www.google.de/search?q=102%2C+Rue+des+Maraichers+L+-+2124+Luxembourg&oq=102 base of a lot of fonds) – this company was due to http://www.sec.gov/ an subsidiary of NRG Energy http://www.cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123569754_1.pdf
    http://luxembourgbusiness.eu/de/european-generating-s-a-r-l.42690.company#top_info

    … but today not listed any more as NRG subsidiary
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1013871/000101387114000003/exhibit21110k2013.htm

    … instead
    NRGenerating Luxembourg (No. 1) S.a.r.l.
    NRGenerating Luxembourg (No. 1) S.a.r.l.
    and some more:
    http://luxembourgbusiness.eu/de/luxembourg-company-search.find/nrgenerating-luxembourg-no-1-sarl
    …all like European Generating S.a.r.l. registered around year 2000 with no obliviously business operation.

    NRG Energy, Inc. A Fortune 200, NRG is the leading integrated power company in the U.S
    http://www.nrg.com/

    …a look at the NRG Website http://www.nrg.com/generation/technologies/nuclear/ provides us with the business field of NRG

    – Conventional
    – Solar
    – Wind
    – Thermal
    – Nuclear

    … a look into the investors section shows a company that have had better times:
    http://investors.nrg.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=121544&p=irol-IRHome
    http://investors.nrg.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=121544&p=irol-stockquote
    … but is slowly recovering and has with a Common Stock Volume of 5,664,452 – Price (today April 23. 2016) $US 14.20 and a market value of $US 80,435,218.

    I get more and more the impression that the Darden action is not because of gaining IP for himself, instead he is acting on behalf of NRG, a company that is in danger of losing all it’s business if LENR- Ecats will (as Rossi has planned) aggressively enter and disrupt the energy market.
    So they have obliterate all traces and under top secret conditions tried to bring not only the Ecat IP under their control, but also the complete Ecat LENR business in the relevant markets worldwide. As it seems now they risk to fail because of Rossis unexpected lawsuit and the due diligence investigation going on in the LENR community. As NRG’s answer right now raves a platoon of Anti-Rossi protagonists on the Internet not only try to discredit Rossi with vengeance, but also to put as many red herrings to distract from the NRG track.

    (additional Information)
    http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140311005157/en/Names-Group-Expands-Corporate-Services-Key-European#
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/maria-yu-a886122b/de

    …to be continued! 😉

  384. @nckhawk So you are implying that your T-team hired Marianne Marcy to write softening story, where you want to downplay Rossis (and Matts) ‘small’ part in much longer and ‘bigger’ Cold fusion saga. So hidden message where followers would not lose trust on LENR future at the moment when Rossi is shown to be fraudster in chain starting from June hearing.
    Ok now your message makes sense, IH and Darden believes on LENR, but not with Rossi on board.
    If that is the scenario only question remains to me – Is Rossi fraud or idealistic inventor whose lollipop big pois took by bigger resources?

    PS. Then black box test Rossi today promised for June makes sense now also. He knows what you are planning, and at least I’m watching direct and indirect indications of any ‘anomalies’ of any kind with the highest interest.
    PS2 Sorry if I called your hack basic one, if it was you.

  385. Then why did IH feel in necessary to hire the world’s best propagandists?


    Same reason they hired the best law firm. Because they know Rossi is devious, duplicitous, dishonest and quite clever at scamming and misleading. They prefer to get this whole mess over with and crush him like the cockroach that he is. I can’t blame them.

  386. More bad news for Rossi… misplaced flow meter. Not sure how to link to this.

    https://gsvit.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/how-to-overestimate-water-flux-by-wrongly-positioning-an-instrument/

    From the same brilliant people who brought us a high temperature calorimeter MFMP and Rossi *could have used*, had they really wanted to be accurate with their high temperature “reactors”.

    That one is here:

    https://gsvit.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/misura-del-calore-emesso-da-una-lampada-ad-infrarossi-da-2kw-tramite-calorimetria-a-flusso/

    (Google translate works fine with the second link, the first one is in English)

  387. bbck7 – do you view me as a paid propagandist? You very very far off beam and the evidence is against this, given my much earlier substantive involvement in decoding Rossi experimental results. Similarly (even more so) ascoli here.

    I’m not a fan of accusing people of being paid propagandists. If their arguments are sound I don’t mind, and if unsound I can ignore. But were I to consider propaganda what about the extraordinary volume of weird conspiracy theories on ECW – whose only common element is a desire somehow to keep Rossi as world hero incarnate. Difficult to imagine a person less deserving of the title given his known past actions (false tests, inability to accept this when it is pointed out, etc).

  388. You don’t need hackers and hired propagandist when you have the truth on your side. Rossi has chosen a deliberate path thru the courts in an attempt to buy time to find a possible escape route. He has picked a fight with the wrong people this time and neither time nor truth are on his side.

    What are the libel laws like in Sweden these days?

  389. IH has retained, for millions of dollars, the best propagandists in the world, they seem to be working overtime on this site.

  390. Mats – complex corporate structures co-travel with well-planned entities who plan for and build global operations. There is no news with your updated post other than good bird-dogging. You’d be better off spending time hunting down the tangled web of corporate structures around Rossi, his lawyers, and his current / former employees.

  391. Siffer – you’re now associating my name with some kind of hack? You’re moving beyond comical and into some libelous territory. Somebody is playing you to be a big fool.

  392. @nckhawk: You call sifferkoll Mat’s “boy” and in the same breath imply that you now withhold crucial information you suggest to have because you feel in some way offended by his postings? Pardon me, but does it get any more childish than that? Personally, I don’t think that you are an IH/APCO shill, as they would certainly hire professionals acting less blatanty. If you have the insinuated information, put your cards on the table, else you should heed what Jed Rothwell said in the last paragraph of his post.

  393. Mats –

    I notice that your updates here relate to speculative new facts about IH which frankly mean nothing definite, nor ever could.

    That is fine, but you said you wanted to find the truth. Why are you not similarly updating that the Rossi tests that had always most convinced you his stuff worked, and the various reports on it, have a mundane rational explanation. You are tech enough to follow all the details, and honest enough to realise that once you use a “hot core” model none of the “it must be LENR” stuff holds together.

    It cannot now be the most convincing of Rossi’s tests, for you. And that change in viewpoint is surely relevant. I know you want fcats, but the fact that those observations have a mundane physics model that explains them is surely relevant?

    And whether Rossi has demonstrated LENR+, ever, is surely an important element in the TRUTH here.

  394. nckhawk – I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make sense. You seem to have the answers, but to gain credibility you need to expose them, more in detail. You’re missing an opportunity.

  395. @nckhawk

    your boy siffer killed off what was turning into a decent information link for you and your community.
    The PR war is winding down anyway. Time to focus on the big picture.

    Wow! So, if I wasn’t such an a-hole you would have posted the photos and all your secreat information here? Is that what your saying? Maybe you can elaborate on that logic…

  396. Mats – your boy siffer killed off what was turning into a decent information link for you and your community.
    The PR war is winding down anyway. Time to focus on the big picture.

  397. https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/04/20/lets-join-forces-to-bring-out-the-truth-on-rossi-ih-affair/#comment-4788

    Dave Smith’s speculation, liked by Timar and probably Mats too, is a great example of why meta-argument should be treated cautiously. “I can’t believe…” is not in this sense a strong argument. It is a straw man where given the implicit assumptions the result looks implausible. All Dave’s speculative points have been dealt with (speculatively) elsewhere so i won’t repeat the answers unless anyone wants that!

    A linked point here is that at the end of the day we all do things that in retrospect look really stupid… That is just being human.

  398. @Dave Smith: Excellent comment. I was going to give similar arguments, but after reading through all the comments here, I can’t put it any better than this. I think those arguments should be reconsidered in context with recent observations made by lenrthenewfire and sifferkol.

  399. @nckhawk
    Again, you seem to be well informed. Do you know at what point in time IH concluded that the MW plant did not produce excess heat?
    And if you have answers to my earlier questions I think that might be important.

  400. @Deleo, an addition. In the Fortune interview Darden is NOT is not talking about his (own personal) investment, but explicitly about an investment of more than one person (‘we’), or accurate, his expression indicated that ‘Woodford Investment Management’ joined in an Investment of the private equity fund of ‘Cherokee Partners Investment’!

    http://fortune.com/2015/09/27/ceo-cherokee-investment-partners-low-energy-nuclear-reaction/

    DARDEN:”Recently, we have been joined by Woodford Investment Management in the U.K., which has made a much larger investment into our international LENR activities—so we are well funded.”

    And more…his statement clearly says that “We”(‘Cherokee Partners Investment’?) sees its foreign business and the connection to ‘Woodford Investment Management’ not in connection with the $US 10 million investment in Rossi.

    He clearly separates the “international LENR activities” of “We”(‘Cherokee Partners Investment’?).

    This interview was given to Fortune on September 27, 2015 (the long term Ecat-Test was still running); the Applicant Organization Change from Industrial Heat, Inc., regarding the disputed patent application that IH filed for Rossi’s E-Cat to IPH International BV (a Dutch company, owned before by a Luxemburg company, later by the UK based IPHBV Holdings Ltd, which has Francis Thomas Darden II as the enterprise’s solitary managing director, that was assigned to lead the company on March 26, 2015 (@Mats maybe an important date))indicates that Darden tried to do his own thing, hidden from and without Rossi (eg. redirecting the mailing address of the inventor to Raleigh http://s31.postimg.org/u7kd2bea3/Patent_Mailing_Address_IH_Rossi.jpg ), out of the UK (no license territory!) with a massive Woodford Investment in the background ($US 50 Million).

    This does not look like the behavior of a solid businessman and an altruistic personality, more like a very clever business shark.

    So much out of one sentence! 😉

  401. At any time, they could have asked him/demanded that he join them and *make it work*! Apparently, he either refused or couldn’t do it. I agree that THAT made IH sad or more than likely very angry including angry at themselves for not doing the correct due diligence and thereby being so easy to bamboozle.

    speculation on again…

    So I guess Darden had enough to do with Rossi to realise that he was personally difficult to deal with, unreliable, likely to fly off the handle and get cross whenever questioned. Likely to see “I’ve shown you it works, are you doubting my integrity?”. Not a good partner. But the prize was high and those tests looked enough that he was convinced Rossi had working LENR+. Rossi’s bad behavior could be an eccentric but brilliant inventor with an abnormal personality. Such things exist, though less often that people imagine.

    Darden might hope this would change once Rossi was on the inside, as CSO. We suspect from info reported here by ‘guest’ from ‘players close to action’ that several times during 24 hour tests IH asked Rossi to come help and he refused. But I guess IH found out pretty quickly after the $11m that Rossi’s help was not much good. I can imagine “You have the powder now, I’ve given you everything. If it does not work you must be making a mistake!”.

    speculation off…

  402. [the Luganoreport miscalculation was] Subtle enough that no-one would notice it except a thermography specialist who knew the unusual non-grey-body properties of alumina.

    Sorry: I’m doing some people an injustice:
    Bob Higgins: noticed the error but himself made the same error in following through its consequences!
    Gruppo Scientifico per la Valutazione Indipendente di Tecnologie (GSVIT): noticed the error and its consequences, but did not clearly calculate them.

    And I’m no thermography expert – in case anyone takes that from the above comment. I had to do a lot of research in that area!

  403. You must think IH is really stupid, a company that invests in start ups, can’t tell if something works, really unbelievable.

    Umm… IH invests in LENR startups. Don’t you think controversy over whether things work or not is therefore part of the territory? Look at all those thousands of ICCF paper which LENR scientists say prove working LENR, and skeptics say do not.

    Rossi had claimed LENR that should, I agree, be easy to validate. In which case Rossi would have access to massive resources from many players and be as important as Bill Gates. But we know Rossi never allowed proper independent tests, and IH invested only after not proper semi-independent tests done by peopme not skilled enough for the job.

    Were they stupid? You decide.

  404. Thomas – the test I referred to was the MW 24h Validation Test that was performed in May 2013. We don’t know anything about this test, other than it led to IH’s 10M investment.

    We know it was done by Penon. We know Rossi’s 100% record of tests that give positive results through mismeasurement. We know Penon has been extraordinarily careless when he does Rossi tests.

    Other than that we know nothing I agree.

    Something could have happened between last September and this February to cause Darden to completely change his mind. It has been suggested that AR prepared the lawsuit well in advance of when was due to be paid the $89MM. So AR knew for a while that Darden had left the building and that there wasn’t going to be another payment.

    Nothing suggests that Darden is a bad guy. He put $10MM of his own cash in this venture and now it’s basically gone, and he is getting sued for more. It is evident to me that he was far down the road before he realized something was wrong. No one here would envy that position.

    I agree.

    I’m not confident in this meta-evidence – it is easy to miss things – or read things different ways. But here is some speculation:

    (1) IH came in to the Rossi affair starry-eyed idealists. Like Mats, (who has less excuse being a bit technical, and also was less convinced perhaps) there were convinced by Rossi’s tests, and once they had that conviction they would see everything in that light. Darden is not a technical guy and we do not know that he had initially any competent technical people except Fulvani whom he nabbed from Rossi, and who was a Rossi supporter. The Swedes, Levi, Mats, Penon would all seem like good support. The Penon, Ferrara (Levi) and Lugano reports would all seem like validation. Maybe Darden asked some other LENR scientist to look over the Swede reports – they would get a good bill of health from most LENR people. Darden and IH would see those multiple tests and reports all billed as independent as very solid evidence indeed that Darden’s hoped-for dream was coming to fruition. He must have been very happy.

    The Ferrara (Swede) report, which I think was the one that led to initial IH investment, was the best of the bunch. No smoking gun – just some uncertainty about electrical measurement and the fact that it was run by Levi who we now know (but Darden did not) has a record of misreporting measurements from tests (the wrong pump speed).

    The Lugano report was a sort of “dot is and cross ts” intended to be more rigorous and dispell any lingering doubts from Ferrara (Levi). It was more rigorous (except for the Rossi ash sample). Critically it was away from Rossi’s factory. I think Rossi’s uncertainty about it was real. There was sign of some issue with the electrical measurement (change from wye to delta topology between dummy and active – not explained). That could have led to false positives through clamp saturation at higher currents. Or not. We will never know because of the main error which was a wild thermography temperature miscalculation. Subtle enough that no-one would notice it except a thermography specialist who knew the unusual non-grey-body properties of alumina.

    So the evidence for Darden was looking good. After this, if Darden had seen my comment he would, not being a technical guy, probably dismiss it as a skeptic poking holes, like Pomp’s refutation which to be fair did not identify a smoking gun. After all Darden was chock-full (like Mats here, but more so) of confirmation bias from all those previous good tests. If the Swedes made a calculation mistake, well, that was not Rossi’s fault.

    (2) At some point all that would collapse. Once you give the reports to a competent technical person (admittedly not that easy to find since the competences are various) they all collapse obviously except for Ferrara (Levi) where there is a loophole but no smoking gun. But your view of Levi’s reliability is critical there.

    I don’t know what triggered the collapse. I also don’t know whether it came from technical guys, or from some other information. Maybe Darden knew well Rossi was totally unreliable but the technical reports convince dthenm nevertheless he had something. I don’t know which technical guys other than Fulvani were looking at this for IH. I don’t know how long it would take a technical guy – arguing like me – to get through the wall of confirmation bias. maybe the turning point was just that after the $11M Darden was certain he would get the real deal – a working Rossi device to test for himself. And when that happened his tech guys said it did not work. And kept on saying it as every possible thing they might be doing wrong was checked and double-checked.

    Once Darden started doubting that Rossi had it the house of cards can come tumbling down – since was we all can see none of Rossi’s own tests are even remotely satisfactory.

    The tragedy of this is that LENR does suffer bias. In both directions. If you are convinced it exists you can look at flawed but not proven tests and say “yes – it probably is excess heat”. If you have never seen good evidence of it, and are convinced by the quite subtle “if it did exist the evidence would be different from what we have” stuff, then given a test you look harder for loopholes.

    Darden probably still believes LENR, but has flipped over the bias line onto the skeptic side as far as Rossi goes. He much more than us had the resources and access to test for himself what is real and what not.

    End of speculation.

  405. Transferring IP to a Dutch Holding is interesting. Many large companies do that because there are no taxes on income from license fees in the Netherlands. It indicates that IH was expecting to make some money from (sub-)licensing IP.

  406. Thomas – the test I referred to was the MW 24h Validation Test that was performed in May 2013. We don’t know anything about this test, other than it led to IH’s 10M investment.

    And in an article today on Infinite Energy today we learned that Darden invested $10MM of his personal money into AR. It was not investors money because he was too concerned about the risk for them. If you look at Darden’s comments in a Fortune Magazine article in Sept. 2015 (approx 6 months after the start of the 1 year test). From that interview I came away with the following:

    1. If the e-cat produced no excess heat and seemed like a dud, would Darden hold off from talking to Fortune so he could get a better sense of whether it worked? Probably. Why go on record with such a high profile magazine if he is having any real doubts about whether it works.

    2. If Darden felt that the Swedish test was poorly handled, would he say to Fortune “a group of Swedish scientists tested the technology, and they got good results”? Probably not.

    3. If Darden thought that the e-cat simply didn’t work after all of these months of testing at the customer factory, would he have said in Fortune “Recently, we have been joined by Woodford Investment Management in the U.K., which has made a much larger investment into our international LENR activities—so we are well funded”? Probably not.

    4. If the test going with the e-cat after those 6 months was looking bad or even highly questionable would Darden have answered the question in the Fortune interview in the following way:
    Q: So you’re optimistic?
    A: Yes

    Something could have happened between last September and this February to cause Darden to completely change his mind. It has been suggested that AR prepared the lawsuit well in advance of when was due to be paid the $89MM. So AR knew for a while that Darden had left the building and that there wasn’t going to be another payment.

    Nothing suggests that Darden is a bad guy. He put $10MM of his own cash in this venture and now it’s basically gone, and he is getting sued for more. It is evident to me that he was far down the road before he realized something was wrong. No one here would envy that position.

  407. Thomas Clarke…..You must think IH is really stupid, a company that invests in start ups, can’t tell if something works, really unbelievable. More likely the ECat worked, but when they saw the test ECat producing three times as much, they realized Rossi out smarted them.

  408. That must always have been a risk but I bet IH were pretty sad about it. And I bet they tried very hard before admitting to themselves that “they could not substantiate his technology”.


    Yikes, @Thomas, NOBODY is THAT stupid (as to try by themselves). Rossi was right there or could easily be flown in. At any time, they could have asked him/demanded that he join them and *make it work*! Apparently, he either refused or couldn’t do it. I agree that THAT made IH sad or more than likely very angry including angry at themselves for not doing the correct due diligence and thereby being so easy to bamboozle.

    @Mats

    But apparently he did that with IH, successfully, since IH paid, and apparently that didn’t ‘convince any number of powerful players.’ Or maybe that is exactly what it did…).


    Could you please rephrase. Maybe I’m not too sharp today but I do not know what you are saying. What powerful players (or what sort) did not get convinced and why and what does that have to do with anything? Didn’t Rossi only have to convince IH? Please explain (sorry).

    If Rossi has nothing, discrediting him is a piece of cake, as I have repeated several times. You don’t even have to discredit him. Just bring him to court and finish the story. Funny IH hasn’t released the report yet, BTW.


    Nothing related to a law suit is ever that simple. Rossi will have his experts, perhaps Penon, testify that past tests of the ecat were adequate and prove that it works. He will say it is not his fault if IH is too inept to make it work also. He will say that the precise terms of the contract were complied with by him. It will be necessary for IH’s lawyers to convince a jury that Rossi is lying and/or that the original contract is invalid due to fraud. Or that the qualifying test is bad and the independent examiner (ERV) worked for Rossi or lied. It’s possible that Rossi’s criminal history and background of failures (ie. thermoelectrics) will be allowed in as testimony but it is also possible that the judge will exclude that as too prejudicial. It is far from simple for IH to win this case, even though they are clearly correct.

    So the $89M decision will be up to a jury, and to a lesser extent to a judge, neither of which knows or is expected to know anything about science, much less cold fusion claims.

    I hope IH and attorneys are up to the task of proving that Rossi has nothing and I suspect they are hell bent on doing so. It would be very disappointing (and cowardly) if they settled out of court.

  409. Thomas – the test I referred to was the MW 24h Validation Test that was performed in May 2013. We don’t know anything about this test, other than it led to IH’s 10M investment.

  410. “BTW, why don’t you see the inherent contradiction in their statement? If they failed to “substantiate over three years without success” then why did they pay Rossi $11 million as if certain milestones were met and initial testing showed excess heat?”

    Most here have already heard the answer. They paid the $11m to get Rossi to hand over all his knowhow so they could do testing fro themselves. Up till then they had working tests from Rossi (all those flakey reports). I guess Rossi did similar tests for them in house. But when they tried to test for themselves (after the $11M) even with all Rossi’s knowhow, it just did not work.

    That must always have been a risk but I bet IH were pretty sad about it. And I bet they tried very hard before admitting to themselves that “they could not substantiate his technology”.

  411. But apparently he did that with IH, successfully, since IH paid, and apparently that didn’t ‘convince any number of powerful players.’

    That is a false assumption. IH were the investor ready to believe in LENR who are not large respectable people needing a bulletproof independent test to convince. They could take a gamble, and wwre predisposed to believe Rossi might have it. There is no evidence of any tests other than the ones we know (and one we know of involving Penon with an unpublished report I think).

    IH accepted these many low quality reports. But then I doubt they listen much to skeptical scientists. Major players would listen to skeptical scientists and would need convincing….

    …but as I, Jed, MY have pointed out, however skeptical, if Rossi has what he claims they would be ardent believers after 24 hours of testing. (OK, maybe you’d need 7 days to be absolutely sure you were beyond chemical).

  412. Mats wrote: “maryyugo – it IS a delicate operation to discredit Rossi IF the stuff works.”

    It would utterly impossible to discredit Rossi IF the stuff works. If it works the way Rossi claims in his press release, with output 50 times input, any licensed HVAC engineer could prove that in an hour, with absolute confidence. The methods used by HVAC engineers are defined in detail by state laws, and in manuals published by the ASME. These methods will definitely hold up in court.

    These methods have been used since the 19th century. If they did not work, boilers all over the world would explode far more often than they do. Boilers did, in fact, often explode before the ASME was founded in 1880. That is why it was founded.

    If you do not follow the ASME procedures, you might get the wrong answer. In the history of cold fusion, many people have done calorimetry wrong. You can make a huge mistake whether you are working with milliwatts, watts, or kilowatts. Just scaling up does not reduce the chances of making a huge blunder. That’s what I have seen, anyway.

  413. I edited your comment Jed.
    I’m sorry there’s no edit function for users. I cannot add that – this is a website hosted by WordPress.com, and the features are what they are.

  414. Note: in the previous message I did not manage to put comments by EEStorFanFibb in quotes, and there does not seem to be a way to edit messages here. Use your imagination to sort out who said what.

  415. EEStorFanFibb wrote:

    “That statement from IH does not actually say it did not work.”

    Yes, it does. “Substantiate” means “provide evidence to support or prove the truth of.” They could not find evidence to support Rossi’s claims. His most important claim is that the reactor produces anomalous excess heat.

    “IH has been very unclear in their public statements so far.”

    It seems clear to me.

    “Why does it take a Jed Rothwell to inform the public what those words are intended to mean?”

    Because I asked them. Take it or leave it.

    “BTW, why don’t you see the inherent contradiction in their statement? If they failed to “substantiate over three years without success” then why did they pay Rossi $11 million as if certain milestones were met and initial testing showed excess heat?”

    I have no knowledge of these earlier tests, so I have no way of judging whether there is contradiction or not.

    “And since you’re in communication with them please ask them how exactly they raised all that money from Woodford and the Chinese – what was that based on?”

    I would never ask them about their business. My conversations are limited to technical issues, without much detail.

    “And ask why did they file ecat related patents with Rossi’s name on them if they never once substantiated Rossi’s claims?”

    I have no knowledge of this.

    “You should show some evidence that they in fact said this to you or take YOUR OWN ADVICE and shut up about it.”

    If you do not wish to take my word for it, I suggest you ignore my messages or ask I.H. yourself.

    “‘I assume I.H. is right, because they are better at calorimetry.’
    How is it that a bunch of non-scientists and non-engineers are better at calorimetry?”

    The people I refer to are scientists and engineers.

  416. maryyugo – it IS a delicate operation to discredit Rossi IF the stuff works. For exactly the reasons that Thomas brings up (that in theory he just has to perform a conclusive black box test, under NDA. But apparently he did that with IH, successfully, since IH paid, and apparently that didn’t ‘convince any number of powerful players.’ Or maybe that is exactly what it did…).
    If Rossi has nothing, discrediting him is a piece of cake, as I have repeated several times. You don’t even have to discredit him. Just bring him to court and finish the story. Funny IH hasn’t released the report yet, BTW.

  417. @ Thomas Clarke,
    “It is an astonishingly bad calorimetric setup – but astonishingly good at seeming impressive.”
    No wonder. We are fully immersed in the last series of The LENR-Truman Show!

  418. @jedrothwell,

    you wrote: “They concluded that it did not work. That is what they meant in their statement: “Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success.””

    That statement from IH does not actually say it did not work. IH has been very unclear in their public statements so far. Why does it take a Jed Rothwell to inform the public what those words are intended to mean?

    BTW, why don’t you see the inherent contradiction in their statement? If they failed to “substantiate over three years without success” then why did they pay Rossi $11 million as if certain milestones were met and initial testing showed excess heat?

    And since you’re in communication with them please ask them how exactly they raised all that money from Woodford and the Chinese – what was that based on? And ask why did they file ecat related patents with Rossi’s name on them if they never once substantiated Rossi’s claims?

    “they told me it means the thing did not work. There was no significant excess heat.”

    You should show some evidence that they in fact said this to you or take YOUR OWN ADVICE and shut up about it.

    “I assume I.H. is right, because they are better at calorimetry.”

    How is it that a bunch of non-scientists and non-engineers are better at calorimetry?

  419. Maryyugo asks: @Jed Rothwell

    “Can you explain why a one year test, monitored only by Rossi insiders, would be helpful or necessary to prove Rossi’s claim?”

    I believe it was also monitored by I.H. experts, not just Rossi insiders. They concluded that it did not work. That is what they meant in their statement: “Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success.” The word “substantiate” is a little unclear, but they told me it means the thing did not work. There was no significant excess heat.

    If it had worked, it would have been helpful and necessary.

    I suppose it is disappointing but just as helpful to determine it did not work. As I said before, I assume I.H. is right, because they are better at calorimetry. That is not proof. For proof, you need to look at reports and the data, which I hope are definitive.

    “Remember that you and I and others collaborated to devise excellent testing methods which could have proved that the ecat worked, back in mid 2011? And that Rossi categorically refused to allow us to perform these tests?”

    I remember doing that for Defkalion. I don’t recall doing a lot of work for Rossi, because early on he invited me, but when I said I wanted to measure the flow rate and temperatures with my own instruments, he said he would not allow that. So I did not go, and I lost interest in him. I and others later made some suggestions to him. For example, we suggested he put an SD card into his handheld thermocouple. He ignored us. I concluded it is a waste of time trying to get Rossi to do a proper experiment. I later heard from various people who visited him, such as the people at NASA who he almost blew up with a clogged valve. They confirmed he is uncooperative. He even refused to try again! I stopped paying attention to him after that.

    Defkalion ended badly. See:

    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf

    “Remember you thought that the factory-heating ecat of 2007 was real? Do you still think so and if so, why has it (or a duplicate) not shown up?”

    As far as I know it worked. Also, the first Levi experiments seem pretty good. They would have to be independently replicated in several labs to be sure. The second set of Levi tests at Lugano were disappointing.

    I do not feel a compelling reason to decide with certainty that something does or does not work. I will go with the preponderance of evidence, and I will change my mind as new evidence comes in. I am only firmly convinced when there is a large pile of evidence, such as replications of Pd-D from ~180 labs in hundreds of papers. There is not enough Ni-H work to convince me, although some of it is pretty good.

    “It is the same issue as with Rossi’s high efficiency thermoelectric converter.”

    I have no knowledge of this.

  420. Thomas — it’s just a hypothesis. I want to investigate and explore them all. Rossi as a fraudster is the easy one. With few consequences. Settling with only that one is simple. I want to be prepared for other outcomes.

  421. Hit him very HARD, and discredit him. It’s a delicate operation, and you would need help of the number one specialists in the world.


    It’s not that difficult to discredit Rossi. All you need is a court mandated test using any one of thousands of suitable engineering experts in a prestigious university or a government or civilian test lab with a good reputation.

    All Rossi can do is point to tests by Penon and his attorney. A lot THAT will get him in court. IH should also browse a bit on the internet so their experts can find it easy to discredit ALL Rossi’s previous tests, including those in which you participated, Mats. It’s not that hard but it certainly will be both tedious and very expensive.

  422. Only that there is something IH can do. Hit him very HARD, and discredit him. It’s a delicate operation

    I think Mats and a few others here have just gone weird.

    If Rossi’s stuff works, all he has to do is a black-box test – no IP given up – under NDA – allowing professional testers to do the calorimetry and measurement. That would convince any number of powerful players, take your pick, to help him commercialise quickly in Europe where he has no constraint from IH legal action.

    It is just not possible to discredit Rossi with the goods.

    Just as Mats is giving more weight to conspiracy theories about fossil fuels and DoS attacks than to the long record of Rossi tests, so he imagines serious large players will ignore tests.

    The reason tests so far are unconvincing is that none are rigorous or independent.

    All Rossi needs to get the whole of Europe is one proper test. Need not be public. Need not allow reverse engineering (as the Lugano test did, so it seems Rossi does not worry about that?).

    Now, Mats. If Rossi has it, why is he discredited?

  423. @Thomas Clarke You wrote<:"If Rossi’s device works and he wants to flood Europe with it then nothing IH do can stop that. This disruption would quickly move to the US because they would not stand the competitive disadvantage.

    This conspiracy theory is way off beam. There are more powerful interests wanting to make money from such a device than there are wanting to stop it. And were it real everyone would realise stopping it would be impossible."

    You may reconsider both of your statements after studying this picture (courtesy of @sifferkoll)

  424. Mats: And exactly there, where Rossi has spent his time the last year, is where I don’t get the two stories to match up.

  425. Mats: And again, you have to hit him so hard that nobody else believes him, regardless of what he can show in the lab. Hardly what we are seeing right now, especially as IH already has paid Rossi 10 million USD, more than enough to keep Rossi well financed to show off a working demo for other investors. Remember that it was Rossi that brought the disagreement to court.

  426. @sifferkoll Yes interesting, Your findings seems plausible more than just coincidence. I did some explorations also (in legal limits) and based on that considering that someone has put up strip down Ubuntu instance to cloud hosting seemingly just for this activity, makes some ‘bored kid’ theory more unlikely (if also assumed that this hosting company does not offer free instances).
    The way that server was set up and primitive means attack was performed tells also its own story about probable culprit (further info about how attack continued would be revealing). I have not enough information at this point, but my sensors also tend to point to “damage control, but no big guns yet”-direction. Lets wait what comes up, but meanwhile – just remember to put strong enough passwords and install latest security updates on your site, there are real ways to come in to your server if you don’t do that.

  427. Adam – Rossi claims to have been in the 1MW container all the year, mostly every day, as far as I understand. Then also working with what he claims to be E-Cat X in some sort of lab somewhere.

  428. Thomas and Adam – Adam, the risk with ‘pay the inventor, bind him with contracts and get hold of the IP, and finally put him in own lab and have him working there developing the technology further’ is just as Thomas says: ‘If Rossi’s device works and he wants to flood Europe with it then nothing IH do can stop that.’
    Only that there is something IH can do. Hit him very HARD, and discredit him. It’s a delicate operation, and you would need help of the number one specialists in the world. Just a hypothesis of course.

  429. There is one thing I don’t fully understand: Has Rossi for the last year been at the site of the customer making sure that the test runs smoothly. Or has he been in his now lab developing the next generation of the technology?

  430. – you need to prevent that the inventor puts massive amounts of products on the market in his own territory

    If Rossi’s device works and he wants to flood Europe with it then nothing IH do can stop that. This disruption would quickly move to the US because they would not stand the competitive disadvantage.

    This conspiracy theory is way off beam. There are more powerful interests wanting to make money from such a device than there are wanting to stop it. And were it real everyone would realise stopping it would be impossible.

  431. Mats: I would much rather pay the inventor, bind him with contracts and get hold of the IP, and finally put him in own lab and have him working there developing the technology further. Then I would have much more control of the technology, the development and the distribution of it.
    Your story relies on that you manage to discredit the inventor so much that nobody else invests in him, regardless of him having a working invention that is easy to show off to other investors.

  432. “Ampenergo did a couple of interview, a half hearted fragment of a web page and absolutely nothing else in more than five years. Is this what you would expect of a company with prestigious participants, who held the secret to, well, The New Fire?”

    Yes.

  433. Thomas – (again IF it works) if your interest is to put this technology on the market, at a cautious pace, controlling it so that it won’t hurt important industrial and financial interests, then
    – you don’t want to immediately admit that it works
    – money is not an issue, but you cannot pay since that means admitting it works
    – you need to prevent that the inventor puts massive amounts of products on the market in his own territory
    – best way of doing this is not paying, hit the inventor hard and discredit him, make agreements with as many LENR players in the field as possible, develop the knowhow further on your own together with such LENR experts.
    – meanwhile convince people that you are the nice guy

    Also note that the main reason for Rossi wanting to start massive production and put large amounts of E-Cat products on the market (IF THEY WORK), according to this scenario, is not necessarily to make money, but because that’s the only way to fight forces that want to control the transition to LENR based energy sources, protecting their own interests.

    IF IT DOESN’T WORK, Rossi is just a fraudster or a victim of his own fantasy, and the story ends there. Sad but nothing more.

  434. Thomas, I forgot, first by not undertaking the one-year test, or delaying it. And meanwhile connecting with as many experts in the field as possible, asking them if they think they could find out how to replicate Rossi, based on the transferred knowhow. Still just a hypothesis.

    The one-year test delay has not stopped Rossi from developing new technology (he says) and would have no impact on Rossi’s commercialisation in Europe.

    If Rossi’s stuff was real then what IH would surely value most is the non-compete clause in the license agreement that they get if they pay. If they don’t pay they lose that and also risk the IP. And if the stuff works, IH would have no problem raising the money for such revolutionary proven technology.

    So: IH make billions in the US etc, Rossi makes billions in Europe. What’s not to like for either party?

  435. @lenrthenewfire

    Ampenergo did a couple of interview, a half hearted fragment of a web page and absolutely nothing else in more than five years. Is this what you would expect of a company with prestigious participants, who held the secret to, well, The New Fire?

  436. @Jed Rothwell

    Can you explain why a one year test, monitored only by Rossi insiders, would be helpful or necessary to prove Rossi’s claim?

    Remember that you and I and others collaborated to devise excellent testing methods which could have proved that the ecat worked, back in mid 2011? And that Rossi categorically refused to allow us to perform these tests?

    Remember you thought that the factory-heating ecat of 2007 was real? Do you still think so and if so, why has it (or a duplicate) not shown up?

    It is the same issue as with Rossi’s high efficiency thermoelectric converter. Rossi claimed he had such a prototype yet nobody ever actually saw or measured it. I tried hard, as did Gary Wright, to find the original test data from CERL, using the Freedom of Information Act. Yet no actual evidence of testing, no names of people testing it at U of NH, nothing at all positive ever turned up. And there is no chance that if Rossi knew how to make such a device in 2000, he would not have been paid a lot more money to reproduce it again if it had been lost.

    Isn’t the 2007 ecat story the same as the 2000 thermoelectric converter story? An implausible lie?

  437. Who is – Ampenergo Inc. – the third company named in the License Agreement
    ————————————————————————–
    The founders of Ampenergo are Karl Norwood, Richard Noceti, Robert Gentile and Craig Cassarino.

    Two of them also founded the consulting firm LTI – Leonardo Technologies Inc. – which for 10 years has been working on contracts amounting to several millions of dollars for the U.S. Defense and Energy departments, and with a recent contract with DOE amounting to 95 million dollars.
    http://www.nyteknik.se/energi/energy-catalyzer-br-gets-u-s-partner-6421312
    http://www.governmentcontractswon.com/department/defense/leonardo_technologies_inc_123687142.asp?yr=08
    ————————————————————————–
    Robert Gentile
    was the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Fossil Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
    ————————————————————————–
    Karl Norwood
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/karlnorwood
    Founder of NAI Norwood Group is an affiliate of NAI Global, the world’s leading managed network of independently owned commercial real estate brokerage firms.
    http://www.nainorwoodgroup.com/
    ————————————————————————–
    Richard Noceti
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Richard_Noceti
    U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
    Petrochemistry, Green Chemistry, Catalysis
    ————————————————————————–
    Craig Cassarino
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/craig-cassarino-88573230
    Vice President of Leonardo Technologies, Inc. (LTI)
    Leonardo Technologies Inc. (LTI) of Bedford New Hampshire, started as USA Nuclear Laser Inc. was founded by Rossi, Robert Gentile and Craig Cassarino. The company was renamed Leonardo Technologies Inc. on Aug. 26, 1999.
    http://www.lti-global.com/

    Cassarino on nyteknik.se Interview in 2011:

    nyteknik.se:Have you paid anything to Rossi yet?
    Cassarino: Yes we have.

    nyteknik.se:Do you have any doubt that this doesn’t work in the end?
    Cassarino: We did three demonstrations here in the US, and these were non public. We did have a group of scientists here that understood exactly what was going on, and we helped actually set up the demonstrations. Obviously we still don’t understand what’s going on inside, but he has something, and we believe that.

  438. Astroturf is my conclusion
    Trolls who love to spread confusion
    While right now they’re easy meat
    APCO’s lot will be more discreet
    Sneaking round the E-cat blogs
    Like a pack of mangy dogs
    They’re well trained in crafty tricks
    What a bunch of clever Dicks
    It seems to us there’s been collusion
    A plot to buy up all cold fusion
    But secrets cannot be contained
    Wrapped in patents, all constrained
    The truth will out, and Darden’s boys
    Will have to share their shiny toys
    For though the thought makes bankers weep
    Some secrets really are too big to keep.

  439. bbck7 – as someone said, if Rossi has nothing and is a fraudster, that would be sad. But it would be MUCH worse if he really has something and it’s being stopped, delayed or attempted to control by powerful people who want to limit the threat to their own interests. That’s why it’s important for us all to keep our eyes open.


    If you look at the history of the development of this scam, it is absolutely impossible that Rossi is anything other than a fraudster or a terminally delusional crazy person. If Rossi’s claims were real, after five years of demonstrating and promoting ecats, the world would be awash in them and Rossi would be a billionaire.

    There is no chance that Rossi, who has never manufactured anything or accomplished anything other than fraud, would be making the devices by the millions in his mythical robotic factory. If the ecat were real, it could be shown to be real in simple two week tests. Then, thousands of the world’s largest companies would be competing to get the secrets and the rights for it. Claims that Rossi deliberately misled potential customers for a competitive advantage are absolute nonsense, given the time elapsed since the supposed discovery.

    Believers without cause always seem to forget what the real world does with real discoveries as useful as this one. They aren’t developed by one inventor squatting in a silly shipping container. The model is Tesla Motors — they started about the same time as Rossi (depending on whether you think Rossi started in 2011 or as he claimed in his patent application, in 2007).

    It is classical that believers do not understand the consequences of their belief being real. Instead, they develop idiotic paranoid theories of why the invention was suppressed. It would be impossible to suppress Rossi for ten years (from 2007) or even five years (from 2011) if the ecat were real. Suppression, really? Has anyone tried in any way ever to interfere with a Rossi demonstration, publication on line or contract? Of course not!

    The only rational conclusion is that there is no appreciable probability that the ecat works. To believe otherwise leads to totally incredible suppositions and scenarios, needed to explain why after so many years of claims, nothing at all is proven about the ecat, and there are no ecats in existence outside the confines of Rossi’s “factory” and the “factory” of the anonymous “customer of IH” which turns out to be Rossi’s lawyer and probable accomplice.

  440. Thomas, I forgot, first by not undertaking the one-year test, or delaying it. And meanwhile connecting with as many experts in the field as possible, asking them if they think they could find out how to replicate Rossi, based on the transferred knowhow. Still just a hypothesis.

  441. Thomas – I said, IF it works.
    Stopping/controlling would be made by using all the forces you have, smashing Rossi, and meanwhile developing the tech further with your own resources together with collaborating experts in the field with whom you have made agreements, and put it on market in a way that suits yours and other’s interests. Just a hypothesis of course.

  442. No matter what contract IH entered into with Rossi, if it was obtained by fraudulent claims, which it certainly was, it will not be valid. Thus, Rossi will indeed have to prove that he told the truth when he told IH that the ecat works. This will not be decided simply based on what Penon told IH about the completely unnecessary one year test.

  443. But it would be MUCH worse if he really has something and it’s being stopped, delayed or attempted to control by powerful people who want to limit the threat to their own interests.

    With respect I can’t see how paying, or not paying, Rossi this $89M does that? He has a free resign to do what he wants in Europe, a big market. He has money. If anyone doubts his stuff works he can easily give them a private and convincing demo under NDA.

    That is – if his stuff works…

  444. @Ashfield

    TC But the $89M was a final payment in a license agreement which had conditions for both sides so:
    (1) I think it likely that if AR can be proven not to have complied with his conditions (e.g. transfer of know-how) the $89M is void, and possibly the license is still valid.
    (2) I suspect that there is no penalty for not making the final payment other than loss of license. In which case AR can only win if IH have stolen IP etc. That then gets very legal.

    AA. That doesn’t make sense. If the 1MW plant did better than COP6 Rossi should win. If IH can’t duplicate it that may be their fault or it may be they require further help. That doesn’t get them out of the contract to pay.

    I’m glad you can give us this clear reading of US contract law. In this context – what does “win” mean? And what is the contractual penalty for Rossi not keeping to his contractual conditions – which includes helping them to get a device to work? And, further, where in the license agreement does it specify the contractual penalty for IH not meeting its conditions, including the $89M? I’m glad at last to have found somone competent to answer these US law questions, but would like a bit more detail.

    TC There could, IH might argue, still be valuable IP even with devices not working. It is not a binary decision. Maybe they work just a tiny bit

    AA. Rubbish. If the E-Cat doesn’t work the IP is valueless.

    Well I’d agree with you that is likely, but IH, and anyone who thinks Ni-H LENR likely, might not. You see Rossi was working on some variant of Focardi’s technology and if you believe Ni-H LENR happens, at low levels of maybe 10% heat in, as many do, then he may well have that and may even have something slightly better than others. In which case his technology, even though not as valuable as high COP, might be worth something. It also might be the basis of more valuable technology. In theory COP of 1.3 could be turned into COP = infinity with the correct insulation and active cooling. Practice is just a bit of normal technological development which IH have the resources to do.

    So IH may well reckon that even though Rossi’s stuff does not work as billed (which is obvious) t could still have some value.

    Superficial views here, turning every question into a binary yes/no, do not do justice to the possibilities and I very much doubt IH will be superficial.

  445. bbck7 – as someone said, if Rossi has nothing and is a fraudster, that would be sad. But it would be MUCH worse if he really has something and it’s being stopped, delayed or attempted to control by powerful people who want to limit the threat to their own interests. That’s why it’s important for us all to keep our eyes open.

  446. We are entering a dangerous time for “free market” LENR. I predicted this fight between Dr. Rossi and IH two months before the Rossi suit. Dr. Rossi, in a way, predicted what is happening right now; if you have been following his site JONP, he has been vigilant to not let Crony Capitalists (my words, Wikipedia definition) take control of his E-Cat IP. I am afraid it is happening right before our eyes, IH has hired the brightest and the best propagandists and legal minds to bend public opinion and our laws to take control of LENR. A landslide of misinformation and legal maneuvering, probably very subtle, is about to hit Dr. Rossi, his IP and E-Cat. Dr. Rossi should, as soon as possible, 1) Release the report on the yearlong test 2) Get a reliable customer to come forward and vouch for economic value of the E-Cat 3) Sell as many E-Cats to customers as fast as possible. Rossi has said it himself many times the only way this is going to be resolved is in the market place. Are there forces out there who do not want it to reach the market?

  447. nckhawk – you seem to be well informed, almost as if you were there. I suggest you provide some details. It would be important, and it would also make it easier to understand if the claims are credible.

    Also, since you seem to be in a position to know, could you maybe also tell us about:
    – IH’s attempts to substantiate Rossi’s claims
    – with whom these attempts were made
    – if they are still ongoing
    – what IH’s plan would be in case the attempts to substantiate the claims would become successful (with or without Rossi)
    – how many groups/inventors in the LENR field IH has tied up in collaboration or funding agreements so far

    Since you say that ‘Tom Darden, a successful pollution mitigator on a mission, decided to put capital at risk with the objective of finding out if LENR is real’, I believe the answers to these questions could be important for us all.

  448. @argon

    Looking at attack to your site, with this information it seems pretty basic one and might as well be some school kid playing with scanners or scrips.

    I know it is very basic. The only important fact is the timing aspect in relation to the blog post …

  449. @nckhawk

    Photos?
    How do you know there are incriminating photos?
    Enquiring minds want to know!

  450. @sifferkoll Looking at attack to your site, with this information it seems pretty basic one and might as well be some school kid playing with scanners or scrips. It is expected that when some pages gets more attention for whatever reason, also someone becomes interested to hack it (same way someones get interested to spam here). So this is positive sign for you in any case.
    There are some ways to further analyze the attack and draw more conclusion then, but for obvious reasons I will not put them here.
    What you could do anyway is to make sure you have backups (also few offline ones) and maybe check need for update your version of Word Press and other components (if your own hosted site).
    WP info:
    https://wpvulndb.com/

  451. Tom Clarke wrote: I’m not a lawyer either, which is why I’m cautious.

    AA. You have to be kidding. You made up your mind long ago.

    TC But the $89M was a final payment in a license agreement which had conditions for both sides so:
    (1) I think it likely that if AR can be proven not to have complied with his conditions (e.g. transfer of know-how) the $89M is void, and possibly the license is still valid.
    (2) I suspect that there is no penalty for not making the final payment other than loss of license. In which case AR can only win if IH have stolen IP etc. That then gets very legal.

    AA. That doesn’t make sense. If the 1MW plant did better than COP6 Rossi should win. If IH can’t duplicate it that may be their fault or it may be they require further help. That doesn’t get them out of the contract to pay.

    TC There could, IH might argue, still be valuable IP even with devices not working. It is not a binary decision. Maybe they work just a tiny bit

    AA. Rubbish. If the E-Cat doesn’t work the IP is valueless.

    Earlier I wrote it was not in Rossi’s business interest to release the ERV’s report. Sifferkoll makes the point it is not in his legal interest either. See http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/the-rossi-darden-apcoworldwide-saga-why-is-it-good-to-not-release-the-cop50-erv-lenr-report/
    This post apparently led to a serious denial of service attempt.

  452. @nckhawk

    busted means caught red-handed in an attempted deception – photographs to back it all up.

    Ok, now there are photos? Of what? What kind of “attempted deception”? So, you mean there were no deception?

    You still have not contributed with nothing but spin.

    And you continue to hint that we should back off because it will not end well for us (Are you actually making threats?) only based on your rumour mongering.

  453. My name is Gunnar Lindberg. I do not need a nick. And you are?

    I’m really sorry if I’ve mistaken you for another Gunnar Lindberg I’ve been in contact with. He would have known who I am. There’s a link to the left with tons of info, if you’re interested.

  454. Gentlemen – busted means caught red-handed in an attempted deception – photographs to back it all up.
    You need to be thinking more about what you publish on behalf of Rossi’s PR war and start working towards a more neutral position. This is not going to end well for Rossi, his fanboys and/or his shills.

  455. [i]@muppgunnar
    It is very obvious we live in different universes.
    This I have known for a long time and I rather keep it that way …[/i]

    Sifferkoll – My name is Gunnar Lindberg. I do not need a nick. And you are?

  456. nckhawk — I would also be interested to get more details on your claim of Rossi being ‘busted’. You might have information that is crucial, but it needs to be clear and more explicit.

  457. @nckhawk

    you’ve made yourself part of a PR war. You need to tone it down so that you have something left of your reputation when the facts eventually come out. You’re being tone deaf with your position these days – take my advice or leave it.

    Oh no, now you’re refering to MY reputation as well… Tell me, why should I care what YOU think about it?

    Instead you could maybe answer my question on the “busted” issue. What exactly did you mean?

  458. Sifferkoll – you’ve made yourself part of a PR war. You need to tone it down so that you have something left of your reputation when the facts eventually come out. You’re being tone deaf with your position these days – take my advice or leave it.

  459. @htc4u

    Yea , you definitely lost it..take the blue pill , but you’ve already swallowed the huge ecat one..may be painful..

    Ouch, maybe we should leave it the our readers to decide on this one …

  460. @nckhawk

    you’re going to so disappointed when the Rossi deceptions become more widely known. He was totally busted with Peenon in the room and the “ERV” still managed put out a “positive” report.

    Busted in what way exactly?

    As far as I know IH has not even mentioned the ERV or disputed it or Penon. Only Rossi has filed a complaint … And according to it (incl the license agreement) IH and Rossi have signed on using Penon as ERV. Now you are attacking him ad-hominem on pure rumours.

    That does not exactly raise your credibility you know.

  461. Siffekoll – Have you ever thought about how impractical it will be with an E-cat on the market that require Andrea Rossi’s presence to work? He has to do the Father Christmas trick.

    And to many others – You will not understand the E-Cat saga by examining trees. Together they constitute a forest that has grown since 2011. You have to study the shape of the forest, and then you can make up your mind. However, do not expect consensus.

  462. Sifferkoll – you’re going to so disappointed when the Rossi deceptions become more widely known. He was totally busted with Peenon in the room and the “ERV” still managed put out a “positive” report.

  463. sifferkoll

    Yea , you definitely lost it..take the blue pill , but you’ve already swallowed the huge ecat one..may be painful..

  464. Sifferkoll – It is very obvious we live in different universes. In my universe, it is easy to foresee the progress of the E-Cat saga. Everything that matters stay secret. The reactor only works when Andra Rossi takes part in the test. Rossi’s cooperation with funding agencies ends in disgust. The Uppsala professors stay quiet. Andrea Rossi withdraw his court case.
    Easy as pie.

  465. If there were any doubts before that we are being watched and acted upon, I just recently realised that there has been serious hacking attempts on the sifferkoll site the last couple of days, and it is still going on … It was triggered by the April 14th post with my analysis of the reasons for Rossi to NOT release the ERV report.

    I still believe that the IH/Apco plan was to provoke Rossi to release and then move all focus to the tiny details of the report instead of discussions on the big picture (which is bad for them). This strategy is taken from the cryptodenialist schoolbook … So without these details to discuss we here continued ad-hominem attacks and discussions of old details … (Lugano etc.)

    http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/somebody-is-watching-and-acting-serious-hacking-attempts-on-sifferkoll-after-lenr-erv-analysis/

  466. Thanks for your suggestion Hermano. Unfortunately, the difficulty is not finding a set-up that’s good enough. The difficulty is to make it happen.

  467. @Mats

    I’ve discussed on an italian forum a very simple protocol that (I think) would eliminate any doubt about e-cat performance and requires only very simple instrumentation (any observation / improvement is obviously welcomed). You need:

    – an e-cat module
    – a hydraulid pump
    – an electric generator
    – a water tank
    – some flexible pipes
    – one or more thermometer
    – a shovel
    – a meter (to measure tank volume)
    – eventually a power meter

    Water tank is filled with X liters of water (at ambient temperature), and generator with Y liters of gasoline. E-cat and hydraulic pump are both powered by generator.
    Water is pumped from tank to e-cat and output steam is condensed back into the tank. The shovel is needed to mix water in the tank to prevent temperature stratification.
    Test is run until gasoline is over, and final water temperature is measured. X and Y are calibrated so that expected deltaT is adequate (eg: start 20C, end 80C, without reaching boiling point).

    Input energy measure: based on Y liters of gasoline consumption (eventually cross checked with a power meter)
    Output energy measure: deltaT x water specific heat x water mass in tank (eventually cross checked with multiple thermometer)

    3-4 hours of work, test video posted on YouTube, and the fear is gone (positive or negative obviously).

    What do you think ?

  468. @htc4u

    “agenda execution”, seems as sifferkoll is losing it..as many before him.

    Does it? So, in your restricted part of the universe, hinting that someone is acting in favour of a certain stakeholders best interests, equals “losing it”… Wow! Maybe you should check your premises …

  469. jedrothwell
    April 21, 2016 at 23:06

    You wrote: “And I want to send out a call to everyone to let us join forces to bringing out the truth in this story . . .”

    I have some slight advantage because I know the people at I.H.

    I suggest you shut up and wait.

    Mats Lewan is a Swedish journalist…. Are you trying to influence the free press in Sweden!

  470. Mats Lewan,
    I respect your opinion.
    But these problems are too inflated. The ancestors lived thousands of years, and warmed the house fossil fuel – coal and firewood. And lived for a long time. My grandmother lived in the village and the house is heated by firewood. Lived 80 years. Many people here in Siberia (but not in Africa) heat homes with coal at the moment. And do not die.
    I was born and live in Siberia. In our town at a distance of 10km two steel plants and three metallurgical coke plant with production.
    Such as smoke from a shop.

    A lot of energy requires desalination of sea water, but fresh water cleaning of dirt requires chemical equipment and reagents, and no energy.

  471. Thomas – I agree with you, this is obviously one of the possible scenarios – flawed measurements, possibly by errors in measuring water flow, and/or uncertainty regarding whether all the water passing the plant was being evaporated or not. On top of that, tampering with the meter. Hopefully (not with certainty) the ERV report could answer these questions. If we’ll ever see it.

  472. AR has recently said on his blog, which is essentially public record at this point that can be used in court, that the customer has purchased three more e-cat’s based on the results of the test.

    That may, as you note, be a typical Rossi lie/exagerration and meaningless. But, even if not, the customer could be misled about the performance of the test in a number of ways, so that willingness alone is not enough. Remember this is not a customer normal factory, this is, at best, a special unit built by Rossi for this test.

  473. @Deleo,

    We’d need the customer to testify convincingly that they made a given quantity of real product, requiring a given amount of energy – and if in the UK and unwilling to testify I don’t see how that can happen. That is, if there is a genuine customer with real product, which we do not know.

    We’d also need to be sure there was a single power bill for the entire factory. It has now been torn down but I guess utility records could be used for this purpose.

    We’d need access to the customer utility bill.

    There might also be an issue of tampering with the supply meter, since it is possible and the stakes in this game have risen quite high.

    My gut feeling here – which Sifferkoll will be convinced is because I am part of some secret IH-paid propaganda machine – is that from IH observers and Penon’s report there will be plentiful evidence the device did not work. Again, gut feeling, but Penon will do the Rossi-inspired calculations that show high COP and the IH observers will show the fatally flawed assumption that makes this meaningless.

    Gut feelings are of course speculation – and it would be proper not to do that – but there sure has been a lot of speculation here about how IH are evil capitalists in cahoots with dark powers – I feel my pennyworth is pretty innocuous.

  474. “agenda execution”, seems as sifferkoll is losing it..as many before him.It should be clear on Rossi’s actions at the Miami court that he wants an out of court agreement and to delay the development of a LENR device. Rossi today is the biggest obstacle for a real energy revolution.

  475. Jed,

    I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if expert witnesses testify the reactor works, Rossi wins, but if expert witnesses agree with I.H., Rossi loses. If the experts disagree, the judge or jury will have to decide. If the gadget does not produce anomalous heat, then all of Rossi’s charges against I.H. are moot. They are meaningless. There can be no intellectual property in that case.

    I’m not a lawyer either, which is why I’m cautious. But the $89M was a final payment in a license agreement which had conditions for both sides so:
    (1) I think it likely that if AR can be proven not to have complied with his conditions (e.g. transfer of know-how) the $89M is void, and possibly the license is still valid.
    (2) I suspect that there is no penalty for not making the final payment other than loss of license. In which case AR can only win if IH have stolen IP etc. That then gets very legal.

    However I agree that if the device does not work, then the payment is not required.

    There could, IH might argue, still be valuable IP even with devices not working. It is not a binary decision. Maybe they work just a tiny bit…

    Of course I don’t see much merit in that but LENR advocates might.

    I don’t see much value in the meta-arguments – like you – there is not enough information – though I’m sure a decent US lawyer could clear up what penalties could be expected from the license agreement itself. In this debate there is a lot of binary thinking that does not do justice to the full range of possibilities, and therefore arguments based on this are likely to be flawed.

  476. Device AR only for the rich countries, and it will not change the state of things in the world

    Rossi’s device can affect only money of some partner or rich believer – at least, it could affect money collected by taxation if the enterpreneur will be able to find right fellows as he id in Italy in 1980/90