Here’s The Settlement—Getting The License Back Was Rossi’s Top Priority

In the settlement between Rossi and his US licensee IH, Rossi got the license back together with all E-Cat equipment and materials, while none of the parties will have to pay damages to the other. Getting the license back was his top priority all the time, Rossi explains in this interview.

[Here’s the document defining the terms of the settlement (un-disclosed source)].

“To us, the most important thing was to regain complete ownership of the IP and of all the rights that were conceded through the license. At this point, it had become very clear that a continued collaboration had become impossible because of the choices IH made and because of other reasons. The development, the finalization, and the distribution of the technology—any agreement regarding this would have been impossible,” Rossi told me during an interview via Skype on July 15.

The settlement was drafted on July 5, 2017, on the fourth day of the trial regarding a lawsuit that Rossi filed in Florida, mainly against his US based licensee Industrial Heat, IH, early in April 2016, for not having paid the final amount of USD 89M according to the license agreement, after one year of operation of a 1MW heat plant based on Rossi’s E-Cat technology, apparently successful according to a supposedly independent report made by nuclear engineer Fabio Penon.

The defense, on the other hand, accused Rossi of having produced false results in conspiracy with Penon and others. Eventually, however, none of these accusations could be confirmed by proof, which I will comment on below.

“There were two clauses in the license agreement that were extremely dangerous to us—the right of first choice [if you plan to make any agreement outside of the licensee’s territory, you first have to offer the licensee the possibility to make an agreement for that new territory] and the rights also to all subsequent inventions. These clauses would have made any further development very complex.

“The perspective for the continued trial was that we could win or we could lose. You always have to examine these possibilities and investigate the consequences. A victory for us risked becoming a pyrrhic victory. Even though we were convinced of having a very strong case, eventually the jury would decide. And the problem was that in the case of a victory, the jury would probably say that it would be fair for Leonardo Corporation [Rossi’s company] to receive the claimed funds, but it would also be fair for IH to keep the license. For us to also get the license back was beyond the horizon.

“So my lawyers asked me before the trial which my priorities were if the trial would lead to any transactions—those indispensable and those negotiable. My answer was that the indispensable condition was to get the license back because I didn’t want to collaborate with IH anymore. As for the financial aspects, I told them which my expectations were, from a lower level to a higher one.”

Were you aware of the danger of the two clauses in the license agreement when you signed it?

“Yes, I had understood the risk but I was convinced that I was collaborating with a partner that I would never separate from. Let’s say that I got married without taking into account the difficulties if there would be a divorce.”

What would have happened with your new reactor version, the E-Cat QX (formerly known as Quark X), if you hadn’t got the license back?

“It would have been very complicated because it’s an E-Cat—the theory base is the same and the patent protection is basically the same, even though revolutionary inventions have been added, but the license agreement expressed very clearly that all inventions, also subsequent and future ones, would become IH’s property. Together with the clause of first choice it would have become very complex. So it was absolutely necessary to eliminate the license.“

According to the settlement, the defendants shall return or destroy all documentation, return all reactor vessels including the 1MW E-Cat plant, also promising not to disclose the E-Cat fuel formula to anyone. How will you be able to control this?

“With the information that I have provided you can make a replication, and if we see other companies producing something analogous, even partly analogous, this means that our technology has been transferred. And we will protect our IP.”

Talking about replication. In his deposition, Tom Darden [President of IH and of Cherokee Investment Partners] claimed that with the information you provided, they ‘were never able to build devices that successfully produced energy.’ What is your comment to that?

“During the discovery phase, emails from Darden were provided and made public, where Darden himself confirmed to have replicated our process successfully. We also have testimonials from persons who have assisted at such replications. Woodford [Investment Management] assisted at one of those replications, after which it invested USD 50M in Industrial Heat, even before the [one-year 1MW] test started in Doral [Miami], at a time when IH obviously had nothing but our IP in its portfolio.”

In his deposition, Darden also claimed that you had said that JM Products [the ‘customer’ that used the thermal power produced by the E-Cat plant in Doral—more comments on that below] was a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey, that Johnson Matthey would have operated the plant of JM Products, and that after e brief period of positive operation Johnson Matthey would have announced that they were the customer. What’s your comment?

“Mr. Darden hasn’t been able to prove what he said under oath. Basically, he has sworn on things of which he has no evidence. I have never said or written that Johnson Matthey was the owner of JM Products, while in contrast I always said and wrote that Johnson Matthey was the producer of materials that I had use for in my work with JM.”

Darden also reported an episode when they provided a reactor that you operated successfully, after which they revealed that the reactor was empty, suggesting that there were systematic errors in the measurement method, also describing your violent reaction when they told you this. Can you comment?

“Darden has said lots of things that he has never been able to prove. What he assures doesn’t exist. I always made experiments with reactors charged by me, or by me in collaboration with Darden. Never with reactors provided to me as a closed box, for obvious reasons.”

Let’s talk about JM, since how, why, and by whom the company was formed was one of the main topics to raise doubt about your motives with the one-year test. You already explained that you never said that Johnson Matthey was the owner. So who formed the company?

“I always said that the owner of JM was an [Italian] person who knew me since a very long time, and who was in contact with a British company and wanted to participate in the work with my technology. So I invented this proposal for him to be both a customer, buying the energy produced by the E-Cat plant, and collaborator, verifying the validity of my technology [both the E-Cat technology and the one used by JM Products]. This is what I always declared. And in my depositions, I also provided the name of the owner of JM. I also explained that the owner of JM didn’t achieve any agreement with the British society, and therefore went on by himself together with other partners.”

Rossi then explained that he had presented his attorney Henry Johnson, who would have the formal position as president for JM Products for administrative reasons, to Darden and JT Vaughn [vice president of IH], making clear that Johnson was his attorney.

“I would then have directed JM’s operations from a technology perspective. I also sent an email in June 2014, provided as evidence, in which I informed Mr. Darden that I was going to be the director of JM’s plant.”

So you invented the technology used by JM?

“Yes, I made all the technology, I invented their production plant, and I made the plant.”

Can you describe the technology?

“We produced substances with a very high added value. To do this we had to achieve an extremely high pressure inside small reactors that were introduced in larger tubes. The concept was to provoke contractions in certain materials, using heat exchange with the hot steam [from the E-Cat plant] and a pressure of a few bars but concentrating the force from the pressure on a larger surface, a few cm2, on much, much smaller surfaces, increasing the pressure proportionally. And this process consumed heat.“

How much of the heat from the E-Cat did this process consume?

“On average it consumed between 20 and 40 percent of the heat produced by the E-Cat plant.  I had to learn from the experiment how much heat was necessary, because there were not any precedent analogous experiments to get data from.“

So since it didn’t consume all of the heat from the E-Cat plant, you had to get rid of the excess heat in some way?

“Yes, I didn’t have any experience of the process in the JM plant, so obviously I over-dimensioned everything to be sure to achieve the intended physical transformations. I didn’t know how much the plant would have consumed, so therefore I introduced a heat exchanger after the plant that could dissipate the eventual excess thermal energy, condensing the steam to water that could be sent back to the E-Cat plant. I designed the heat exchanger so that it could dissipate all the heat from the E-Cat plant, in the case of malfunctioning of the JM plant, since I didn’t want to stop the E-Cat plant, because I needed to make the famous 350 days of operation within 400 days [according to the license agreement].“

So how much thermal power could the heat exchanger dissipate?

“One megawatt.“

And you didn’t have any photos of the heat exchanger?

“No. I never take photos. I don’t need them. I never take pictures of my prototypes.”

This was the famous heat exchanger in the mezzanine of the premises in Doral where the one-year test was run. The heat exchanger was questioned by the defense in the lawsuit since there were no photos or other proof of its existence. However, the plaintiffs’ expert witness Ph.D. Vincent Wong [Prof. of thermodynamics for engineers at the University of Florida] confirmed that Rossi’s description corresponded to a possible design for dissipating the necessary heat. Rossi explained that it consisted of tubes and two fans blowing horizontally inside an isolated wooden construction attached to the windows where the heat was vented out. A large tube for the steam and a smaller tube for the returning water went through the small door to the mezzanine at the lower left corner.

Rossi explained a couple of things with regard to the heat exchanger.

  1. A ‘circulator’ (positioned in connection to the heat exchanger) was used to stabilize the flow of steam and water through the whole system. Rossi wouldn’t comment on further data of the circulator since he said he was preparing a patent for this device. 
  2. This circulator had nothing to do with a pump of the model ‘Grundfos’ that was brought up by the defense’s expert witness Rick Smith who suggested that the Grundfos pump was used to make hot water flow through the system and that no steam was produced. The real use for the Grundfos pump was instead to push the water through a by-pass with a filter about once a week to make it cleaner.

Rossi also addressed the claim made by IH that producing one megawatt of heat inside the building where the test was run would have made it so hot that you couldn’t have stayed there. First, he noted that the sun on a sunny day radiates about 1 kW per m2 and that the building, having a roof of about 1,000 m2 normally would have received about 1 MW of heat from the sun, without making it too hot in the building, even though the roof was barely insulated. Furthermore, it had large openings with exhausts for venting air out of the building. Then the JM plant consumed on average 20 to 40 percent of the produced heat, and the rest was vented out with the heat exchanger.

I then wanted to hear Rossi’s view on the discussion about the 24 smaller pumps feeding water into the E-Cat modules, which had become one of the defense’s major arguments against Rossi, and also one that attorney Christopher Pace raised at the beginning of the trial.

“This is my favorite because now we’re going to have some fun. You need to see it from a ridiculous side because it’s so ridiculous that you can’t take it seriously.”

The argument, which was brought up in the Expert Report by engineer Rick A. Smith, was based on an observation that on the name plate of the pump it said ’32 l/h.’ In his report, Smith concluded that this was the maximum capacity of the pump, and multiplying 32×24 you get 768 l/h which, if evaporated, only consumes 482 kW—less than half of a megawatt.

The issue is that just next to ’32 l/h’ it says ’02 bar’. The reason is that any pump’s capacity depends on the pressure it needs to overcome to pump the water, the same way as the flow of air you can blow out of your mouth depends on how open it is. Now, 2 bars correspond to the pressure under 20 meters of water, which is way beyond the pressure in the E-Cat plant, and the pumps’ capacity in the actual situation was therefore much larger because the pressure on the pumps was about 1/10 of bar.

“Here comes the comic aspect. At the trial, you cannot bring documents that you haven’t produced during the discovery phase so I would have needed to explain to the jury, which was not composed of experts on the matter, that the capacity of a pump is a function of the pressure. I would have had to explain that the flow rate of a pump is an integral, not a number, as any intelligent engineer knows. It would have been a little difficult, albeit possible.

“But during his deposition, Smith, after having insulted me and Penon [the independent controller], several times, saying that we were fraudsters and how can you say that with 32 l/h and 24 pumps you produce a megawatt, and so on, then he said something like ‘now I will show you the brochure of the pump, 120 pages of technical data,’ as if he wanted to show how much of an expert he was. Then you need to know that I have used these pumps for years and know the brochure by heart. I opened the brochure and looked at the page where I knew that the capacity was specified, and it said ‘minimum capacity at 2 bars pressure, 32 l/h.’ But in his report, Smith had written maximum capacity.

“When he said this I could have reacted, asking if he had read the brochure, open it and make him read. But we preferred to remain silent, letting them being convinced that it had passed as true, just like when you have an enemy and you let him run and get himself pierced by your bayonet. I showed it to my attorney who laughed under his mustache, and we would then have brought it out at the trial. We would have destroyed them. Because half of Smith’s report talks about this and the other half about things that are related. But the problem is—we would have won, but they would have kept the license. That’s why my lawyers told me ‘you need to tell us clearly which is your priority—getting the money or the license because listen, you won’t have both.’ And I said the license because the license has an enormous value not only in economic terms but also in technological, philosophical, and existential terms.”

But, what do you think—didn’t they ever realize that they were wrong?

I think… I’m extremely puzzled by the fact that two engineers, Murray and Smith, are so naive not to realize making errors of this kind. I cannot make conclusions because I cannot start imagining things. I can only say that they probably all thought we were fools. I think that their problem, from the beginning to the end of this affair, was just that—they underestimated the person they had in front of them enormously. I believe that they thought they could write such things without my noticing it. It’s impossible that two good engineers with excellent careers, like Murray and Smith, really can have thought that something like that was true, because if a student at the first year of engineering school takes the exam in thermodynamics and tells his professor that a pump, of which the specifications says that its minimum capacity at 2 bars is 32 l/h, has a maximum capacity of 32 l/h, he would have been sent home immediately.”

By the way, since you know these pumps, what capacity do they have at the actual pressure in the plant—about 0.2 bars?

“About 75 l/h.”

Going back in time—when did you first understand that things were not going well between you and IH?

“When I discovered that IH was making agreements with our competitors. At that point, I understood that they were trying to fill up their portfolio of intellectual property in view of litigation with us pending the huge payment they were going to have to pay. It was instinct—I had no proof, but eventually, the facts confirmed this instinctive doubt.”

And later, on January 8, 2016, there was a meeting in Miami between you, Darden and the lawyers. What can you say about that meeting?

“Nothing, because it was a meeting between lawyers and covered by NDA.”

Now, there’s much more to comment, but leaving all this behind, what are your plans now?

“First there will be a very important presentation in Sweden and in the US. We can move much faster now, being free from a series of situations. My program is to start industrialization of a series of products, mainly the latest version of the E-Cat QX, in the US and in Sweden.”

Of the E-Cat QX?

“Yes, because the E-Cat QX is the latest version of the E-Cat, built on all my experience, also on the enormous knowledge collected at the one-year test, which was not only a test to meet the terms of an agreement, but that brought lots of information. The E-Cat QX was born there, at the side of the container, on a small table, from observations that I couldn’t have done before. I found a mine of information.”

Finally—what happened to your hair?

“I have undergone surgery for a skin tumor on the head and I cannot be exposed to sunlight. A normal wig is not shielding enough so this is a wig made of a material which has a very high capacity to reflect sunlight. I always need to keep this wig—a hat is not enough. But my health is perfectly good now.”

§

When Rossi filed the lawsuit against IH I had to take a step back and look at all possible explanations. I was and have been open to the possibility that Rossi was involved in fraud and conspiracy. But during the discovery phase of the litigation, it became obvious that the defense couldn’t produce any convincing evidence for this hypothesis. All technical arguments that were put forward were hollow and easily torn apart by people with engineering training. Yet, these arguments were continuously repeated by a number of people, possibly related to IH, at various forums. Since there was no way to discuss them in a serious way I early decided to stay away from such discussions, also closing the comment feature on this blog, yet I admire a few individuals, mostly anonymous, who continued to fight for what they considered to be the truth in those discussions.

I am confident that if Rossi were really involved in fraud, evidence for that would have been found during the time—a year and a half—since IH claimed to have started to be suspicious about Rossi. Looking back and noting that no such evidence was found, while hollow arguments have been shouted out loud, I have very little doubt that the E-Cat technology is real and that the one-year test was a clear success of a world changing technology, producing 1 MW of heat without emissions, from small amounts of harmless fuel at a COP of about 80 for a whole year!

Noting this I have also started investigating the timing for relaunching the energy conference I proposed in 2016—the New Energy World Symposium, addressing the consequences of LENR based technologies for industry, society, and finance.

Now the fun can start!

§

Documents:

The document defining the terms of the settlement

Rossi’s notes addressing the Expert Report by Rick Smith.

Rossi’s notes regarding arguments raised by Joseph A. Murray.

§

Note: All comments to this post will need to be confirmed by me.

World Affairs – Cold Fusion: An Impossible Invention

worldaffairsThis text was originally published in Vol. 20, No. 4, of the Indian journal World Affairs in January 2017. It was written on request by the journal’s editor and submitted in October 2016. The journal is circulated to many libraries, institutions, government departments and universities in more than 50 countries but particularly in India.

– – – – – – –

What if there was an energy source that could provide clean water to planet Earth, zero-emission vehicles with unlimited mileage, a solution to the climate crisis and much more but was blocked not by Big Oil but the scientific community. Would that make sense? Much indicates that this is the case with the phenomenon known as cold fusion or LENR (low energy nuclear reactions). Little did I know, when I wrote a short news piece on cold fusion in January 2011 on the website of the Swedish technology magazine Ny Teknik where I worked as a staff writer, that this piece would throw me into a story full of scientific mystery and excitement, harsh discussions on fraud and pathological science and hope for a world changing technology and that almost six years later, the story would still not be settled. On the contrary, it has probably just begun. The news piece I wrote was titled Cold Fusion: Now Supposedly Ready for Production. It was a report on a semi-public test of a tabletop experiment with a heating device, not very impressive looking, boiling water that was being continuously pumped into it. The test was performed by the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi in Bologna, Italy on his device the E-Cat (Energy Catalyser). The device was exceptional if the claims were true, not only because it produced heat from minuscule amounts of fuel through a process that seemed to be in line with cold fusion but also because it started every time and the output power was in the range of kilowatts.

Ever since the two world-class electrochemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons surprised the world in 1989 with experimental results that they suggested were based on cold fusion, such claims had always been in the range of watts and extremely difficult to repeat. Due to the difficulty of reproducing Fleischmann’s and Pons’ results and because the process was considered impossible according to known physics, after only a few months the scientific community rejected the claims with aversion as measurement errors or pathological science, that is, when scientists find results that are not true only because they want to find them. In contrast, a device like the E-Cat that started every time and could produce kilowatts of heat would be the answer to all earlier doubts on cold fusion. It would be nothing less than a scientific revolution and a world changing technology, more so since it seemed close to being commercially available.

When my colleagues and I noted that the news piece was getting close to 100,000 hits—several times more than any previous piece on the website—I realized that I needed to dig further into the story. Although there were immediate comments ranging from enthusiasm to indignation, it pleased me that our readers, mostly engineers, chose a pragmatic approach to the climate and pollution crisis. Rather than merely optimizing energy consumption and settling for known energy sources, they were more interested in solutions involving scientific discoveries leading to new unexpected energy sources or as Bill and Melinda Gates put it in their annual letter a few years later, “we need an energy miracle”—cold fusion would be just that. Most easily it could be described as a nuclear reaction without ionizing radiation and with no radioactive fuel or hazardous waste—in other words without all the dangerous side effects that have given the word “nuclear” its frightening and alarming connotation. Its most important aspect, however, is its high energy density. Nuclear reactions—like fusion which is the process that powers the sun and the stars or fission that is at the core of nuclear power plants—involve the atomic nucleus. The nucleus has a mass thousands of times greater than that of the tiny electrons, which are the particles involved in chemical reactions like combustion, oxidation, digestion and many other everyday processes around us. The forces that keep the nucleus intact are also several orders of magnitude stronger than those keeping the electrons in their orbits around the nucleus. This is one way of understanding why nuclear reactions release about a million times more energy from the same amount of fuel compared to chemical reactions, meaning that one gram of nuclear fuel corresponds to tonnes of oil or coal, which implies that with a nuclear energy source, the fuel of a car’s lifetime would fit in the palm of your hand.

So far, however, nuclear reactions have had the significant inconvenience of deadly radiation and hazardous radioactive waste. Furthermore, nuclear fusion, which has not even been achieved in a controlled form as an energy source despite decades of research and billions of funding, requires an operating temperature of a hundred million degrees. Cold fusion, on the other hand, operating at a temperature up to about 1,500°C would provide nuclear energy that is easy to handle—a compact, cheap, clean, silent and carbon-free energy source on-demand that would literally change the world. The issue is that so far no one has been able to explain how cold fusion can occur according to known laws of physics since nuclear fusion normally requires millions of degrees and produces lots of radiation, although cold fusion would not necessarily be the same case. “Hot” fusion happens between free nuclei colliding with each other, while cold fusion would take place among atoms fixed in a lattice in solid-state matter or possibly in a liquid and it is not even sure that what we call cold fusion should be defined as fusion.

What is clear is that the signs of this unexplained nuclear process—energy release far beyond what could be produced through chemical reaction and changes in the atomic nuclei—have been observed hundreds of times in experiments published in peer-review journals. Even direct replications of Fleischmann’s and Pons’ rejected results have been produced repeatedly, once the tricky and necessary conditions for the experiment were sorted out. However because the rejection from the scientific community in 1989 was so categorical, most of these results made by a small group of researchers scattered over the world, focusing on what is now labeled LENR, have not been noted. Nonetheless, these researchers helped some people become more open to the possibility that Rossi might have actually found something along these lines. Most people, however, did not think he had and many referred to Rossi’s past activities in the 1980s with producing biofuel from organic waste and eventually ending up in prison, as a clear indication that he was a fraudster. Since I know Italy fairly well, I soon found that this conclusion was a bit hasty and that as usual in Italy things were probably not what they seemed to be at first look. Instead, I found reasonable explanations to Rossi’s past troubles and some clues to his particular character, which in turn could explain why he might have succeeded where many others had failed. Just to give an example of his extreme strength of will and tendency to seek and undertake challenges on his own—at the age of 19, he set the Italian record in 24 hours non-stop running, covering a distance of 175 kilometers and 144 meters. Speaking Italian, I got in touch with Rossi, which led to a series of meetings and other connections and I eventually wrote the book An Impossible Invention where I tell the story of everything I came to know behind the scenes, until its release in 2014.

I introduced Rossi to two Swedish physicists—Professor Sven Kullander, a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which awards the Nobel Prizes in Chemistry and Physics and Assistant Professor Hanno Essén, at the time chairman of the Swedish Sceptics Society, dedicated to debunking false science. Essén surprised me by immediately saying, “This looks interesting”. Later Essén and Kullander went to Bologna, Italy to assist at a test with Rossi’s E-Cat, after which they produced a report that gained a lot of attention, stating that the process of the device must be nuclear. I also assisted at four tests with the E-Cat, making measurements and videos that I published at Ny Teknik. At one of the tests in October 2011, Rossi detached the electric input which was necessary to ignite the reaction and to a certain extent keep it under control and for almost four hours the device kept boiling water that was pumped in, without any power input at all. Many others and I found the test fairly convincing. During this time I was both encouraged and personally attacked by our readers. Meanwhile, essentially all other mainstream media and journalists in the world kept quiet—for years. During this time, Rossi kept working and developing his E-Cat, demonstrating an impressive one-megawatt plant under unclear conditions in 2011 as well as making and breaking connections with several corporations, organisations and potential investors, including a Greek, a Swedish and an American investor group and organisations such as NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) and National Instruments. As time passed, several prominent scientists passed away, among them Martin Fleischmann, Professor Sergio Focardi who was Rossi’s scientific advisor in Italy and Kullander, who though strongly criticised kept investigating the E-Cat, involving a few colleagues who continued his work and made an important long-term test of a second generation E-Cat with higher operating temperature in 2014.

The report known as the Lugano Report has as of today been downloaded over 200,000 times and since it contained an analysis of the fuel mix in the E-Cat—mostly nickel, hydrogen, and lithium—it led people all over the world to try and replicate Rossi’s effect and a few months later a Russian scientist claimed to have had some success. Meanwhile, Rossi finally found an industrial partner—the environmental investment fund Cherokee Investment Partners led by Thomas Darden who founded the company Industrial Heat (IH). In 2012, IH acquired the rights to produce and commercialize E-Cat technology in North and South America, Russia, China and the Arab Emirates and in 2013 IH helped Rossi re-build his one-megawatt plant that had been sent from Italy to Raleigh, North Carolina, where IH had its head office. Almost two years later, in February 2015, the plant was put in commercial operation for a full one-year trial at the premises of a customer in Miami, Florida, reportedly buying the heat. On 17 February 2016, the test was concluded after 352 days of operation, seemingly without major problems, producing its powerful output as hot steam, supposedly from only tens of grams of fuel that had lasted without recharging. Halfway through the trial, Rossi was also granted an American patent on the core technology of the E-Cat, to the surprise of many.

An informed and interested group of people closely following the development of the LENR field—estimated at thousands or even ten thousand persons globally—avidly awaited an independent report prepared by a reputable third party ERV (expert responsible for validation) having continuously controlled and measured the performance of the plant during the one-year trial but the report was never released. Instead, on 6 April 2016, the news broke that Rossi had filed a lawsuit against IH for not paying an agreed amount of US $89 million upon the successful completion of the trial—a lawsuit that is still ongoing, due for court in June 2017. At this point, I had to take a few steps back in order to reassess the information I had and re-evaluate sources, testimonials and my impressions of Rossi himself. Possible hypotheses ranged from Rossi being a full-fledged lunatic and mythomaniac, skilfully able to fool not only everyone around him but also himself, to conspiracy theories involving powerful financial and political interests wanting to control the introduction of such a hugely disruptive invention, potentially upending not only the oil and nuclear industry but eventually threatening the entire dollar economy. Fairly soon I could exclude the first of the extremes, concluding again that Rossi, certainly a peculiar individual, was definitely not an outright liar. Furthermore, the summed up amount of indications on his technology being valid and real was at that moment significant, including results achieved by other players in the same field, which I will soon get back to. The other of the extremes—the conspiracy theory—was almost by definition not possible to exclude, although I expected the truth to be found somewhere in between, with less exotic explanations. Over time this seemed to be the case.

The good thing about the lawsuit was that a series of details not known before or were protected by non-disclosure agreements immediately became public among them the license agreement between Rossi and IH, which turned out to be surprisingly advantageous to IH to a degree that made many people think that Rossi had been deliberately cheated. The license agreement also revealed that a 24-hour test of the E-Cat undertaken in May 2013 was successfully concluded and overseen by the same ERV as during the one-year test, entailing a US $10 million payment to Rossi, which was added to a US $1.5 million payment at the signing of the original agreement in 2012. In the lawsuit, Rossi also detailed key facts from the ERV report on the one-year trial that was never released—among them a coefficient of performance (COP) or a ratio of output power to input power of over 50. In other words, if the output power was one megawatt, all that power was possibly produced from tens of grams of fuel for a whole year, with an average power consumption for operating the plant of less than 20 kilowatts. Given that this was a prototype plant where performance could be expected to improve, this figure if true was completely disruptive from the point of view of energy generation.

What happened in the following months was interesting. IH obviously denied the allegations brought forward in the lawsuit, claiming that the performance of the plant was not as reported by Rossi and that “Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology—all without success”. In a response to the lawsuit, IH later made a counterclaim of a conspiracy between Rossi, the ERV, and a few other persons involved, accusing them of fraud, claiming that the customer in Florida did not exist and that there was no process using the heat from the plant. More remarkable was that a group of people, of whom at least one with close connections to IH as an investor started an aggressive campaign against Rossi on different internet fora, making serious accusations, claiming to have proof of a series of irregularities committed by Rossi. To my knowledge, however, no substantial technical evidence has until this moment been filed by IH to prove that the plant was not working. In fact, in its response, even IH did not claim a COP below 10, which in itself would be scientifically sensational. Instead, IH seems to be fighting the case mainly on formal contractual grounds. What is also remarkable is that in defending itself against an alleged fraudster, IH has apparently decided to take help from the world’s most high profile public relations and crisis management agency, APCO Worldwide and the most prestigious law firm in the United States of America (US), Jones Day.

Meanwhile, people with insight to the ERV report that was never released have explained to me that the result presented in the report is conclusive and that the only possible way to attack it would be to attack Rossi, the ERV, and other people involved, for fraud. Yet, based on testimonials I have received, I find the fraud hypothesis highly unlikely. Obviously, it is premature to draw any firm conclusions while the lawsuit is ongoing. Still, my strictly personal assessment, adding all the pieces of the puzzle and weighing them in direct contact with several parties, is that IH was acting logically as a venture capitalist, trying to get hold of an incredibly valuable technology at the lowest possible cost, but that it misjudged the difficulties in dealing with the inventor and other people involved. This does not mean that I find IH’s behavior correct or defendable but again that is for the court to sort out and I have confidence in its ability to do so. At this moment, Rossi is busy with daily actions regarding the lawsuit and the situation might remind someone of what the Wright Brothers went through soon after they made their aircraft technology public. The situation is also similar in the sense that we are discussing a potentially world-changing technology that has been considered impossible from a scientific point of view—just like heavier-than-air flight—yet observations indicate its validity.

It is, however, more important to pay attention to a further development of the E-Cat technology that Rossi claims to have achieved. The new reactor generation is called the Quark X. According to Rossi, it is a tiny device as large as a match producing an output power of about 20 watts, which is not much. However, as with earlier reactors, the COP is supposedly high, the reaction starts instantly and the output is heat, light or even electricity. In addition, the tiny match-sized reactor can supposedly be combined in groups to achieve any total output power. This has yet to be confirmed and proven but again based on information from sources, I have reason to believe that these claims are true and that Rossi will be ready to demonstrate them within a year or maybe months. For anyone hearing this for the first time, it may seem completely absurd and unbelievable, not least since it seems obvious that such a revolutionary technology should be widely talked about and reported on by scientists and media by now, but is not. It is important to look back in history and remember how difficult it is for inventions threatening an existing scientific paradigm to gain recognition. Moreover, the resistance against the idea of LENR, which has become apparent, should not be underestimated. To quote the legendary physicist Max Planck, whose theories led to a paradigm shift, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”. Adding to this are economic interests—billions of dollars are directed towards research on “hot or plasma fusion” as an energy source—a research field that would instantly become obsolete if you could achieve the same energy density—sustainable and carbon free—from a reaction without the need for an operating temperature of a hundred million degrees and without deadly radiation.

Maybe most important is the fact that Rossi is not alone in this field. As always in the history of science and technology, new phenomena and inventions emerge through the work of several persons or groups, more or less at the same time, in different parts of the world. LENR research is actively carried out in countries such as Italy, India, Japan, Russia and the US. In Japan, a joint venture between Tohoku University and Clean Planet Inc was launched in 2015, with the aim to develop LENR technology for sustainable energy production and for mitigation of nuclear waste, which is possible through transmutation—the changes in the atomic nuclei that occur at the reaction. At ICCF—the international conference on LENR science—Professor Yasuhiro Iwamura of Tohoku University recently presented results showing stable and reproducible energy release. In the US, a company called Brillouin Energy has been working on LENR based technology for heat generation for many years. With a technology called Q-Pulse, it now claims to be in a research and development phase, being able to control the reaction, turn it on and off, which seems to be one of the main challenges in LENR and to consistently produce heat. The next step, according to Brillouin, is going to market.

The increased interest and activity in the field during the last few years has also led to political awareness and in June 2016 it was reported that the US House of Representatives Armed Services Committee had ordered the Secretary of Defence to provide a briefing on LENR to the committee by 22 September 2016. However, the briefing was not expected to be public and it is not known if it has been completed or what it contains. These are just a few examples of events and players that add credibility to the LENR field. I emphasize that we are not talking about some fluffy dreamlike miraculous energy emerging from imaginary hidden dimensions that you just have to believe in to make it true. This is science. The energy released in low energy nuclear reactions originates, like in all exothermic nuclear and chemical reactions, from mass transformed into energy, according to Einstein’s epic formula ‘energy equals mass times the speed of light squared’ (E=mc2). What is not yet known is how these reactions can occur at relatively low temperatures and without dangerous high-energy radiation—that remains to be explained.

That the consequences of such an energy source would be disruptive is an understatement. Personally, I think it is high time to discuss the implications for industry, finance, and society and earlier this year I founded the New Energy World Symposium with this scope. The initial plans were to hold the first session in Stockholm, Sweden in June 2016, but because of the lawsuit and the missing report from the one-year test, I had to cancel the event and aim to re-launch the symposium next year. The reason this is important is that the potential implications are so profound that it is urgent to start discussing them, in order to avoid a chaotic energy transition. Some effects may not be disruptive from an industry point of view but yet would be of fundamental importance such as the possibility of providing clean water to every person on planet Earth. The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that about 3.5 million people die every year from a lack of clean water and that 780 million people lack access to clean and safe water sources. With an energy source producing heat for months or years from grams of cheap fuel, anyone could sterilize water through boiling.

One step further is a device called Slingshot, developed by entrepreneur Dean Kamen, inventor of the self-balancing two-wheeled Segway. Slingshot desalinates water and can turn virtually anything wet into clean drinking water via a process based on vapour-compression distillation. It also supplies electrical power and is intended to work for long periods without maintenance. Slingshot is powered by a Stirling engine—an advanced version of the steam engine that needs only a heat source to spin. Heat is what an LENR based energy source offers. Has Dean Kamen developed an idea about this yet? As a source of heat, merely replacing fire, LENR could provide significant benefits. According to the WHO, three billion people use open fires and leaky stoves for cooking and heating, daily. Over a million people die each year from the lung disease COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), acquired from breathing polluted indoor air, while almost half of all deaths from pneumonia among children under five are also due to poor air where fires burn indoors. Moreover, collecting firewood takes a lot of time from women and children, reducing their ability to perform other productive work or go to school. A clean, new heat source, free of radioactivity and emissions could potentially address this problem, equally applicable to any other heating method. It is, therefore, most urgent to develop and deploy LENR based energy sources as soon as possible in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and solve the climate crisis. LENR based energy is carbon-free and sustainable. It consumes a few elements, but these are abundant on Earth and would be used at a pace which would not be an issue for millions of years.

Together with solar power, LENR holds the promise to stop global warming. Solar power is arguably the most viable among sustainable conventional energy sources so far, with a cost that is decreasing exponentially. However, a massive scale of installed solar power worldwide requires huge amounts of batteries for energy storage, which entails significant environmental problems for producing, handling and recycling battery chemicals. LENR based energy sources operate 24/7, even at night and could potentially reduce the need for battery storage to a fraction of what would otherwise be needed. Abundant access to cheap and sustainable energy would even make it possible to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, turn it into hydrocarbons, which requires energy, and pump it back into the ground, thus reducing global warming more effectively than even a complete stop of carbon emissions would.

So far so good but then comes the disruptive aspect, which makes it important to start discussing the implications of LENR based energy. We can already see the big picture. An energy source like cold fusion would over time not only substitute fossil fuels and nuclear power, saving the world from disastrous air pollution and radiation hazard but also challenge established structures in the global multi-trillion dollar energy industry. It would decrease the cost of production in virtually every industry from agriculture to steel and lower all transportation costs. If Rossi’s Quark X can be confirmed it is merely an engineering issue to provide electric vehicles—cars, trucks, and buses—with an energy source that removes the need for recharging the battery and reduces the necessary battery size to a relatively small backup battery. Together with technology for autonomous vehicles, the implications for the transportation industry are huge.

Conditions for military operations would also change fundamentally. Autonomous systems such as drones and unmanned underwater vehicles would be able to operate continuously on their own for months and the small size of the Quark X should make it possible to launch swarms of insect-like micro drones. Such drones are already being developed by the US government-backed consortium Micro Autonomous Systems and Technology but what is still lacking is a lightweight and durable energy source. From a consumer perspective, we could expect to see LENR based energy accelerate the potential for many households to go off-grid, which in turn would either challenge the business case for wide area power grids or increase the need for smart grids, with possibilities to input and consume power at all nodes in the network. Knowing how difficult it is to predict long-term effects of important innovations, this is probably only the start of what a cheap, abundant and sustainable energy source would mean for the world.

Yet, the main consequence of LENR based power generation may be even more disruptive. From a larger perspective, it would eventually mean that energy would shift from being controlled by a few to being easily accessible to everyone on Earth, just as what happened with information in a few decades through the development of the internet. Such a redistribution of energy control would bring a change of the same magnitude for individuals and society as well as geopolitically. With direct access to free information and cheap energy combined, opportunities for people all over the world to raise their living standards, gain access to education, realise their dreams and ideas, start businesses, take care of their health and protect their freedom would increase dramatically, while the possibility for nations, governments and large corporations to exercise power based on controlling energy supplies would be dramatically reduced. Hopefully, however, this access to abundant energy will not decrease the ongoing efforts to optimize energy consumption throughout the world. Moreover, from a scientific perspective, solving the theoretical mystery of LENR might, according to competent scientists, change and expand our understanding of matter and energy. Yet, many scientists still consider all this to be impossible.

Mats Lewan, October 2016.

– – – – –

Due to the infected debate regarding the ongoing lawsuit between Rossi, his licensee IH, and other parties involved, where the transparency of personal interests may be limited, I have chosen to keep this blog closed for comments until all evidence is presented in court and the lawsuit is settled.

Rossi makes offer on Swedish factory building – plus more updates

Screen Shot 2016-05-16 at 15.04.35Last week, Andrea Rossi made a visit to Sweden, and apart from meeting with the team of professors in Uppsala, with me and other persons, he made a trip from Stockholm to the south of Sweden to have look at a 10,000 square meter factory building for sale. The day after, assisted by his Northern Europe partner and licensee Hydrofusion, Rossi made an offer on the building in the order of USD 3 to 5 million. Negotiations are now ongoing.

Obviously, making an offer is not the same as buying, but Rossi made it clear to me that he intended to buy the factory building, aiming at starting manufacturing of the third generation E-Cat reactor, called the Quark X, hopefully this year, otherwise in 2017, with an estimated production volume of 500,000 items a year, using a robot line provided by ABB.

Rossi said he had no other funding than the 11.5M he already received from his licensee Industrial Heat, according to their license agreement, which is now subject to a lawsuit. He said that he estimated the costs for the lawsuit to amount to 1M.

Even buying a factory building is no proof that production will start. Critics, accusing Rossi for being a fraudster, will assume that it could be a way to attract investors, but I honestly wouldn’t expect a fraudster to make use of such expensive schemes. Especially not since it would be quite fine just getting away with 11.5M without further trouble.

I would take this as a strong indication that the modular Quark X, supposedly big as a pen, producing heat, light and direct electricity at variable proportions at a total power of about 100W, based on the E-Cat LENR technology with hydrogen, lithium, aluminium and nickel in the fuel, is real. Rossi, however, said that there’s still R&D to be done to get the Quark X ready for production. He also said that the ‘X’ had no other meaning than being a substitute for a final name.

After my meeting with Rossi (first time for me since September 2012), I have a few other updates.

Claiming that everything he said could be proven with documents (or that he otherwise would be lying), Rossi told me regarding the one-year 1MW test that:

  • All the instruments for measurements were installed, under observation of IH and Rossi, by the ERV (Expert Responsible for Validation) Fabio Penon, who had been communicating also with Darden, receiving technical suggestions from him on this matter. All communications with the ERV were made with both Darden and Rossi in copy.
  • The flow meter was mounted according to all standard requirements, for example at the lowest point in the system.
  • The MW plant was placed on blocks, 33 cm above the ground, to make sure that leaking water or any hidden connections would become visible.
  • The two IH representatives present at the test were Barry West and Fulvio Fabiani (who worked for Rossi from January 2012 until August 2013, when the MW plant was delivered to IH in North Carolina, after which he was paid by IH as an expert who would make the technology transition from Rossi to IH easier). West and Fabiani reported to JT Vaughn every day on the phone.
  • Three interim reports, about every three months, with basically the same results as in the final report, were provided by the ERV during the test.
  • During summer 2015, IH offered Rossi to back out from the test and cancel it, with a significant sum of money as compensation. Rossi’s counter offer was to give back the already paid 11.5M and cancel the license agreement, but IH didn’t accept.
  • The unidentified customer (‘JM Products’) using the thermal energy from the MW plant, had its equipment at the official address—7861, 46th Street, Doral, Fl. The total surface of the premises was 1,000 square meters, of which the MW plant used 400 and the customer 600.
  • The equipment of the customer measured 20 x 3 x 3 meters, and the process was running 24/7.
  • The thermal energy was transfered to the customer with heat exchangers and the heat that was not consumed was vented out as hot air through the roof.
  • The water heated by the MW plant was circulating in a closed loop, and since the return temperature was varying, due to different load in the process of the customer, Rossi insisted that the energy corresponding to heating the inflowing cooled water (at about 60˚C) to boiling temperature would not be taken into account for calculating the thermal power produced by the MW plant. The ERV accepted. (This was conservative, decreasing the calculated thermal power. The main part of the calculated thermal power, however, derives from the water being evaporated when boiling).
  • He also insisted that an arbitrary chosen 10 percent should be subtracted in the power calculation, with no other reason than to be conservative. The ERV accepted.
  • IH never had access to the customer’s area. At the end of the test, an expert hired by IH, insisted that it was important to know where the water came from and where it was used. The ERV explained that this had no importance.
  • The average flow of water was 36 cubic meters per day.
  • At the end of the test, the ERV dismounted all the instruments by himself, in the presence of Rossi and IH, packed them and brought everything to DHL for transportation to the instrument manufacturers who would recalibrate the instruments and certify that they were not manipulated.
  • After the test, IH wanted to remove the MW plant from the premises in Florida, but Rossi would not accept until the remaining $89M were paid according to the license agreement. Rossi’s and IH’s attorneys then agreed that both parties should lock the plant with their own padlocks (as opposed to the claim by Dewey Weaver—a person apparently connected to IH, but yet not clear in what way—that ‘IH decided to padlock the 1MW container after observing and documenting many disappointing actions and facts’).

I should also add that I have been in contact with people with insight into the MW report, that hopefully will get public this summer as part of the lawsuit, and they told me that based on the contents, the only way for IH to claim a COP about 1 (that no heat was produced—COP, Coefficient of Performance, is Output Energy/Input Energy) would be to accuse Penon of having produced a fake report in collaboration with Rossi. Nothing in the report itself seems to give any opportunity for large mistakes, invalidating the claim of a high COP (as opposed to claims by people having talked about the report with persons connected to IH).

As for hints on the ERV Penon being incompetent, based partly on the HotCat report from August 2012, I would like to point out:

  • Fabio Penon has a degree in Nuclear Engineering, from Bologna University, with rating 100 of 100 and honors.
  • He worked for several years in the nuclear industry with thermo mechanics.
  • When the nuclear industry was put on hold in Italy, he turned to work as expert on product certification, collaborating with entities such as Bureau Veritas, Vertiquality and Det Norske Veritas.
  • The HotCat report from August 2012, signed by Penon, containing a few notable errors, was not written by Penon. Penon assisted at a test on August 7, 2012, repeating an experiment made on July 16, 2012. The report was written on the July test, and Penon was only confirming that similar results were obtained on the August test. Penon told me this in an interview in September, 2012. You could of course accuse Penon of not having studied the original report sufficiently before signing it, but the errors were not a result of Penon’s work.

Two further remarks regarding earlier E-Cat tests:

  • I had a new look at the calculations of the October 6, 2011, test, which was recently disputed. A total of about 31 MJ of electric energy was input. At 0,9 g/s, a total of about 26 kg of water was input during the test from 11 am until 7 pm. Heating this water from 25 to 116 degrees centigrade requires about 10 MJ. During the last 5 hours, 16 kg of this water was also evaporated, which required about 36 MJ. An estimated 100W was radiated from the E-Cat for at least 5h, making about 2MJ. The E-Cat was leaking a significant amount of hot water during large parts of the test. Even without taking this lost thermal energy into account, about 48MJ was released and 31MJ input, which gives a rough COP of 1.5.
    (Boiling at 116˚C assumes an internal pressure of about 1.7 bars—lower pressure would mean lower boiling point and longer period of boiling, with more energy released—116˚C was the final temperature, when the water was still boiling, before interrupting the test).
  • I have contacted several experts to get a third party evaluation of the Lugano test report and the contesting papers by Thomas Clarke and Bob Higgins. Until I receive these evaluations I only note that the original result is contested, but that no conclusive result is agreed upon. The isotopic shifts remain unexplained, unless you assume fraud.

§

Now, all this makes me conclude that the E-Cat is most probably valid and that the 1MW test was indeed successful. What remains to be explained is why IH in that case didn’t pay Rossi the final $89M and continued to partner with him to develop and market such a disruptive, world changing technology.

After looking at it for some time, I tend to be skeptic about the conspiracy hypothesis, involving large financial and political interests being threatened by such a technology, even though I find it remarkable that IH has involved APCO Worldwide and Jones Day.

I then ask myself if it’s really possible that it all comes down to money. That IH/Cherokee, as has been suggested, has a track record of putting up companies based on emerging technologies or remediation projects, collecting public and private funding (or also this link), making the funds disappear and then closing down the companies with reasonable explanations for unsuccessful development of the technology or of the project.

Admittedly, this could be a defendable strategy in some cases where results could be obtained. Still, if the E-Cat is really working as claimed, why wouldn’t they then take the chance to build it into a prospering money machine? Taking care of the magic hen that lays golden eggs instead of roasting it after having collected the first egg, as some would put it. I cannot figure it out.

Clearly, such an endeavour would require investing a lot of money and work, spending large parts, if not all of the funding IH collected while boasting about the successful MW test, and also taking a market risk that it might not play out as expected. But wouldn’t it be worth it? Becoming remembered for introducing a technology that could change and literally save the planet, from the climate crisis and from fossil fuel pollution? Rather than being forever remembered as those who only saw the money, and didn’t want to get involved in the technology project? I just cannot understand.

§

Finally—I will continue having the comments on this blog closed. The main reason is that few new facts have been presented, whereas unmanageable amounts of opinions have been posted.

I would like to apologise if I have hinted at Thomas Clarke’s having an agenda with his impressive number of comments. I want to assume that Clarke is perfectly honest in the significant work he has laid down on analysing the Lugano report and on commenting what, according to him, is probable or not. But I would also like to note that producing for some periods up to 34 posts per day hints at a position which I’m not sure if it should be called balanced. This, combined with obvious spin from a few people, apparently having an agenda in criticising some individuals, adds to my decision to keep the comments closed.

However, please share the post if you think t’s relevant, and feel free to email me if you have facts that you think I should be aware of.

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.

New Energy World Symposium will be cancelled

News-blue-text-dateIt is with deep regret that I must announce the cancellation of the New Energy World Symposium scheduled to have taken place in June in Stockholm.

As initially communicated, the Symposium was conditioned by the report from the one-year 1MW test undertaken by Rossi and Industrial Heat, IH. However, with the ongoing lawsuit by Rossi on IH, the report is not expected to be released anytime soon, and therefore the Symposium can not be held as initially planned.

Let me also point out that until there is such an independent report, based on generally satisfactory measurements, I would not consider the E-Cat, on which the 1MW test was based, a confirmed LENR technology.

In this situation, I have discussed holding a repurposed event based on the increased and most interesting activity in the LENR field in general, but I have found that I will not be able to organise this in time.

On the other hand, I hope to be able to propose a new event on LENR based technologies further ahead and will keep you updated.

I would like to thank the highly qualified speakers who were planned to participate at the Symposium, for their enthusiasm and for their willingness to contribute with their valuable experience and competence. Over 270 attendees decided to pre-register for the event, which I believe is an indication of the value that the speakers’ mix of ideas, models and thoughts would have offered.

A great thanks also the the Symposium’s partners, Kairos Future, E-Cat World, Network Society and Lenria.

Any inconvenience to attendees of the Symposium is deeply regretted.

And here’s the opposite hypothesis on the Rossi-IH affair

Andrea Rossi

Andrea Rossi

Some people thought that I was too biased towards Rossi in the hypothesis on the Rossi-IH affair that I presented recently. So, for equilibrium, here’s more or less the opposite hypothesis, based on claims that have reached me from other sources.

– The starting point for this scenario is that either Rossi has achieved LENR reactions with high COP, without ever proving it, or he might have achieved modest efficiency, with COP between 1 and 3, as many others in the field. Over time, in that case, he tended to exaggerate the results, being absolutely convinced that he would obtain increased COP, sooner or later, with changes in the design. Meanwhile he hid the lack of progress with lack of precision in various tests.

Thomas Darden

Thomas Darden

– In October 2012, Rossi and IH (Industrial Heat LLC) entered a license agreement, on which Rossi was paid $1.5M. The reason for IH to enter the agreement was, a part from the increased credible activity in the LENR field, that several seemingly convincing independent tests had verified the validity of the E-Cat technology, and that it was worth risking the money for getting access to a potentially disruptive energy technology that could change the world and save it from the climate and pollution crisis.

– The 24h Validation Test in May 2013 was apparently successful, and again the amount of $10M was worth risking, giving the potential upside, especially since IH with this sum would get access to the IP and the knowhow of the E-Cat, which Rossi transferred to them as stipulated by the license agreement. Rossi, however, at this occasion maybe kept some essential details for obtaining high COP for himself.

– With the IP in hand, with claims that IH had acquired the IP, and with seemingly successful demonstrations made with Rossi’s assistance, IH could raise funding, e.g. about $50M from UK based Woodford, in addition to about $10M already raised from other investors.

– After a while, however, IH realised that it didn’t manage to obtain Rossi’s effect with the instructions received from him, when performing tests with the help of independent experts (maybe e.g. the team at Brillouin Energy, in which IH also invested). And over time IH concluded that either Rossi didn’t have what he claimed, or he hadn’t given them the complete knowhow. IH was therefore not interested in going ahead with the one-year test stipulated by the license agreement, at least not before having been able to replicate with high COP.

– Rossi still wanted to perform the one-year test, and found a way to set it up. A UK based company, or possibly just some people Rossi knew, formed a local company in Florida, appointing Rossi’s lawyer as president. IH was presented with this plan, and since IH now had low confidence in Rossi, it didn’t care much about what Rossi would do and accepted any suggestion. They also accepted, or didn’t object to, the same ERV as in the 24h Validation Test, although they were not convinced he was the right choice for this task. IH maybe didn’t think that Rossi would obtain any result. Alternatively, IH considered the condition of transferring the knowhow not fulfilled, and therefore they would not have to pay the remaining $89M, even if the one-year test would be successful. Meanwhile, IH used the raised funds for other investments in the LENR field, and kept a low profile on the possibly failed investment in Rossi’s technology.

– The customer company using the energy from the plant (‘JM Chemical Products Inc’ according to the license agreement) should produce products for catalytic applications, but IH soon found out that there was no production activity (maybe the heat from the plant was just absorbed in a dummy load and vented out). IH didn’t want to make too much noise of this finding, and since they argued that the agreement’s conditions weren’t fulfilled, they didn’t act on this fact. Yet they had two representatives always present at the heat plant.

– IH also found flaws in the ERV’s measurements. Again, IH didn’t act on this.

– Meanwhile, IH filed a few patent applications on Rossi’s technology, taking advantage of a change in the US patent law, making it possible under certain conditions to file an application without the inventor signing it. Maybe the filings were simply part of normal business activities in the technology field.

– As the one-year test went on, IH realised that Rossi was convinced of a positive result, and it used the PR and crisis management firm APCO Worldwide to get help on handling a potentially delicate situation. IH also started to reach out to experts in the field, asking for help to understand what secret Rossi might have kept for himself, or alternatively to get information that could help proving that Rossi had nothing. IH also reached out to Rossi who declined to give any further help.

– Meanwhile, Rossi, started to gather information on a lawsuit to be able to defend himself, since he was convinced of a positive result but understood that IH didn’t agree with him.

– The test was completed in February 2016. The ERV compiled a report, which was not very convincing, and delivered it to Rossi and IH. Rossi filed his lawsuit to defend himself. IH kept a low profile, still considering the license agreement to be open but arguing that it didn’t have to pay, at least not until Rossi hadn’t provided all the knowhow needed for a successful high COP replication.

§

I must underline that I have not been able to confirm much of this information, except for a few well-known facts, known from the documents in Rossi’s lawsuit.

Neither have I yet seen the ERV report, which could give important perspectives on this scenario. The latest info I have on the report is that it will be released only when the IH-Rossi case will be brought up in court, maybe a month or more from now, which I think is an unfortunate delay.

I have tried to reach Tom Darden and JT Vaughn at IH several times to get comments, but I haven’t got any response.

Rossi strongly denies parts of this scenario, particularly the claim that there wasn’t any activity in the factory and that the ERV’s measurements were non-satisfactory.

Hopefully, we will know what is true when the case will be handled in court.

Summing up my own experiences of the E-Cat technology, I have seen several flaws in the reports on the high temperature ‘Hot Cat’, while I had more confidence in the results from the older E-Cat, on which I made measurements myself at four occasions. The most convincing demonstration, in my opinion, was held on October 6, 2011, when the E-Cat was run in self-sustained mode for almost four hours, with water boiling inside all the time, even though fresh water was input continuously. Here’s my report from the test. And here is the temperature data.

Finally, let me make clear that my fundamental aim in this story is to bring out the truth, whatever it may be.

I’m also confident that whatever the outcome will be, the LENR field has gained something in the end, if only by a significantly increased interest over the last years. And I will keep fighting for the importance of increasing the efforts on making LENR a commercially viable technology.

Here’s my hypothesis on the Rossi-IH affair

Andrea Rossi

Andrea Rossi

(Read also the opposite hypothesis here). 

(Updated April 10, see below). Here’s my main hypothesis on the IH-Rossi affair, after a few days (BTW in line with what Torkel Nyberg/Sifferkoll argues):

– With the license agreement signed, IH had the possibility to get access to the whole IP for a world changing technology, paying ‘only’ $11.5M after the 24h Validation Test in May 2013 (as specified in the License Agreement). And they did.

– IH then never intended to perform the stipulated one-year test (Rossi claims that they continuously tried to delay it), but instead wanted to get rid of Rossi and progress with R&D, based on the IP they hade received. By not undertaking the one-year test they would save $89M (which according to the License Agreement should be paid after a successful ‘Guaranteed Performance Test’).

Thomas Darden

Thomas Darden

– With the IP in hand, and with successful demonstrations, IH could raise funding which could be used for investing in other companies in the field, e.g. Brillouin Energy (UPDATE: As far as I have understood, IH has not invested in Brillouin Energy. It has been reported that Darden invested personally in Brillouin, but before putting up IH)—companies having experts that could help them working with the technology, since they didn’t posses the skill or competence themselves to use the info obtained from Rossi. They also approached individual experts in the field, asking them to work with IH.

– However, like everyone else in this story, IH underestimated Rossi—thinking that he was just another of those confused and not-so-business-and-competition-prepared inventors out there, when he was instead extremely focused, persistent (being an former long distance runner), competitive, intelligent, intuitive, far-aiming and hardened by tough experiences in a fairly corrupt power game country like Italy; Rossi managed to find a location and a customer for the one-year test, and also completed the test (which IH maybe didn’t expect), furthermore with exceptionally good results—a COP (Coefficient of Performance) above 50, far beyond the requirement in the License Agreement for full payment, a COP>6.

– Rossi saw this coming, observing IH’s actions, including investing in other companies, filing competing patent applications with false inventors and with copied material from Bologna University’s HotCat report without permission, and probably a series of other observations, and he started to prepare the lawsuit.

– Having already gone through a similar process with the Greek company Defkalion, which systematically delayed payments, Rossi this time decided to be ready to sue immediately the day after the payment of $89M was due (five days after receiving the ERV report, as specified in the License Agreement).

– Probably, at this point, Rossi also saw the possibility to get out of a license agreement which was far to advantageous for IH, given the achieved COP of 50, and given that the agreement gave IH full sales and manufacturing rights in markets covering over 50 percent of the world’s GDP, as Torkel Nyberg notes. Thus he could regain control of manufacturing rights in the whole world, with sales rights still being licensed in some markets.

– Again, IH underestimated Rossi. They realised that the completion of the one-year test would become a problem and issued a statement, with support of the PR and crisis management firm APCO Worldwide, in order to discredit any information not coming from themselves. But they were probably not prepared for the immediate and extensive lawsuit submitted by Rossi and Leonardo Corp. IH’s situation now became delicate.

– The lawsuit will probably go on for years, but it’s interesting to note how Rossi has systematically used his blog and the Internet to spread public knowledge on his activities, challenges and progress. In my book he described how he was destroyed by Italian media during the Petroldragon affair, since media then had unchallenged power over individuals, and that this is no longer true with Internet giving everyone the possibility to reach out to the world. Therefore it’s also logic for Rossi to demand for a jury to settle the case.

– The lawsuit could possibly over time develop into a parallel to the Honeywell, Inc. v. Sperry Rand Corp. case regarding the invention of the electronic computer—a case that went on from 1967 until 1973, which some people argue was in order to keep third parties out of the computer business, with lawyers on both sides dragging out the lawsuit as long as possible.

So this is my hypothesis. I might be wrong. Maybe IH simply underestimated the difficulties to raise the necessary funding. What they raised (reportedly about $60M, excluded Chinese funds for a collaborative project in China), was enough for investing in a few other LENR technology companies and for buying some patents, but not for paying Rossi the remaining $89M. So IH found itself in a difficult situation and didn’t find a good way out (but they could at least have tried to negotiate?).

Some suggest IH was forced by the US government, in order to keep the technology in the US, free from a foreign inventor, but realistically in that case, I believe the government would gladly have paid $89M to keep things quite and clean. We’ll find out one day, maybe.

§

(UPDATE April 10): As I wrote in a comment here below, thanks everyone for interesting and thought worthy comments so far. My hypothesis might not be the best, or not even close, and it’s the discussion that brings out a wider perspective.

One of the possible interpretations that have been brought up, that I also believe could be right, is that IH is correct in its statement that it has not been able to ‘substantiate’ the results claimed Rossi, meaning that they have received the technology instructions for doing it, but have not been able to make a satisfactory replication with other people’s help, at some level of efficiency (COP) that they consider Rossi has achieved. And since it’s stated in the license agreement that Rossi has to make sure that IH can successfully use the instructions transferred after the 24h Validation Test in May 2013, this would be a motive for not paying. Yet, in that situation, IH would still keep the agreement open, since they see the possibility that they could succeed to replicate with high COP, and in that case pay the $89M and go ahead with Rossi.

This would also explain why IH has approached experts in the field, to collaborate with them. One crucial question might of course be how many attempts they have made so far, and with what skill and expertise.

Andrea Rossi sues Industrial Heat for $89M

Andrea Rossi

Andrea Rossi

(UPDATED below with statement from IH)
(Also UPDATED with response from Andrea Rossi).
(June 2: IH filed motion to dismiss lawsuit—link below).

First of all—we now know that the one-year 1MW test was very successful and that the E-Cat and LENR is a technology field that will fundamentally change the world. [Admittedly premature. We haven’t seen the report yet]. More about this later. In any case, let’s wait for the detailed report for final confirmation. Champagne is still on ice.

On Wednesday, April 6, I received a press release from the lawyer representing Rossi’s company, Leonardo Corp., about a lawsuit on Rossi’s US licensee Industrial Heat (IH), its representatives Thomas Darden and JT Vaughn, and Darden’s main company, Cherokee Investment Partners. Link to the case docket is here.

Thomas Darden

Thomas Darden

I was first somewhat surprised, but reading the documents and adding info that I have received during the last months, things became clearer.

I recommend you to read the complaint and the license agreement between Rossi and IH (see below)—it tells a detailed story of what has been going on during the last years, and one good thing about the lawsuit is that all this info, originally protected by NDA, is now open.

Rossi and IH entered an agreement in October 2012 (as I also report in An Impossible Invention), on which Rossi was paid $1.5M.

A 24h Validation Test was performed in May 2013 with a plant consisting of 30 E-Cats. After successful completion Rossi was paid $10M, and he transferred all the necessary IP for the E-Cat and its fuel to IH.

Now things are getting interesting. The license agreement defined that IH acquired a license for North and South America, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, to sell and manufacture E-Cat based products, but the IP remained property of Leonardo Corp. Yet IH stated that it had acquired the technology from Rossi, apparently in order to raise more money (we know that at least $60M was raised, of which about $50M from UK based Woodford).

IH then delayed the one-year test—the ‘Guaranteed Performance Test’. If successful, with at least six times more energy output than input (COP>6), IH should pay Rossi $89M (or less at lower performance). And although the test was finally undertaken, and successfully concluded recently—producing over 50 times more output energy than input energy (!), validated by two experts, paid for and chosen by IH and Rossi—IH never paid Rossi (we will probably soon see the full report that was delivered to Rossi and Darden on March 29).

Instead, it turns out from Leonardo’s lawsuit that IH (Darden and Vaughn), made a series of maneuvers to avoid undertaking the one-year test, to avoid risking the billions in Cherokee’s fund, while trying to get hold of the E-Cat IP, sharing it with Rossi’s competitors in which IH was investing, and even filing patent applications based on the IP transferred from Rossi, nominating other inventors than Rossi.

These claims are supported by independent information I have received lately (not from Rossi), on people connected to IH, actively trying to engage experts in the field to work on replication of Rossi’s effect, while telling various stories about Rossi, all indicating that IH might have been missing some essential info, or at least wanted to get this info before paying Rossi.

Furthermore, in the lawsuit, Leonardo demands a trial by jury. Everything out in the light.

This doesn’t fit well with the hypothesis that Rossi is a fraudster and that IH knew this and therefore tried to get away from him. Not a bit.

But even if all the claims in the lawsuit are true, it’s not obvious that Darden and Vaughn had these intentions initially, as Torkel Nyberg points out on his blog Sifferkoll.

IH might have been pressed by investors’ expectations, while not being sure of having all the technology details. IH can even have been approached by more powerful entities, seeing the E-Cat as a threat, or wanting to secure the technology for the US, without depending on Rossi.

We don’t know this. And to settle the case might take years, unfortunately. In any case—the public statement from IH a few weeks ago now comes into another perspective, looking more like damage limitation, with support of the well-known PR agency APCO Worldwide.

 

The good part is that all this info now is public, that the one-year 1MW was successful, and that commercially viable LENR is here to stay, and that it will change the world.

§

As for the New Energy World Symposium, I’m very close to take the final decision to hold the event now.

§

Files regarding the lawsuit:

Link to the case docket.

All documents released from the court

Rossi et al v Darden et al_(complaint)

Rossi et al v Darden et al (Rossi’s patent)

Rossi et al v Darden et al (license agreement)

Rossi_et_al_v_Darden et al (First amendment, Exhibit A—E-cat Validation)

Rossi et al v Darden et al (Second Amendment)

For further documents use the link above (“All documents…”).

§

UPDATE (April 7): Industrial Heat has issued a statement in response to the lawsuit by Rossi and Leonardo Corp. It starts:

“We are aware of the lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against Industrial Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are without merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against this action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success.”

I’m still waiting to see the report, but if it confirms the data that Rossi has given—a COP over 50, validated by the ERV chosen by Rossi and IH together—and if it’s true that IH has had its staff present at the test all the time, even bringing representatives for UK based Woodford to the plant to make due diligence and then receiving $50M in funding, I would find it quite difficult to understand that IH has not been able to substantiate the results claimed by Rossi. Maybe IH has not been able to replicate the effect themselves. But in that case I guess that they should kindly ask Rossi for help.

§

(UPDATED April 8): Rossi earlier said he couldn’t comment the ongoing lawsuit, but after IH’s press release above, he responded to some questions on his blog, Journal of Nuclear Physics. I have chosen to publish three of these comments, which I think speak for themselves:

 

  • Andrea Rossi
    April 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM
    Dear Janne:
    I have to comment the press release of IH, being a press release and not a forensic act.
    They made the Lugano reactor ( they also signed it ) they made many replications of which we have due record and witnesses, they made multiple patent applications ( without my authotization ) with their chief engineer as the co-inventor ( he invented nothing ) , with detailed description of the replications , they made replications with the attendance of Woodford, after which they got 50 or 60 millions of dollars from Woodfords’ investors, they made replications with the attendance of Chinese top level officers, after which they started thanks to the E-Cat they made an R&D activity in China in a 200 millions concern, they made replications with an E-Cat completely made by them under my direction the very day in which the 1 MW plant has been delivered in Raleigh, they made replications that we have recorded. After the replication they made with the attendance of Woodford in 2013 Mr Tom Darden said publicly: ” this replication has been stellar” ( witnesses available). But this is not the place to discuss this. We have prepared 18 volumes to explain exactly and in detail the activity of our “Licensee” and his acquaintances from 2013 to now. Until they had to collect money thanks to the E-Cat, they made replications and have been happy with the E-Cat; when it turned to have to pay, they discovered that they never made replications, that the ERV that they had chosen in agreement with us was not good, that the test on the 1 MW plant, thanks to which they collected enormous amounts of money from the investors and where I put at risk my health working 16-18 hours per day was not a good test ( but for all the year of the test they NEVER said a single word of complaint, even if they had constantly their men in the plant), etc etc. But the worse has still to come out. The worse is in the 18 volumes we will present in due time, in due place. A blog is not the right place to discuss a litigation. This is only a quick answer to the press release made by IH.
    Ad majora.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
  • Andrea Rossi
    April 7, 2016 at 8:32 PM
    Hank Mills:
    They prepared everything, the charges, the body of the reactor EVERYTHING !!!.
    I just teached to them what to do.
    They never used anything pre-prepared by Leonardo Corp.
    Now, let me talk to you of a very singular coincidence: Brillouin has always made only electrolytic apparatuses: go to read all their patent applications made before their agreement with IH, and you will find confirmation of what I am saying ( I know their patents by heart, because I have studied them and probably I know them better than themselves : I wrote about 100 pages of notes about their patents ). And now the singular coincidence: they make the agreement with IH in April 2015, and Voilà, they made a public demo in Capitol Hill ( Washington, DC) with a device that is the Copy-Cat of something I am familiar with. Nothing that Brillouin has ever made before the agreement with IH. What a coincidence !!!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
  • Andrea Rossi
    April 7, 2016 at 9:09 PM
    Hank Mills:
    In the press release of IH they write that ” for three years they tried to replicate the Rossi effect, with no avail”: very good, but during those three years Industrial Heat collected about 60 million dollars from Woodford, more millions from other sources, exclusively based on my E-Cats technology. This before making shopping to buy other patents. Now, the cases are two: either they are lying when they say they didn’t replicate, or they made a fraud collecting 60 millions from Woodford, more from others, not to mention Cherokee fund. You had to see Tom Darden and JT Vaughn dance like ballet etoiles around the investors, showing them the E-Cats, and telling them that the E-Cats had been built by them! “Stellar” coherently Darden, in his role of etoile, repeated to the enchanted attandees, ready to spend 50 millions. Now, that my bill arrived, the E-Cat had not been replicated , they say. For three years.
    Again, I am just answering to a press release of IH.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

 

 

Industrial Heat makes announcement

JT Vaughn

JT Vaughn

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

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

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

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

§

“Statement of Industrial Heat regarding LENR Industry Developments


March 10, 2016


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

§

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

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

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

§

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

I believe IH are holding back for several reasons.

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

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

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

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

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

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