E-Cat update: Rossi tells inspectors no nuclear reaction occurs in the E-Cat process, no factory in US
14 March 2012
According to several reports (link, link), Andrea Rossi, the inventor of the “Energy Catalyzer” Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) (cold fusion) device, told an inspector from the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control that, contrary to his earlier claims, that no nuclear reactions occur in the device, and that he has no factory in the US.
The New Energy Times News Service notes that:
Rossi’s statements contradict nearly everything he has said in the last year about his claims of a factory and his development of a low-energy nuclear reaction device. Rossi told the bureau that his device produces thermal energy of six times the electrical energy input. However, for the last several years, Rossi claimed nuclear reactions occur in his device.
The bureau responded to a citizen’s complaint, made by Gary Wright of Las Vegas, in February. New Energy Times obtained the report from this blog. Wright was concerned that Rossi’s device had failed proper nuclear certifications or, if not, that Rossi was committing fraud.
(A hat-tip to E-P!)
Reel$$ - you're a supporter of Rossi right? Any thoughts? Comments?
Posted by: ejj | 14 March 2012 at 07:19 AM
Would the E-Cat become an imaginary 6:1 energy amplifier/multiplier?
Posted by: HarveyD | 14 March 2012 at 08:15 AM
Wishful thinking by marks who ignored every sign that this was a fraud and were desperate to avoid the reality that we need conventional nuclear power led to their being infinitely credulous.
Posted by: Davemart | 14 March 2012 at 08:23 AM
EEStor, E-Cat, that's that - on to the next announced battery breakthrough..
Posted by: kelly | 14 March 2012 at 10:08 AM
Why do people insist on believing in magic? Life is hard and it takes work to make things happen.
With the energy and time these scam artists put into things, they could have started a legitimate business.
Posted by: DaveD | 14 March 2012 at 11:38 AM
Now now people, I'm no true believer of Rossi either but let's not over overboard. It's true that he's gone back on 2 of his claims but there's still his claim that his device produces thermal energy of six times the electrical energy input. We don't know that it isn't true... Of course we have no reason to believe it IS true either and, until Rossi stops acting like a fraudster and let's someone open up his his "black box" demonstration device, we can't.
So I, for one, am still waiting for more imformation. I just don't plan on holding my breath for it.
Posted by: ai_vin | 14 March 2012 at 12:12 PM
And we still don't know that the moon is NOT made of cheese - underneath what the astronauts saw on the surface; if there really WERE astronauts on the moon.
If no cheese, why did that a cow jumped over it? Umm ?
Wait for the facts.
And of course Scuderi is readily covered by the same parasol.
Not to mention many possible good reasons for invading Iraq.
We’re still there, aren’t we?
Wait for the facts from those who have misled us in the past - sure.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 14 March 2012 at 05:53 PM
TT, good sarcasm should be subtle sarcasm.
Posted by: ai_vin | 14 March 2012 at 08:58 PM
Every pound of uranium or thorium that is fissioned can prevent the placing of nearly ten million pounds of CO2 in the air, and this is sufficiently magic to produce, even at low, efficiency all of the electricity and fuel needed to operate modern society. Very high efficiency nuclear power plants are a waste of money; since their are laws in the US which have made the high efficiency use of nuclear fuel illegal; so that more than 95% of nuclear fuel is wasted.
These facts alone has all of the rich oil speculators pouring money like the supporters of US political action committees into anti nuclear lies. Cell phones used for texting have killed thousands of times as many people as all failed nuclear power plants have. Eliminating he texting feature from all cell phones can be done tomorrow and would save more lives than all anti nuclear power activities put together. Nuclear power actually saves lives by preventing fossil fuel produced carcinogens from entering into the air. Turning off working nuclear power plants has killed thousands of people directly and indirectly.
People do not know and forget if they could have known that radioactivity in small amounts does not kill because all of them have built in radioactivity and every bit of farm ground on the earth is and must be radioactive to produce healthy crops. Look up natural potassium on the internet and find out that it is always radioactive and is required by all live animals and all plants.
Cold fusion has existed since the universe was created, and it is only the explanation of its various forms that is very incomplete. Electron capture by a nucleus is an energy producing fusion reaction well known by nuclear physicists. A possible explanation of the Pons and Fleishmann experiment is that deuterium fused not with itself but with the nucleus of the Palladium much like electron capture and so did not produce any neutrons. Cold fusion that produced many neutrons has been long available in the Farnsworth fusor and its variations. Any large scale deuterium tritium fusor would be not considerate of its owners and funding if it did not use the ability of natural uranium or thorium to multiply the neutrons before they were used to produce tritium. This neutron multiplication process would produce far more energy than the initial fusion process and is another reason why not using it would be economically foolish and a waste of the high speed neutron from fusion. ..HG..
Posted by: Henry Gibson | 15 March 2012 at 12:19 AM
Henry, Do you think Rossi is a scam artist?
-
Also, i think you'd be more persuasive if you dropped the "radioactivity is safe" argument. Just sayin'.
Better to frame it as LFTRs cannot meltdown and are failsafe (or, could be).
Posted by: danm | 15 March 2012 at 09:59 AM
'Also, i think you'd be more persuasive if you dropped the "radioactivity is safe" argument.'
We tell it like it is, and leave the agitprop to the likes of Greenpeace.
There is no evidence for Linear No Threshold, which is the assumption, with no evidential proof, that radiation causes damage down to vanishingly small levels.
The assumption is the same as assuming that if 100 asprins kill you, taking 100 asprins over years will inevitably lead to a death.
What is more commonality is assumed, so that of 100 different people taking one asprin, one of them is a dead duck.
On such ridiculous notions are the standards for radiation set, and at the extreme edge of looniness, that is how Greenpeace manage to spread the lie of hundreds of thousands of casualties from Chernobyl etc.
These people are both liars and shameless ideologically motivated propagandists, and need outing.
Posted by: Davemart | 16 March 2012 at 03:31 AM
Davemart,
I think you're wasting your breath with that argument, even if you're right. Try selling it to the people near Fukushima.
And, are the Greenpeace people liars any more than the engineers who built Fukushima, who promised it was safe?
-
I want to see nuclear power move forward but i don't think it will happen if you tell people "radiation might get released but it's harmless". They have to believe the technology is failsafe (or nearly so).
Posted by: danm | 16 March 2012 at 09:26 AM
The engineers who built Fukushima didn't guarantee it safe. They guaranteed it proof against the design-basis accident, which it was. What hit the site was far beyond the design basis. The fault belongs to inadequate geological studies (which were in the process of being updated), lack of consideration of what could occur in a beyond-design-basis incident, and TEPCO's stonewalling.
If you want to see proof that engineers can do it if they're given good info and allowed to do their jobs, see the Dai'ini plant to the south of Dai'ichi and the Onagawa plant to the north.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 17 March 2012 at 07:13 AM
Why were nuclear power built on Japan East Coast Line in the first place? Wouldn't the West Coast been a safer place?
Posted by: HarveyD | 17 March 2012 at 09:28 AM
Apparently we're back to denial of the "surface plasmon" effect announced by NASA Langley Research Center. Hiding from this technology will not make it go away - anymore than talking down motor cars did last century.
The Japanese are doing a fine job of developing micro-CHP and we applaud this latest effort. The SOFC is simply too expensive in this system - even with a chiller component.
This NASA study from Glenn Research Center might help some come to grips with the fact this technology is actively being developed for home CHP systems. Not just by Ross and the Greek company. The NASA scientists named on the presentation are:
Gustave C. Fralick
John D. Wrbanek, Susan Y. Wrbanek,
Janis Niedra (ASRC)
http://1.usa.gov/zKKKy1
There are at least six active theories for the CF effect. Widom Larsen also claim it is "not nuclear fusion."
Posted by: Reel$$ | 17 March 2012 at 11:34 AM
Honest researchers are indeed working on this but no honest researcher is going to jump into commercialization like Rossi did, not when there are at least six active theories for the CF effect.
That the Glenn Research Center is looking into this should not lead anyone to think this technology is actively being developed for home CHP systems. This just means it's keeping its options open: Afterall the Glenn Research Center is also researching the possibility of interstellar travel; http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/warp.html
Posted by: ai_vin | 17 March 2012 at 12:30 PM
Fair points. Commercialization is the path of least resistance at the moment. Though that is changing rapidly. NASA's Michael Nelson of the Marshall Space Flight Center has confirmed collaboration between GRC, MSFC, and the Langley Research Center on CF effect. Dr. Ross has demoed his implementation for DoD, DoE and NASA. NASA has filed its own patent under Zawodney's name. It is reported there are a dozen startup operations putting together commercial products. Here's one from Dr. Miley at U Illinois - for NASA RTG:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/nets2012/pdf/3051.pdf
According to reports from tests of the Defkalion water heater, 7 laboratories are conducting 3rd party tests and will be complete by mid April.
Interestingly, the lattice assisted reaction is one focus of NASA interstellar flight - and gravity well virtual particle thrust;)
Posted by: Reel$$ | 17 March 2012 at 01:51 PM
Just for the record, I've always thought this had potential. It's Rossi I have the problem with - even if he's not a fraud he's acting like one. He can't even practice his trade in Texas because he got a degree from a diploma-mill that had to be closed down - twice!
Having said that, there may still be some useful information to be gained from Rossi's work: He once let it slip that he used nickel from a specific mine and that after a test the nickel had a higher percentage of copper in it.
This mine is noted for having a higher percentage of nickel-64 in its ore.
When other researchers have tried to repeat his experiments there appears to be some correlation in their success/failure rates with the source of nickel also.
I really think someone should look into the nickel-64 theory. If it pans out the potential could be huge.
Posted by: ai_vin | 17 March 2012 at 02:48 PM
And if not, we still learn something.
Posted by: ai_vin | 17 March 2012 at 02:51 PM
I have no particular stake in Rossi. He does have a Doctorate from Milan University - not that many inventors bother with degrees. Recall too that Drs. Focardi, Levi, Piantelli, Stremmenos, all contribute to Rossi's work.
http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3197200.ece/BINARY/Rossi_degree_University_Milan.pdf
"The University of Milan is a public, multidisciplinary teaching and research institution that offers 9 Faculties, 134 study courses, 21 Doctoral Schools and 92 Specialisation Schools.
Our 2,500 professors represent the highest concentration of scientific expertise in the region and our research is ranked among the best in Italy and Europe."
Why be unhappy about one guy? There are dozens of smart people in government and private sector hammering on this rather astonishing energy source. Its development is now inevitable:
http://bit.ly/FOK0YW
Posted by: Reel$$ | 17 March 2012 at 06:14 PM
Yeah, keep up your fog of false hopes of a real alternative to nuclear fission. None of what you support is real; not the alternatives to U/Th, nor the "alternative science" to authentic climate science.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 17 March 2012 at 07:42 PM
I have no particular stake in Rossi.
Really? The sheer number of times you've come on this site and promoted him and/or his E-cat (to the point of even inserting him/it into the discussion of totally unrelated articles, I might add) would suggest otherwise.
There's a reason the very first comment to this article was ejj asking: "Reel$$ - you're a supporter of Rossi right? Any thoughts? Comments?"
Posted by: ai_vin | 17 March 2012 at 09:22 PM
BTW that link you just gave; http://bit.ly/FOK0YW
Also states "Powder is “enriched” to increase NI-62, NI-64 content" so the nickel-64 theory is looking better.
Posted by: ai_vin | 17 March 2012 at 09:28 PM
You guys should also take a look at the two very interesting papers being given by Dr. Kim, and Dr. Miley at the Emerging Technologies for Space conference in Texas:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/nets2012/pdf/sess462.pdf
http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/03/george-miley-upcoming-presentation-game.html
And the day before these two papers we have Dr. Celani giving a talk on the subject to the mecca of science CERN:
http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=177379
Excellent progress on disclosure.
Posted by: Reel$$ | 18 March 2012 at 10:23 AM
Well yes, they are interesting papers, but not impressive. This is just the basic research and discussion that scientists have to do. It's nothing to bet the farm on or hold your breath for when solar and wind are already in use. As I said nobody honest is going to jump into commercialization, not when there are still at least six active theories for the CF effect.
BTW, you should read the comments on your nextbigfuture link. They actually provide more information than the article. Also, Miley states the reaction products are mildly radioactive and confired nuclear reactions provide output energy. What did Rossi say again?
Posted by: ai_vin | 18 March 2012 at 09:47 PM