Wednesday, January 20, 2016


First MOTTO- for the following discussion

EPPUR SI fa un sacco di calore in eccesso. (Andrea Rossi, attributed)

a) Bet, re Rossi's near future

 Peter: "For you, the leading anti-Rossi, anti-E-Cat person(ality) there is only 1 one answer possible- to say that you are perfectly, deeply, irreversibly convinced from more reasons and based on solid proofs that all the Rossi generators from 2007 to today (including all the demos from 2011). including the Lugano Test and the entire 1MW plant are not producing a bit of excess heat- not a small trace and never will. And bet an impressive sum of money on that statement. COP - is 1.00, finita la 

I will bet you $1000 on just your word that Rossi does not mass market any product to the general public within 3 years. I choose marketing because it is the easiest to prove. If you prefer, I will instead bet that Rossi does not get a properly calibrated replication from any major university (UC, CalTech, MIT, Sorbonne, etc.) officially or any government laboratory (Sandia, CERN, ORNL, etc.) within 3 years. Or ever.

and adds
I would bet you or anyone up to $100,000 US, if there was some way to properly insure the bet.

I am 78+ years old, hypertensive, sitting at least 10 hours daily at my PC, not willing to sacrifice a bit of the quality of my life for the quantity. Three years seems too long for me. Let's focus someway on the coming event. Just in our case I think instead of money let's decide "the loser will commit instant intellectual virtual seppuku" 
disseminated on the WWW. Let's establish the text, it should be humble, decent, sincere and deeply masochistic- as "I am a terrible bad example for the posterity."
Surely you will receive offers of betting for big money too from younger people..

b) Second MOTTO- for a depressive document: No matter how much we scorn it, kitsch is an integral part of the human condition.
(Milan Kundera)

Andrea Rossi E-cat Patent Application Rejected in 2016
What’s Next for Rossi and Industrial Heat, LLC?

Times are changing, the once strong meme of "quality" is fading away and less and less people learn the word "kitsch" and are aware that it is something to avoid- do not manufacture products and do not write papers and books of weak, dubious, value. The journalistic deontology is in peril, fearmongering and cheap sensationalism are the pillars of bad Press.
Gary Price- who once seemed to be well documented e-journalist has now published  a "it can be much worse!" writing.First I have decided to ignore it because it speaks about an event not more relevant- Rossi's patent applied in 2009 (I have rejected it too) but now Gary came with an up-date that is not an up-date- I want to tell him my opinion not more taking in account that Gary is in a desperate situation- if and when Rossi will prove that his generators are producing massive excess heat and are on the way to become a new great energy source then Gary's initiative to "shut down Rossi" will be considered as a crime against progress and even against law. See here what kinds of proofs Gary  manufactures. His first tweapon is loquacity- the document is awfully long, but he also uses all the types of opinion manipulation as: ""divide and rule" "connect and confuse" "combine and destroy" ""mix and kill"

The start is typical for the rest: it says that Jed Rothwell- a well known and much appreciated LENR supporter has just destroyed Rossi's hopes to get investors. A totally false connection and Jed has shown that he has absolutely nothing to do with this patent rejection, Gary insists. He connects this patent with the investors- but the investors are coming if the E-Cat's work and will not be discouraged if this 7 years old patent will disappear. Rossi has many patents underway .

Then follows:

This website is a non-commercial website, fighting sometimes it seems, like Quixote. You will notice there are no Google ads, or pay to view sections. The things we are fighting against – ignorance, incompetence, ineptness and free energy frauds and scams, have real world impacts, therefore we claim fair use for the quotations used in this article.

Then a good idea: it cannot be proved that Rossi has taken away money from victims, however: "Scammers also remove money from the field that could have been used for development of really useful devices." Instead of getting real proff of the Scam (e.g. 1MW plant fictional or like a Potemkin Village) nasty things are insinuated; where are the really meritous inventions/inventors missing funding from Rossi's fault?
Gary speaks about a fraud but does not explain how could it be built, amplified, developed, get a strong supporter base as it has  making his mission so difficult if Rosssi' s E-Cat's are actually non-functional, consume energy but do not produce it. And , indeed if he is so convinced about fraud why he does not appeal to the Law?
He knows things he cannot actually know- how and why has Industrial Heat made the partnership with Rossi- he (like any other outsider) has no idea what devices where tested and how.

Being so knowledgeable he says: "We are, though, accusing them of massively poor judgment, by investing in and becoming partners with the felon, jailbird and con-artist, Andrea Rossi."  He seems to be unable or unwilling to get the idea that only the performances of  the E-Cats and not the personality of Rossi can lead to such a deal.
He mixes ad libitum past, present and future and shows us an unchangeable Rossi  and an anti-ideal E-Cat - denies the possibility that Rossi has solved problems, has learned, made errors but also progress. From here this apocalyptic judgement about a 7 years old idea-patent. He is fighting against the image of Rossi and so can ignore both reality and search for truth.
The rest of the paper explores Rossi's writings and it is unbearable long. 
It does not show anything about the core of the problem- is the Rossi technology good or not? 

Years ago I started using the term: "economic friend"- he can spare your enemies doing things that harms you. Gary Price is the opposite - an economic enemy of Rossi by using so weak arguments  that it actually demonstrates the opposite of what he writes.

1) Edmund Storms' new publication and message
Excerpt from a description of LENR by Edmund Storms: The complete paper will be published soon!

The author warns us (and Rossi too):
 Tritium is a known nuclear product of LENR. The importance of this nuclear product is generally ignored because the amount produced is normally small during scientific studies. What happens when the rate of LENR is increased to produce commercial levels of energy? My theory predicts production of serious amounts of tritium can be expected when light hydrogen is used. This amount of tritium could be both dangerous and illegal. Nevertheless, if collected, this product would be highly valuable.  Thus, aside from being disruptive to the energy industry, LENR might affect national security as result of it being a very simple way to make tritium.

In view of this possible threat, I'm making the justification for these conclusions available here for public comment. The danger to individuals and to acceptance of LENR as a safe source of energy is too important to ignore this possibility.  Can we afford to ignore such a potentially serious possibility?

Solutions to the problem can be suggested but their application will only result if people consider the threat plausible.  Hopefully, a discussion will create enough interest in the possibility to encourage careful testing for tritium and, if necessary, to put the solutions into effect.

If Ed is right then T (tritium) is a T (threat) in a SWOT analysis of the NiH LENR technology.
For SWOT, please see: 

It will be a lot of work bringing the SWOT analysis again to date

Knots and LENR (Axil Axil)

Rossi Sees E-Cat X Making Impact in Automotive Field

Video: Hermann Oskarovich Gref: the epoch of hydrocarbon energetics has ended

Греф Герман Оскарович: эпоха углеводородной энергетики закончилась
About the author see: a VIP!

NANOTECH 2016 Conference& Expo


Perhaps we will understand better Rossi's optimal patent strategy
The Bright Side of Patents,%202016
by Joan Farre-Mensa, Deepak Hegde & Alexander Ljungqvist

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY — We examine whether patents help startups grow and succeed using detailed micro data on all patent applications filed by startups at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office since 2001 and approved or rejected before 2014. We find that patent approvals help startups create jobs, grow their sales, innovate, and reward their investors.


  1. T T T Tsk... tritium is worth about a million dollars per gram today only because it is rare, as soon as it became know to be possibly abundant it would drop to $1000 per kilo, effectively worthless. it's price collapse would make shale oil look like gold reserves. It has only a few novel applications. Being legendary though today immaterial in nukes it will always be classified as a potentially nuclear strageic material and as such could be exploited by nefarious regulators to bury any tech they and their banksters buddies don't like.

  2. Tritium is a beta emittor. Maybe in case of Ecat X it contributes to the DC current. The resulting 3He may be even more valuable. I believe that Edmund is right and if large quantities are released into the atmosphere, the radiation may become an issue. Using it for bombs still requires a lot of this and also knowledge and should be considered seriously, but can it be avoided that the 'enemy' is going to use LENR?

    1. Yes 3He is very valuable and there is a shortage due to nuclear weapon reduction, and to increase of anti-terrorism detectors (it is used to detect some radioactive products).

      Even He4 is getting a little scarce because of increased use for superconducting magnets.

  3. Before tritium can become a hazard, it has to be present in at least detectable quantities. Also, remember that tritium will be bonded to the nickel (or palladium) LENR substrate just as H1 or deuterium.

    1. It was clearly detected, by BARC, LANL, Bockris...
      The ambiguity of detection is just a myth.
      Tritium is so rare, noise is so low that detection by competent people is reliable.

      Peter probably have better references

    2. But were all those not electrolysis-based systems?? Certainly Bockris was, and probably LANL (I don't recognize the BARC reference).

      The critical datum is "how much" tritium is produced, both in absolute amount and as a percentage. Merely detecting a few molecules does not necessarily mean a dangerous situation.

      It may be the case that "dry" systems a la Rossi produce much less H3 than "wet" ones.