1 MW E-Cat Plant Watch Thread [UPDATE #41 — 350 Day Test is Over, Results in Approx 1 Month]

    Fuel endurance time.


    I completely missed that ... Well then, let's hope they got their parameters right.
    Should be visible in the output curves: 'fine ... fine ... fine ... drooping ... nada ...'


    I should think that the ongoing data collection should essentially be done-and-analyzed within hours of the "done switch" being shut off.
    After all, the data has been gathering for a year.
    And the data-analysis agency must sure have been taking spot-checks under non-disclosure the whole time...
    ... to work out base rates, operating parameters, differential response curves and the like.


    Just saying.
    It sounds thin.
    Like testing an ocean going yacht for a year to see when the fuel tank runs dry.
    Mmmm... hmmm...


    GoatGuy

    @GoatGuy


    The test evaluator has vast nuclear industry experience so you know that he will milk this job for as much as he can get. That is business as usual in that industry. It might take a month before the report is prepared; this is consistent with the pace of nuclear industry report prep speeds. The test evaluator will milk this job for all fees that it is worth. After all when his ID is revealed to his nuclear brothers, he will be shunned from the nuclear industry and made to retire out of vindictive spite.


    After all, he is contributing to the demise of the nuclear industry if he in fact tells the truth.

    • Official Post

    Well Goat Guy, that is a good question. One that has been asked many times the past year. Not trying to embarrass you for asking it yet again mind you, as it is only asked so often because it makes sense...understand you aren't privy to prior discussions? Even our dearly departed Mary Yugo, ;) incorporated that very question into the majority of his anti-Rossi rants. I may have asked the same myself a time or two.


    The answer varies depending on the affiliation -skep/believer, of those answering. Skeps...well of course we know what they say. I assume you are in that category? Believers such as myself, who, when they put on the skep hat for a moment, are all over the place as is expected of us...hey, we don't want to disappoint. :)


    Seriously, and honestly, most explanations revolve around the "N" letter in LENR. That word alone changes the R/D of any product. Puts it onto an alternate, much more difficult, highly political, regulatory approval track. If this is all real, obviously the 1MW plant, or any of Rossi's products to come (hey what do you think of that ECat-X? ;) ) for that matter, are not going to be introduced into the marketplace so easily as other, non "N" products, would.


    According to Rothwell, not even a 1 year test run will come close to placating the regulatory agencies in western societies, possibly even communist regimes...not to mention keeping the greenies at bay. If I recall correctly, he thinks it will take hundreds of Ecat test beds being run simultaneously, for a long, long time to even come close to gaining approval for putting such a unique device in the public domain. He had some more graphic descriptions I won't mention so as not to scare the children. :)


    Yes, what I said raises even more questions as to how this one test was allowed? That has been discussed too. I've seen your stuff before, so I guess you already are wondering that too.

    We are talking about Rossi here. No one else could have pulled it off. He has had a lot of experience dirty infighting with the Mafia and Big Gov.
    Anyone else would have blown it with bright eyed naivete.


    If I were Rossi I would not let anyone near the device just too satisfy your curiosity.


    He has all the cards. It's his call.

    Why did they allow the test to proceed?
    Two reasons
    1 They were trapped by their own propaganda. How could they admit it was nuclear when they had previously denied such a thing was possible?
    2 They have a war to fight. You can bet your bottom Dollar that the competition was not bound by any theoretical niceties.
    I'll leave you with your demented imagination as to how this will effect warfare.

    • Official Post

    As said here that is was working have been proven in the first days of operation.
    If it was not working at all, if it were a scam, it would have ended after few days of analysis, at worst after first billing analysis.
    The goal of the test is just legal to determine contractual commitments, confirm reliability targets.
    The F9 is like "presumption of innocence", a legal position not related to factual evidences.


    I see 3 population.

    • The happy few of aware and convinced people will put more pressure on their projects, increasing evangelisation efforts. La Tribune article triggered such moves, adding to many others in process in many zone.
    • The mass of uninformed people will float between rare direct influence by happy few, seldom joining them, and wide influence of the massive FUD and Wikipedia lies. Most people will prefer comfortable FUD to disruptive hypothesis.
    • The few active nay-believers will increase their FUD efforts, developing conspiracy theories of increased complexity, which will satisfy the demand of FUD, as it happens since may 1989 in Baltimore conference.

    We will have to work for the growing few who support LENR, ignoring others while will only admit it when a kid of 5 years old will menace to ridicule them.

    I would say that financial reports do take a while to prepare, especially if one is going to account for capex using a new technology.
    It isn't about whether the plant makes heat or not, it is about profitability.
    The report will be tied to the year-end financial report of the company is my guess.

    • Official Post

    Mats Lewan seems pretty confident about this just concluded test:

    multiple sources have told me that the test has been successful.

    Earlier, some sources having visited the test plant told me that the COP, Coefficient of Performance, i.e. the ratio between output power and input power for control, was in the range 20—80, meaning that the heat plant was consuming 12—50 kW while producing 1 MW

    I have also been told that the total amount of fuel—mostly harmless elements such as lithium, hydrogen and nickel, according to Andrea Rossi’s granted patent on the technology—was in the range of tenths of grams

    Personally, however, I will put the champagne on ice. Now.

    I especially like that last comment. :) Based on Lewan's breaking out the bubbly, I'm adjusting my earlier pledge: "to not let myself get excited", to now "not letting myself get TOO excited".

    Hello, my 2 cents opinion :) I think what is the most important is not the technological proof but the market proof. What would unleash investment will be the proof that there are effective manufacturing agreements with China, US and some others. If there is manufacturing agreement there's working product. What is important is the core technology, not the product. Core technology cannot be protected and msut not be protected. I bet that the LENR law will soon such as "effective power density will double every 6 months" Thus will decrease size, weight, raw materials costs, enable wider integration and so on... The only way for any company with a as usual business model is to be in a position to propose a return on investment short enough to get customers to invest in the product. Do not forget how much value this technology will destroy at first...Best,Michel.

    • Official Post


    Recently when saying that "LENR must be integrated or will be killed".
    I think Rossi gave the answer to your question.
    All who still think Rossi is in charge of the E-Cat, please stop being naive.

    Shane D., quoting Mats Lewan (emphasis added by me):


    Quote from Shane D.

    I have also been told that the total amount of fuel—mostly harmless elements such as lithium, hydrogen and nickel, according to Andrea Rossi’s granted patent on the technology—was in the range of tenths of grams


    I wonder what the other elements were? (My guess: radioisotopes.)

    Quote

    The few active nay-believers will increase their FUD efforts, developing conspiracy theories of increased complexity, which will satisfy the demand of FUD, as it happens since may 1989 in Baltimore conference.


    How many incompetents do you need:


    (1) to get a Lugano report wrong?
    (2) to get an 1 year e-cat test wrong?

    • Official Post
    Quote from Eric Walker

    I wonder what the other elements were? (My guess: radioisotopes.)




    Eric,


    I don't know...maybe Thomas will have an idea? ;)


    Actually, I can't tell from the way he worded it, if he leaves room for there to be other elements involved, other than the three listed? Since you mentioned it though, it is odd he would say it that way. Fuel composition vis a vis the Lugano ash analysis, and Rossi's recent patent approval, only shows the three elements. Maybe there is more to the "secret sauce"?

    Quote from Shane D.

    Fuel composition vis a vis the Lugano ash analysis, and Rossi's recent patent approval, only shows the three elements.


    Take a look at Appendix 3 -- there are a lot of other elements shown there in the spectra. The reason for them being there is open to question. In this short paper I look at whether there are any radioisotopes in the Lugano ash. (Having authored a Vixra paper, I am now officially a crackpot.)

    Shane D.


    Attributed to"
    Gregory Byron Goble


    February 19, 2016 at 01:42

    I guess you are saying that Rossi can pull the wool over the eyes of the Canadian DoD? Study up and reconsider.


    Special Policy Project


    Defence Research and Development Canada, Corporate Office Ottawa


    As a senior analyst in the Office of the Chief Scientist, provides
    strategic analysis for S&T policy, capability and outlook, power and
    energy (P&E) in sustaining defence and security capabilities, here
    and abroad, with an emphasis on off-grid and arctic future challenges.
    Develops and manages projects in support of developing program
    innovation, excellence and knowledge management for Defence R&D
    Canada and the Defence S&T Enterprise.


    New publication: Evidence base for the development of an enduring
    DND/CAF Operational Energy Strategy (DOES) : Expressing Canadian values
    through defence operational energy stewardship here and abroad. http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc189/p800726_A1b.pdf


    Quote from the publication


    Most recent results from the third party independent E-Cat trials
    showed exceptional energy densities. When including internal plus
    external components the volumetric energy density observed was (3.6 104 ±
    12%) MJ/L and the gravimetric energy density was (1.3 104 ± 10%) MJ/kg.
    The energy densities of gasoline are 32.4 MJ/L and 44.4 MJ/kg
    respectively. So the E-Cat is thousand times more volumetric energy
    dense and 293 times more gravimetric energy dense than gasoline.


    The conservative E-Cat gravimetric power density was (4.7 103 ± 10%)
    W/kg. Jet engines of Boeing 747 and Airbus A300 offer a power density
    5.67 kw/kg. So the E-Cat is almost as gravimetric power dense as these
    jet engines. Wärtsilä RTA96-C 14-cylinder twostroke turbo diesel engines
    display 0.03 kW/kg. So the E-Cat is 100 times more gravimetric power
    dense than these ship engines.


    https://animpossibleinvention.…tt-e-cat-trial-completed/

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.