Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • I wonder if he means literally series - vs parallel - or just a bunch of lights in a serial row (Maybe he needs a high resistive load?)

    "Diffusion" is presumably Rossi-speak for "distribution".

    Yes, distribution rather than diffusion.


    But Rossi is bizarrely off with his 58% figure. The reality is probably between 1 and 2 orders of magnitude lower.

    Combined residential, commercial and industry lighting is less than 10 percent of total US electrical consumption.

    And total US electrical consumption will be much less than the total non electrical energy consumption for things like heat and transportation.


    As for the demo, it seems one of his partners is in the lighting business. They could provide enough high powered LED lights that the spectators might have to shield their eyes from the brightness in the room. That would be something.

  • But think about the additional saving of potentially not having to connect everything to main power.

    Just think of all the heavy power cables going to outdoor lighting that could be replaced with the proposed unit and maybe low power cabling to a control center. (For lights on/off, not controlling Rossi's system)

    Add to that all of the lighting that is probably not installed due to cost or logistics.

    Just disaster relief would be a huge opportunity.

    We start getting to a monster market driver equal to Tesla.

  • Mark U


    Rossi's 58% is global not US and it's for fossil not for electric. how much fossil energy is needed to produce 15% of the world's electricity?

    Let's assume following reference is roughly correct:

    https://www.worldenergydata.or…-total-final-consumption/

    Then, from following quoted text:


    "World total final consumption and electricity generation are shown in chart 1. In 2018, 21% of energy was consumed as electricity and 64% directly as fossil fuels1 (e.g. combustion of oil). In 2019 63% of electricity was generated by fossil fuels."


    it can be calculated that:

    15% global electricity is used for lighting, with 21% of total global energy produced as electricity, lighting corresponds with 15% of 21% = 3% of global energy consumption. With 64% of global energy consumption from fossil, the total percentage of lighting electricity from fossil fuels corresponds with (0.03 x 0.64) = roughly 2%.

    I sincerely hope Rossi´s COP calculations have not been determined in a similar way as his 58% value.

  • Iwamura hasn't invented anything, he's just catching up.

    Come on, I put you, a little drawing, to make you forget your former dreams such as Holmlid and UDH :)

    His "discovery" is only a "flat " release from the Ecat HT :)


    I read this patent application but no meaning of invention because at that time Cold Fusion has no mechanism explanation, they just want to use the phenomena of hydrogen storage metal with D absorption is reported to generate the excess heat.Cold Fusion patent usually excess heat is generated with the tool configuration of ours and they sent the experimental data to Japan patent office to approved patent. This may be the same all around the world.The experimental data is easy to be understood by the examiner but invention technical and scientific explanation are difficult to be understood by the patent examiner. Thus the bad culture is generated without understanding the mechanism, and result in very low efficiency of E-Cat etc.

    Actually the Cold Fusion has no issue of the heat generation due to the very high potential heat by fusion, but without understanding the mechanism everyone believe that nano-particle has good just because the surface area is so large, etc.

    AS I explained everywhere, if the all of the nano-particle are used to occur fusion, the power generation must be higher and it would melt the reactor.

    Be honest to the physics and engineering , because the business is not patent but it is real reactor in a real world so the reactor not based on real cold fusion mechanism will be useless or loosing huge amount of money.

  • your calculations seem to be OK although it's not based on 2020 data.

    Do you know how much % of fossil energy is used for heating? An ecat can be used for heating too.

  • it can be calculated that:

    15% global electricity is used for lighting, with 21% of total global energy produced as electricity, lighting corresponds with 15% of 21% = 3% of global energy consumption. With 64% of global energy consumption from fossil, the total percentage of lighting electricity from fossil fuels corresponds with (0.03 x 0.64) = roughly 2%.

    Yes. A quibble in semantics though : given that lighting uses up 3 percent of total energy production (fossil fuel plus non fossil fuel), the same lighting will use up a wee bit *more* than 3 percent of just fossil fuel energy production, perhaps 3.5 percent or something in that ballpark. In any event, it makes what Rossi said :

    "Light consumes the 58% of the energy produced in the world by fossil fuels" bizarrely (disturbingly?) wrong.

    Perhaps Rossi's lighting company partner was promoting a generous figure of 5.8% and Rossi misread it. Hard to say!

  • Yes. A quibble in semantics though : given that lighting uses up 3 percent of total energy production (fossil fuel plus non fossil fuel), the same lighting will use up a wee bit *more* than 3 percent of just fossil fuel energy production, perhaps 3.5 percent or something in that ballpark. In any event, it makes what Rossi said :

    "Light consumes the 58% of the energy produced in the world by fossil fuels" bizarrely (disturbingly?) wrong.

    Perhaps Rossi's lighting company partner was promoting a generous figure of 5.8% and Rossi misread it. Hard to say!

    Mark, correct.
    Let me elaborate my post (in blue text):


    15% global electricity is used for lighting, with 21% of total global energy produced as electricity, lighting corresponds with 15% of 21% = 3% of global energy consumption.


    and


    With 64% of global energy consumption from fossil, the total percentage of lighting electricity from fossil fuels corresponds with (0.03 x 0.64) = roughly 2% of total global energy consumption. Assuming a similar percentage of electricity is generated from fossil then from non-fossil energy sources, the percentage of lighting electricity consumption is roughly 3% of total fossil energy consumption.


  • The "believe it or not" information is firming up :


    200 W ecat-powered lamps -- a million a year.

    Last summer Rossi said he had an Ecat SKL producing 4kW of power. That could power 20 200W LED lights.

    But it seems now that Ecats can vary in size and power, so it remains to be seen how many 200W lights he will have connected to a single Ecat.

    A million units a year to start is a Trumpian huuuge!

  • Rossi said :

    "Light consumes the 58% of the energy produced in the world by fossil fuels" bizarrely (disturbingly?) wrong.

    Perhaps Rossi's lighting company partner was promoting a generous figure of 5.8% and Rossi misread it. Hard to say!

    You should know by now that when Rossi says something blatantly false, it should be ignored and excuses made, like language issues, Rossi is tired from working so hard, etc. If you question him on this you will be a rock'n troller and lose your ECW and JONP posting privledges. Tread very lightly.

  • You should know by now that when Rossi says something blatantly false, it should be ignored and excuses made, like language issues, Rossi is tired from working so hard, etc. If you question him on this you will be a rock'n troller and lose your ECW and JONP posting privledges. Tread very lightly.

    Yes, I am personally aware of even relatively benign posts that have been blocked on Rossi's blog. All the same however, Sam posted the following as a polite correction to Rossi :


    2021-03-07 13:36 Sam

    Hello DR Rossi

    According to this article lighting

    accounts for 15 percent of Electricity use....


    and Rossi thanked him for the link, hmmm.


    I DO SO LIKE GREEN EGGS AND HAM!

    THANK YOU! THANK YOU, SAM I AM.

  • Rossi finally admits what we said all along, that the e-cat skl is just a light bulb.


    1. Frank Acland March 11, 2021 at 11:57 AM

      Dear Andrea,

      Are the LED lights used in the E-Cat SKL normal off-the-shelf LEDs, or are they specially made for use with the SKL?

      Many thanks,

      Frank Acland

    2. Andrea Rossi March 11, 2021 at 4:45 PM

      Frank Acland:

      Good question.

      They have been invented in a way to match the characteristics of the Ecat SK to yield the maximum of efficiency, studying with the spectrometer the LED light and many other factors. The Ecat SKLed is a synergetic unicum.

      Warm Regards,

      A.R.


    And since he says it is an integrated device, there will be "no way" to directly measure power in vs power out.

    My friends, we have been Mis"SKLed" again. And by "unicum" I think he just misspelled unicorn.

    Here is the history of the ecat output claims:


    Heat only.

    Heat + Electricity

    Primarily Electricity.

    Electricity in close loop, no mains!

    Electricity connected to mains again.

    LED lightbulb connected to mains.


  • Miskled, very clever.

    I just hope Rossi has not confused the wattage consumed by an LED light with the wattage consumed by an incandescent light putting out the same amount of visible light, the latter being roughly 8 times greater.

    The good news is that this synergetic unicumis will be available for sale to us common folk, or so Rossi has implied. Get out your lux meters!

  • Collecting a few more rossi-sez (separate posts, last few days, numbered for reference)
    rossi-isms highlighted: add to Rossi-English dictionary idoneous, defectous and unicum

    R01: All the control system is integrated inside the Ecat SKLed.
    R02: Thank you for your attention to our work; our light is white.
    Q03: Here is an article on grow-light spectrum.
    R04: I don’t think the Ecat SKLed is idoneous for this specific utilization.

    R05: A unique Led lamp is integrated inside an Ecat SKLed module.

    Q06: May I ask if the SKLed light for domestic use is omni directional or only partly omni directional or is it an essentially parallel beam?
    R07: It can be both.
    Q08: Will the E-Cat SKLed be a product that you will market for industrial, commercial, or household lighting?

    R09: It would be for all these tasks ...
    Q10: Will the SKLed have any self-destruct mechanism if it is tampered with?
    R11: yes, and we would recognize easily that there has been a tempering attempt, and consequently the guarantee would expire, while for any other defect we will substitute the Ecat for free as soon as we will receive back the defectous one,
    R12: Yes, the life is expected to be many years, 24 hours per day, without necessity of a recharge.
    R13: [The LEDs] have been invented in a way to match the characteristics of the Ecat SK to yield the maximum of efficiency, studying with the spectrometer the LED light and many other factors. The Ecat SKLed is a synergetic unicum.

  • LED is probably chosen because just switch on means a very constant load anticipated, which is probably required with the current status of his device due to complications of control.


    I wonder whether Rossi anticipated LED dimming.
    LED dimming usually is done by power modulation which might be disadvantageous for the current ECAT.

    Dimming option is an absolute requirement that needs to be included.

  • Q10: Will the SKLed have any self-destruct mechanism if it is tampered with?
    R11: yes, and we would recognize easily that there has been a tempering attempt, and consequently the guarantee would expire, while for any other defect we will substitute the Ecat for free as soon as we will receive back the defectous one,

    This will not stop reverse engineering. That will happen anyway.