Not according to Rossi's testimony. And in any case a few fins would not help. You are not surprised because you have not tried to work out how you could get the claimed 1MW from the 200m of piping Rossi swore he used.
Did Rossi deny using finned radiators? I admit it is my speculation only, but I don't think he has ever denied using them, and he has been known to use them with past configurations. Why would he all of the sudden stop using them in this instance?
I wonder why IH has bought back the Rossi License for Africa from its holder? Still throwing good money after bad?
Alan, do you know when this happened?
It didn't, my mistake, Rossi bought it back...Alan.
Here the calculation for a DN150 pipe (BTW: Who the heck would use DN150 pipes for such a heat exchanger?)
Exactly. There was probably more to it than just the pipes.
Rossi filed the lawsuit before the payment was due, by a few days.
No, IH had a contractural duty to pay him some number of days after they received the ERV report (don't remember but it was something like 5 days). He filed his suit the day after the period for IH to pay him had passed. Yes the lawyers were talking smack before that, but I believe that if IH's lawyers did not directly tell Rossi not to destroy anything in anticipation of a law suit, then he had no legal duty to do refrain from doing so. In fact I'm not even sure what his duty would have been even if IH's lawyers had contacted him. But the data spoliation issue is a big question mark for me.
There was no contractual requirement (AFAIK) that this plant should produce 1MW of heat continuously. Running at 250kW would be fine, so long as the COP was high enough to meet the required standard. Perhaps someone can point me to a contradictory clause in the disputed contract that says otherwise?
It's possible, depending upon which 'contractual' requirement you mean. As is well known, IH denies that Doral was a GPT as defined in the 2nd amendment, so that the ruling 'contract' would be from the Term Sheet rental agreement.
From the 'Term Sheet':
QuoteJMC will pay rent of $1000 per day to IH or its designee, monthly in arrears, once the 1MW plant is installed in their facility and operating at a capacity of 1MW. however, if the plant provides less than 1 MW of thermal energy, the rental rate will be reduced proportionally. ...
JMP invoiced for 1MW and sometimes 750KW, so although 250KW is not necessarily a violation of contract, invoicing for more than that would be a problem.
On the other hand, Rossi asserts that the 2nd amendment is estopped (despite not being signed by AEG) and therefore applies. In that case, the 'level' is stated to derive from the level determined at validation.
From the license agreement:
QuotePayment of the amount set forth in Section 3(c) [of $89 Million] is contingent upon the Plant operating at the same level (or better) at which Validation was achieved for a period of 350 days (even if not consecutive) within a 400 day period...
[and later in the 2nd amendment...]
the Plant consistently produces energy that is at least four times greater than the energy consumed by the Plant and that the temperature of the steam produceed by the Plant was consistently 100 degrees Celsius or greater...
It would seem from this that the 'level' achieved (according to Rossi) for Validation was 1MW, so that 250KW would be insufficient.
However, if you skip that interpretation (which seems untenable), then the second clear requirement is COP >= 4. Based on the power consumption asserted by Rossi (Penon and/or Fabiani), production generally above 80KW would be sufficient.
Which interpretation is legally correct? We may not know, depending on what happens in or out of court (rulings/settlement).
Sorry- I have just discovered that actually that the Africa one was bought back by Rossi for cost +10%. I am at this moment enquiring about the other extant licenses with a contact (not AR) right now. I will correct my error above.
I have also taking the liberty of appending my correction to your own post. hope that's ok.
No-one disputes that. Perhaps the problem is that the Penon report indicates 1MW. If in fact only 250kW or less was generated, then the Penon data is clearly wrong by at least a factor of 4 and can clearly not be relied upon to indicate any excess heat.
I agree. This is a bit of a common issue with the whole drama. Too many people have tunnel vision to the facts, when in reality, everything links together.
True, the GPT did not require 1MW, but if as you say, the GPT report reported 1MW, then either the facility HAD to dissipate 1MW or the report was false and the GPT nullified.
If the report stated 1MW and the exchanger is used as evidence, then all the back pressure, having to travel hundreds of meters through piping and up a second floor, has to be accounted for at the eCat outlet. If higher pressure, the higher temperature or no phase change. People then say a vacuum was used, well now more unknowns and then the small pump clearly states it must have postive pressure to work. The cobweb continues to grow.
One must link everythiing together, INCLUDING all the NEGATIVE evidence! With the present known information, it fits the story of out and out fraud. To counter this argument, people have to extrapolate questionable scenarios and stretch the imagination to build a defense that Rossi himself is not presenting! We must realize that if ANY of these scenarios were true, Rossi could easily prove it, yet he does not. There is a reason why!
It was supposed to be the large square thing in front of the white door here still wrapped in cardboard.
I am not clear on your thoughts here. Is the photo you posted showing the cardboard box? My understanding was that the heat exchanger used 200 meters of piping. This would be a rather large device and certainly not fit in the box shown.
Also, Rossi's testimony was that it was built using "day labor", so I do not think it was a purchased unit.
I may be misunderstanding your post.
Thanks.
Rossi could easily prove it, yet he does not. There is a reason why!
I suspect AR is already considering an appeal, which requires the introduction of fresh evidence. But that is the wildest of conjectures based on his erratic personality.
I am not clear on your thoughts here. Is the photo you posted showing the cardboard box? My understanding was that the heat exchanger used 200 meters of piping. This would be a rather large device and certainly not fit in the box shown.
I'm not disputing or trying to counter that argument. From what I recall it was suggested when the photo was first released that the cardboard partially wrapped a heat exchanger of size similar to those used in trucks, etc. It could be all they used, or one of several; I don't know - although I suspect that alone wouldn't be enough for 1 MW. It may also well be something else instead. I just wanted to report what I remembered from old discussions about that photo.
A single truck radiator ought to be good for 100kW at a reasonable wind-speed (20-30 mph). This is because a 300kW fully loaded truck climbing a gradient needs to be able to dissipate that much heat via the radiator.
I am not clear on your thoughts here. Is the photo you posted showing the cardboard box? My understanding was that the heat exchanger used 200 meters of piping. This would be a rather large device and certainly not fit in the box shown.
Also, Rossi's testimony was that it was built using "day labor", so I do not think it was a purchased unit.
200 Meters is not all that much piping. The exchanger requires at least four lines running to it to work; Steam supply, condensate return, product supply, and product return. That cuts total travel down to 50 meters each. next you have to take out vertical travel to the second floor. that takes an estimated 8-10 meters out of each line leaving about 40 meters in each line for horizontal travel. In America, 200 meters of piping would be bout 60 sticks of piping. On, average even with careful use, your going to lose about 1/6 of a meter to wastage for every stick of piping, that's about 10 meters total or 2 meters for each system. (Note I'm using rough figures not exact calculation.) That leaves about 38 meters of horizontal travel available to have a single line system. Add in control loops, bypasses, headers, drains, etc. quickly brings me to the conclusion that if the exchanger existed it was a very simple system People drastically underestimate how much piping is needed to run industrial plants. I built a fuel gas supply to one boiler one time that ran over a 1000 feet of piping just for supply to a single boiler.
I suspect AR is already considering an appeal, which requires the introduction of fresh evidence. But that is the wildest of conjectures based on his erratic personality.
Generally speaking, appeals are not allowed to introduce new evidence. Appeal court rulings are restricted to matters of law. The only exception is usually when an appeals court orders a whole new trial.
There is much evidence, I suppose from both sides, that we have yet to see. We might see more during the trial. We have only been able to review snippets of the depositions (apart from Murray's, which Rossi's team deposited on the docket in its entirety).
There is much evidence, I suppose from both sides, that we have yet to see. We might see more during the trial. We have only been able to review snippets of the depositions (apart from Murray's, which Rossi's team deposited on the docket in its entirety).
Discovery is meant to allow each side to put forward (in initial form) its arguments and the corresponding evidence. That can be elaborated a bit, but introducing new evidence would be problematic because it would not allow the other side to prepare suitably.
So we will get things not previously disclosed from the depositions, and perhaps some new evidence (e.g. from Murray and Smith) but I don't think Rossi can introduce whole new expert witnesses without a good reason.
Why did they do not perform a long-term test there, as foreseen in the agreement with Rossi
They did perform both long-term and short term tests, on several devices, with Rossi's help. None of them worked.
Note that the "customer" was a detail of the Doral term sheet that was agreed and was not part of the GPT specification. There is no mention of the need to find a customer in the original License Agreement or its amendments, where the terms of the GPT are spelled out. It would have to be through some weird contortion of estoppel that the need for finding a customer and IH's dragging its feet in doing so somehow becomes bound up with the GPT. (Or, I suppose, a link that was made to the GPT itself, in contrast to the Doral term sheet agreement, in one of the many documents other than the License Agreement and its amendments.)
They did perform both long-term and short term tests, on several devices, with Rossi's help. None of them worked.
They did perform both long-term and short term test, on several devices, with and without Rossi's help. And as far as we know, all of them worked. We have no extant evidence*--neither contemporaneous with the tests or otherwise, other than after-the-fact self-serving testimony, that they did not work. We do, however, have evidence that they did work.
* Darden expressed some doubt of their abilities, but had enough confidence in the results to pursue significant outside funding.
I think that it is clear that Rossi reasonably foresaw that there would be a pending legal issue.
Yet the IH supporters here say that IH was shocked when the lawsuit was filed. That Darden never would have imagined that Rossi would sue.
Rossi foresaw there would be a legal issue because he himself intended to sue! He filed a lawsuit, not I.H. He had no business doing that. His test was a total failure, and blatant fraud. He should have skipped town and gone to Sweden, where he has already prepared a new scam with a new group of marks. It was foolish to try to get the $89 million after scamming I.H. out of $11 million. He pushed his luck too far.
Not sure whether this detail has been mentioned or not yet, but the "customer" was the subtext of the Doral term sheet that was agreed and was not part of the GPT specification. There is no mention of the need to find a customer in the original License Agreement or its amendments, where the terms of the GPT are spelled out. It would have to be through some weird contortion of estoppel that the need for finding a customer and IH's dragging its feet in doing so somehow becomes bound up with the GPT. (Or, I suppose, a link that was made to the GPT itself, in contrast to the Doral term sheet agreement, in one of the many documents other than the License Agreement and its amendments.)
Yes. You will notice that I put Rossi's lies about the identity of the customer as a legal ace for IH. It is not because the customer validation has any bearing on the GPT. But Rossi's lying over the customer has a bearing on whether IH agreed to the test (which they did not consider the GPT, though Rossi wanted it to be that). Also, Rossi's brazen lying on this peripheral issue to Rossi's suit is central to IH's counter-suit for fraud. I think also, in any trial, the disclosure of Rossi's trickery over the customer will severely reduce confidence in other matters that are supported only by RossiSays, such as the second floor heat exchanger.
