Not sure about date matching with FPL. If it is like it is here, the smart meters are read at night between 12 and 3.
Yes that's an issue. But the data should not be off by more than one day. A bigger issue is perhaps the data is not read at the same time each day.
Display MoreI did my own FPL conversion, and haven't opened Malcolm's V14 to look at it yet.
The ERV start day, I think, is undisputed, and is probably the only good metric for deciding the days of the week relative to all of the data.
The IH FPL data starts even before the "extra day" indicated on the IH 129-01 Exhibit, based on the angle of the line entering from the LH margin.
It is possible that IH could have accidentally shifted something by a day, also. They have the original data for FPL and Fabiani's data, so I can only guess that they have plotted it correctly.
Fabiani's kWh input log "falls behind" enough at the first not-recorded day to get into sync (mostly) with the ERV data (or maybe the ERV data speeds up to catch up with Fabiani's data).
Malcom Lear's data I believe was reverse engineered from the FPL data graph.
The first four values for FPL KWh/d are:
| 2/24/15 373 |
| 2/25/15 405 |
| 2/26/15 430 |
| 2/27/15 528 |
What are your values for these dates? There's enough variability here that I can sync up your dates with Malcom's.
Thanks,
Display MoreI had to add an additional day to the very beginning of the ERV data file (a day 0) in order to get the ERV kWh trace to match the one on the IH Exhibit 129-01, which bumped my low kWh days to Saturday.
(I had to correct my x axis to include the added new first day).
Did you test that with your data? (Just so we are all on the same page with our data files).
There is something screwy there anyways, since Fabiani's data is a day off, also.
Well I did use Malcom Lear's tabulated data because it was a better fit than mine (see FinalReportV14.xls) for the FPL data. I did NOT adjust days. Day 1 for the ERV data was 2/24/15 (2/23/15 10:30PM - 2/24/15 10:30PM) from the ERV data tables for me from Malcom Lear's tables. Day 0 in the graph for FPL data got mapped to Day 1 in the spreadsheet I believe.
I'll look into shifting the FPL data but I need to understand this a little better. The ERV data unequivocally starts with Day 1 as 2/24/15. Which day do you think Malcom Lear's FPL data starts?
Thanks.
This is the weekly data usage I have:
In which case why don't you ask him yourself? Although I personally would find such a request impertinent at least.
I am! And as a journalist whose integrity is everything, I don't think he would have a probem with the question. He may have already addressed this before but if not I am a bit surprised.
Display MoreWell, the customer "stating" this would not be enough. They would have to show a great deal of documented proof such as invoices, employee records and records of sales to their customers. They would have to explain why they needed small sums of money from Rossi to pay routine expenses. They would have to answer many technical questions from experts, such as how they managed to use all that heat, in what sort of industrial process, why they did not heat up the building, and how they operated without people in the production area, and without noise. They would have to explain how they managed to use 1 MW of process heat with only ~4 kW of machinery.
The customer would need a 1-MW capacity cooling tower outside the building, like the one you see in the photo on p. 4 of this brochure, where it says "Ready to use in an instant."
http://www.viflow.fi/uploads/coolingtowerseng.pdf
I think they would need something the size of the OCT01 model shown on the next page. No one saw anything like that outside the facility. I do not see how they could magically hide it. You can't put it inside the building.
All in all, I think it is out of the question.
Rossi claims "the customer" does not want to describe their secret industrial process. It turns out the customer is Rossi and his lawyer. They are the owners and the only employees of the company. So if he wants the money, he -- the company, that is -- better change that policy and describe the process in enough detail to convince people it is real.
Needless to say, that is all nonsense, as anyone who does not live on Planet Rossi can see.
Jed,
If a company with the credibility like Johnson Matthey (purely used as an example) contacted IH and said, we can vouch for the 1MW plant and are prepared to do so in court, I think IH would probably change their tune. Yes, they may well ask for invoices etc but my point is this could have been very easily cleared up by the customer compared to long, expensive, protracted legal battle we are seeing.
I am sure he does not. His investment has been something far more valuable than mere money, Time, reputation, career. That is quite enough I think.
I'd like to hear it from himself personally. I once asked MFMP if they had any associations with IH and they promptly disclosed they had none. Not too hard and given Mats comments of late I am wondering a bit about his objectivity.
I did buy and read his book. I thought his title, An Impossible Invention, was quite clever because it would apply no matter which way this thing went.
Display MoreRossi's data! His data, not mine. He uploaded it to the court papers. Have you even looked at it?
I just did. The methods are dead simple. Here:
Rossi's data shows the input power ~11 kW. However, he told Lewan and others it was 20 kW. So let's go with 20 kW.
Rossi often said the temperature in the reservoir was 60°C. Sometimes he said it was 69°C. Let's go with 60°C.
The temperature of the water coming out of the reactor was 103°C.
Okay, so the temperature rose about 43°C.
Observers told me the flow meter was off by about a factor of 4, because it was the wrong kind of flow meter and it was sitting in a half-empty pipe. (They probably measured the flow themselves, but I did not hear the details.)
Okay, so assuming there was no excess heat, and working backwards, 20 kW is 4762 calories per second. The temperature rose 43°C, meaning the flow must have been 4762/43 = 111 g/s which is ~400 kg/hour. That's about 3.8 times less than the pretend flow rate numbers in the log. Those numbers could not possibly be right -- because they show a giant flow rate on days when the machine was turned off, and because the pumps could not produce that much flow. As I said, observers estimate the flow rate was wrong by roughly a factor of 4.
That adds up nicely.
Very plausible scenario JedRothwell. Now the "customer" could come out and state that they received 3600 Kg/d of steam and IH would have no choice but to pay $89M to Rossi IMO. It would be a slam-dunk case. But for some reason the customer continues to hide here. Maybe Rossi is going for 3x the damages? Of course it's quite likely that there is no customer in which case Rossi has perpetrated a massive fraud. Given this, why would anybody believe anything Rossi has done?
It boggles my mind that people still believe what Rossi says. For instance Mats Lewan continues to believe in Rossi's technology: http://www.e-catworld.com/2017…er-interviews-mats-lewan/ Does anybody know if Mats Lewan has any Rossi E-Cat derived investments (besides his book)? His opinion would be far more credible for me if he can make statement clarifying this releationship.
"Rossi had backup systems alright and fluid temps might have been able to remain somewhat constant in the system, even during the "down" days, very possibly because of certain "other systems" on the "customer" side that have recently been discovered."
The correlation coefficient (Google sheets CORREL function) for ERV daily supplied energy and customer daily energy use is -0.28. On the right side of Dewey's statement for sure. By customer daily energy use, I mean the FPL daily usage (reverse engineered from the graph in Court Document 129-01 Exhibit A) minus the ERV daily supplied energy (Court Document 128-01 Exhibit 1).
, Rossi's fake broke customer, etc.....
If Rossi's fake customer was broke, who paid for the power bills? These must have been substantial each month.
Just Askin'
HI Barty,
I never could get logging in via Facebook to work. Getting "App Not Setup: This app is still in development mode, and you don't have access to it. Switch to a registered test user or ask an app admin for permissions." message.
I created a new account but it took three different attempts before I received an activation code.
I'm using this site through my desktop. Just letting you know.
Peter Metz
Excellent work on the graphs, have you managed to reverse engineer the data from the published graphs or is this photoshop??
Hi Malcom Lear,
Thank you for your work on the ERV annex data. I'm surprised that there has been so little comment about it, Paradigmnoia exempted. More interest in trolling and posturing here I think. I'm somewhat surprised as I think there is some interesting relations in the data.
I managed to digitize the FPL daily data provided in one of the exhibits. After trying a few sites, I found WebPlotDigitizer (http://arohatgi.info/WebPlotDigitizer/) to work best. It's online, free, and easy to use and the tracing mode will produce usage data on the day boundaries using X Step w/Interpolation automatic tracing.
Based on this work the data in the graph does not appear to be exactly daily data. That is the peaks of the graphs are not at day intervals but vary across the graph. There are a number of possible reasons for this one of them being that the data was not reported at the same time each day or possibly accumulated. The data is probably also out of sync with the data in the ERV annex. Still the data is useful and I was able to get the data from the daily graph when aggregated to be a few percentages from the monthly FPL data from another exhibit so I consider the data good enough.
If there is interest I will post my working spreadsheet with this data.
