Forbes: Hello Cheap Energy, Hello Brave New World

[johnnd]

http://www.forbes.co...rave-new-world/

 

"Over on Network World where I've had a gig as a columnist for about 18 years, my Backspin column I wrote this week about a power generation system called E-Cat that is to be tested on October 28th.

 

If you've missed the recent brouhaha over the E-Cat (which stands for Energy Catalyzer), you're missing out on a three ring circus over a technology that will either change everything or change nothing because what is promised is, in theory, power too cheap to be worth metering.

 

The E-Cat is a simple device albeit with functioning that defies all known explanations.

 

In summary, the E-Cat is a cold fusion (CF) device (the inventor, Andrea Rossi, prefers to term the technology "Low Energy Nuclear Reaction" (which appears to be the same thing as CF but a less contentious phrasing). I'll refer you to my Network World column for a more long-winded explanation of the background and theories about the device.

 

The problem with Rossi's system is that it is too good to be true. It is claimed that the E-Cat only requires some initial heating to start after which the reaction is self-sustaining. The reaction uses a secret catalyst to transform nickel into copper with heat being produced which can be used to make steam, drive a Stirling engine, or be used for whatever you please.

 

If this device works as claimed, the world will change and not just a little but hugely and at every level of how we're organized, how we make stuff, how we travel, and how wealth is distributed. And those changes won't just impact the US or the Western hemisphere; they well transform the entire world because incredibly cheap energy is the ultimate game changer.

 

So, here's what I'm wondering: If the E-Cat does work, how will ultra-cheap energy transform your world? Imagine the following:

 

• Where today you use petroleum products for motive energy (for example, to propel cars, trucks, and planes) you will be using steam engines or Stirling engines. In theory you'll be able to drive across the country for cents. What will that do to the trucking industry? The shipping industry? Aviation?
• With the demand for gasoline falling overnight and petroleum becoming needed primarily as feedstock for plastics, the US would immediately become self-sufficient in crude oil. What will happen in the Middle East without the huge flow of cash from the Western hemisphere? How will world politics be changed?
• An E-Cat system could power your house or office making the existing grid obsolete. What would it mean to make your personal and corporate electricity and gas bills nearly zero?
• The cost of manufacturing would fall very quickly with energy removed from the equation. If you are in manufacturing of any kind, this will affect you enormously. How fast could and how would you rework your corporate strategy to become competitive in a market where prices suddenly plummeted (note that the suddenly reduced cash flows would play havoc with the finance structures of many corporations).

So, the E-Cat will be demonstrated on the 28^th of this month and I, for one, will be watching with great interest and enormous hope because if Rossi's E-Cat system works, it will be goodbye recession and hello, brave new world."

 

Edited October 19, 2011 by swansont
remove spammy links

[imatfaal]

There will be a lot of hat eating as well! Quite apart from the physics being against him - Eng. Rossi's actions (patent the damn thing) so far and his history (petrodragon) do not bode well for a energy bonanza.

 

We have had a couple of threads so far

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/60356-cold-fusion-demonstration-definitely-a-hoax-or-merely-almost-definitely-a-hoax/

 

This is the latest and I cannot find the other

[johnnd]

While it's categorically true that those factors would point to a scam, how do you explain this:

 

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

 

"In a detailed report, two Swedish physicists exclude chemical reactions as the energy source in the Italian ‘energy catalyzer’. The two physicists recently supervised a new test of the device in Bologna, Italy."

“Any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production.”

“In some way a new kind of physics is taking place. It’s enigmatic, but probably no new laws of nature are involved. We believe it is possible to explain the process with known laws of nature,” said Hanno Essén, associate professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and member of the board.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt2JqEmaUGc (video interview)

“This is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geopolitics of solving quite a bit of the energy problem. – Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist of NASA Langley.

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3108242.ece

In a new experiment, the Italian “energy catalyzer” has been run at Bologna University for 18 hours.

“In my opinion, all chemical sources are now excluded,” physicist Giuseppe Levi told Ny Teknik.

Prof. Roland Petterson:

"More experiment must be done to be convinced - or the opposite. Is it wrong or is it right? At the moment, I think it's correct. But we will make more experiment. It's a wonderful energy source, clean energy source - if it's right, when we have convinced the world that it is not any chemical reaction behind it, that it is some kind of a nuclear reaction, fusion reactions. The theory about it, or the details, we don't know. But I guess we quite soon will know it."

(Question about Uppsala test, will it be the same?)

"Roughly the same, we will change some part of the equipment, some parts of the detectors, the thermometers and so on, and make at least two different change in the equipment."

(Prof. Christos Stremmenos)

Rossi must be quite the con man to have convinced all of these and other scientists and not through his powers of persuasion, but from observing the workings of the apparatus and actual verifiable data.

Edited October 18, 2011 by johnnd

[imatfaal]

While it's categorically true that those factors would point to a scam, how do you explain this:

 

I don't explain those things; it doesn't work like that. With a new invention there is no point trying to prove whether it is a scam or the best thing since sliced bread when there is no access to the device. In the same way I don't bother explaining why homoeopathy is a scam; until it has shown some form of attempted proof it's just scotch mist and doesn't even make it to the level where debunking is a possibility. It matters not one whit how many learned people support a therapy, device, or theory - it matters how it passes independent experimental verification; and at present this has not taken place with the e-cat.

 

For a process or invention to be challenged it must be known and understood - the e-cat at the moment is a black box, given a few weeks in the shop I could make one that does exactly the same thing! Debunking might necessary sooner than it should when the machine is either offered for sale or people are asked to contribute to development - as this is not the case with the e-cat then we just wait till he patents the damn thing and releases his physics.

 

when cavendish labs/mit etc are given blueprints and announce they can get more out than in ( or when he starts selling serious amounts of power back to the national grid - in europe you can just pump power back into the network and get paid for it) - that's when to sit up and take notice; and the fact that he has neither shown it commercially, nor used the usual scientific route, nor the usual patent approach makes every sort of alarm bell ring.

[johnnd]

Very reasonable. If we are to believe Rossi, and he has been consistently saying this for the past few months, the commercial strategy will begin in November. Meaning these LENR devices will be on the market.

 

Rossi does have a penchant for theatrics:

 

"About the snakes: the time of the snakes is over. The start up of the 1 MW plant is the end of the mental masturbations of envious, wannabe theorists, lecturers of calorimetry and engineering. Now LENR goes to the market. The test will not be made by me, but by the Customers’ consultants. Time of chatters is over. Maybe the test will not be good, maybe: it will be the first time I will start up a plant of that dimension, but in this case the problem will be the Customer, not the bunch of imbeciles that instead of understanding that we actually made LENR a reality lose their time digging holes on the surface the water in the middle of the ocean to find the wine. And in the case this test will go not well, we will learn and remake another, and another, and another, but, be sure, we will arrive to the target. At any cost."

"Snakes are the paradigmatic example of how corruption can expose a journalist to pathetic situations. Anyway, the times of snakes are over, after the start up of our 1 MW plant the market will sweep them away. They have been paid from competitors who tried all they could to forbid us to arrive at this point, but, as you see, they failed."

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=22#comments

Edited October 19, 2011 by johnnd

[imatfaal]

John - it will be a great day if that were to be true, and I hope it will come to pass ... but I ain't selling my energy stocks just yet.

[johnnd]

An analysis of the NyTeknik data by Bob Higgins of Motorola Solutions:

 

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg52921.html

"It is interesting now how the skeptical criticism on the net seems

to be switching from doesnt work at all to doesnt work with acceptable

commercial COP. Are the skeptics now convinced there was large scale

excess energy? In and of itself, this is a physics shattering breakthrough.

It is clear from the data that the COP would have been much higher if the

test had been run for a longer period. I am personally excited by the

results and data from the experiment."

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

johnnd, you are dangerously close to crossing the "no advertising" line by including multiple links to your site. They have been removed. Don't let it happen again. Do not derail the thread by responding to this.

[johnnd]

!

Moderator Note

johnnd, you are dangerously close to crossing the "no advertising" line by including multiple links to your site. They have been removed. Don't let it happen again. Do not derail the thread by responding to this.

Okay, maybe you can help me out here, because I'm slightly confused. If you're talking about linking to a certain Swedish-site-which-must-not-be-named, it just so happens that this particular magazine is the only mainstream source that reports and conducts experiments on the E-Cat. Rossi gave them exclusive publishing rights on the October 6th test data. When your policies get in the way of informing fellow forum-dwellers through relevant links, maybe it's time to rethink them. Just a suggestion.

 

EDIT:

 

 

Ah, I see. You thought I wrote the Forbes article. I just copy-pasted it over, which is why the links remained. Won't happen again.

Edited October 19, 2011 by johnnd

[John Cuthber]

Johnd

There's a delete button.

Anyway, this statement "Any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container." is demonstrably false by at least 3 orders of magnitude every time someone sets of a big firework.

If that's their "scientific evidence" then we can just lock this thread now. It's about a fraudulent or delusional claim and so it will never achieve much.

[johnnd]

Anyway, this statement "Any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container." is demonstrably false by at least 3 orders of magnitude every time someone sets of a big firework.

If that's their "scientific evidence" then we can just lock this thread now. It's about a fraudulent or delusional claim and so it will never achieve much.

 

I see where you're coming from, but the only problem with the fireworks example is that... well, let me use another example: 40 lbs of TNT could produce that much energy, but not in that volume - and it has a nasty little habit of releasing it much too quickly for peaceful purposes.

Edited October 19, 2011 by johnnd

[swansont]

Okay, maybe you can help me out here, because I'm slightly confused. If you're talking about linking to a certain Swedish-site-which-must-not-be-named, it just so happens that this particular magazine is the only mainstream source that reports and conducts experiments on the E-Cat. Rossi gave them exclusive publishing rights on the October 6th test data. When your policies get in the way of informing fellow forum-dwellers through relevant links, maybe it's time to rethink them. Just a suggestion.

 

In addition to the link to your column, you had three additional links to the networkworld site that did not lead to a specific article. That's advertising. That's what was deleted.

[John Cuthber]

Oops!, I misread KWH as KW.

To get that much energy stored as a normal fuel you would need about 25 litres of oil.

I think the delete button should be at the bottom of the post about ..................................................................................here.

Have another look

Edited October 19, 2011 by John Cuthber

[johnnd]

"I think the delete button should be at the bottom of the post about ..................................................................................here."

I don't see one. Maybe it's because I'm a new member? Anyway...

 

 

Latest Rossi quotes from his site:

 

Q: Have you had the opportunity to connect several ECATS (such as 5) in parallel for a modest sized test before you prepare to fire up the "BIG CAT"? I am curious as to the proceedure required to reach operational conditions. Will you enable one ECAT at a time and verify that it is starting as expected or activate all as close to simultaneous as possible? How many helpers will be around to fire up the system?

I noticed the large pump you have on the exterior of the cargo container. Can it supply water flow to only a few ECATS at a time? Does your power design allow water to exit the system into the steam duct during the heating up period?

 

We are all sitting on the edges of our chairs hoping for your success. Please by careful and stay safe.

 

 

A:

 

1- yes

 

2- we turn on series of 6

 

3- there are 2 pumps, one for each 500 kW system. We have divided the plant in 2 sections, each of 500 kW, each with its own dissipator.

 

4- yes

 

5- safety first

 

Warm Regards,

 

A.R.

 

Dear Sean Parker:

Yes, after the 28th no more public tests, we will be too engaged to manufacture and test for our Customers. We will continue R&D

work with Bologna University and Uppsala University, but the work will not be public.

Actually, also the test of the 28th will not be public, being a test made by the Customer, with his experts, along a contractual

protocol. Anyway it will be the last work with a public report made upon the resulting numbers.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

 

Q: Dear Mr. Rossi,

 

When you say that the test will not be "public", will "high-level scientists" and "prominent scientific journalists" still be attending like you have indicated? In other words, will this test be the one that finally makes the E-Cat known to the larger public through mass media reports?

 

A:

1- yes

2- yes

Warm Regards,

A.R.

 

Q: "Dear Mr. Rossi,

 

On September 11th, regarding the 1 MW Plant demonstration, you confirmed that you will have a webcam and real-time power meters of your plant to be shown on this site.

 

Is this still planned for?"

 

 

 

 

A: Our Customer, who will make the test, is still planning for this.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

Dear Marco:

The 1 MW plants will be for sale starting November. We did not decide, yet, about the smaller units.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

Edited October 19, 2011 by johnnd

[swansont]

I think the delete button should be at the bottom of the post about ..................................................................................here.

Have another look

 

That's because you have powers that the mortals do not possess. Standard user options are limited to quote and multiquote. No "delete", "unapprove" or "terminate with extreme prejudice" buttons for them.

[imatfaal]

Please tell me that experts and moderators do really have a "terminate with extreme prejudice button" - I can see no reason that they should have, but I just want to believe it

[Fuzzwood]

The reaction uses a secret catalyst to transform nickel into copper <-- yeah i cannot see a chemical catalyst and some heat doing that. Substantional proof or it didn't happen.

[Myuncle]

Whether this guy is awarded the Nobel or ends up in jail, I am glad I am following this saga on the web. What are the mainstream media doing? Are they sleeping, or are they just too busy to tell us about the next boyband reunion?

[swansont]

Please tell me that experts and moderators do really have a "terminate with extreme prejudice button" - I can see no reason that they should have, but I just want to believe it

 

The experts do not have such a button.

[John Cuthber]

That's because you have powers that the mortals do not possess. Standard user options are limited to quote and multiquote. No "delete", "unapprove" or "terminate with extreme prejudice" buttons for them.

Sorry, sometimes I forget I'm, a demigod.

I don't have the "terminate with extreme prejudice" button. I think that's only on the Linux versions.

On the other hand I have a crystal ball on my desk at work.

In accordance with our audit policy, it is labelled "Iindicator only. Not calibrated"

It's about as likely to work as the idea in this thread.

[Erb]

Personally I cannot see any point in putting Rossi and his team to shame, just yet. If there is a secret catalyst that causes a fusion reaction to take place between nickel and hydrogen then yippee. If Rossi has found it and noone else has then good for him. If it works, and we will all know soon enough, then I think the more important topic is, what are we going to do when the global economy goes to shit!!!

[Myuncle]

Personally I cannot see any point in putting Rossi and his team to shame, just yet. If there is a secret catalyst that causes a fusion reaction to take place between nickel and hydrogen then yippee. If Rossi has found it and noone else has then good for him. If it works, and we will all know soon enough, then I think the more important topic is, what are we going to do when the global economy goes to shit!!!

 

 

If it works and it's not a hoax why the global economy is going to shit?

[imatfaal]

If it works and it's not a hoax why the global economy is going to shit?

 

Not sure I agree that the economy would be done for - but as the largest corporations in virtually every state or bloc are oil companies (who would be royally in it) the fall out from those companies coming to terms with the end (or beginning of the end) of commoditised energy would be entertaining to say the least.