Posted on 05/25/2011 9:16:20 AM PDT by Normandy
any news on the cost of the nickel powder required for 6 months?
and how long before a electric generator centered around an eCat could be plugged into a home grid?
e-catworld.com - yeah, now there’s a credible source...not.
I looked at their international (PCT) patent application (and so can you) - very vague, hardly workable, won’t be granted in most countries in the national phase, IMO. The proverbial crock of sh!t. The solution to the world’s energy needs and they can’t even do a proper patent application? I think not!
Rossi has mentioned $100 per six month charge, and says work on electricity production is going on but will take “more time.” They are launching with the thermal unit.
If this does take off, there will be lots of engineers looking at how to generate electricity from this technology. Installation into power stations is one area that Rossi wants to purusue.
"It’s supposed to be released this October..." Oct. 21 is supposed to be the end of the world. Is there a connection here????
lol
cold fusion ping list
If there were any evidence or proof we would have seen it. It's 2011. It's not hard to put a 24/7 webcam on the device.
I’ve always thought that (regardless of the long odds) some farm-boy in Iowa who tinkers around in the barn with salvaged hardware, would invent something akin to a warp-drive-battery for cars or something that would obviate the need for gas in the family car. And he would post it all on the web, soup to nuts, for all to see & replicate.
Then, we could tell the arabs to drink their oil, because we wouldn’t be needing it. Oh, and a bushel of grain would from that point on cost them $100, subject to arbitrary OGEC* price manipulations.
I know it’s “Wishful Thinking”, but that doesn’t mean it’s not fun to wish for.
*Organization of the Grain Exporting Countries
I hope they have it right.
I wish them success in all their endeavors.
If this is for real, the market will decide in short order.
He/they could be richer than Bill Gates, Warren Buffet,Donald Trump, all the Saudi princes and the Sultan of Brunei combined!.............
Where do you see that in the article?? AFAIK, the only thing the US has done is to not approve his US patent, which is not the same thing as "outlawing it".
There will be. And Rossi says he is looking into it. My take from all the discussions is that his earlier test units were aimed at larger outputs from a single unit (10KW), but units of that size appear not to be easy to control (tend to thermally "run away" and "melt down"). Evidently, late in the development process, he found that smaller units were easier to control, but he knows that something for unattended use in the home market has to pass a higher standard of controllability and safety. Industrial uses.....not so much. So those will come first.
Have you ever applied for/gotten a patent issued??
The Italian patent has already been issued. As I understand the European patent situation, the issuance of the Italian patent pretty much assures a "Europe-wide" international patent will be granted. The US is another story.
Rossi's current patent application is for the DEVICE only, not the formulation of the "catalyst" that boosts efficiency. He has said that if his device patents are granted, he will apply for a separate patent on the catalyst. If patents are not granted, he will still sell generators, but will keep the catalyst formulation as a trade secret. It is unclear whether those conditions apply to granting of both European and American patents, or Europe only.
Further (and interesting), he says that he has given the details of the catalyst and devices to a third party, to be released in the event of an "unfortunate accident".
Might I suggest you examine the evidence from the demonstrations before jumping to the "it's a scam" conclusion.
I misread what he said in the article regarding the US, however I do not for one minute believe the US will allow it. The mere fact that they denied his patent will be reason enough for the Government to consider it a HOAX Fraudulent and Outlaw it, especially if it really works as advertised.
A cheap, abundant supply of energy will do nothing but fuel the thirst for freedom and independence. We Cannot Allow this to happen.
Yes, about 100 or more - it's part of how I make a living.
The Italian patent has already been issued.
Are you aware that there is no substantive examination in the Italian patent procedure? Applications are "examined" for formal defects only. If there are none, the patent is summarily granted. Only recently (after the Rossi filing) has the procedure been amended to include a novelty search and a written examiner opinion (but still no real examination). Oh, that has been outsourced to the EPO since the Italian patent office has neither the capacity nor the expertise to do so.
As I understand the European patent situation, the issuance of the Italian patent pretty much assures a "Europe-wide" international patent will be granted.
Absolutely NOT! I could write a short treatise on the subject but given the above alone and for a number of other procedural reasons I think it unneccessary. Trust me on this.
The US is another story.
Yes and no. ;-) USPTO examiners tend to dwell on formalities to no end and sometimes lack on substantive grounds (in my experience). But on the whole, the quality of US, EP, and JP examinations is comparable.
Rossi's current patent application is for the DEVICE only
No, the application claims a METHOD and an APPARATUS (device), hence the title "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CARRYING OUT NICKEL AND HYDROGEN EXOTHERMAL REACTIONS"
not the formulation of the "catalyst" that boosts efficiency.
That is correct. A major defect of the application so far and just one of the reasons I critisized it.
He has said that if his device patents are granted, he will apply for a separate patent on the catalyst. If patents are not granted, he will still sell generators, but will keep the catalyst formulation as a trade secret. It is unclear whether those conditions apply to granting of both European and American patents, or Europe only.
OK, wait and see.
Further (and interesting), he says that he has given the details of the catalyst and devices to a third party, to be released in the event of an "unfortunate accident".
Got tinfoil?
It may interest you that a "third party observation" has just been filed with the EPO, which contends to invalidate the application due to prior art. (This is highly unusual - perhaps one in a few thousand. The reason is that the "observer" does not become a party to the further procedure, i.e. has no say in it. Therefore interested parties generally file an opposition after grant. Of course, that costs money.) Also note that amended claims have been filed in response to the ISR - so much for the Italian patent (= worthless)!
The following link is to the EPO online file of the application, which includes said observation (hope it works, otherwise you can access it through ESPACENET):
PS: Don't know why you chose your particular screen name but back in the days I enjoyed those comics (and the FFF). Cheers!
OK, you know something about the process. And at that level, probably more than I....I design instruments. Anything I patent is just ancillary to that.
"Are you aware that there is no substantive examination in the Italian patent procedure? Applications are "examined" for formal defects only. If there are none, the patent is summarily granted. Only recently (after the Rossi filing) has the procedure been amended to include a novelty search and a written examiner opinion (but still no real examination). Oh, that has been outsourced to the EPO since the Italian patent office has neither the capacity nor the expertise to do so.
Heh! On foreign filing you DEFINITELY know more than me. All my patents have been US.
"Absolutely NOT! I could write a short treatise on the subject but given the above alone and for a number of other procedural reasons I think it unneccessary. Trust me on this."
Clarify, please.....
"Yes and no. ;-) USPTO examiners tend to dwell on formalities to no end and sometimes lack on substantive grounds (in my experience). But on the whole, the quality of US, EP, and JP examinations is comparable.
Well, personally, I have problems with the "obviousness" objections. Some of the stuff the examiners pull out of thin air to cite for "obviousness" are REALLY strange.
"No, the application claims a METHOD and an APPARATUS (device), hence the title "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CARRYING OUT NICKEL AND HYDROGEN EXOTHERMAL REACTIONS"
Excuse....imprecise language on my part. What I meant was that his "Method and Apparatus" patent is claiming his improvement over Panetelli in the use of nanostructure nickel instead of the nickel rod that Panetelli used. As I understand the background, what he claims WILL WORK, and yield anomalous heat....just not as much as with the catalyst.
"That is correct. A major defect of the application so far and just one of the reasons I critisized it.
See above as to why I think your criticism is not correct. The presence of the catalyst is a separate issue over the nanostructured nickel.
"Got tinfoil?
Rossi....not me.
"It may interest you that a "third party observation" has just been filed with the EPO, which contends to invalidate the application due to prior art. (This is highly unusual - perhaps one in a few thousand. The reason is that the "observer" does not become a party to the further procedure, i.e. has no say in it. Therefore interested parties generally file an opposition after grant. Of course, that costs money.) Also note that amended claims have been filed in response to the ISR - so much for the Italian patent (= worthless)!
I think this is probably Panetelli's attorney.
"The following link is to the EPO online file of the application, which includes said observation (hope it works, otherwise you can access it through ESPACENET)"
Thanks. I haven't studied Rossi's patents on the subject, as I have been more interested in the data from the various demos. So many people have criticized those as "poorly done", when, in fact, in engineering labs all over the world, essentially equivalent apparatuses and methods are used to generate data used to design processes, get patents, and more.
"PS: Don't know why you chose your particular screen name but back in the days I enjoyed those comics (and the FFF). Cheers!"
And that was precisely why I chose it. Old WW was THE original "anti-hero".... :^)
Well, a patent granted in one country is generally not a precedent accepted by the patent office of another country. This holds true for patents from countries with high examination standards, never mind Italy. Exceptions are e.g. patents granted in GB or CN that can be extended to Hong Kong.
Do you draft your own patent applications for your inventions and prosecute the apps before the USPTO?
No, indeed. I know my limitations. Fortunately, I have a very good friend with whom I shared office space when we both worked for "ye giant chemical company". While there, he segued into working as an assistant in the plant's Patent Department, initially just chasing down the various applicants and making sure that all the "i's were dotted and t's crossed", but eventually helping to write patent applications.
He took an early retirement and became a patent agent. And he is "very, very good". His success rate in getting patents granted is quite high. He's a bit of an odd duck. He majored in chemistry in college, but minored in English, and had really wanted to go to law school, but couldn't. As a chemist, he was a bit mediocre....but as a patent agent he's great. The skills needed as a patent agent are exactly his strengths and interests. He is a real stickler about getting all the details right, and following the absolute letter and spirit of the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.