What do you think about Andrea Rossi's E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) technology?

Nuclear Phynance ^ | Posted: 2011-06-26 05:33 | IQuant1

[aruanan]

What do you think about Andrea Rossi's E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) technology?

What do you think those who were heavily invested in whale oil and gas lamps thought about Edison's boast of bringing about gentle electric home lighting (as opposed to the harsh arc lighting used in large venues) before and after he did what he'd said he'd do?

The E-Cat or something similar will work or it won't. Either way, someone will get rich and someone will have screwed themselves over believing current technology is nth technology.

[Kevmo]

Sounds like you are a QC guy. Startups don’t hire QC guys until all the design engineering is well past the prototype stage and into production. At least here in Silicon Valley. Bloom Energy is the latest example.

[Kevmo]

True dat. But who made more money off the gold miners? The guy selling shovels who took a huge risk or Wells Fargo who waited until the gold strike was proven before moving in?
***Wells Fargo was at the enterprise level while the shovel salesman was at the level I am at. Of course, if I were at the enterprise level and had a $Billion to control, I know where I’d put it. But I don’t, so the analogy falls apart. But I can buy lots of shovels. I can buy lots of sewing machines and canvas.

If e-cat works, there will be a brazillion new possibilities to open up. Where is Atari now? If you looked at the personal computer market in 1978 and projected 20 years down the road you never would have guessed that Microsoft and Apple would rule the computer world.
***Actually, according to Wikipedia, in 1978 Atari did not have a Personal Computer offering while Apple did. The same situation exists today. Someone looking at the PC market in 1978 would have put their money down on Apple rather than Atari, and they would have luckily been right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari
A project to design a successor to the 2600 started as soon as the system shipped. The original development team estimated the 2600 had a lifespan of about three years, and decided to build the most powerful machine they could, given that time frame. Midway into the effort’s time-frame, the home computer revolution was taking off, so the new machines were adapted, with the addition of a keyboard and various inputs, to produce the Atari 800, and its smaller cousin, the 400. Although a variety of issues made them less attractive than the Apple II for some users, the new machines had some success when they finally became available in quantity in 1980.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse get the cheese.
***Never attack a 3 headed dog with a 2-pronged pitchfork.

[Kevmo]

So, how do we position ourselves to sell shovels to the “Rossi Gold Miner 49ers”?

How I Made Money from Cold Fusion
Saturday, January 23, 2010 12:28:49 PM · by Kevmo · 28 replies · 1,013+ views
Exclusive Article for Free Republic | 1/23/10 | Kevmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2435697/posts

[PhilosopherStone1000]

LOL! OK, you win. Ultimately, it’s your money and your choice.

You are using the word “shovel” as a metaphor/analogy. If you have something more specific in mind, FReepmail me. I know people (even people with money!). Be prepared to demonstrate that

a) you know what you’re talking about
b) that there are barriers to entry to any possible competitors,
c) that your idea is something that a brazillion other people won’t immediately come up with once it’s proven that the technology is for real
d) how are you protecting yourself on the chance (whatever the odds are) that, once again, the technology is a sham.

Seriously, BS Physics,BA Philosophy,MBA. I don’t have answers, but I generally have very, very good questions!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the articles and links, dear Kevmo, and for your encouragements!

I haven't read all of them yet but I look forward to it.

Concerning E-Cat, I'm hoping Rossi will have great success but I'm also taking things with a generous grain of salt because it appears information is not as forthcoming as it needs to be (see Krivit's blog.)

Of course, we can expect Rossi to play his cards close to his chest to retain full inventor's rights but at some point he must lay it all out for peer review and market acceptance.

[Kevmo]

BA in Philosophy? Ugh.

Thanks for the list. It actually helps.

Regarding B: Doesn’t being first to market mean you’ve covered the main barrier to entry? How did Levi’s become the main player in blue jeans — because he was first, not because he had more canvas or more sewing machines. How did Bill Gates sell BASIC for the ALTAIR? Because he was first, not because others couldn’t do it. When dealing with a disruptive technology, being ahead of the curve is worth far more than all the other stuff. Have you read “Innovator’s Dilemma”?
http://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Dilemma-Revolutionary-Business-Essentials/dp/0060521996/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309151934&sr=1-1

[Kevmo]

also taking things with a generous grain of salt because it appears information is not as forthcoming as it needs to be (see Krivit’s blog.)
***From post 15 in this thread...

Did you read what Jed Rothwell came up with?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2736442/posts#48

It could just boil down to a simple miscommunication due to language barrier.

Or... it could be a scam. But the discussion on Vortex-L doesn’t seem to support the scam angle.

.............................................

Of course, we can expect Rossi to play his cards close to his chest to retain full inventor’s rights but at some point he must lay it all out for peer review and market acceptance.
***It would appear that he is aiming for market acceptance first, and peer review as a distant second that would basically enable his future competitors. At this point, a close-to-the-chest inventor appears to act in the same fashion as a scam artist. But if you contrast Rossi’s actions to Mills, you see that Rossi is demonstrating prototypes, maybe as many as a hundred, while Mills is just selling Powerpoint slides after 20 years of effort.

97 E-Cats In Operation Right Now Accross 4 Countries
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2712829/posts
Saturday, April 30, 2011 8:56:32 AM · by Free Vulcan · 72 replies
Free Energy Truth ^ | 4.29.11 | Staff

Keep in mind that at a similar point in the development of the Airplane, the Wright brothers would not demonstrate their device to anyone who would not promise orders. It weeded out sniffing competitors. Were they scam artists?

[Alamo-Girl]

I'm not accusing him of being a scam - only of evading peer review - but this is a commercial venture, not a typical publicly funded research project, so that is expected.

But the big money will not come his way until he finally crosses that bridge, IMHO.

[Kevmo]

But the big money will not come his way until he finally crosses that bridge, IMHO
***400M Euros is not big money? He plans to sell commercial units by November, although I doubt he would make such a deadline. What’s the watershed point between little $ and big $? If his 1MWatt demo plant in October is a success, so many people will want to be a part of it that he might not ever need to go through peer review. He has promised to deliver units to the University of Bologna for analysis by next year or so.

[AZLiberty]

The Peebles book, including the section on cold fusion, is available here: http://books.google.com/books?id=hTaw4Ht4Vi8C&printsec=frontcover

It basically says that Pons-Fleischman deuterium cold fusion won’t produce significant energy. Published in 1992, it doesn’t have anything to say about the energy catalyzer.

[saganite]

Comments on a website re: Krivit’s video pretty much took Rossi apart. They didn’t say he wasn’t producing excess energy, just not in the quantity he claims. Color me sceptical until he releases his device to other researchers for analysis.

[saganite]

From Lewan’s article. Doh!

“I’m still disappointed that I forgot one very simple check: I only measured the input current on one cable, the ‘zero,’ or ‘cold’ line. Obviously, this leaves open the possibility of deception if there is a large current on the phase, or ‘hot,’ line and it is distributed in part (1.6A) on the ‘zero’ (’cold’) line and in part over the ground line (about 10A to achieve 2.5 kW).

[Wonder Warthog]

"Comments on a website re: Krivit’s video pretty much took Rossi apart. They didn’t say he wasn’t producing excess energy, just not in the quantity he claims."

"Took Rossi apart"....how? I didn't get that from the video, but then I mostly don't "do" videos, because my hearing defects make it hard to follow soundtracks.

And Krivit and everyone else doing the "wet steam dance" are certainly IMPLYING that there's no "there" there, and that there is no excess energy.

Krivit's "analysis" makes serious mistakes which he shows no sign of correcting. Specifically, he essentially calls Levi either a charlatan or an incompetent by broaching the "wet steam" issue and ignoring the "no steam" test. Part of Krivit's argument involves the use of a capacitance probe to determine steam quality. Capacitance sensors are not USUALLY used to determine steam quality, true (all you really need for that is a good thermometer, a barometer, and a CRC Handbook). But capacitance probes certainly CAN be used to determine steam quality. It would take me about half a day to develop the necessary recalibration to make that measurement. The resulting graph would be decidedly non-linear, but usable. And, as I said on another post, such data is probably available from the manufacturer.

Why didn't Krivit simply call (or interview, since he "was" in Italy) Galantini and clarify the point??

[saganite]

Based on what I read on the blog I referred to, Krivit didn’t understand the importance of the steam issue until after the video was completed and so missed the opportunity to ask the relevant questions. Also, as I pointed out the discussion on that blog didn’t preclude excess energy being produced. They did question Rossi’s exorbitant claims though. As I’ve said before, Rossi needs to put the device in the hands of other research teams and allow them to duplicate (or not) his research. I understand his reluctance to do so pending the approval of his patent but until that occurs his results will remain in doubt.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Based on what I read on the blog I referred to, Krivit didn’t understand the importance of the steam issue until after the video was completed and so missed the opportunity to ask the relevant questions."

Krivit was posting about the "wet steam dance" well before he went to Italy (I think on the Vortex-L mailing list). He specifically raised the issue with Levi during their interview. Levi tried to explain things, but whether due to Krivit's ignorance or the language barrier, the necessary communication didn't take place.

[saganite]

Here is Krivit's post on the blog and the response from "Goat Guy" Steven B. Krivit 1 week ago Goat Guy... you are the third person who has contacted me with this tip about exit velocity. Question: Was the E-Cat running at a very low temp out rate at the time I filmed the exiting steam? Answer: No. Temp out is pegged at 100 +/1. Will upload videos as soon as I unpack and stuff. Please stay in touch. GoatGuy 5 days ago in reply to Steven B. Krivit Steve, Thank you for posting directly. I deeply respect the fact that you saw the demo, looked at pipes and hoses, and came to whatever conclusions you're harboring. I didn't come to the same conclusions (necessarily), since you and I haven't yet had the opportunity to sit and discuss things over a beer or two. But no matter. My conclusion is mathematical in the engineering sense: one simply can NOT use the words “2500 watts” of output and not vaporize less than 1.07 grams per second. roughly a milliliter per second. A liter every 20 minutes. The thermal equation cannot be sidestepped — that milliliter, if it is entirely vaporized (and not just atomized and rushed down the hose along with the steam train) would result in 1⁄18th of 22.4 liters of “dry” steam (at least to start with). The loss to hose-heating is about 6%. The result should have been a 10 meter-per-second exhaust steam stream more or less. And not “much more” or much less. See — here's where the devil is in the details: to HEAT WATER to boiling only takes 70 watt-seconds (joules) per milliliter. HOWEVER appreciate this: it takes nearly 2250 MORE watt-seconds to boil off the water as full dry steam. And in between the whole range can be done, with water+steam coming out of a hose, and its friggin' hard to figure out what the actual wattage is. This is why I keep holding to the straight mathematical thermodynamics. The amount of steam coming out — doesn't matter except in the most basic sense if it is “100.1° C“, but rather what proportion of that steam+water is WATER and STEAM. It is also for this reason that it would be far preferable that the experiment be done by exhausting the water+steam into a Styrofoam picnic chest half-full of a measured amount of water starting at some start-point temperature. Knowing that the thermal conductivity of the lead-in hose is going to lose some 6% of the heat, and the Styrofoam another 2% or so over the hour of an extended test, then it would be trivial to compute from the end-point temperature AND the total-endpoint volume of the water in the chest the amount of output power WITHIN 10% OF THE SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE measure. In other words, with an picnic chest, 25 liters of tap water, a thermometer and 1 hour of time, I could measure whether Mr. Rossi's device was emitting 300 W, 2,500 W, 100 W, 7,500 W, 4,700 W or absolutely anything between with virtually no controversy. In fact, I wouldn't even look at it but for to make sure that the water in the chest wasn't itself brought to boiling. To me, the whole thing looked suspiciously like either a sham, or a researcher who wasn't in charge of knowing what the fnurk he was talking about. There is no way Rossi could have stood there and said “its stable and producing about 2,500 watts” of output without measuring the flow and the wetness of the steam. However, the above picnic-chest capture method would easily do the trick. PPS: 25 liters of water could be brought TO boiling (but not turned to vapor) with the input of only (25 L × 1000 ml/L × (100 C - 30 C )÷2500 W / 60 s/min / 0.9 efficiency ) = 13 minutes of 2500 watt output. So, again, even if the tub of water was brought TO boiling, the time that it would take fits neatly into the confirmation of 2,500 watts output. INCLUDING losses to hose heat transfer.

[Wonder Warthog]

This is simply garbage, and the standard current "meme" from the Vortex-L anti's. Simply put, there is no way that Krivit has any idea what the condensation losses in the hose might be. He has no way of knowing what the hose is made of, what its thermal conductivity is, or anything else about it, other than that it is black, and hot. Nor does "GoatGuy" or "Horace somebody or other" who is posting much the same sort of thing. This is all a lot of handwaving with no serious content. Sticking in a lot of pretty equations doesn't overcome the flaws in the fundamental assumptions.

And this STILL ignores the "no steam" experiment, which completely by-passes that particular possible error, because THERE IS NO STEAM GENERATED.

[saganite]

You should go to that blog and respond to Goat Guy. It would be an interesting conversation. I’m not equipped to deem either of you right or wrong but would be interested in a discussion along the lines of your post here. Sorry about the mess on my last post. It looked fine before I posted it.

[Wonder Warthog]

"You should go to that blog and respond to Goat Guy. It would be an interesting conversation."

I thought about it, but the Vortex-L mailing list just generates too much "email clutter" if you subscribe. Keeping up with the posts on the list itself isn't too terribly bad, and can be done at odd moments (as here at FR). I used to follow "Talk-Polywell" reasonably closely, as there is a pretty long thread there about Rossi and I'm also interested in Bussards hot fusion concept, but I just got too tired of the blatant intellectual dishonesty on the part of the naysayers.

I've got too much work to do in the real world to manage the time it would take.