Posted on 05/09/2011 7:33:35 PM PDT by Liberty1970
The Italian energy catalyzer that seems to be based on an unknown nuclear reaction is now patented in Italy. The examination continues regarding protection in the rest of the world.
The Italian Patent Office, Ufficio Italiano Brevetti e Marchi, granted a patent for the energy catalyzer on April 6, 2011, valid until April 9, 2028.
The inventor is Andrea Rossi, while his wife Maddalena Pascucci is the patent owner.
The final content of the patent is public but not directly available online (details on how to order the content can be found here).
According to Rossi ten of the original 15 claims remain (see below).
It is not clear if the patent means that the secret details of the energy catalyst can be revealed.
“Now I have to think and, based on the effective patent protection, we can decide what to disclose,” Andrea Rossi said.
The patent office in Italy confirmed that it is a normal patent which was granted after technical examination of the filed application.
(Excerpt) Read more at nyteknik.se ...
I'll admit that I'll have to do some soul-searching and review things carefully, if this turns out to be a hoax. I'll be interested in understanding how I misjudged the evidence and claims over these past months. But, by degrees, they have been winning me over. It takes more than generic close-mindedness at this point to deal with the evidence that has been presented.
I agree with the heat and hot water, but power cars and trucks will require a conversion process for useful energy. If they can come up with more efficient and economical thermoelectric generators, then there will be more far reaching applications, including self-sustaining reactions.
LOL, I've been following this from the start (even have a little bookmark file in *favorites* on it).
Went from skeptic to a cautious maybe on it.
We'll know if it's real in less than a year.
You know what? This is an impressively thoughtful response. I tend to approach discussions of claimed energy revolutions with pretty poor expectations of the participants, having dealt with all kinds of irrational true believers before, but you have completely disarmed me. Let me give some thought to your post and get back to you.
A "conversion process" already exists. It's called "steam", and was originally "a contendah" for automotive power.
For a time, the Stanley Steamer was actually superior in reliability and performance to ICE driven autos. The thing that killed the steam car was the fact that it took too long to "crank up". Given today's capability for automatic controls, that shouldn't be a problem....just keep the E-Cat "ticking over" at a low level to keep the batteries charged (still need electricity for the various electronics.
Thermoelectric conversion not required. Nice to have, and probably more efficient, but not necessary.
Yes. Sufficiently high temperatures can be had to drive steam power. As another poster theorized, the problem is "control". The LENR process gets more efficient as it's temperature goes up, and has a tendency to "run away" and melt the nickel powder. The consequences obviously aren't anywhere nearly comparable to a fission meltdown (gross understatement), but still not desirable.
I think once large scale production and more R&D is invested, that a solution to that problem (and probably more than one) will be found.
Alright, where did you get that cat? I’ve been looking everywhere for the demotivator poster with that cat on it. It reads something like, “Goodbye world for I must leave this place behind.”
Seriously though, nano-powderized nickel sounds sufficiently specialized that it could be six of one, a half dozen of the other as far as energy expense.
Nothing springs to mind so much as expensive digital printer consumables.
One possibility came to mind when reading the most recent report (from Swedish group). The device output about 4 KW (thermal) and used a (approximately) 400 watt auxiliary electrical heater coil, with the 400 watt auxiliary input power measured by a calibrated voltmeter and ammeter.
What was not clear was the power source for the auxiliary heater. Depending upon the type of voltmeter and ammeter, it would be possible to use a pulse waveform with a high RMS (heating value) and low average power (as measured by average reading voltmeter and ammeter). So, the "auxiliary" heating coil could be operating at 4KW, but measured at 400 watts, thus providing a fake result.
To detect that sort of fake, it would be useful to continuously observe the auxiliary heater power input waveform with an oscilloscope and also to use calibrated RMS-sensing voltmeter and ammeters on the auxiliary heater power leads.
Another way of sneaking power into the device would be to use the water supply pipes as an electrical heating circuit. This would be detectable with a clip on DC-AC ammeter presumably. (I think plastic or rubber tubing is used from the photos I saw, which would make it more difficult to run power through the pipe, although the tubing could have conductors running through it. Or, one might even use the water as a conductor, if it has impurities.)
Not saying this is a fake, just responding to how one might go about faking the results.
Jack
If you look at the videos of the demonstrations, you will see that there are two temperature controllers active, one for the internal heater and one for the auxiliary heater. Power for both is supplied by a single cable from the 220V wall plug, which is where the power is measured with a clamp-on ammeter (voltage was also measured at that point). So the power measurements at the wall are indicative of total power drawn. No matter what the waveform out of the "blue box" that contains the temperature controllers, the wall current draw will measure total power.
Since some of the demos were held at the University of Bologna (and not Rossi's factory/R&D facility), the likelihood of "jimmying" the wall power is, I think, pretty miniscule.
But if you're interested, there is a 61 page document floating around the web which purports to have an extensive examination of all the possible ways to "fraudilize" the demos. I think there is a link on the Yahoo H-Ni Fusion group:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/H-Ni_Fusion/
A degree of skepticism is good, particularly with all the various claims that float around the internet, most of which appear delusional.
I'm becoming less skeptical, and more hopeful, as time goes by. I still would like to see Rossi's e-cat device run for a month in an independent lab.
As far as e-cat generating power in your basement, that's at least a decade or two away. You do NOT want a high pressure steam turbine in your basement, regardless of the heat source. I COULD see e-cat power plants being built close to the power consumers, taking a load off the high-voltage long-distance transmission grid.
"As much as the market can bear" is not usually the price-point that maximizes profit. For the first couple of years at least, you want the price-point being low enough that your product gains high demand. It is better to make $100 per unit on a hundred million units than $10,000 per unit on a few thousand units.
If it were me, I'd price the e-cat at a price point where it becomes very worth-while to convert existing coal-fired power plants to e-cat, with a discount to the first dozen customers. You KNOW there will be glitches in the first years, and it will take some time to get them operating reliably, and you want your initial customers to still make money even in the face of glitches and breakdowns.
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.