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 ...
When can I buy a unit for my home, and how much will one cost?Defkalion Green Technologies is planning on opening a factory in October that will produce 300,000 units a year that will be sold in the Greek and Baltic markets. Other factories will most likely be opening in other parts of the world. Defkalion estimates that a reactor for your home would cost approximately 3500 Euros and the generator to convert the heat to electricity would cost an additional 1500 Euros. This is a very favorable price considering the massive energy and fuel savings an individual will reap after buying a unit. For example, an average home may use a few hundred dollars worth of electricity a month and may also pay substantial amounts of money for natural gas or fuel oil. In one year the unit could pay for itself. However, with any technology the cost will come down dramatically in time.
PROCESSES OR MEANS, e.g. BATTERIES, FOR THE DIRECT CONVERSION OF CHEMICAL ENERGY INTO ELECTRICAL ENERGY (electrochemical processes or apparatus in general C 25; semiconductor or other solid state devices for converting light or heat into electrical energy H 01 L, e.g. 31/00, 35/00, 37/00)
Good spade work Gondring. Now we cross reference this info against the broadly worded claims of the Rossi patent (google WO 2009/125444 A1) which are broad enough to encompass chemical reactions. It would appear the Rossi patent has slipped past as a chemical reactor in which case its possible a practical demo of the device for patent examiner's benefit never occurred.
Of course, as a chemical reactor the eCAT is of no commercial value but then its not the role of the patent office to determine commercial value.
If nuclear reactions are occurring then Rossi is still protected but the granting of the patent only covers ‘exothermic reactions of nickle and hydrogen under pressure’ which could easily fall short of nuclear reactions. Thus we are back at square one as pertains the validity of the eCAT.
Someone more expert please correct me.
Thanks for the ping.
I understand your skepticism. You sound as though you have more than a passing familiarity with the science involved here, so I can’t really comment beyond saying that I’m keeping my layman’s eyes open, and am watching to see what happens with this development.
Not just you but now several universities. If this is a hoax the very idea that universities have value in revealing truth is at risk.
At risk???? Already self-trashed!
East Anglia. Penn State.
I rest my case.
[ “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.”
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. ]
Well plug it into the “grid” when you are at home to help power the house when it is running on “low level output” it if is generating enough energy at idle to re-charge the batteries then after ti is done re-charging those the onboard computer can switch over to help power the home.
Indeed. This is one of the supposed advantages of electric cars, except in reverse. The theory is that you recharge the car overnight (which lets the generating plants run at a more constant level, and hence more efficiently). And if you install an alternate energy system (solar cells, windmill) to recharge the car, it can supplement the grid when the car isn't charging (and the sun is out or the wind is blowing).
If Ross's gizmo pans out, it will be "very interesting" to see what direction things take.
Oh thank you so much, mugwump56 and Gondring, for your spadework and illuminating observations! Seem's the jury's still out on whether any kind of nuclear reaction has occurred at all.
If the patent only covers "exothermic reactions of nickle and hydrogen under pressure," then it seems the patent holder itself knows that nuclear reactions are probably not taking place. At least the patent doesn't seem to mention them. Or am I missing something?
I'm perplexed by what the Greek company Defkalion Green Technologies SA, had been excluded from in its exclusive licensing/marketing agreement with the patent holder. Defkalion has
[t]he rights to use and industrial use (for non-military purposes) of the invention of the Italians for the whole world except the United States.... Defkalion.What on earth is going on here?
Thanks so much for writing! Please keep me posted!
What I think is going on is that Rossi is smarter than he looks.
If Pons & Fleishmann had never uttered the word “nuclear”, they would be billionaires right now. All they needed to say was it was an “anomalous chemical energy reaction”. Rossi learned their lesson.
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.