[Normandy]

Rossi says he is trying to help the US employment situation.

[A. Morgan]

“we have to work hard and fast: our Country needs jobs.”

So far there’s been nothing but talk along with the smoke and mirrors. Where is a working unit?

[mad_as_he$$]

I could put about 500kw online of E-cats right now creating 6 jobs. One of my ventures is in a place with no access to grid power. Diesel is too expensive to use in generators and fixed system do not make sense for the relative short term of the project.

[ChiefJayStrongbow]

He just cancelled his huge project in Greece that had a go live date in october/november of this year. Do you know the reason? I was very hopeful that this technology would stick it to the middle east countries. But the cancellation of the project o that magnitude so close to a go live date smells fishy.

[GraceG]

I hope and really hope the eCat is legit.

It would be the “Machine Gun given to the idiot child” and as such would drive the liberals insane.

[
Quote by Paul Ehrlich that illustrates some of the anti-nuclear movement’s thinking

“Giving society cheap, abundant energy ... would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”

-Paul Ehrlich, ``An Ecologist’s Perspective on Nuclear Power’’, May/June 1978 issue of Federation of American Scientists Public Issue Report
]

I would love to see the libs squirm when a cheap abundant energy supply that outstrips oil explodes into the market.

Let there be light!

[Sherman Logan]

Interesting article.

It’s all about the economics. IF this process works (now there’s a big IF!!), how much impact it will have on the economy is dependent on how much it costs per kwh. If it’s significantly less than present methods, it will completely change the economy as we shift over. Many new jobs will be created to install and maintain the new infrastructure, and many jobs will be lost in old energy.

But cheaper energy would be a huge boon to the world economy.

BTW, if this system does work, and is cheaper, look for environmentalists to try to regulate or tax its advantage away, supported of course by existing energy companies, unions, etc.

Enviros (the extremists, anyway) don’t want cheap, clean energy. It would destroy their goal of returning man to a condition of living “closer to the earth.”

[Moonman62]

At the very least he’ll be employing those connected with the investigation and prosecution of fraud.

[Liberty1970]

My take on this leans negative; of course Rossi can say anything he wants, and there's nothing irrational about an inventor speculating in hopeful terms about the impact of his work. But it also sounds suspiciously like someone trying to generate hype for his device, legit or not.

In the short term, in fact, I believe the E-cat could cost huge numbers of jobs, before it started generating them. The utility industry could face massive layoffs over the next few years if demand for electricity on the grid began plummeting and powerplants started shutting down, oil rigs go out of production, etc.

There would be offsets. In my industry (automotive), I would expect massive demand for E-cat powerplants once they were proved out, replacing internal combustion engines. That would potentially create a huge bubble of demand for new cars/trucks for a few years.

So I guess it could create jobs, but it's not a simple matter in my eyes.

[aruanan]

While a much better energy technology would certainly generate economic activity, it could also be disruptive to the point of causing unemployment — for example in the coal mining industry, which could take a hit if nickel, not coal became the primary source of energy for generating electricity.

While a much better energy technology would certainly generate economic activity, it could also be disruptive to the point of causing unemployment — for example in the whaling industry, which could take a hit if petroleum, not whale oil became the primary source of energy for generating home lighting.