Posted on 11/03/2011 12:19:06 PM PDT by Liberty1970
So who bought the world’s first fully operational fusion reactor? Was it a straw buyer arranged by inventor Andrea Rossi as part of a larger fraud to entice gullible investors or buyers? While we have no proof yet, several interesting pieces of evidence have come to light.
The first line of evidence came after the October 28 test when Rossi released an Excel spreadsheet of test data. The properties section embedded in the file identified it as coming from a computer owned by “Manutencoop Facility Management.” This is a large (16,000 employee) Italian company with a range of services including installation and management of things like building climate control systems.
It would make sense that a company like this would be interested in the initial E-cat as a water or building heating system. In addition, they stand to profit if they become distributors or develop support contracts servicing other Ecats installed at commercial buildings. So they would be plausible early adopters, seeking to gain an advantage over rivals as they study the practical aspects of the Ecat in addition to simply installing it in a suitable building location and using it.
However, Manutencoop does not fit other evidence as to the identity of the buyer, and a more likely scenario is that they were simply among the subcontractors that were helping manage the October 28 test. The test involved setting up and operating several generators, the water tanks and lines, cooling apparatus and so on, in which Manutencoop could have played a role. That could explain how a laptop from their company wound up compiling the test data.
What is the other evidence for the buyer? Rossi says that the buyer has a ‘default mode’ of secrecy. It was said to be an American organization. The consultant at the Oct. 28 test on behalf of the customer was an Italian named Domenico Fioravanti, said to be a ‘NATO engineer’ with thirty years of relevant experience. Paperwork with his name at the test listed him as a ‘Colonel’ but this was crossed off. And now a Nov. 3 update at Ecatnews.com states:
Rossi has stated in an email that, “THE CUSTOMER HAS BOUGHT THE E-CAT AS A MOBILE HEATER FOR REMOTE CAMPS.”
Most interesting, however is the Fox News story on the October 28 test which reported that a man named Paul Swanson of the U.S. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Unit (SPAWAR) could vouch for the demonstration. Originally attributed to Oct. 28 spectator Sterling Allen, who denied giving this information, it now appears to have come from Rossi himself. Fox contacted Paul Swanson at SPAWAR and several other individuals there, but they all refused to comment.
We know that SPAWAR has been in the thick of LENR research, lending further credibility to this link. I would appreciate insight from readers with more experience than I on this subject, but if Paul Swanson and SPAWAR were really unrelated to the Ecat, wouldn’t their first response to the journalists calling them be “Cat? Ecat? Huh? No, I have no idea what you are talking about”? And then maybe they’d remember to say “And I can’t talk to the media without approval”? The refusal to comment strikes me more as a confirmation of a link, though I’m open to (objective) insight and correction.
The risk of errors and misinformation is high, but if we take the data above at face value it leads us in this direction:
The first ECAT buyer on Oct. 28 is the U.S. Military (either SPAWAR or another command working in collaboration with them), to use as a prototype for field operations as a mobile heating system. As such other NATO resources are involved to help with the procurement and evaluation of the ECAT.
Like Manutencoop, the U.S. Military is an obvious organization to be an early adopter of ECAT technology.
As noted, this is speculative and depends heavily on the accuracy of the data outlined above. But there is a consistency between the various data points that leds credence to the general direction the conclusion takes.
And what if the ECAT were a fraud? While the U.S. Military is a naturally secretive entity, it would serve no military purpose to hide the discovery that the ECAT is a fraud. The basic point of the military is to protect American citizens and their interests. Therefore, I would fully expect that if they were the buyer and determined it to be a fraud they would quickly publicize that fact to protect American citizens from being caught up in the fraud.
The converse is more complicated – if it works, it is not the job of the military to publicize that fact. And holding new technology that gives any kind of competitive advantage is something every military wants, and wants to keep secret. So if (1) I’m right about the buyer, then (2) we should only expect to hear if the ECAT is a fraud, not if it is real. I hasten to add that silence does not mean the ECAT is for real, until we can verify who the buyer is and that they are not straw men for Rossi.
Can anyone else add pertinent data I've missed or constructive criticism? Fire away! (Note that this does not include pointless declarations that you "know" the Ecat is a fraud. We already know your opinion and it does nothing to repeat it if you have no relevant information to share on the subject of this thread.)
*Ping* for your list.
I just heard about a device called a ‘podunk carbuerator’ and if you send in $10 they will send you the plans- the oil companies don’t want you to buy it because it gets 100 miles to the gallon
As with so much of Rossi’s so called data and demonstrated proof, this is gobbledy gook of the worst sort. He has accomplished nothing until it is repeatable by independent scientists. Good luck with that
Thank you for pointless, irrelevant posts. Guess I’ll bold-face my request for relevance next time.
“E-cat as a water or building heating system”
Think of the leading suppliers of building automation who are now very heavily involved in energy efficiency improvements:
Honeywell
Schneider Electric
Emerson
Siemens
Johnson Controls
All could be good partners for ECAT merely as a heat source if it were more efficient than other fuels, aside from any power generating capacity. Half of all energy is consumed for commercial and industrial purposes, and a good chunk of that is for heating.
If the DoD were a buyer, it would be under a non-disclosure agreement.
Saying that the customer needed the device for "remote camps" would be a violation of any NDA and an automatic deal-breaker.
Rossi is a lying jailbird running a scam.
That is blisteringly obvious to anyone who has avoided the Kool-Aid.
That’s a good list of parties that would be interested earlier than most. Unfortunately I am not aware of any bits of data linking any of them to Rossi or the ECAT. I wouldn’t be surprised if they are paying close attention though.
The only part of the article worth reading.
You are jumping to conclusions since you don’t know the details of the NDA or if there even is one, nor the context of this commment. Indeed, I’m trying now to nail down the origin of that very comment. It appears at the PESN website (http://pesn.com/2011/11/02/9501943_Rossis_E-Cat_Victory_on_Cold_Fusion_Emergence_Day—E-Day/), where Hank Mills, in a very triumphalistic write-up, writes that Rossi wrote this in an email. But there is no further detail as to when the email was written or to whom, etc. Obviously that is a critical detail, and needs to be taken with a grain of salt regardless of ones’ position on the ECAT.
The only flaw in your logic is this:
“The basic point of the military is to protect American citizens and their interests.”
The US military is under the command of a marxist moslem, who has no business ordering troops to be in Libya or Uganda.
But the other point is that those who are convinced that this whole thing is a fraud, will never give it a rest. Small minds have nothing better to do.
As expected, the whole thing is dissolving into a farce.
Doesn't matter if it's more efficient ~ it should be possible to keep 100 years worth of nickel filings on hand.
Why?
If (Big IF) the ECAT turns out to be real, they ought to be bumped to the very back of the line when it comes to purchasing one. ;-)
If it had been bought by a military or government concern, it would not have been an open test. The device would be on its way to a test lab right now, not deployment somewhere.
The whole “customer” thing looks like a scam that they’re trying to hint is some big deal in order to gain legitimacy. That coupled with the fact that paying customers will be the future functional proof.
Time will tell.
I really can’t see this thing as being operational without having been regulated out of existence by various government entities.
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.