Who Bought the First ECAT?

Various ECAT news sites ^ | 11/3/11 | Liberty1970

[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.)

[Kevmo]

A Sober Look At 1MW eCat Clues
admin on November 3, 2011 — 62 Comments

http://ecatnews.com/?p=1240&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ecatnews%2FAdFD+%28+%C2%BB+eCatNews+-+Rossi%E2%80%99s+Cold+Fusion+2.0%29

Fox News stirred up a a lot of dust and while we have to question their guess about the 1MW eCat customer having a US Naval connection, the identity of that customer is critical when trying to pin credibility or otherwise onto the sale. I am certain that if we learned that NATO, NASA, The US Navy or any other similarly large institution with technical roots was known to have tested and then bought the 1MW device, many people around the world who should take notice, will. For that reason, it is worthwhile trying to thread what we think we have.

First we have Fox’s assertion that Andrea Rossi said that Paul Swanson of SPAWAR can vouch for the demo. Then Fox said that Sterling Allan thought a large organisation beginning with the letter ‘N’ was the customer. In the previous post, you can see that this statement is not true. Sterling was referring to a previous and independent test (of what, I am not sure).

During the Bologna test, the customer rep in charge of signing the pass/fail slip was (according to Dr Rossi) a NATO engineer with thirty years experience called, Domenico Fioravanti. Perhaps he was now a civilian acting as a consultant able to speak the language or perhaps the buy was a joint enterprise between NATO countries with SPAWAR taking a keen interest.

Peswiki’s excellent coverage of the 1MW test has so much information that it is easy to overlook little nuggets. Thanks to Don Witcher for pointing out the following from Hank Mills’ write up of that day:

Rossi has stated in an email that, “THE CUSTOMER HAS BOUGHT THE E-CAT AS A MOBILE HEATER FOR REMOTE CAMPS.” This seems to indicate to me that the organization may be related to the military. Also, Rossi’s remark that it is the kind of company that does *everything* in secret, seems to add credence to that possibility.

And then we have the following from the sluething eye of Terry Blanton on Vortex:

Domenico
August 4th, 2011 at 4:40 PM
Egregio ing. Rossi

(If you already have answered this question previously in your blog, please apologise) – What are the risks of an E-Cat in operation being damaged/destroyed by a collapsing building (e.g. earthquake), by shieldbreaking firearm bullets or explosives (never underestimate human madness or stupidity), by floods/tsunamis or other destructive action, in terms of gamma ray exposure intensity and duration?

Thank you – in your work lies hope of many people.

Cordialmente

Domenico

Andrea Rossi
August 5th, 2011 at 8:48 AM
Dear Mr Domenico:
The risk is zero, because we do not use radioactive material and we do not produce radioactive wastes. In all the cases you listed H is cut. If the temperature rises too high, Nickel melts, powder becomes ingot and the process is stopped: intrinsecally safe situation.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

It may be a thread of coincidence. Many experienced engineers leave the military and work outside it. There are lots of Domenico’s around and the person calling himself that and asking about armour-piercing shells and explosives blowing the eCat up, may just be erring on caution or asking out of curiosity. Remember, it seems that the customer in question stepped in after the initial deal fell through (because Rossi did not want to retain ownership and ship it under his name after the sale). Such a scenario fits the timescale and we may be seeing a dipping toe in that Domenico-Post on AR’s blog.

Even so, many NGOs would benefit from an emergency heating system that would not destroy the environment if struck by an earthquake or shot at. Perhaps Andrea Rossi was wrongly quoted regarding Paul Swanson’s ability to vouch for the demo. Perhaps it is all a Nancy Drew misdirection. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.

Once more, no single thing proves the customer has a military connection but together, it kinda makes sense (until it’s all shot down again). I wonder if Dr Rossi is both grateful to the customer for stepping in and at the same time frustrated at not being able to shout it from the rooftops. He had almost certainly imagined the floodgates begin to open by now.

Once again, the list of actors grows making the idea of Rossi being a lone con-man seem more ridiculous than the notion that he has solved the cold fusion puzzle.