The claim I'm disputing is from page 7 of Rossi's filed US patent application, numbered paragraph "[0038]", not an article. I would hope that Rossi made sure that he had a English-proficient scientist check it over before submitting the patent application.
LOL. Have you ever applied for a patent?? I've been granted over two dozen, and applied for many more. NOBODY gets "a scientist" to check over a patent application, especially a small company, because they simply can't afford it (and for concerns about confidentiality/competition/etc). I'm somewhat lucky in that the patent agent I use is a retired chemist, but "he" is a rarity. Most patent agents and lawyers don't have the background.
I don't think anyone (even Rossi) actually knows exactly how much energy his process puts out. To get that, you "would" have to do the kind of calorimetry that "marktwain" referred to up-thread.....which is NOT cheap OR easy (I suspect that this kind of info is what Rossi is paying the U. of Bologana to gather with that half-million Euros). The reality is that all we know is that the energy liberated is "large" (which "can" be determined by the type of flow-through calorimetry used in the demos). Any number "derived from theory" is simply speculation, as no one really knows what "the theory" is.
One fact not pointed out anywhere that I know of is that the Rossi demos only set a "lower bound" for the energy output under a specific set of conditions......they are NOT accounting for the losses through the walls of the reactor assembly by radiation/conduction/convection into the demonstration room, for instance. All the insulation is going to do is keep "some" (unknown) fraction from escaping.