Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Andrea Rossiís Plan to Commercialize Cold Fusion ó Says Initial Cost of Electricity 1 Cent per kWh.
Free Energy Times ^ | March 9, 2011

Posted on 03/09/2011 3:59:22 AM PST by Normandy

If you listen to inventor Andrea Rossi responding to questions about his “energy catalyzer” cold fusion device, he regularly brings up the topic of commercialization of his devices.

Yesterday he responded briefly to inquiries and a request for an interview from Sterling Allen at the PESWiki web site in which he indicated that he was not inclined to talk about his inventions until after October, when the first operating power plant which will be built in Greece is expected to be up and running.

He states, “I am sorry to inform you that I prefer not to make interviews until October, when we will start up our 1 MW plant.

"Therefore I kindly ask you to defer our contact to the end of November. I will only make an interview to an European radio because I already got this engagement a month ago, but that will be my last communication before end October, unless I will have something new to communicate. I prefer to work and not talk, until I start the industrial production and operation of my plants."

(Excerpt) Read more at freeenergytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Science; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: andrearossi; coldfusion; electricity; energy; rossiecat
More details about this interesting cold fusion story.
1 posted on 03/09/2011 3:59:28 AM PST by Normandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Normandy

If it really works, they’ll ban it here for some reason.


2 posted on 03/09/2011 4:08:06 AM PST by xmission (www.iwilldefendtheconstitution.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

Well three outcomes of this story....he is a fliflam man and will soon be exposed as a con artist who bilked investors of millions, He will roll out the plant as advertised assuming non inteference from the Greek bureaucracy and enviromentalists, or his inventions are real and therefore a real threat to governments and energy producers alike and he will be “disappeared”(bribed or killed) and his plans suppressed and buried!


3 posted on 03/09/2011 4:13:01 AM PST by mdmathis6 (Applied Christianity;a study in spiritual fiber optics connecting God's love to man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

I hope your outcome number 3 does not happen.

As for number 1, he says “for now we prefer not to have investors. We finance ourselves selling our plants” That doesn’t mean he hasn’t had investors, so that’s still a possiblity.

Regarding number 2, we’ll have to wait until October to see what happen. Knowing startups, the rollout date could well change.

Interestingly, a long testing program at the University of Bologna is supposed to be underway.

http://pesn.com/2011/03/07/9501782_Cold_Fusion_Steams_Ahead_at_Worlds_Oldest_University/


4 posted on 03/09/2011 4:25:47 AM PST by Normandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

‘1 cent per kwh’... Brother, have I heard that before. Nuclear power advocates said the same thing. Not sayin’ we shouldn’t go that way, just modestly suggesting that ‘there ain’t no such a thing as a free lunch’.


5 posted on 03/09/2011 4:32:10 AM PST by ArtDodger (Reread Animal Farm (with your kids))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
“therefore a real threat to governments and energy producers alike”

Your premise assumes that governments and energy producers would not want access to extremely low cost energy. The advantage such a production method would give to any government that adopted it, both commercially and militarily, would make it suicidal for them to suppress it.

6 posted on 03/09/2011 4:34:52 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

I am astonished people are still beating the dead horse of ‘Cold Fusion’. It was demonstrated a long time ago to not be true, and yet people won’t let it go. Science relies on the ability to reproduce an experiment to verify it being true. Cold Fusion has repeatedly failed by that standard.


7 posted on 03/09/2011 4:36:52 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

If his invention is real then a lot of energy suppliers stand to lose a lot of money.
He probably needs some good body guards or he will not be with us in November.


8 posted on 03/09/2011 4:37:35 AM PST by BuffaloJack (Obama did not learn incompetence; he was born to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

More details??? The only detail in the story is that there will be no details until later. I pity the poor investors.


9 posted on 03/09/2011 4:39:52 AM PST by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

In fact not true.

“A healthy skepticism is warranted,” says Steven B. Krivit, author of a recent book on cold fusion. “However, the facts show that cold fusion experiments have been demonstrated, reproduced, replicated and published in peer-review journals.”

Experimental evidence consistently demonstrates that nuclear-scale energy, in the form of heat, is being generated without harmful radiation, greenhouse gasses or nuclear waste.

From “Cold Fusion goes back to school at MIT”

http://pesn.com/2005/04/20/6900085_Cold_Fusion_MIT/


10 posted on 03/09/2011 4:52:34 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: djf

I’ll wait and see. If true, then awesome and the guy will become the richest man who ever lived, deseveredly so, the stock market will go to 30,000 in a year, and gold will drop to 32 dollars per ounce. If not true, then the cold fusion story will just continue on in a new vien as it has for so many years.


11 posted on 03/09/2011 5:01:44 AM PST by BRK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BRK

Agreed. At least he’s putting the metal to the pedal, as it were...


12 posted on 03/09/2011 5:08:35 AM PST by StAnDeliver ("Are you better off than you were four years ago?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BRK

I also am skeptical, by that I mean I will wait for more evidence/theoretical explanations.

But just as an off-hand assessment, I’m inclined to think there is some anomalous results going on. Some of the people designing and performing these experiments are the top chemists/physicists in the world. I hope that more than a few of them know how to measure thermodynamics.

What DOESN’T help the situation is every few months some yodel coming out with a new “box” that you can hook up to your home and get off the grid. Especially when the new boxes all require power to run.

Or claims of a 250 mpg carb.

Interestingly, a few years back here in the Seattle area, there was some guy who claimed he had done mods to the carb on like an 89 Buick LeSabre.

They went out and rode with him and verified he was getting well over 100 mpg.

Never heard how the story played out... he’s probably in the Bahamas now with four wives...
or he’s fertilizer...


13 posted on 03/09/2011 5:13:32 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
Well three outcomes of this story....he is a fliflam man and will soon be exposed as a con artist who bilked investors of millions,

All three outcomes are:

  1. he is a fliflam man ,
  2. he is a fliflam man and
  3. he is a fliflam man
Not encouraging investors simply means he already has his pigeons plucked.
14 posted on 03/09/2011 5:17:55 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

I am astonished people are still beating the dead horse of ‘Global Warming’. It was demonstrated a long time ago to not be true, and yet people won’t let it go. Science relies on the ability to reproduce an experiment to verify it being true. Global Warming has repeatedly failed by that standard...................


15 posted on 03/09/2011 5:28:23 AM PST by Red Badger (How can anyone look at the situation in Libya and be for gun control is beyond stupid. It's suicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

16 posted on 03/09/2011 5:29:51 AM PST by Red Badger (How can anyone look at the situation in Libya and be for gun control is beyond stupid. It's suicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djf
They went out and rode with him and verified he was getting well over 100 mpg.

Probably did this the same way the old fill your gas tank with water and drop in this special pill scam worked. Secret gas tank hidden someplace in the car

17 posted on 03/09/2011 5:34:17 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack
If his invention is real then a lot of energy suppliers stand to lose a lot of money.

The big losers would be wind turbine and solar panel makers. And I wouldn't trust them.

18 posted on 03/09/2011 5:34:45 AM PST by Oztrich Boy (I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it -Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Normandy

sfl


19 posted on 03/09/2011 5:36:01 AM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I certainly hope you are not implying that I believe in the Global Warming hoax.


20 posted on 03/09/2011 5:38:55 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

Absolutely not!

I was merely pointing out that what you wrote could equally apply to Global Warming hoaxers as well.

The only difference is the CF guys are targeting individual investors, ant the GW hoaxers are targeting government legislators.

The GW guys have an easier row to hoe............


21 posted on 03/09/2011 5:42:55 AM PST by Red Badger (How can anyone look at the situation in Libya and be for gun control is beyond stupid. It's suicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

You are painting with a very wide brush my friend. His invention has been observed by outside scientists and is said to produce excess heat.

Lets give the man the opportunity to prove his claims.


22 posted on 03/09/2011 5:46:01 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Normandy
As for number 1, he says “for now we prefer not to have investors. We finance ourselves selling our plants” That doesn’t mean he hasn’t had investors, so that’s still a possiblity.

The purchasers of his early units are effectively his investors.

I'd like to see a demo of one of his units running for a month at the location of an independent observer, producing a megawatt(thermal) of output.

23 posted on 03/09/2011 5:48:21 AM PST by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ArtDodger

Yeah, the cost to PRODUCE electricity is far different than the:

- costs to comply with health and safety laws
- costs to pay union workers
- costs to comply with environmental regulations
- costs to monitor and meter the electricity
- costs to build the distribution system
- costs of maintenance
- and of course, taxes


24 posted on 03/09/2011 5:48:39 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Well, Duh!!

For all I know, he could have had lemmings running on a wheel.

It was a local news story, and they had mechanics check the whole setup before/after the test.

These kinds of reports are like crop circles.

Even if 99.9 percent are outright fraud, all it takes is one to be true.

There is alot of con going on. But that by itself doesn’t make the idea impossible.


25 posted on 03/09/2011 5:53:51 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Probably did this the same way the old fill your gas tank with water and drop in this special pill scam worked. Secret gas tank hidden someplace in the car

This is why I'd like to see this unit run for a month, at a different location, under supervision.

For the case of cars with extraordinary mpg, the test also needs to be to run continuously for a month(using drivers in relays, or on a dynamometer) and see. Hybrid car makers are big culprits in this sort of scam, starting the test with full batteries and not counting their contribution.

26 posted on 03/09/2011 5:55:47 AM PST by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: djf
Experimental evidence consistently demonstrates that nuclear-scale energy, in the form of heat, is being generated without harmful radiation, greenhouse gasses or nuclear waste.

You forgot a key word there, as in 'disputed' experimental evidence consistently demonstrates...

Scientific American throws some cold water on the Cold Fusion debate here with a discussion of the findings of a DOE review panel. Most people in the panel don't seem to be sold("two thirds of reviewers found the evidence unconvincing").

Actually I found this article to be fairly interesting. The author makes a rather telling point that even if Cold Fusion works, it doesn't seem to generate enough energy to be interesting (as in it is less cost effective than wind or solar, which we know are already laughable).
27 posted on 03/09/2011 6:02:10 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
This is why I'd like to see this unit run for a month, at a different location, under supervision.

Which is why you'll never see that. There are so many ways to fake a demonstration that you could never account for them all.

28 posted on 03/09/2011 6:02:51 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

Or he is just wrong.


29 posted on 03/09/2011 6:04:12 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: djf
But that by itself doesn’t make the idea impossible.

Physics goes a long way toward making it impossible. Cold fusion is just modern perpetual motion.

30 posted on 03/09/2011 6:08:57 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

Well, like I said above, I am somewhat skeptical. For sure, I’m not gonna invest a months salary in it.

What they need to do now has two parts:
1) Absolutely, positively, undeniably verify that there is excess energy being produced
2) Come up with some sound, provable, peer-reviewed theoretical basis for exactly what in hallelujah is going on.

For all we know, some of the successes might happen at places that use fluorescent lights while the failures happen at places using incandescents.
Could be some hidden, previously unseen quantum effect.

We just don’t know yet.

But I think there is enough evidence to warrant continued testing.


31 posted on 03/09/2011 6:13:22 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
You are painting with a very wide brush my friend. His invention has been observed by outside scientists and is said to produce excess heat.

I'm painting with a wide brush? I don't really see that. We have a branch of research which is very much in dispute and has not really produced anything in the way of either compelling experimental evidence or any real theoretical explanation for what is allegedly occurring. As was said in an article I cited in another post, nobody has managed to as much as boil a cup of tea with Cold Fusion energy, so claims of 1 cent per kWh are pure pie in the sky.

Lets give the man the opportunity to prove his claims.

I have no objection to that. I would, however, favor him chasing his chimeras with private funding.
32 posted on 03/09/2011 6:13:33 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: djf
But I think there is enough evidence to warrant continued testing.

I'm generally all for research, but there's no infinite pool of research funds. I would say if a researcher can find private funds interested in seeing if this pans out, more power to him. If it requires the DOE to make the funding come about, I say no. Heck, I want the DOE gone as it is (put their control of the nuclear stockpile into some other agency, or make one specifically for it).
33 posted on 03/09/2011 6:21:41 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: djf
What they need to do now has two parts: 1) Absolutely, positively, undeniably verify that there is excess energy being produced 2) Come up with some sound, provable, peer-reviewed theoretical basis for exactly what in hallelujah is going on.

The scientific community would want #2. Frankly, consumers and investors would be satisfied with #1 and probably don't care about #2. As long as the cold fusion process works, consumers and investors wouldn't care if the explanation was elves and fairy dust.

34 posted on 03/09/2011 6:27:46 AM PST by CommerceComet (Governor Romney, why would any conservative vote for the author of the beta version of ObamaCare?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

I have Dirac on my bookshelf.
De Broglie, Einstein, Menzel, J. S. Bell, Maxwell.

Yur not talking to some clam-digger.

The changes in physics have been some of the most violent in the intellectual world.
That was a metaphor of sorts, but true nonetheless.

The Earth used to be the center of the universe. Then it wasn’t the center of the universe.

Newton figured out gravity and invented calculus.

Then, some odd things were found about Mercurys orbit, and Newton was shown to be wrong.

Then Einstein figured that one out.

Then the quantum world was discovered and much of what Einstein said (at least about space and time and locality) were thrown out.

The next change to physics will probably shake it to it’s very foundations.

That’s why things like this interest me. As possible pointers to whatever will come to be accepted (after a whole lot of grumbling and sneering and denigrating) as the new model of our understanding of the universe(s).

So you can deny it all you want, that by itself doesn’t make it true or untrue.

God does not play Dice!!


35 posted on 03/09/2011 6:30:18 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard
http://www.coldfusionenergyscience.com/theory

The theory behind cold fusion involves
a “deflated zeroith orbital” for the
electron in a hydrogen atom
this is generally considered a
violation of known physics

I've seen much of the arguments for this
and believe that the math is not rigorous

36 posted on 03/09/2011 6:36:02 AM PST by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: djf
I have Dirac on my bookshelf. De Broglie, Einstein, Menzel, J. S. Bell, Maxwell.

And here I thought they were dead and buried.

Then, some odd things were found about Mercurys orbit, and Newton was shown to be wrong.

Newton wasn't wrong. He just didn't account for some stuff under some conditions. He was right as far as he went. Likewise the current physical requirement of overcoming the proton-proton repulsion to get them close enough to fuse is not wrong. If some magical method that does this in bulk matter exists that doesn't require enormous heat and pressure, then it has yet to be seen. You can get fusion in a particle accelerator, but you'll never be able to use one to produce net energy. I suppose a particle accelerator would qualify as cold fusion, but we're talking about net energy production. So I will remain intensely sceptical, but please feel free to invest in one of these schemes. I'll look forward to hearing how it turns out.

37 posted on 03/09/2011 6:43:35 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

Actually, I think if you take Newtons numbers and apply the Lorentz transforms to it, they work fine and you don’t need Albert at all.

Cold fusion is probably a long shot, but it might be revolutionary.

Whatever happens in physics, you can bet one thing: Alot of well-respected peoples jaws are gonna collectively hit the floor!


38 posted on 03/09/2011 6:53:21 AM PST by djf (Dems and liberals: Let's redefine "marriage". We already redefined "natural born citizen".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge
I've seen much of the arguments for this and believe that the math is not rigorous

Ok, I read through a fair amount of that 'explanation' of the science of Cold Fusion. I read until it went off the rails of actual science. I have a PhD in Materials Science. While I generally focused on Thermodynamics and Solidification in my work, I did take enough courses in the quantum aspects of materials to know when that article started spouting utter gibberish.

The article does an OK job of explaining quantum implications of metallic bonding (not great, but OK), but then it jumps in with nonsense about 'deuterons' as if a deuterium nuclei was a quantum scale particle relevant in the scope of metallic bonding. It most assuredly is not. We're talking drastically different scales here, and completely different physical processes which govern the interactions. It's noteworthy that the article in question doesn't actually have an author. This is understandable since I can't imagine anyone would actually want their name attached to such drivel.
39 posted on 03/09/2011 7:47:49 AM PST by drbuzzard (different league)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

I’ve read the same thing.
I’m fairly excited about this.


40 posted on 03/09/2011 11:23:37 AM PST by mowowie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mowowie

I think there is a chance that Mr. Rossi could have discovered something important with this technology. He’s doing the kinds of things you’d expect someone who was confident in his claims would do, such as inviting independent testers to examine the device and measure results.

Results measured have been quite impressive: one report can be found here: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3108242.ece

I understand the skepticism, but my approach would be to look at this with an open mind and see what transpires.


41 posted on 03/09/2011 11:44:53 AM PST by Normandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson