My name is Daniel and I just put up links about the E-Cat on this blog. I suddenly had some second thoughts about doing so. I know hardly anything about nuclear-physics. (Nor does the E-Cat, apparently) In my life I probably have worried more about the future of jazz, than the future of the planet. But this story fascinates me. It´s a hell of a scam, or a truly fantastic invention, that´s for sure. The E-cat, if it works, has the potential to change the world to the better, for so many people, on so many levels. That creates hope. And perhaps false hope. At least for me. Although the "scam-alarm" is shouting out loud on every level, I might continue to post links here for a while...maybe it can save some Google-searchtime for others. That´s the only reason I can think of for the blog to exist.
However, soon the blog have 100.000 visits, and it happens to be growing fast in recent days, after the Defkalion press-conference last week. As I have read in several discussion forums, many people are thinking about risking their own money and invest in the Defkalion business. Things are getting serious, and therefore I probably have to take certain responsibilities(?). I try to find links that focus on the skeptics point of view. However, the established science community still prefer to be silent, and the people writing about E-Cat are often devoted bloggers that seems to believe in anything but self-criticism, and there is (maybe) a risk that this tiny little blog becomes part of a thousand others that repeats lies(?) until people start to believe them. If so(?) I will just stop... What do U think? If you have the time to comment, please do so. Thanks./ DL energycatalyzer@gmail.com
A Bolognese radio station, Città del Capo Radio Metropolitana, recently interviewed Loris Ferrari and Giuseppe Levi from the University of Bologna about their R&D contract with Andrea Rossi.
According to the article, the study will last for at least a year, financed by Rossi, and it will take at least six months for the results to be published. (Although the research group may release some preliminary results as early as December, 2011.)
Some aspects of the research may be subject to trade secret protections.
You can read a summary of the interview here. (translated via Google)
Quote: "This is the second in a series of reports based on my interviews with Andrea Rossi, creator of a device he calls the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat, Sergio Focardi, professor emeritus at the University of Bologna, and Giuseppe Levi, a professor in the university’s Department of Physics, and based on my investigation of their claims of a low-energy nuclear reaction device that produces commercially useful levels of excess heat." You find the report here
Steven B. Krivits videos filmed June 14 in Bologna, has resulted in interesting comments and critique. Today Peter Ekström posted his thoughts on the production of steam.
Quote from the publication; "I think Steven Krivit’s video from his visit to Bologna is very revealing. In reference (1c) one can see a little puff of mist at the end of the tube. If we had invisible steam rushing out of the tube at a speed of 11 m/s (Calculation 1 below), the puff of mist would certainly be blown away quickly! The E-Cat runs on 5 kW power. So what we can see coming out of the tube is the total production of E-Cat running at 5 kW! This little trickle is hardly useful for heating or producing electricity! Note that losses in the tube are small according to Rossi (1a) and that all water is converted into dry steam (Calculation 2). Where does the power go? Out of the E-Cat or the tube? Not very likely since the losses are small, 5 kW is a lot of power and it would heat the room perceptibly. The only remaining explanation is that the E-Cat does not produce excess energy. The input electrical power is 3.5*220=770 W (2b). It takes 608 W to heat 7 kg of water in an hour from 25 to 100 C and boil it (Calculation 2). The remaining 770-608=162 W is used to evaporate a small fraction of the water. Since the temperature of the output water is not actually measured, it is quite possible that the temperature is less than 100 o C, which would leave some additional power to evaporate water. So, where is the water then? It should be trickling out of the tube. When Rossi removed the end piece of the tube, he very deliberately emptied a fair portion of the tube from water, and subsequently held the end above the level of the rest of the tube (1b). It would take a significant time for the tube to be filled with water and the water would trickle out (Calculation 3)." The Calculations referred to can be found in the publication.
Here is (again) the two videos mentioned; The references mentioned in Ekström´s PDF is in this video is at 1a "very small condensation": 10.40 (minutes.seconds) 1b The tube trick: 11.00 1c Steam against T-shirt: 11.30 1d "In this moment we are making 7 kilograms of water per hour": 12.15
The references mentioned in Ekström´s PDF is in this video is at 2a Temperature difference: 3.35 (minutes.seconds) 2b Ampére meter: 09.20
So what to say? Many would answer "Emperor´s New Clothes". Andrea Rossi comments on his blog.
New York – AmpEnergo Inc. along with Leonardo Corporation and the inventor Dr. Andrea Rossi are working on commercializing the E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) technology in the Americas, including North America, Central America, South America, and the Caribbean. Current efforts involve setting up strategic financial and business partnerships and negotiating licensing agreements with interested parties. At the present time AmpEnergo Inc. is not offering stock to the general public, but we appreciate the many inquiries and words of support we have received. We look forward to bringing this world changing energy technology to market and will keep you informed of future developments."
An article from Ny Teknik about Ampenergo can be found here
Since its start the 23rd of June the Defkalion Green Technologies own user forum has been gathering a few skeptic voices! One of them discuss "Dr. Randell Mills comments"
Quote from Mills: "The fusion reaction is theoretically impossible and not shown experimentally. Nor, is net power shown experimentally by the method presented. At 4.4 kW output, the heater power could be disconnected and threshold temperature to maintain the claimed reaction will be far exceeded. The proper method of measuring power from steam is to condense it and measure the heat delivered by the steam. This was not done. Based on the energy balance and power density in this case as well as in more aggressive claims, it is overwhelmingly possible that the heat balance was not measured properly."
However, Randell Mills, founder of Blacklight Power and author of The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics is another controversial figure in the business of alternative energy.
An article in NY Times described in 2008 how Mills had kept plugging on and getting $60 million in venture funding despite his theories being first rejected and then ignored by the scientific community during years.
Here are some excerpts from NY Times article that almost sounds strangely familiar today;
"But Blacklight’s claims have a special significance: If they’re true, there’s a source of cheap, clean energy that can be easily tapped anywhere in the world. And rather than attempt to convince the world with calculations, Blacklight is now saying that it has physical proof of its energy generator, verified by an independent university lab." "Its “hydrino” theory isn’t put forth by a single crackpot; instead, the company employs a good handful of high-level scientists who would presumably rebel if the idea was totally false." "Mills, for his part, says that he’d like for scientists to independently verify every step of the process, from obtaining the Raney nickel and doping it to the calorimeter tests to prove that the energy bursts really exist. The information to run those tests is free to the public, he says; the only thing required is a researcher willing to take the time to puzzle through the process." "Unfortunately, the reactions Jansson’s team has gotten are only a quick burst of intense heat. For a commercializable process, there would need to be a steady output. Mills explains that by saying he has purposefully kept knowledge of the methods to loop the reaction within the company, so that his own researchers can remain a step ahead in their work on the 50KW reactor that the company earlier announced.According to Mills, it’s likely a totally independent researcher will verify the whole process within a year. Meanwhile the company will start licensing out its energy process, and do work with hydrinos in various chemical applications." "As I noted in May, it would be odd, if Blacklight were a complete sham, for Mills to place himself in an end game in which he would be definitively proven wrong within just a year or two. So there does seem to be something deeper here. Physicists will deny the hydrino theory, and they may be right; perhaps that’s why there was a distinct note of smugness in Mills’ voice as he said, “The controversy and academic debate won’t stop commercialization.”What evidence there is, Mills calls “totally unequivocal,” although it seems prudent to wait for more independent verifications to emerge for what Mills himself calls the most important energy breakthrough since the discovery of nuclear power."
Peter Ekström, who also is strongly critical to Andrea Rossi, describes Blacklight Power as "probably the most advanced example of psuedo-science in the history of science"
Here is an interview, published 23 of June, with Giuseppe Levi in Italian Query. (Translated via Google)
An interesting excerpt from the Google-translation; "-Let's talk about this, then. All experts who have witnessed the first test (the physicists Hanno Essen and Sven Kullander, Swedish journalist Mats Lewan, the Director of the INFN Antonio Zoccoli, and at this point also Krivit) agree on the need for definitive tests. There is also a research agreement between Rossi and the University of Bologna. At what point is the drawing? -I look forward to hours the copy signed by Rossi, told me that today [June 20] sent me. It has already been approved in the department and has already been signed by our leader, so it's now a matter of hours. There are also administrative lead time, the usual things, the agreement still there."
Swedish Ny Teknik: "A box measuring 22x18x14 inches to help Greece and the world. That’s the new energy box Hyperion – based on the energy catalyzer invented by Andrea Rossi – that was presented on Thursday by the Greek company Defkalion." Read article here
Waiting for updates from todays press-conference with Defkalion Green Technologies, I recommend to watch this video. It is directed by Manuel Zani, and focus on coldfusion in general, and the Rossi experiments in particular. It includes highly interesting interviews with Sergio Focardi, Giuseppe Levi, Fransico Celani and Cristos Stremmenos among others.
The website of Defkalion Green Technologies has fallen into place during the morning. Right now (14.30 in Greece) the press-conference is taking place, and I suppose that it will mainly focus on the information in this company overview, released just a moment ago. It includes some new information and specifications of the product line in 6 different series, A-F, to serve different purposes. It is also mentioned that "all products are connected to Defkalion main computers through on-line GSM for monitoring."
Energypress.gr posted a summary of the E-Cat, on the occasion of todays press-conference.
It is interesting to note the following quite dramatic claims;
-The first prototype reactors will be produced by the end of July, regular production will begin in November, and the first household units will be introduced next January.
-The cost of the E-Cat that produces heat will be about €4000-5000.
-A converter to produce electricity from the unit will cost an extra €500-900.
You can read the article here, translated via Google
Dr. Brian Josephson represents the rare combination of a believer in paranormal phenomenon as well as a Nobel laureate (in Physics,1973, for his work on superconductivity) He recently released a YouTube video of an interview of himself. Ivy Matt has written some comments on the video here
It is disturbing that Dr. Brian Josephson does not use his knowledge and status in a more proper way. The video starts with a false qoute from Mr. Dennis Bushnell! As Mr. Bushnell told New Energy Times;“They borrowed my audio clip from the EV World phone interview. The clip does not include the adjacent words “If it is real.” I was not contacted by Josephson." On a similar note, Ny Teknik´s tabloid-headline "IT´S A NUCLEAR REACTION" is presented both in the paper and video as a quote from Sven Kullander and Hanno Essén. What Sven and Hanno actually said was "Any chemical process for producing 25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm 3 container can be ruled out. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production."
If you get too uncomfortable with the editing of the video, here is a transcript of the interview; with credit to ecatreport.com:
"[An audio insert of EV World's interview]
Dennis M. Bushnell, NASA Chief Scientist, Langley Research Center: “This is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geo-politics, and solving climate and energy”.
[end of audio clip] [Bushnell have complained that the phrase 'If it's real...' was ommited from the clip.]
Judith Driscoll: What’s this Rossi reactor then? Why do you consider it so important?
Brian Josephson: This picture shows Rossi with his device [being shown to Sven Kullander, chairman of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences’ Energy Committee, and Hanno Essén, associate professor of theoretical physics and member of the board of the Swedish Skeptics Society, who carried out one of the investigations], which he calls the ‘Energy Catalyzer’, or E-cat for short. He says what’s happening is that there’s a nuclear reaction involving nickel and hydrogen. And since nuclear reactions produce so much more energy than ordinary chemical reactions, this means you can get a vast amount of energy with very little consumption of fuel. Furthermore, you won’t get any greenhouse gases produced.
JD: What’s the evidence that a nuclear process is involved?
BJ: Well, there’s some suggestion that copper is produced, that nickel has been transmuted into copper. But clear evidence is in regard to the amount of energy it produces. There’s a maximum amount of energy you can produce in a chemical reaction, so if the device produces vastly more energy than that, there must be something else going on, either a nuclear reaction or some unknown process. It’s been investigated a number of times, teams have come in to investigate it. For example, in February this year a test was carried out that ran for 18 hours. The amount of heat produced during that time was measured at 270 kWh. And that is the amount of energy you’d get from 25 kg of petrol. And since the size of the reaction chamber is only 50 ml, this rather rules out the idea of energy being generated by any conventional source. This appears to be pretty good evidence [various sources are mentioned at this point, repeated in subtitles. The Wikipedia article on the reactor is currently good, but is subject to the whims and prejudices of editors.
However, there are some problems with the idea that it is a nuclear reaction, because first of all conventional theory says that you need extremely high temperatures to get the reaction to go at a measurable rate, so people are skeptical on those grounds. On the other hand, there may be something wrong with the theory, because here we've got something happening in a solid; it's not in a gas with isolated protons going round. It's in a solid, so maybe many protons can cooperate and intensify the effect. So I think that's not such strong grounds for rejecting it.
Another argument people have against this is to say not many gamma rays are produced -- an extremely small amount of gamma rays [relative to what would be expected], and thess fusion processes normally generate gamma rays. But then again we’ve got a very different kind of situation to what happens in thermonuclear processes. You can see what might happen in this slide. Imagine two different situations. One is a rock that is falling in air; it falls with a crash on some surface. The other situation is where it’s falling through water, and when it’s falling through water the energy is just gradually getting transferred to the water, there’s no big crash. That’s just an explanation [in general terms] of why you mightn’t get gamma rays. There’s really very little in the way of theory — actually lots of attempts have been made to explain it [cold fusion] but there isn’t enough evidence to show which is right. I think it’s not impossible that an explanation will be found.
JD: How is the amount of heat measured?
BJ: Well, this is really just school physics. You’re putting cold water in and you’re getting hot water or steam coming out, and if you know how much water’s going through you know how much heat is being produced, that’s all there is to it really[1].
—–
[1] In principle, but in practice one has to look carefully into what additional sources of heat there may be. Also, when steam is generated there are complications. The various investigations have attempted to address these issues.
—–
Also, there’s quite a big difference in temperature, in some experiments there’s [at least] a five degrees temperature rise; in other cases the water actually boiled. So you can’t say that errors in measuring the temperature are responsible for it.
JD: Why does energy need to be fed into the reactor to keep it going? Can’t the energy it generates be fed back into the reactor, so it can keep going with no energy input?
BJ: According to Rossi you can do that — he says it can be run in a mode where you aren’t feeding energy in, but you it’s then difficult to stabilise it; … in practical applications you want a reactor that can easily be stabilized. So the devices he’s building have energy being fed in, and you control it by altering how much current is being fed into the device.
JD: You say no greenhouse gases are involved, but what about radioactivity?
BJ: Well, Rossi says there are no radioactive residues. It’s not like ordinary reactors where you have radioactive residues that go on emitting radiation and heat as well for a very long time. And also he says should there be something like, say, and earthquake, then the hydrogen would escape and the reaction would stop. So he claims, at any rate, that it’s all very safe.
JD: Is it possible that Rossi’s just fooling people, he’s made it seem as if the reactor is heating up water, but he’s just trying to persuade people to invest in it, or to buy it, but it actually doesn’t really work.
BJ: Various people think that this is all a scam, but it’s not that plausible an idea because he allows people to investigate it; they can decide what to measure, how to measure it, they can also look inside, peer inside; the only thing they can’t look at is the reactor that contains his secret catalyst. But it doesn’t matter if you can’t look inside as what you’re trying to do is to see if it can produce this vast amount of heat which has been measured, and no matter what ordinary process it is you can’t produce more than a certain amount of energy in that amount of volume. So it doesn’t really matter if you can’t look inside. The reason he doesn’t want people to look inside is that they might discover how he does it and obviously, since it’s a commercial enterprise he doesn’t want other people to be able to make it so that he would lose what he gets back by selling the devices.
JD: Can’t he protect the invention by patenting the ideas?
BJ: Well, the trouble is, patenting is a rather tricky process if you really want to protect [your invention]. He has got some patents but it’s not fully protected.
JD: If this is as important as you believe it is, how is it we haven’t heard about it?
BJ: Well, that’s a very interesting question. One wonders about this. What isn’t Nature [Journal], say, writing this up, I mean, [this information] is available, but Nature doesn’t seem to be interested. However, if you were in Sweden you would know about it because there’s a Swedish technology journal called Ny Teknik, and someone there called Mats Lewan has been following it — somebody told him about it — and he at any rate was interested, he’s been following it and in fact he was responsible for [arranging] some of the setups. He’s written a great number of articles over that time.
It’s funny that people aren’t interested, but it has its historical precedents. One thing that was pretty similar was when the Wright brothers — they got their first flying machine and people had seen it, and you’d have thought this would be of tremendous interest, but very little was published. The publisher of the local journal [the Dayton Daily News] said, when he was asked about it later, “Frankly, we didn’t believe it.” And then there’s a typical account with skepticism was a newspaper which said “The Wrights have flown or they have not flown. They possess a machine or they do not possess one. They are in fact either fliers or liars. It is difficult to fly. It’s easy to say, ‘We have flown’”. So this shows … the skeptical mind at work, dismissing something in that way. So, in the case of the Rossi reactor, people are saying “it is easy to overlook something”. But the question is, what has been overlooked. It is such a simple measurement that it is not clear what could have been overlooked [by people who have looked carefully at the device].
But of course, part of the problem is the history of cold fusion. Pons and Fleischmann brought out their original spectacular claims in a press conference they were rather pushed into and there was a lot of skepticism, they were attacked. … People tried to reproduce the experiment … they thought it was a very easy experiment — you just [feed in] an electric current and lo and behold the reaction would go, but it wasn’t actually that simple. So the result was, a lot of people failed to get anything out and they denounced Pons and Fleischmann, and said ‘this is all incompetence’, and somehow their voice was heard more loudly than the other people, who were successful. The skeptics got in first. And so, the skepticism bandwagon rolled, and somebody invented the phrase ‘fiasco of the century’ to describe it, and it had become the ‘well-established fact’ that cold fusion was a delusion. So Rossi had to fight against that general viewpoint.
But he’s really not so bothered about what the scientists think. In fact he wasn’t that keen on having scientists investigate it. His original plan had been simply to make a big reactor, producing so much power that people couldn’t say ‘nothing’s happening’. So that’s how it went.
JD: Is the reactor claim really so unbelievable?
BJ: Well, it looks unbelievable at first sight, but always in physics there are things you haven’t thought about, and I think here one possibility is that you’re getting energy concentrated into a point, as I said before. A familiar example of getting energy into a point is just hammering in a nail. The energy you have wouldn’t be able to get you into wood or whatever, but because it all gets concentrated into a point that forces its way in [SLIDE]. And so something like this may be happening, you may be pushing the hydrogen into nickel and there’s some obstruction or bottleneck, the [enhanced] flow of energy is produced at that point.
That’s one possibility. Another thing which is really quite similar, which people haven’t thought of in this context: someone called Seth Putterman — he and his colleagues got a device to work which actually produced nuclear reactions in a table-top experiment, and the way he did this was something called pyroelecticity. You heat up a substance and an electric field is produced. And that electric field he focussed on to a point, and there was a very strong electric field at that point. He had his crystal in deuterium gas, and that ionized the deuterium, and the electric field imparted so much energy to it that there were nuclear reactions and neutrons were produced. So … it shouldn’t really be thought so impossible. Fleischmann’s original idea was having a material where hydrogen was pushed in with high density with an electric current to see if anything happened, and lo and behold it did happen.
So, it’s been a gradual development. Rossi’s advance would appear to be to discover his secret catalyst, which makes the reaction go much faster, and make it a practical source of energy.
JD: So what do you think is going to happen?
BJ: Well, as I see it, there are two different worlds, there’s the world of the academic, and the world of the practical person. The academic is mired in theory, and wanting absolute proof, and says ‘this is nonsense’ — at least that’s the general view. Meanwhile Rossi is going ahead in the practical sphere, … he’s building these reactors and people will — one hopes — see that they’re producing lots of energy. His first reactor is due to be produced in October, and he has a buyer for it. People, by the way, don’t have to pay until they’re convinced it is working, which is not what fraudsters do. So I think gradually it will take off.
The unfortunate thing is there’s been a delay; there will be a delay in it getting going because the journals, and the media who follow the scientists, are refusing to publish anything. That delay will have consequences. It really does matter, from that point of view, that the scientists and the media are looking away"
Steven B. Krivit just uploaded a YouTube-video from his recent visit in Bologna, in which Andrea Rossi explains the function of the E-Cat!
(ed. July 28 : Read Peter Ekströms comments here)
As mentioned earlier Steven B. Krivit expressed some doubtfulness over the methods of measurement for the E-Cat demonstrations that have been done. After the meeting with Rossi, Focardi and Levi, Krivit also expressed some doubt over Giuseppe Levi´s competence; "I discussed the crucial difference in steam enthalpy calculations by mass versus by volume with Levi on Wednesday afternoon. Based on his initial response, I could not be sure if he had previously understood the potential impact."
"Dear, Mr. Krivit I have carefully read your preliminary report on your travel in Bologna. Your report clearly demonstrates that you have not understood anything of what you have seen and what we have explained you. First of all the story about the steam. As the signature in my email says I got a PhD in Physics years ago. This means that I have totally understood the difference between residual water in steam as fraction of mass or volume. As I have unsuccessfully tried to explain you : 1) The plots you where showing are well known and you can find them in any manual of physical chemistry. The apply when you measure the quantity of steam present as % of VOLUME.
2) As I have told you many times, Dr. Galantini, the expert chemist that was in charge, have done a measure as percent of MASS.
As Professor Zanchini has told you the same day we met, one of the crutial informations you have omitted from your preliminary report, a fraction of water in the steam, measured by MASS as we have done, would reduce the amount of measured energy in a linear way.
So our calculation and our analysis is correct.
Because you: Omitted part of information you had, insulted me (and my University) trying to say that I'm not prepared in my field, tried (just tried) to scare me and put me under psychological pressure in order to obtain so far undisclosed data, I will not send you any other information.
Regards, Dr. G.Levi"
Here is Giuseppe Levis personal page at the University of Bologna. Steven B. Krivit is the editor of the website New Energy Times, focusing on LENR-research. As I didn´t find a CV for Steven, I link to a YouTube-video in which he explains his standpoints.
PS: The moment I posted, I noticed that this already been mentioned in the previous post comment field by Henk!! :) Thanks!
Here is a quick status report from Steven B. Krivit´s visit to Andrea Rossi’s showroom on Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday to look at his E-Cat. It is refreshing to note that Steven seems to take a critical point of view, and is eager to point out the dubious parts of the previous tests-results. It will be interesting to read his full report of the demonstration.
Not everyone appreciates Krivit´s critical thoughts, though. Here is Andrea Rossi´s comments today;
Dear Roger Barker:
Please read the answer I gave to Craig:
AGAIN : WE MADE THE MEASUREMENT OF THE WATER IN WEIGHT !!!!!!
AND WE EXPLAINED THIS TO KRIVIT VERY WELL!!!!!
AND HE GOT CONFIRMATION OF THIS FROM AN INDIPENDENT PROFESSOR HE CONTACTED !!!!!
NOBODY MAKES THIS KIND OF MEASUREMENT IN VOLUME, BECAUSE IT IS A NONSENSE !!!!!
KRIVIT SAID ” I HAVE UNDERSTOOD” WHEN I TOLD THIS DURING THE INTERVIEW.
I HAVE MANY WITNESSES OF WHAT ABOVE ENCLOSED THE PROF. HE CONTACTED TO GET INDIPENDENT COUNSEL !!!!!
BUT HE REPORTED THAT WE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM: WE. PHYSICS PROFESSORS OF CERN, UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA, UNIVERSITY OF UPPSALA, UNIVARSITY OF STOCKOLM, WHO MADE THE TESTS!!!!! AND HE COMES HERE TO TESCH TO US PHYSICS!!!!!!
HE CAME TO US SMILING, VERY FRIENDLY, ACCEPTED TO BE INVITED TO GET LUNCH, ACCEPTED TAXI REMBOURSEMENT, MADE FAIR QUESTIONS, GOT PRECISE ANSWERS, AND NOW HE WRITES TOTALLY FALSE THINGS:
THIS IS A SNAKE, NOT A JOURNALIST, AND I WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO KNOW WHO SENT HIM (I HAVE A PRETTY IDEA, THOUGH, SINCE HE UNADVERTEDLY GAVE US A CLUE).
Warm Regards,
A.R."
Dear Craig:
Mr Krivit has understood nothing of what he saw, from what I have read in his ridiculous report… This guy has seen for half an hour an E-Cat in the factory where we make many tests, made some questions to Prof. Levi, Prof. Focardi and me. Evidently has understood nothing, perhaps for the short time we gave him, also because we have to work: maybe he is angry because we had to send him away from the closed boxes and because we had to say him good bye shortly because we have to make our work. Prof. Levi has explained very well to him how the measures have been made and the importance of the issue. He has explained very well that the percentage of uncondensed water in the steam has been measured in weight (in volume is impossible, for various reasons), and he also got confirmation of this from a specialist from whom he has taken indipendent counsel. Nevertheless, he has understood nothing, or wanted not to understand, for reasons he better knows. Our tests have been performed by Physics Professors, who know how to make measures , and I am measuring the performance every day on 300 reactors.
In any case we will start our 1 MW plant in october and we will see how it works. Of course I assure his considerations are invalid, but I want to say more: our products on the market will confirm this. Probably this journalist has been sent by someone that wants to dwarf our work. He also tried to blackmail prof. Levi, and Levi already has given to his attorney due information .
Warm Regards,
A.R."
Daniele Passerini today receieved the following invitation in his mailbox:
"Dear ***, Green Technologies cordially invites Defkalion knows you to attend press conference to announce to the ITS Technological breakthroughs in energy with exclusive rights to Greece. Kind Regards, Symeon Tsalikoglou.
Press Conference
Invitation
GREECE's ANSWER TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRISIS
HYDROGEN & NICKEL EXOTHERMIC REACTION
CHEAP, CLEAN & GREEN ENERGY
Thursday 23rd June, 2011 @ 14:30
Municipality of Palaio Faliro
Terpsihoris 51 & Artemidos
RSVP: [omissis] A Reception will follow
Today, there is great pessimism regarding the future energy needs of our planet. Energy will soon become universally cheap, clean and readily usable.
Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi have discovered and patented a technology that will change the world’s energy field. This technology will be made commercially available by Defkalion Green Technologies s.a., a Greek company.
By combining Hydrogen and Nickel to create an exothermic reaction (at room temperatures and in a device that can be safely placed in households and also industry) heat is emitted on a 24-hour basis. This energy is produced at a fraction of the cost in comparison to currently available energy sources, it is clean and totally green. Furthermore, using conventional, readily available third-party technologies, the heat can also be used to produce electricity.
Defkalion Green Technologies s.a. has secured exclusive distribution rights for the entire world, except for the USA and military applications. It will start production and first distribution of its products from its factory in Xanthi for the Greek and Balkan markets, initially. Two more factories are scheduled within 2012. International sales are already strong in demand, which will spur exports.
Suffice to say, that Greece possesses 83% of Europe’s Nickel deposits, a key strategic consideration. Furthermore, at this time of the global financial crisis, Greece is faced with a golden opportunity to become energy self-sufficient, gain in employment in one of its most underdeveloped regions, as well as become a technological leader in this new scientific field.
The press conference will comprise of undisclosed to-date information relating the technology’s commercial and industrial applications, the company’s strategic placements, as well as commercial issues that are of interest not only to Defkalion’s future customers, but also to the political society of our country. It goes without saying that such an important development also possesses a strong international dimension in many aspects.
