Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims

In a few hours, promoter Andrea Rossi will, for the 12th time, demonstrate how he is able to make boxes of pipes and wires heat water and, possibly, bring it to a boil. What makes Rossi’s device different from an ordinary electric tea kettle is his claim: massive amounts of nuclear-scale heat.

I don’t doubt the legitimacy of the underlying science — apparently copied from biophysicist Francesco Piantelli — which has been published in peer-reviewed journals. But I do doubt the extraordinary magnitude of Rossi’s claim. And I certainly have very low confidence in the one and only paper that Rossi published with his associate Sergio Focardi. They self-published their paper on Rossi’s blog, which Rossi calls Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Readers may find this timeline of events helpful. It provides an excellent track of the Rossi story from the beginning to perhaps the end. I have recently added many new details.

One of the main reasons I doubt Rossi’s claim is that, when I went to see his device in person and filmed it, the visible steam output looked even less than what would come out of an ordinary tea kettle. Yet, according to Rossi, it was producing kilowatts of heat at the time.

Another reason I doubt the claim is that his numerous attempts to present credible scientific evidence have failed.

After several dozen New Energy Times readers analyzed Rossi’s claims and left no doubt about the lack of scientific credibility, Rossi said that he didn’t need to provide scientific evidence because he would prove himself by producing an operating reactor.

Thus, as the sun rises over Bologna this morning, there will be no need for data, thermistors or flow measurements. Rossi will turn on his device, then unplug it from the wall and show that his reactor can do real work: light a light bulb, turn a motor or warm up the room for his guests. Or he won’t.

Another reason for my doubt is that multiple customers, apparently with ample financial resources, have lined up to perform due diligence, and they all seem to lose interest. First, it was Defkalion, then Ampenergo, then Quantum Energy Technologies. Quantum’s engineers observed tests on Sept. 5 and 6 in Rossi’s showroom. The potential customers come, they look, they don’t come back. Same with NASA. NASA engineers went to see Rossi’s show along with the representatives from Quantum, and they came away empty-handed.

If I spent the time to count the inconsistencies presented by Rossi and his collaborators, I could list dozens of examples. Here’s a crucial one: In their 2010 self-published paper, they claimed an energy gain of 213 times. Yet, in January 2011, Rossi downgraded the claim to a 30 times energy gain. In April, he downgraded his claim again, to 6 times.

Here’s another example: Rossi and Focardi have said that they submitted their self-published paper to several journals but that it was rejected with prejudice. Yet, on June 14, I asked Focardi in which journals he and Rossi had attempted to publish their paper. Focardi revealed that they had not submitted the paper to any journal; he said they submitted it only to the arXiv pre-print service, but the administrators rejected it.

Another example: Rossi claimed he had a factory in Florida where he was testing 300 of his devices, yet the address listed on his corporate documents shows that to be a fifth-floor apartment.

Another example: Rossi claimed he was heating a building in Italy with one of his reactors, yet there is not a single piece of evidence to support that claim.

Another example: Rossi has claimed that the key to his technological innovation is a secret “catalyst.” Yet, in my video interview with him, he said his crucial discovery had everything to do with “pressure.”

How has Rossi been able to perform his magic show for so long? Technology journalist Mats Lewan of Ny Teknik gets some of the credit for this. Lewan has consistently failed to ask Rossi tough questions, turned a blind eye to crucial inconsistencies, and acted as Rossi’s scribe by writing his technical reports for him.

No wonder mainstream science media have not picked up on this Internet miracle. But two mainstream journalists have noticed the story. The first is David Hambling, a freelance journalist who wrote an article for Wired U.K. on Oct. 6, 2011. The second is Peter Svensson, a technology writer with the Associated Press who contacted me on May 20.

Mats Lewan                Peter Svensson       David Hambling

“I’ve been using your site quite a bit in my researches, sparked by my interest in the Rossi affair,” Svensson wrote. “The site is impressive, and I thought I might introduce myself to a fellow journalist.”

Before I left for my June trip to Bologna, I told Svensson that I was headed out to meet Rossi and see his device.

“I would be interested in hearing what you think,” Svensson wrote. “I’ve met Rossi. Give my regards to him when you see him!”

Svensson was interested in hearing my opinion about Rossi and his claim. I cannot say it any better than Daniel Larsson, the owner of the Energy Catalzyer blog, did: “Maybe Andrea Rossi knows: ‘Extraordinary scams require extraordinary claims.'”

[Update Oct. 28, 19:34: Rossi’s 12th demo. No light bulbs are lit, no motors turn, no room is heated. Italian engineers with unknown affiliation take and report data on behalf of unknown “customer.” Rossi uploads documents to his Web site which say that unidentified customer accepts delivery of his device. Document is signed “For the customer – Ing Domenico Fioravanti, (signature) ” “For Leonardo Corporation” (signature). Words “For the customer” are partially redacted by Rossi.]