A few days ago, a Web site called The Explorer published a story written by Tina Quizon called “Steven Chu looks at Lattice-Assisted Nuclear Reactions Cold Fusion.”

No sources or direct quotes were given for Chu’s alleged interest in “cold fusion.”

Yesterday New Energy Times asked Department of Energy spokesman Jeff Sherwood about the Explorer Web page.

“Secretary Chu did not speak at that conference, did not attend and was, in fact, out of the country at the time,” Sherwood said.

Source: 22 Passi, Daniele Passerini (“Galantini sent it to Levi and Levi sent it to me.”)

Data: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:02:22 +0200
Da: Greit Service srl
Rispondi-A:Greit Service srl [omissis]
A: [omissis]

Buon giorno, in merito alla richiesta fattami in data odierna, come da me ripetutamente confermato alle numerose persone che me ne hanno fatto richiesta in passato, ripeto che tutte le mie misurazioni effettuate durante le decine di test per misurare la quantità di acqua non evaporata presente nel vapore prodotto dai generatori  “E-Cat” sono sempre state effettuate dando i risultati in % di massa poiché lo strumento utilizzato indica  i gr. di acqua per mc. di vapore.
Confermo che la temperatura misurata è sempre stata maggiore di 100,1°C.
E che la pressione misurata nel camino è sempre risultata essere pari alla pressione ambiente.
Lo strumento utilizzato durante il test effettuato alla presenza dei professori svedesi è stato il seguente: Testo 176 H2  codice 0572 1766.
Distinti saluti.

Galantini dr. Gilberto
Ordine dei Chimici n.194
Provincia di Ferrara

Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:02:22 +0200
From: Greit Service Ltd.
Reply-To: Greit Service Ltd. [snip]
A: [snip]

Good morning, on the request made to me today, as I have repeatedly confirmed to me that many people have requested in the past,  I repeat that all the measurements I did, during tens of tests done to measure the amount of not evaporated water (read liquid water, TN) present in the steam produced by “E-Cat” generators, always was made providing results in “% of mass”, since the used device indicates the grams of water by cubic meter of steam.
I confirm that the measured temperature always was higher than 100,1°C and that the measured pression in the chimney always  was equal to the ambient pressure.

The instrument used during the tests performed in the presence of Swedish teachers was as follows: 176 Text Code 0572 H2 1766 .

Yours sincerely.

Galantini dr.Gilberto
Order No. 194 of Chemical
Province of Ferrara

Message from Celani from January:

Data: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:15:26 +0100

Da: Francesco Celani
Rispondi-A:Francesco Celani
Oggetto: Declaration of Dr. Galantini (In Italian).  [Fwd: sonda]
A: [omissis]@googlegroups.com
Cc: [omissis]

Dear Colleagues,
as anticipated, I am sending copy of the “Declaration” of Dr. Galantini about the instrumentation used.
I received it just now and it is in Italian language.
Thanks for Your kind attention,

Francesco CELANI

Oggetto:        sonda
Data:   Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:56:41 +0100
Mittente:       Greit Service srl <@greitservice.it>
A:      <francesco.celani@

Source: Daniele Passerini’s Blog
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/06/quattro-gatti-e-sette-persone-3.html

Venerdì 17 giugno 2011
Quattro gatti e sette persone (3)

Dear Mr. Krivit,

I have carefully read your preliminary report on your trip to 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 states, I got a PhD in Physics several years ago. This implies I have totally understood the difference between residual water in steam as a fraction of mass or volume.

As I have unsuccessfully tried to explain:

1) The plots you were showing are well known and can be found in any textbook of physical chemistry. They show measurements of the steam fraction in VOLUME percentage.

2) As I have told you many times, Dr. Galantini, the expert chemist that was in charge, performed measurements in MASS percentage.

As Professor Zanchini told you the same day we met, one of the crucial bits of information you omitted from your preliminary report is that 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.

Therefore, our calculations and our analysis are correct.

Given that you omitted portions of information you had, insulted me (and my University) trying to say that I’m not knowledgeable enough in my area, 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 further information.

Regards,
Dr. G.Levi

Ovviamente spero che Steven, ritorni sui suoi troppo frettolosi passi e nel report definitivo racconti un po’ più esaustivamente la sua visita a Bologna, ancorandosi soprattutto a veri e propri fatti… anche io il 14 gennaio, come tanti, mi infilai per errore dal gommista lì vicino (mi riferisco al 3° e 4° capoverso del suo “preliminary report”), ma lo ritenni un particolare di nessun valore e continuo a ritenerlo tale: domandai e trovai subito l’ingresso giusto!

=================================

POSTSCRIPT 1: As it turns out, it was irrelevant whether they calculated the steam by mass or volume. Galantini, the chemist hired by Rossi, used the wrong instrument: It was incapable of measuring steam quality.

POSTSCRIPT 2: It would also have been irrelevant if they had used the correct instrument because Rossi was sending unvaporized water down into the hole in the wall.