It just gets better and better with Leonardo, NI and the 1st customer
working together on delivering a new E-Cat:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516&cpage=15#comment-156194
*
Neil Ferguson
December 24th, 2011 at 10:41 AM
<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516&cpage=15#comment-156040>
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Merry Christmas. Perhaps for Christmas you could give us
stocking-stuffers by way of a few tidbits of information. For
example, your preferred nomenclature: you have mentioned it
previously no doubt, but it wouldn’t hurt to repeat. Is “Energy
Catalyzer” proper? E-Catalyser”? Is “ECAT” okay? Or “E-Cat”?
“E-cat”? “Ecat”? Help us get the formal name and brand right.
Next, is your first 1MW plant going to be rehoused (given NI’s
advise, perhaps)? If you will pardon me for mentioning it, the
arrangement of numerous extra E-Cat’s on top of the container
housing on October 28 (as reported) seemed makeshift. Was it because
the plant operation was intentionally suboptimal for that particular
test? Will the production 1MW plants eventually fit into the 52 unit
container housings already publicly revealed? Or will they each
consist of two housings? Or perhaps you are planning a completely
different housing arrangement?
As always, any information you find suitable to share is eagerly
awaited.
Cordially,
Neil Ferguson
*
Andrea Rossi
December 24th, 2011 at 5:03 PM
<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516&cpage=15#comment-156194>
Dear Neil Ferguson:
1- We registered” E-Cat, Energy Catalyzer, The New Fire”.
2- yes: when it will be re-engineered by the Customwer and NI it
will be unrecognizable inside. Outside the same, just a container,
to make it easy to be transported.
3- You are right: many particulars of the version tested on October
28th have been a makeshift.
Warm Regards, and thank you for your attention: and Merry Christmas!
A.R.
