Update 3: So who thinks nothing good comes of this? Ecatnews.com revived by Hot Cat!
Update 2: Here is another sceptical take, that explains nicely how input power can be manipulated as long as there is an unscrutinized wire going to a device. So, as was to be expected, this report nicely reinforces the biases of everybody following this story (as if by design – honi soit qui mal y pense).
Something I did not expect to see: An actual report on independent testing performed on Rossi’s Hot Cat in the arxiv.org pre-print archive.
This is not a published peer reviewed paper (yet?) but it’s quite remarkable to see Hanno Essén‘s name on there. Obviously this theoretical physicist not only stands by his earlier impression of Rossi’s work, but clearly now puts his reputation behind this report.
The verdict is forcefully put forth in the abstract:
An experimental investigation of possible anomalous heat production in a special type of reactor tube named E-Cat HT is carried out. The reactor tube is charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel powder plus some additives. The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils inside the reactor tube. Measurement of the produced heat was performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second from the hot reactor tube. The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large bandwidth three-phase power analyzer. Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours, respectively. An anomalous heat production was indicated in both experiments. The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT. In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the electric input. Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources.
Some interesting quotes from the report (first test):
The device subject to testing was powered by 360 W for a total of 96 hours, and produced in all 2034 W thermal. This value was reached by calculating the power transferred by the E-Cat HT to the environment by convection and power irradiated by the device. The resultant values of generated power density (7093 W/kg) and thermal energy density (6,81 · 105 Wh/kg) allow us to place the E-Cat HT above conventional power sources.
From the second test calculations:
According to the engineering definition, COP is given by the ratio between the output power of a device and the power required by its operation, thereby including, in our case, the power consumed by the control electronics. For the E-Cat HT2 one would therefore have (assuming a 10% uncertainty in the powers): COP = 816/322 = 2.6 ± 0.5
An interesting aspect of the E-Cat HT2 is certainly its capacity to operate in self-sustaining mode.
Even from the standpoint of a “blind” evaluation of volumetric energy density, if we consider the whole volume of the reactor core and the most conservative figures on energy production, we still get a value of (7.93 ± 0.8) 102 MJ/Liter that is one order of magnitude higher than any conventional source.
Lastly, it must be remarked that both tests were terminated by a deliberate shutdown of the reactor, not by fuel exhaustion; thus, the energy densities that were measured should be considered as lower limits of real values.