Rossi has given out a bit more information:

1) Fuel embodied energy = ~200 Wh/MWh (amount of energy needed to make enough fuel to produce 1 MWh of steam output). This is VERY low.

2) Fuel cost =  1EU (~1.40USD) / MWh of steam output.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516&cpage=6#comment-106665

Burning 1 tonne of good coal will produce ~5 MWhs of steam plus ~2 tonne of CO2. Cost USD50 - 100 / tonne of coal = USD10 - 20 per MWh of steam plus carbon cost (at USD30 / tonne of CO2) of USD12 / MWh (tonne) of CO2 = USD22 - 32 / MWh of steam.

E-Cat fuel costs are ~USD1.40 / MWh of steam compared to coal fuel cost of USD22 - 32 / MWh of steam.

Coal, gas and conventional nuclear powered power stations are now relics of our industrial fire and brimstone based past. The Fat Lady has sung and Elvis has left the room.

I happen to know John Michell personally. He has written a book on the e-cat.  He is a brilliant chemist and speaks many languages fluently. I trust his assesment of the e-cat. He says it works. PERIOD!

Quote from: a.king21 on October 30, 2011, 11:32:30 PM
I happen to know John Michell personally. He has written a book on the e-cat.  He is a brilliant chemist and speaks many languages fluently. I trust his assesment of the e-cat. He says it works. PERIOD!

As a engineer, I have no doubt it worked. 479 kWs of heat per hour would be like putting 479 x 1 kW electric heaters in a room and leaving them on for 5.5 hours. It would get hot in there. Rossi had 2 heat exchangers with big fans connected to the steam output of the ECat to get rid of the heat and return the water to a liquid state with 2 circulating pumps to return the now cooled water back into the holding tank and then back to the reaction chambers.

During the 5.5 hours of sustained operation, the heaters of the reaction chambers were not powered by the onsite gen set. They were initially powered by the gen set for about 90 minutes to get the reaction chambers up to operational temperature. After that the gen set continued to run but only to supply power to the circulating pumps and the fans of the heat exchangers.

479 kWs per hour of steam / heat for 5.5 hours, with no input power to the reaction chambers is an amazing result. Here is a link to the published test results: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk

Rossi has also revealed the customer has taken away the 20ft container with the ECat, has orders for more and is building more.

Here is a 1 hour video of the test in which you can see the 2 heat exchangers that turned the steam back into liquid water: www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcQ82zmRJHY

This might be a good time to go short on coal, gas and nuclear stocks? The price of Nickel may well be going up.

I read where Deuterium, also called heavy hydrogen, may have been used instead of normal light hydrogen in the Rossi set-up.  Deuterium is very expensive and requires considerable energy to produce. 
Any thoughts on how much this would affect the cost of E-cat power generation if Deuterium was in fact Rossi's secret ingredient?   I read where a canister of Deuterium was spotted at Rossi's lab during one of the tests and was quickly dismissed by Rossi as a back-up to quench any runaway problems which made no sense as a reason to have it there. 
So what if Deuterium was the secret ingredient?  Any on know how much hydrogen Rossi used for his 5.5 hours run? 

Quote from: maw2432 on October 31, 2011, 06:29:47 AM
I read where Deuterium, also called heavy hydrogen, may have been used instead of normal light hydrogen in the Rossi set-up.  Deuterium is very expensive and requires considerable energy to produce. 
Any thoughts on how much this would affect the cost of E-cat power generation if Deuterium was in fact Rossi's secret ingredient?   I read where a canister of Deuterium was spotted at Rossi's lab during one of the tests and was quickly dismissed by Rossi as a back-up to quench any runaway problems which made no sense as a reason to have it there. 
So what if Deuterium was the secret ingredient?  Any on know how much hydrogen Rossi used for his 5.5 hours run?

The amount of H used is stated in the report I linked.
      http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk

The H tank's mass was:
13,604.5 g before the test started
13,602.8 g after the test.
--------
       1.7 g of H was used to produce 2,635 kWhs of thermal energy.

Stated COP was 2,635:0.

Energy drawn from the gen set, during the 5.5 hours of the self sustaining run, was 66 kWh. The reactor's pre heat heaters were switched off during this time. The 66 kWhs of energy was used by the 2 circulating pumps and the 2 heat exchanger fans.

Why did the run stop at 18:00? Probably because the purchaser was satisfied with the ECat's performance and it was time for a beer?

Rossi has also stated the reactor's "Fuel" needs to be changed after 4,320 hours (6 months at 24 hours per day of operation). At a fuel cost of USD1.40 / MWh of heat, that would be a cost of 4,320 MWhs * USD1.40 = USD6,048 or USD12,096 to produce 8,640 MWhs of steam / heat per year (assuming a 1 MW reactor running 24/7/365). With a Sterling Engine 50% heat to electricity conversion efficiency that is 4,320 MWhs of electricity per year for a fuel cost of USD12,096 = USD0.0028 / AckWh as per fuel cost.

That price is a electricity generation game changer world wide, no matter how the Rossi ECat blue box works.