Excited ??
It would be a brand new unexplored field, surely of interest ?


Regarding the test Lab and their protocol ...Perhaps their engineers decided that submerging a high temp lithium solution into a Vat of water might not be the best course of action     , maybe their insurance underwriters got involved and they had to come up with an alternate solution  [it was after all a 32 day run ??


Perhaps the Test Lab should be given the benefit of the doubt ,They supplied all the test equipment.   TEST Labs as a rule Dot the I's and cross the T's when it comes to "Their" equipment and its appropriate use in Measurement .
 
Today's Lab level thermal imaging Equipment Is Not like last years or even last weeks ..
Sensitivity improvements are daily in this field  , which is probably self evident to those who calibrate these Imagers at the scientific/Lab level for industry and laboratories.


Chet

 "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--  that principle is contempt prior to investigation."  -
 Herbert Spencer
-----------------


This is getting real clear and very simple to play with,perhaps some contributions on how to investigate ??


respectfully


Chet

if your nuke side-effect goes exothermic instead of endothermic,then you can remove the mouse..but you better have a damn good coolant system going or a meltdown is likely in that scenario

Quar is the word @mark E regardless of what rossi is using to heat his lounge..quar is the new black

Profitis if someday you would like to back a claim that actually had objective evidence in its favor that would be nice.

Profitis if someday you would like to back a claim that actually had objective evidence in its favor that would be nice.

Mats Lewan Receives an Electricity Bill for 1MW Test CustomerPosted on April 24, 2016 by Frank Acland • 172 Comments Mats Lewan is continuing to try and find evidence about the 1MW Plant test, and has turned up some interesting information about an electricity bill for the customer JM Products at the address 7861 NW 4th St, Doral, FL.  Mats update from this post: https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/04/20/lets-join-forces-to-bring-out-the-truth-on-rossi-ih-affair/
 <blockquote>April 24, 2016
I have received a copy of an electricity statement, from Florida Power & Light Company, issued on JM Chemical Products Corp., for the period February 2 until March 2, 2015. The total amount of energy consumed is 7,251 kWh. Depending on when the plant was put in operation for the one-year test (assuming at the latest February 16) this indicates an average consumption of about 10 to 20 kWh per hour. The Service Address on the statement is 7861 NW 46th Street, Doral, FL 33166-5470, which is the same as the official address listed for JM Products, and also where photos were taken that according to visitors to the plant looked like the place they visited. The amount charged is $1,266, while the amount for the previous month was $309, which is about a quarter, possibly indicating some early test activity.
This statement proves that electricity corresponding to what the 1MW plant should have consumed at a successful COP of about 50 has been consumed at the address reportedly being where the test was undertaken. It doesn’t prove any production by the customer, nor anything about the amount of energy produced by the MW plant, and consequently nothing about the COP. My source is not Rossi.</blockquote> So some great sleuthing by Mats Lewan! Hard numbers from independent sources are not easy to come by in this contentious environment. Rossi’s Complaint in his lawsuit against IH et al. states that the test began “on or about February 19 2015,” so only part of this electricity bill would be for while the test was taking place, and we can’t tell from this bill what the average electricity usage was during the period before or after testing. 
In this 30 day period, there are 720 hours. If my calculations are correct, if the amount of energy consumed is 7,251 kWh in that period, the amount of power generated during this billing period would be very close to 10 kW on average. Being conservative, let’s assume the test started on February 20th, and that very little energy was used prior to the official start of the test. 12 days (Feb 20-Mar 2) = 288 hours. If we assume 6500 kWh were used during that 12 day period; this would give an average power generation of 22.57 kW (6500/288) during the testing period. If Andrea Rossi is correct about the average output of the plant during the test being 1MW, then this would give close to the 50+ COP claimed by Rossi in the report; (1000/22.57 = 44.31 COP)
This has been very useful information regarding the energy input side of things (power bills for the entire duration of the test would be better). It would be nice if we could get confirmation of some kind that the output of the plant was 1MW, as Rossi has stated.

Mats Lewan Receives an Electricity Bill for 1MW Test CustomerPosted on April 24, 2016 by Frank Acland • 172 Comments Mats Lewan is continuing to try and find evidence about the 1MW Plant test, and has turned up some interesting information about an electricity bill for the customer JM Products at the address 7861 NW 4th St, Doral, FL.  Mats update from this post: https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/04/20/lets-join-forces-to-bring-out-the-truth-on-rossi-ih-affair/
 <blockquote>April 24, 2016
I have received a copy of an electricity statement, from Florida Power & Light Company, issued on JM Chemical Products Corp., for the period February 2 until March 2, 2015. The total amount of energy consumed is 7,251 kWh. Depending on when the plant was put in operation for the one-year test (assuming at the latest February 16) this indicates an average consumption of about 10 to 20 kWh per hour. The Service Address on the statement is 7861 NW 46th Street, Doral, FL 33166-5470, which is the same as the official address listed for JM Products, and also where photos were taken that according to visitors to the plant looked like the place they visited. The amount charged is $1,266, while the amount for the previous month was $309, which is about a quarter, possibly indicating some early test activity.
This statement proves that electricity corresponding to what the 1MW plant should have consumed at a successful COP of about 50 has been consumed at the address reportedly being where the test was undertaken. It doesn’t prove any production by the customer, nor anything about the amount of energy produced by the MW plant, and consequently nothing about the COP. My source is not Rossi.</blockquote> So some great sleuthing by Mats Lewan! Hard numbers from independent sources are not easy to come by in this contentious environment. Rossi’s Complaint in his lawsuit against IH et al. states that the test began “on or about February 19 2015,” so only part of this electricity bill would be for while the test was taking place, and we can’t tell from this bill what the average electricity usage was during the period before or after testing. 
In this 30 day period, there are 720 hours. If my calculations are correct, if the amount of energy consumed is 7,251 kWh in that period, the amount of power generated during this billing period would be very close to 10 kW on average. Being conservative, let’s assume the test started on February 20th, and that very little energy was used prior to the official start of the test. 12 days (Feb 20-Mar 2) = 288 hours. If we assume 6500 kWh were used during that 12 day period; this would give an average power generation of 22.57 kW (6500/288) during the testing period. If Andrea Rossi is correct about the average output of the plant during the test being 1MW, then this would give close to the 50+ COP claimed by Rossi in the report; (1000/22.57 = 44.31 COP)
This has been very useful information regarding the energy input side of things (power bills for the entire duration of the test would be better). It would be nice if we could get confirmation of some kind that the output of the plant was 1MW, as Rossi has stated.

But if his unit/device really outputs more than is input, then his electricity bill would be 0 correct?  Why does he even have an electricity bill at all?  It's the same with WITTS and all of these other clowns out there all claiming free energy to power your home yet all of them still are on the grid and paying electric bills. Common sense tells me what is happening.

Bill