July 30, 2011
Issue #37


Previous ArticleTable of ContentsNext Article
New Energy Times home page


St. Louis Steam Analysis of Rossi Experiment

Appendix 7 to New Energy Times Report #3

By Dan St. Louis

I was very excited when I first read about Andrea Rossi's device. It seemed to be a dream come true for the planet: clean, abundant, cheap energy. After reading New Energy Times Editor Steven B. Krivit's reports and, in particular, after reviewing his video of the Rossi device "test" he witnessed, I'm now very skeptical. Here are my observations that lead to my skeptical view, some of which Krivit has stated in his report "Report #2 - Energy Catalyzer: Scientific Communication and Ethics Issues."

1) The "lab," as it is called by Rossi, is incredibly sparse. There is very little equipment and very few instruments, not nearly enough instrumentation for a good test and not nearly what a person would expect to see from a lab that was able to develop a scientific breakthrough of this magnitude. This is not proof of anything, but it is an indication of the likely validity or lack thereof of the Rossi lab.

2) The measurement technique for power output is very poorly implemented and would allow easy errors or easy faking of results.

3) The discharge of the steam hose is concealed most of the time. It is possible that a lot of water is being pumped through the hose most of the time and not steam. The water is being sent directly to what appears to be a wall drain for a missing sink.

4) 748 Watts (the electric power input to Rossi's device) can produce a lot of steam on its own, at least as much as shown discharging from the hose when it is temporarily removed from the wall drain.

6) 100.1-degree steam is not "very hot" as Rossi claims. 100.1-degree steam is right on the borderline between steam and water. He claims that you cannot see the steam discharge too well because it is very hot. I think it is hard to see because there is not much steam, as shown in Krivit's video. Even slightly superheated steam (many degrees greater than 100.1) would cool and condense very quickly when discharged in air.

5) The part that really made me skeptical is that, just before he pulled the hose from the wall, he actually lifts a large portion of the hose above the drain level. There is no reason to do this other than to drain water that has accumulated in the portion of the hose that was lower than the height of the drain. He empties the hose, then quickly shows steam coming out of the end of the hose and then quickly reinserts the hose back in the wall before the water can build up again and come out of the hose. To me, this demonstrates that he probably knows exactly what is going on and that much of the discharge is hot water, not steam.

Based on the evidence in this video, I have become very skeptical of Rossi's claims, and I now suspect there may be intentional misleading of the observations and results. I think the Rossi device may be nothing more than a well-disguised water kettle. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.


Brief Biography of Dan St. Louis (Kansas)
Dan St. Louis earned a bachelor’s degree in business administration from Wilfrid Laurier University, in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, and a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Waterloo. He worked as an intern for two four-month periods with Babcock and Wilcox. After he graduated, he worked full-time with the company for 2½ years in the Nuclear Services Department in Cambridge, Ontario. Babcock and Wilcox is a major corporation that is involved in the power plant equipment and construction industry. The company operates all kinds of power plants — nuclear, coal, oil, gas-fired — and makes heat to produce steam. Power plants use hot pressurized steam to power turbines, which turn generators to produce power. St. Louis has worked as an engineer and inventor for two decades and has 15 U.S. patents and many more pending.


Previous ArticleTable of ContentsNext Article