For reasons that have nothing to do with Dr. Rossi’s e-cat, investing is a challenge right now to say the least. I have, however made some changes to my personal portfolio (though it isn’t huge) in response to the pending e-cat (see article in e-catworld.com).
I have placed some money in Cyclone Power Technologies (CYPW) as I am sure that they will skyrocket if/when the e-cat is revealed. At 30 cents a share, it doesn’t take much to hold a meaningful stake in the company. An investment of $300 gets you 1000 shares. This is enough to make a small fortune from the e-cat, but the downside risk is minimal. (I love the huge upside, small downside equations of penny stocks.)
I have purged myself of everything in the energy sector. If I were more confident of the legitimacy of the e-cat I may have shorted the sector, but I’m not. (Turns out I’d have done just fine so far by shorting the sector due to the world’s economic state.)
I am making no investment in nickel because the e-cat actually will do little to boost the nickel sector. Because it gets so much energy out of nickel, it’s likely that a pound of the stuff would suffice for a lifetime even if we end up using 100 times the energy that we use today.
Mostly I am holding my breath, I will be on the buy and sell buttons the moment that the e-cat gets top billing on every news source.
Tags: cold fusion, energy catalyzer, investing, natural gas, oil, rossi, stocks
August 19, 2011 at 10:53 am |
Sold all utilities but still own some EXXON and hope to sell it but it’s already so cheap. Bought some ERY, an inverse (3X-bear-energy) for $12.10, which was close to its all time low. It’s up 61% and briefly was up double. Own CYPW but unfortunately bought at .46. E-mailed CYPW several months ago and management claimed he’d never heard of E-cat but promised he would read up.
E-cat will be long term super-bullish but I fear bearish in short term because it’ll be so disruptive. Bye bye boom in Texas, N Dakota, Russia, and Middle-East.
Believe Rossi would have been smarter to develop E-cat in an energy poor company like S Korea. He’s amongst many enemies here.
August 19, 2011 at 3:32 pm |
My suggestion, now, is to keep your money in gold and silver (silver is more bullish long term, but really more instable in the short).
As the 1 MW plant is showed, tested and confirmed, smart people will have time to buy the shares of the right companies.
In the meantime enjoy the rising gold and study well the pros and cons of the various possible investments concerning the e-cat.
August 19, 2011 at 3:56 pm |
Like gold and also PRPFX, a fund that’s 20% gold, 5% silver, a portion in Swiss Francs, with the balance expertly invested in stocks and bonds. Has a great 10 yr chart.
August 19, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
“study well the pros and cons of the various possible investments concerning the e-cat”
That is much of what I am attempting to do, for myself and for others, with this blog. The e-cat will send societies through a time of major adjustment. Those who have thought out, and discussed out the issues ahead of time will find the transition much easier than those who are blind-sided by the e-cat’s arrival.
August 20, 2011 at 11:32 am |
You might want to short Cu, as that can be made much easier than mined
. Shorting energy, not sure. I don’t think we will spend less money on energy, just different. But the oil research and alternative energy such as solar: definitely gone!
August 20, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
Interesting thought. First, however, I still am not truly convinced of the truth of Dr. Rossi’s claim. As such, I am only adjusting my portfolio to consider that Dr. Rossi’s claims are valid, not betting that they are.
Further, Copper usage has been growing exponentially, and is currently at about 15 million tons per year. Nickel, on the other hand has a usage of about 1.2 million tons per year. Nickel’s price will be affected far more than copper’s will. As I am not expecting nickel usage to go up notably in an e-cat world, I would hardly expect Cu’s to go through the floor. Actually, Cu may do very well in a world where electricity is free, as it is used so heavily in an electrical world.
August 21, 2011 at 4:20 am |
About “alternative” energy sources like PV, Wind, and like I agree, they are dead if the e-cat work as advertised.
Oil, maybe not. The ICE have not substitutes, for now. And oil is needed for plastic production, lubricant, etc.
What will be damaged is the conventional producers, as the e-cat make easier to extract shale oil and tar sand
August 21, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
Steam will need to be converted into electricity for most of our power needs with E-cat. I cannot make toast with steam, or power my laptop.
One problem I have with steam engines winning the automotive battle is the noise. With 1 or 2 small ecats built into where my fuel tank/batteries might normally be I could generate (even if ineffeciently for starters) more than enough electricity to power any sized vehicle. Even monster truck s.u.v.’s.
Electric cars would be much quietter. Electric motors are also very simple, and the framework for electric car manufacturing is already in place with many automotive plants, they will simply need to redesign the cars to be much larger. If all the corner gas stations are going to vanish, I at least want a vehicle with an on board washroom.
I suppose steam would be in the battle, and will eventually prove successful. Toiday there is hardly a trained steam engine mechanic around, and the testing and designs of great engines by car companies may take several years.
Who is to say Nissan (or any company) will buy their engines from Cyclone? Steam engines are not new, and I am sure most automotive companies could come up with similar version that do not break their patents.
I would invest in a magnet company. Magnets are used in construction of electricity generators and motors, and both will be strong growth industries.
I do think the car will be electric before it is steam, but I know for a fact that homes and business are a long way from steam operation.
August 21, 2011 at 2:29 pm |
“One problem I have with steam engines winning the automotive battle is the noise.”
As discussed in http://nickelpower.org/2011/04/18/return-of-the-steam-car/, If you check out the tail end of this video: http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/1925-doble-series-e-steam-car/213453/ you will see that the best of steam cars aren’t all that loud.
The vast majority of steam engine noise is the noise of combustion, which wouldn’t be relevant in an e-cat environment and the exiting steam which doesn’t happen with a modern regenerative motor. They won’t be silent like electric, but they won’t be louder than a modern car at all. (Turns out that people with electrics are having trouble because their cars are so quiet — not being noticed by pedestrians etc. As a result some electrics are coming out with “artificial noise”.)
August 23, 2011 at 12:55 am |
Brucefast
“I love the huge upside, small downside, of penny stocks”
Not what you were saying back in May, just after Cyclone stocks went wild.
Craig Binns Says:
May 16, 2011 at 9:47 pm | Reply
Well, if Rossi’s going to take it over, maybe he should do so quite soon! According to the latest Auditors’ Report, April 18 2011:
“[T]he Company’s dependence on outside financing, lack of sufficient working capital, and recurring losses raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.”
See http://www.cyclonepower.com/PDF/Annual_Report_2010.pdf
In spite of this, enthusiasm seems to undampened. According to a penny stocks news sheet
http://news.wooeb.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=726397 (26 April)
“Cyclone Power Technologies Inc. (PINK:CYPW) reached up 20.69% in morning trading to $.35 with 400K shares traded.”
Congrats!
Your reply:
Craig, Cyclone power is clearly not going to go anyware unless the Rossi proves valid. Even then I wonder if their “no lubrication” model will be robust enough for the real world. Penny stocks are a funny game, where 100% loss is rather common, but upsides of 10,000% are not unheard of. Play in the risk, or don’t play at that table.
Are you now minimising the risk. Why? You open yourself to grievous suspicions of conflict of interest. Now is the time to deny them.
August 23, 2011 at 8:41 am |
Craig, please understand me. I’m figuring that there’s a 10% chance that the e-cat or Piantelli’s technology is for real (despite the damning video from Steve Krivit.) I also think that when/if one of these technologies gets introduced to the world formally, cyclone power is destined for a HUGE ride! I am figuring it’ll go up at least 100 times as the world scrambles to rediscover interest in heat to usable energy conversion. (I believe that the main advantage that cyclone power will have is a “first to market” advantage — but that is a HUGE advantage in this world.)
So despite recognizing that cyclone power is an unlikely candidate for success without the e-cat, I still find it a good bet exactly because “the huge upside, small downside, of penny stocks”.
So, Craig, we see the difference in outlook between you and me. You would go with the 90% because it is the more likely, and you are the one likely to say “I told you so”. I’d rather ride the 10% horse because if a primary system like the world’s energy supply system transforms, I want to be in it from the beginning.
A further note on Steve Krivit. I looked into his career as a cold fusion reporter. He has clearly been interested in cold fusion for a long time. He is also obviously positively predisposed to seeing cold fusion/LENR work. This positive predisposition, unlike your own lack of it, makes his damning case much stronger.
August 23, 2011 at 5:21 am |
Guys, elsewhere someone noted that lead was a very finite resource (40 year left before the e-cat came on the scene?). Looks like e-cats will initially at least need lead screening in many applications – will lead go short?
August 23, 2011 at 9:02 am |
timycelyn, you bring up an interesting point. I did a bit of exploring. When I search google for “running out of lead”, I find nothing interesting. When I search for “peak lead” I find this article: http://www.lead.org.au/lanv11n1/lanv11n1-8.html. But only this one.
Currently about twice as much lead is mined than nickel. But the current lead usage is about 70 times the usage of lithium, a substance found in virtually all laptop and handheld devices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth's_crust). In addition, most cars use a significant amount of lead in their lead-acid batteries.
I conclude the following:
> If 1/70th of the usage of lead covers all of the laptops and handhelds in the world, providing e-cats for everything isn’t going to require all that much lead — unless the lead becomes radioactive, and has to be abandoned into might toxic lead dumps.
> Lead has by no means been explored for with the determination that oil has been explored for. There are likely many lead finds to be had.
> Lead is not critical to the e-cat process. Everything absorbs gamma rays to some extent (which seems to be the reason for the shielding). While lead is particularly good at gamma ray absorption, if there truly was a shortage, we’d soon find out what substance is second best.
I, therefore, am not worried that lead will be a problem any time soon. While e-cats may make lead an attractive investment some time in the future, I don’t expect it to become so with any haste.
August 23, 2011 at 6:59 am |
Improbable. The gamma emitted are very weak and easily shielded by metal and water. Rossi and Focardi tested the first prototypes without shielding and they are living and well.
From what appear, I think the materials used are pretty common. Their price will not grow because the e-cat.
What will be used more if energy is cheap?
What will be used more if heat is cheaper than ever and it is in scarce supply?
This is the question an investor need to answer?
September 22, 2011 at 12:27 am |
Shielding is needed. I read somewhere that Rossi had increased the thickness of his shielding, so it must be an issue.
There are plastic Resins and tungsten heavy Metal that work as good or better than lead with no pollution. Lead availability will not be an issue.
Has the amount of radiation emitted ever been given. I don’t remember seeing this number given. It would be interesting to know to figure the lead thickness or equivalent required to shield it properly.
August 23, 2011 at 9:12 am |
“Even then I wonder if their “no lubrication” model will be robust enough for the real world.”
Raytheon seems convinced.
http://www.govconwire.com/2011/05/raytheon-ids-places-engines-order-from-cyclone-power-technologies/
August 23, 2011 at 2:21 pm |
Yes, I saw that order come through. However, the engine they ordered has a fairly limited duty cycle. The most attractive feature that they have gone for is the fact that the steam engine doesn’t need to idle to be ready to output power. I don’t know if this compares well to a vehicle usage situation that expects a couple hundred thousand miles out of a motor.
August 24, 2011 at 7:55 am |
Yes, that seems reasonable – weak gamma rays can be shielded in a number of ways, so lead is probably not key to success here, certainly in 10 yrs or so one would expect to find other shileding that could be approved.
I think the upcoming possible shortage of lead for other reasons may be real though, I found the following in <> Wikipedia: “At current use rates, the supply of lead is estimated to run out in 42 years.[18] Environmental analyst Lester Brown has suggested lead could run out within 18 years based on an extrapolation of 2% growth per year.[19] This may need to be reviewed to take account of renewed interest in recycling, and rapid progress in fuel cell technology.”
September 4, 2011 at 9:52 am |
Ive discussed having a system like the ecat and its effect on production and consumption. The design and construction of automobiles will change, why make a car energy efficient if the fuel is almost free. Why use expensive lightweight materials, aerodynamic streamlining, when you could build them using cheap heavy materials and long lasting components. Electricity from the grid will see a gradual decline until all power is generated locally. 50% of the cost of electricity comes from transmission, distribution and metering. Having a self contained power plant in my backyard of say 100 KWh/H would allow me to have several times my usage at a fraction of the cost. No more outages from storms, downed powerlines, and accidents. AC and heating costs will disappear, and be replaced with maintenance and purchase costs. Clean drinking water from distillation or RO will allow deserts to bloom and along the seas of the world.
No more wars to control energy resources allows all the wasted manpower to be used at home. What the internet did to communications the Ecat will do for energy… hopefully
September 4, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
Just about everything would be cheaper. Transportation fuel costs are a sizable portion of retail costs. Basic construction materials such as metals, cement, and asphalt require high heat to produce. Asphalt, plastics, and some fertilizers will benefit from lower oil prices. Freighter ships, cruise lines, and residential ships will boom. Real estate and agriculture will reign.
I don’t believe there will be a problem with lead supply. Lead is the most highly recycled material.
September 4, 2011 at 2:26 pm |
I could take my houseboat into the middle of the lake and stay there forever with a few grams of nickel. Until i get tired of fish and antenna based television.
Everyone will want a motor-home. Why drive a tiny car when you can have a 5 ton entertainment system and living room at your disposal while stuck in traffic. It will be air conditioned; and I’ll hang Christmas lights all around and underneath. Plus I can charge up my segways while i drive. Why walk now?
So yes.. Plant my money in portable toilets and motor-homes.
You can park at an empty corner lot that used to have a gas station and charge a dime to let people use your toilet, it’s not like the corner stations are going to be there any more.
What kind of business would thrive in an old gas station lot? I know coffee sounds good, but don’t forget we have fully stocked fridges and stoves and coffee machines in our motor-homes. I’m driving clean fuel, then let me up-size. Governments will have to implement size restrictions on vehicles. Get a massive one while you still can and refurbish them to resell to yuppies.
with energy being so cheap maybe i’ll take my motorhome and stake out a mining claim. Instead of costly sluice machines I could operate twenty of them for less cost. Thar’s gold in them there streams..
Lot of people will do what i said, and live off the grid.
So boats/mining/motor-homes/ any electric generation or magnet companies. Portable toilets, and emptying stations. remote internet access devices.
I really don’t want to see my daughter going on her first date in a motor-home… Thanks Mr. Rossi…
Bicycles have Push trailers. Basically a trailer that is electric and can push the bike. Could (WIde thinking here) a car have a steam or electric push trailer. I doubt it, but it’s a thought and in brainstorming there is no bad ideas..
My cottage will have a tesla coil security system that also hunts ducks while i sleep. Forget bugs.. I’m gonna fry me some instant duck. Every car/motorhome will be able to light up a football field for night sports, and huge lighting tracks will be a fad for sure.
pipelines of ocean water will be brought inland for desalination at desert locals, and for farmers to exploit. Engineers can be trained to build man made lakes and direct water for forest fire uses.
Good luck Mr Rossi, and please be sure to leave lots of information about your catalyst, and protect yourself. oil companies may soon dislike you.
September 4, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
The funniest post.
September 4, 2011 at 10:18 pm |
kwhilborn, you also have my vote for funniest post, this was great!
BTW, “charge a dime to let people use your toilet.”
I’d charge two nickels.
September 19, 2011 at 9:22 pm |
A most interesting discussion! I would be very hesitant to make stock moves at this early stage. Even though the Ecat may truly be revolutionary, changes will take time and infrastructure and market acceptance will take time. The first home systems will require loans and finance, banks will need to step up and put finance in place. Sometimes a late starting company can end up number 1 by out innovating and out manufacturing. Don’t short stocks, its way to early, based on Ecat. Investing in steam engines could work out, but the dominant company feeding the market will pick suppliers and will determine winners and losers. IMHO
September 22, 2011 at 7:19 pm |
Ty, Ty, I’m here every week.
October 30, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
Since I have no money, I am hoping that just owning an E-Cat will help me somehow make money in my basement, and I don’t just mean unhooking from the grid. I could set up a machine and make widgets or something.
October 30, 2011 at 8:40 pm |
I’m no financial guru nor am I a technophobe, but common sense dictates that if eCat is for real, then old energy is doomed. ERY is an etf that bets against old energy. ERY is dirt cheap, $11.45/share. ERY was over $300 in late 2008, during the depths of despair during the crash. The fundamentals of a new energy era dwarf the rationale of the ’08 crash. I’m accumulating ERA and the current low price is a gift, however I can’t cash in until WallStreet acknowledges the new era.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=ERY+Basic+Chart&t=5y
Do your own due diligence
October 30, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Iggy, That was my thinking too. But then how was ERY during the boom years 2005-2007? Supposed to be even much lower than today, right?
And won’t the fund managers adjust the allocation when ecat comes around? the description says bear ENERGY, not bear OIL. And energy we will be using only more, oil will become cheap, stimulating more use of that too while at the same time more expensive exploration of oil becomes obsolete…
October 31, 2011 at 7:07 am
Apparently ERY wasn’t started until late ’07.
October 31, 2011 at 1:10 pm
Today the market was down about 2%, yet ERY gained 13% (the 1st full day after the big demo).
Is the word getting around?
November 1, 2011 at 7:04 pm
ERY finished Oct 28 (e-Cat demo day) at $11.45/share.
Today, 2 days later, ERY finished at $14.18. A coincidence? Maybe, but on the other hand, the e-CAT may be out of the bag.
November 10, 2011 at 12:44 pm
There’s a new leveraged inverse etf for natural gas, symbol: KOLD. I figure that natural gas will be the first segment of energy to be adversely affected by the eCat.
There are other nat gas etfs on the Toronto exchange.
I would prefer a non-leveraged etf.
November 1, 2011 at 11:51 am |
For Rossi’s invention to reach its full potential, some of the heat will need to be converted to electricity. This can be done with Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) generators. Pratt & Whitney Power Systems, a United Technologies company, has been producing these for years. Perhaps they were the “mystery customer” at Rossi’s test. UTX is my E-cat bet.
http://www.pw.utc.com/products/power_systems/power_systems.asp
November 1, 2011 at 12:10 pm |
So, which one is the teeny, tiny one that will work in my basement?
November 1, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Here ’tis
November 2, 2011 at 9:20 am
What a cute little thing!
November 2, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
20 yr wait for eCat in cars. 2 yr for home heat.
That tells me I shouldn’t focus on shorting energy in general,
but focus on shorting natural gas. Diesel next, oil impacted last.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rita Ekholm
November 2nd, 2011 at 1:57
How long do you think it will take before we here in the cold north to warm our houses with E-cat
What if E-cat could also be used in cars
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Andrea Rossi
November 2nd, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Dear Rita Ekholm:
up to 2 years, mainly for authorizations for heating systems; 20 years for cars.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
November 2, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
I don’t believe that it’ll take 20 years for cars. I think the first cars will show up in showrooms in 5 years. By 20 years I believe that it’ll be difficult to find a place to buy gas.
Heat engines for cars already exist. Cyclone power has car-sized steam engines (1/2 size of the gas engine, no transmission required). I understand that some years ago Ford experimented with a stirling drive car. Electric and hybrid cars will be easily convertible with just a stirling or steam generator. Most importantly, once the e-cat is fully realized (I figure that’ll take most of a year), there will be a mad race to be the first out with an e-cat car.
November 2, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Have you forgotten all of the hysteria about the E-Cat being a nuclear device? It might take people some time to get used to the idea that they have a “nuclear device” in their basements.
February 15, 2012 at 3:08 pm
Nuttin’ like a low price tag to get people past their paranoia.
February 16, 2012 at 12:40 pm
That is so right!
December 29, 2011 at 6:58 am |
Assuming the eCat is widely adopted, there would still be good demand for copper because of the new cheapness of electricity, however once the grid became obsolete and started to be dismantled, there would be a huge glut of the metal.
December 29, 2011 at 7:00 am |
But I guess most grid cable is aluminum, rather than copper.
February 15, 2012 at 11:35 am |
Rossi has announced that Leonardo Corporation is now owned by an investors’ trust. There is speculation by commentators on eCatWorld that EON or E.ON is the new owner. One of the commentators pointed out that EON was a large European natural gas utility. I’ve long thought that natural gas would be the 1st casualty of eCat competition, since both are use primarily to produce heat.
February 15, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
Enel is the owner of E.ON
Italy sees gas shortfall from Russia
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/12/italy-gas-idUSL5E8DC3JH20120212?feedType=RSS&feedName=utilitiesSector&rpc=43