How Essential is Public Funding of LENR Research?


As we contemplate the possibilities that the emerging field of LENR presents, one question that is often raised is, why isn’t the government doing something about this — why can’t governments direct funds into LENR research and get things moving in this area, so we can hasten the emergence of this technology into real-world applications?

We see government R&D budgets and grant funding supporting all kinds of alternative energy research, and interesting and promising reports do come out of government funded labs. Yet we are still struggling to find a really breakthrough energy techonlogy coming out of government departments, or government funded universities into the marketplace.

Andrea Rossi commented on this situation yesterday and was rather contemptuous in his assessment of what government funding can do to research and development:

I am exclusively interested to apparatuses able to work. In our field we are too much filled up with theorists who write stupidities of which they are not liable because they have not to produce something that actually works. Take for example the ridiculous theories coming from the “papers” of Widom, Larsen and accolites: they suppose groundless behaviours of virtual particles just if they could behave like Fermions, and they simply ignore the leptons’ conservation law: this is ridicolous, but the “theoretical gurus” are all around this pure loss- of- time- theory, just because none of them has the anxiety deriving from the necessity to make the money necessary to refund the expenses of the research : they just ask for money of the taxpayer, like the other (Italian) guru who is using since 20 years the taxpayer’s money to make ridiculous research on the cold fusion electrilytic processes. This is also why we count on our Customers to repay ourselves, while they ask for Taxpayer’s contribution. While they make mental masturbations with ridiculous theories totally groundless, we are working 16 hours per day to make real working products. With our money, not with money of the Taxpayers . . . to “think” without to be able to make anything useful is a loss of time, if made without money, and is a fraud if made with the money of the Taxpayer.

While I am sure that Rossi’s comments here will find many critics, I think he does make an important point. When all is said and done, science that produces nothing useful to the public is of little real value. We would enjoy none of today’s technological benefits (e.g. electricity, transportation, communications, medicine) if these discoveries had stayed in laboratories and research journals — someone had to find ways to commercialize these products, and often this is a more difficult undertaking than the research phase of the process.

Rossi seems determined to carry on his work without any contribution from governmental bodies. He has said that the only thing he wants from government is the ability to carry on his work without interference. I am sure that there are other people working in LENR research who take a different position, and would like to have public funds to help them carry on their research. But if we do see working E-Cats appearing in the marketplace it will be a clear indication that public funds are not an essential ingredient for developing new energy sources.


  • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

    Speaking of funding, according to the rumour mill, Brouillon has now found a sponsor for the $2M it needs to continue development of the boiler unit (http://energycatalyzer3.com/news/brillouin-has-money-to-complete-work).

    There doesn’t seem to be any indication of who the sponsor may be, so plenty of grounds for speculation there! If true, then it seems to be a 2 horse race at the moment, with DGT a possible third. Plenty of other prizes to come though, as various related technologies find their niches (caveats too numerous to mention).

    • GreenWin

      This is not to mention the apparent $$millions in black projects carried out in most western nations. Clearly there is something of a space race going on to develop LENR/LANR – we hear little about the French who borrowed technology from Italy and have built an entire research center to develop cold fusion.

  • georgehants

    What a Wonderful page of comments covering all sides and opinions.
    Just a couple of nasty’s that we hope go away.
    As I guessed Rossi was referring to scientists who deny and abuse, people who must be laughed out of science before it can regain any respect.
    -
    Andrea Rossi
    June 3rd, 2012 at 9:41 AM
    Dear Antonella:
    No, I was referring to the theoretical gurus unable to make anything working, searching taxpayers money, that insult persons who make real work by means of their money.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • racribeiro

    I would rephrase the question to: “Can states afoard not to invest on LENR research?”

    • racribeiro

      Or…

      How essential is LENR research for public funding?

      • jacob

        As Mr. Rossi is proving ,goverment money is not really needed to produce a product ready for the market place,government seems to be interested why LENR works,and will give lots of money to researchers to find out why.

        Government is not in the business to manufacture,but to promote and encourage new
        innovative technologies to create new jobs,to increase the number of people who pay income taxes.

        but their blood is rich in oil and perhaps
        clouds their minds with lack of much needed oxygen ,for them to think crystal clear, to recognize the potential of LENR

        for the betterment of humanity as a whole

  • J Done

    Both Italy and the United States of America are member States of the Paris Convention on the Protection of Industrial Property (amended 1979.) This Convention provides for protection of patents, trademarks and industrial designs across member States.

    Both States are also participants in the Patent Cooperation Treaty (1970) providing streamlined international patent protection. Rossi’s issued Italian patent is entered into the PCT for recognition and protection in 168 countries. This application is subject to an international search report – Rossi’s issued patent carries the weight of member State prior art.

    Rossi’s international patent, if issued, will only protect the unique process described in the original patent – unless it is amended in-application.

    • dsm

      Rossi has already had one international patent refused (can’t patent secret catalyst) and the 2nd attempt was turned down due to prior art. Rossi had removed the ‘secret catalyst & said it worked without it. The prior art claims were between Piantelli + a German + a Japanese each of who have recognized prior art to some part of Rossi’s list of claims.

      No patent for Cold Fusion has been granted in the US. Rossi’s original patent relies on acceptance of cold fusion.

      DSM

  • Pingback: How Essential is Public Funding of LENR Research? | ColdFusion | Cold Fusion | Free Energy !

  • dsm

    The problem with what Rossi is saying is that he has *no* theory that anyone has peer reviewed (or IIRC even read).

    Also it is mockery to claim that theories aren’t needed when the cold hard reality is no one has yet explained how LENR or CF works. That is remarkably poor taste let alone poor science.

    So rail as he may, he will never get a patent again if he can’t explain what is going on.

    The only hope anyone has to get LENR (or in the extreme CF) patents is to get theories published & peer reviewed.

    Rossi needs to spend less time railing against others & more time producing proofs.

    DSM

    • chris robinson

      The problem is that finding out what is actually happening at the quantum level with this phenomena may be similar to finding the Higgs particle .

      Billions spent on the CERN colider and they still have not come close to confirming that theory

      • Stephen Taylor

        Fire can be used while theory develops. Duh.

        • dsm

          Duh, without a theory there is no patent
          Duh, without a patent there is no protection
          Duh, without understanding of the effects there *will* be no hme use approval
          Duh, (would you like a few more …)

          DSM

          • Richard Hill

            AFAIK, In Australia there is no requirement for a theoretical explanation needed to be awarded a patent. It is only required that the subject of the patent can be reproduced by “persons skilled in the art”.

          • dsm

            Richard,
            What most inventors want is US patent approval as it is very common for ‘big corp’ investors to 1st ask “What Patents do you have” and then “What is in them”. This issue is rammed home repeatedly by Brillouin’s chief technologis Robert Godes. He really does know what he is talking about because he just went through exactly this scenarion. He managed to secure $2 mill but not from the ‘big corp’ investors but ‘Angel investors’.

            Rossi desperately wants a patent outside Italy. Without a patent he can’t get big investment because without the protection he can’t sue anybody (like Defkalion) no matter where they claim they got the ip from.

            The USPTO have (again according to Robert Godes) been told to refuse all patents that contain any ref to Cold Fusion.

            A bummer !.

            DSM

          • jacob

            dsm ,patents can be granted simply on a process ,in this case ,the LENR heat production

            sorry,but the explanation on a atomic level is not required,it is the EFFECT that
            can be patented

          • dsm

            Jacob

            That’s great – can you file a patent with USPTO for Rossi then – he needs your ability to get CF patents through the system :)

            DSM

          • jacob

            DSM,I will not ever deal with the patent office ,if my life depended on it,it belongs to the establishment kids and their sand box.
            If I have to worry about competition copying my products I custom built for my customers,then I might as well not get out of bed in the morning

      • dsm

        I don’t believe they plan to sell Higgs bosons in packets to home users :)

        D

        • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

          I’ll sell you the packets. Its up to you to find the Higgs bosons though.

          • dsm

            LOL :)
            D

    • Daniel Steward

      Humans were using fire for useful purposes long before they even knew what a theory was or had one for how fire worked. The notion that you have to have a theory or it can’t possibly work is silly.

  • http://deadstickarizona-zedshort.blogspot.com/ Zedshort

    The time for funding of basic research into the phenomena was twenty years ago. If Rossi has something marketable, he should charge what the market will bear and to put as much money as possible into basic research. If private industry has the motivation and the money to invest in research they will and that is best. I would prefer the government stay out of the business of picking winners and losers. The greatest government boondoggle are tokamak and inertial confinement fusion, and it continues to this day.

  • Garfield

    If Rossi has a working LENR device, the debate about public research funding is pointless. This is where he comes from. One thing we can tell about Rossi is that he is sly. Not sure about his honesty, though.

  • Garfield

    GreenWin, you are agreeing and disagreeing at the same time.
    Rossi’s post makes perfect sense, and yet public funds should be used to develop LENR. Ambivalence.

    • GreenWin

      Correct. I should say “makes perfect sense to him.” His is the complaint of the entrepreneur who must compete with public research budgets. He seems to have no complaint if they develop a useful product or service.

  • GreenWin

    Rossi’s post makes perfect sense. HE has got to perform day in day out to get a return on his sweat equity and cash investments. GREAT motivator. Did Edison use public funds for the motion picture camera? Light bulb? Phonograph? Bell? Tesla? Galileo? Da Vinci?? Most inventors work on their own dime.

    What we might consider is how public funds in competitive industries are re-directed to monopolize those industries – to the detriment of the public. This is what we have seen with hot fusion. Funds used to block, antagonize, suppress new, disruptive technology like cold fusion.

    This speaks to a failing of government oversight. And antitrust obligations. Governments today are held hostage by the oil economy. They are petrolified (sic) to challenge oil’s control of global energy. Which puts the fate of the human race in the hands of men interested solely in drilling and selling the last barrel of oil.

    Rossi’s dismissal of theorists on the public teat is honest. Theorists don’t have to actually MAKE anything of value – just keep coming up with new theories. Hence the hot fusion, climate, medical research “industries.”

    Research for product development and even “pure” research is necessary. Product research gets cut off if it yields no product. Pure research arguably increases human knowledge which MAY help the human race evolve.

    My thought is we should distribute public funds beyond the handful of “approved fields” controlled by the science priesthood. Too much is at stake, too much suffering could be alleviated. Public funds should be used to develop LENR – provided they are NOT controlled by science “priests.”

    • HHiram

      Actually, virtually all useful inventions of the last century have had either part or all of their basis in publicly-funded scientific research. This has been written about extensively. The role of private industry in operationalizing that research is obviously valuable, and industry often makes refinements over time. But the idea that private research and development is the primary source of invention is simply false. Even in industries today where there is a large amount of privately-funded R&D, such as in computing and pharmaceuticals, the underlying research breakthroughs happen at universities on projects that are funded in part or entirely by public grants in the majority of cases.

      I’m sad to say that it is simply ignorance to claim otherwise. You end up sounding like either a conservative nutjob or a conspiracy loon. Either way, you reveal that you have no real knowledge of the actual reality of scientific research.

      • Hampus

        Rossi have indeed shown how little he knows about science, not only in this case but also when he tries to explain how the device work.

        Rossi is just a man who tried hard enough and worked hard to get a working device, a great “doer” not such a great thinker.

        Let’s not forget Focardi, he is a great scientist and without him Rossi might never have been able to make this work.

        • Zalomi

          Adrea Rossi received a special inspiration from God , many other scientists with much more knowlege failed to discover this phenomena.

      • GreenWin

        HHiram, your last para reveals much of your motivation. If you remain here long enough to become familiar you’ll note ad hominem attacks are discouraged as both childish and uninformative.

      • http://www.lenrforum.eu Alain

        right, nealy all really invention, real one, get financed by public money, army, or state related monopoly…
        even leonardo da vincin get financed by the states and kings…

        the big drama with recent science loss of inventivity, like for cold fusion “no-research”, is that an ideology “anti-state”, libertarian, freemarketist, push the governements to control tightly their research budget, to avoid mistakes, bad use.it happens in america, and because of elite propaganda, infect the european comission to replicate that stupidity.
        in fact it did not protect from stupid decision, but from innovative decision…
        the result is that old, faschion and predictable research were promoted, and strange looking, heretic or innovative research were blacklisted…

        free market have it’s domain of usefull ness, like small and big organization have, but public research and public business have also it’s role.

        radical and integrist vision on freemarket and state is pure stupiditi, like it is in all domain of real life.

        roland benabou have also made some papers about religion/atheism, and statism/anti-statism, as example of his collective delusion.

        for example the social replication (chance to get richer than your father because of you own capacities or luck) is the same between europe and US, yet the beliefs in each cultural zone is totally opposite.
        European thinks that the worls is unfair (that family is the dominant factor), and US that world is fair(that works count mostly)…

        and that local bias to reality in each zone is linked to beliefs in God, and especialy in the kind of God and religion (in US zone, God is material, paradize is sure to punish evil and pay work quickly… in Europe it is more philosophic and inspiring with compassion to ask for more justice for the weakest)…

        it is funny to read US zealots, because you have the symmetric zealots in France, with similar irrational and extremist language.

      • jacob

        HHiram,I have to agree with GreenWin on this,the majority of innovations regarding useful inventions where conceived without government funding or research funding,here in Canada as would be similar to UK or US
        application can be made to the National Research Counsel , and applications based on merit, for instance the pharmaceutical companies take advantage of this alot,I was
        in a meeting which another company that deals with all the applications and works on a percentage to get a piece of the pie.
        this was 2 years ago and this money is available to every single individual as long as they are an incorporated company,and that’s when I started an incorporated Research Company,just for that.
        So
        so HHiram ,now I like to see some of your proof and hope you are not just making this up , based on all you know.
        all I can tell you any useful invention starts with people like you and me ,if it is a good invention ,it may get funding,or it may not in the case of Cold Fusion,the paperwork that has to be filled out ,takes a few weeks of running around.
        But when on approaches the National research Counsel,to get funding ,you better make sure ,you do not upset the SYSTEM,or go against Big PhARM or Big OIL or other big mayor Business ,that could be affected by what you are trying to innovate

      • jacob

        HHiram,I have to agree with GreenWin on this,the majority of innovations regarding useful inventions where conceived without government funding or research funding,here in Canada as would be similar to UK or US
        application can be made to the National Research Counsel , and applications based on merit, for instance the pharmaceutical companies take advantage of this alot,I was
        in a meeting which another company that deals with all the applications and works on a percentage to get a piece of the pie.
        this was 2 years ago and this money is available to every single individual as long as they are an incorporated company,and that’s when I started an incorporated Research Company,just for that.
        So
        so HHiram ,now I like to see some of your proof and hope you are not just making this up , based on all you know.
        all I can tell you any useful invention starts with people like you and me ,if it is a good invention ,it may get funding,or it may not in the case of Cold Fusion,the paperwork that has to be filled out ,takes a few weeks of running around.
        But when one approaches the National research Counsel,to get funding ,you better make sure ,you do not upset the SYSTEM,or go against Big PhARM or Big OIL or other big mayor Business ,that could be affected by what you are trying to innovate

    • GreenWin

      “Either way, you reveal that you have no real knowledge of the actual reality of scientific research.”

      Er, what part of – “Research for product development and even “pure” research is necessary. Product research gets cut off if it yields no product. Pure research arguably increases human knowledge which MAY help the human race evolve,” – is confusing you HHiram?? Sorry, apparently your reading comprehension is weak.

      BTW, William Shockley won a Nobel Prize in Physics for his in role inventing the transistor at AT&T’s Bell Labs. Bell hosted 11 Nobel laureates, and invented the laser, solar cell, and communications satellites among other things.

  • Karl

    It’s really a lot of emotions in the Rossi comment above. This is understandable not least because how the priest hood of main science community have treated research in this segment and still does. I still think that it is more important in a first step and a better approach to go for the real stuff, e.g. deliver working products. It should of course have been a lot easier for many players in the research and business segment with a more open mind from various researcher, UNIs, patent organisation and media groups at an early stage and today.
    One must admit that the guys that once obviously stopped the open research in the CF segment after 1989 acted very clever. Any one of us on this forum that have the door open for a breakthrough in the CF/LENR have surely noticed how difficult it is to take up this subject to serious discussion in any situation. I think it is still more or less impossible to have any significant changes and achieve significant money for research in this segment unless a real product is becoming visible on the market.
    The brave and intelligent that have been fighting on the barricades and continued their research and development in CF, deserves a completely different treatment than the type of attitudes visible in numerous sarcastic comments. I still think Rossi et al judge the situation in a good way while heading for the market rather than persuading the official tax financed scientific community.

    • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

      I wonder, is the ’29302′ the number of identities you’ve worked your way through on CF blogs?

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

        Sorry Karl – that was meant for john29302′s post below.

  • john29302

    still rossi has only shown a 1.5 inch tube of light steam that he measured at 500kw of power and that steam was “dry” he sed. and it was going 2-5 miles an hour out the pipe. it never did do any work, heat the room, etc. you take a 1500 watt hairdryer and blow it and it would do more than his 500 kw (which by the way is 333 hair dryers) and that is his demo. sure you want to believe. but this is ludicrous. factor in his torrid criminal record which so happens to be trash to oil scheme, his childish antics and assanine philosophy, his claim to be a scientist yet he reveals us nothing and expects us to believe or else it angers him. if he has built his science on that stuff and now wants us to believe the same then it means we dumb down to be manipulated or else he will get twisted and mad. the payoff is his perch on the throne of power. typical philosophy major wants magical results from his work and no one is shown proof. if its not a scam its a miracle. the world has never been shown one single miracle yet. sounds like religion, no miracles just the touting and so on.

    • TPBurnett

      Wow. You have really got your facts and events mixed up.

    • GreenWin

      Incoherence is not critique.

    • jacob

      john,Mr.Rossi does not have to explain anything to anybody, but only has to answer to those who own
      leonardo corp as such, because he is the CEO.

      but when I read your reply, i can not help but think
      who is more childish ,John or Andrea ,I guess it is not up to me to judge,but the jury is out on this one.

  • http://www.american-reporter.com Joe Shea

    This is the mostr important [post, the most important question you’
    ve ever asked. We hear so much from our leaders about their commitment to America’s energy future and to clean alternative energy, yet even people Rep. Rush Holt, who actually represents the district where BlackLight Power is located and is a physicist by training, says absolutely nothing about any of it. If we can’t count on him to sit up and take notice, who can we count upon? Great work, and thank you!

    • http://www.american-reporter.com Joe Shea

      This is the most important post, the most important question you’ve ever asked. We hear so much from our leaders about their commitment to America’s energy future and to clean alternative energy, yet even people Rep. Rush Holt, who actually represents the district where BlackLight Power is located and is a physicist by training, says absolutely nothing about any of it. If we can’t count on him to sit up and take notice, who can we count upon? Great work, and thank you!

    • GreenWin

      Joe, I note that Rep Holt does not want to read email from anyone outside the 12th District. Probably not directed at Mills but a convenient out. You have to wonder why Mills’ substantial Board has not broken the wall of silence in Congress. The oil lobby may have dirt on the whole bunch.

  • http://www.choicedowsing.com kwhilborn

    How much has Andrea Rossi thrown at this?

    Let’s say $500,000 in lost wages plus another few million dollars?

    When LENR technology comes it will come in a storm unlike any the marketing world has ever seen. If 400 degrees is possible then it will power cars and trucks soon. Rossi is now claiming 600 degrees with his few million in research.

    This is a technology that not only will save thousands of lives but can possibly save our entire planet. If global warming is indeed caused by our use of fossil fuels then we are digging a deeper hole everyday.

    I think Andrea Rossi should have gone public years ago and raised money with shares. His one man approach is allowing competitors to possibly pass him with his own brainchild. If it id true (I doubt) that defkalion beat Rossi to the punch then Rossi will lose everything and could not even prove he was in the running ans Andrea Rossi never was able to demonstrate a stable product and would lose in court.

    This technology will make desalination cheap among seaside villages and bring food and water to the starving. It is too important to make this technology wait.

    Now imagine that someone came along with a billion dollars and started research on this from scratch. They could hire leading scientists and might even entice Andrea Rossi himself if the wage offered was high enough. (20 million dollar contract?). Even without Rossi they coud hire some great talent in a large research facility and iron out the mechanics of the ecat within months. Imagine an office building worth of labs conducting organized trials and attempts based on what they already know works and some of the smartes minds reviewing QRT, Hydrino possibilities, LLT, and anything else they can come up with to explain the energies.

    Public funding is HUGE. There is currently over 20 billion dollars being allocated towards new nuclear power plants in the U.S. One Billion would easily solve any problems remaining with LENR. In fact; the One Billion would cancel the need for the 20 Billion.

    I think LENR is too important for my breathing health, the health of people relying on fresh water and food, and the health of our planet to be left in the hands of private individuals who care more about their profit than mankind.

    If I had an invention this important to mankind I would make it open source and would seek profits in the smiles of the fed and living, and be happy to have several schools named after me. I would not be a profit monger.

    This invention is too importnat to take another 5 years to get to market.

  • Zalomi

    Billion of dollars funds for finding alternative energy source will not do any thing without inspiration from God.
    Adrea Rossi received that inspiration without any funding – Actually it is God’s gift.

    • Sooner

      I’m agree with you ,It is same as good health and happiness , you can’t buy a good health with money but it is God’s grace.

    • jacob

      Zalomi,you can give billions of dollars to scientists and universities to develop LENR,but
      if this money goes to people that are not driven to succeed and are not inspired with out inspired leaders that work for the benefit of Humanity as a whole,almost nothing can be accomplished anyway.
      then we are better off ,taking this money and provide clean water to Africa

      • Zalomi

        Jacob, Andrea Rossi “discoverd” a new phenomena – Money will not make a new discoveries , money used only for building and improvement.

        • jacob

          thats right,Zalomi

    • GreenWin

      What public funds CAN do is prevent irrational, monopolistic attacks on the inspired and gifted. I would not be surprised to find a dozen previous Rossi’s with very good ideas and technologies – that have been hidden, destroyed, suppressed. Public funds should be used to give ALL people with qualified technologies an opportunity.

      Years ago the U.S. was seen as a “land of opportunity.” Today it is more like the land of the cliques, privileged tribes, and militants.

      • jacob

        Why did it change ? ,Greenwin

  • http://aol.com Tom HB

    We have seen so many examples of government involvement/money in the green energy field, only to see it disappear down the black hole of bankruptcy of poorly thought out inventions (i.e. Solyndra). Politicians and beaurocrats have little to no interest in the outcome of research, only that it appear to their constituents or political donors that they are doing something to solve a problem or benefit some political end

    I am very sceptical that government involvement will benefit or improve research in the energy field or any other field. Only private enterprise has a record of success.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yeah Tom.The Coulomb barrier doesn’t seem to be a problem for Rossi. The bureaucratic barrier is what he has to tunnel through (or bypass) now.

    • GreenWin

      Tom, you mention the Republican’s kicking stone Solyndra – but do not mention the hot fusion debacle that has cost global taxpayers billions ($$250B.) It is acceptable for science to create theories and experiments to prove them on public funds. But when those experiments prove the theory failed – it must not become a government subsidy program to employ scientists.

      NASA’s space programs Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo are all undeniable success due entirely to taxpayer funds. We should not forget that well administered money from private or public can deliver brilliant advances.

  • Al D

    I sort of support Rossi’s feelings. The object of private capital is to make profitable products. The object of public funded research is usually to get next year’s funding.

  • Lu

    Rossi is being a bit disingenuous. His first 1MW customer is supposedly the military, a branch of the government that is frequently used to seed and nurture state of the art technologies. Rossi has a long history of soliciting funds from government agencies etc. The truth is government through various investment mechanisms can accelerate or coalesce technology.

    • GreenWin

      Lu, big difference in selling a privately financed product to government and using government funds to develop. Rossi is antagonized by publicly funded research that relies on theory and incremental progress to continue its public funding.

      And we should all be antagonized by science demanding a-priori a working “theory” before offering IP protections. In the case of Blacklight even with a viable theory – patent office resists since it is not an “accepted” theory.

      • Lu

        What product? There was no 1 MW product before Rossi sold it to the military. Even then, it only worked half-way, leaked, and took months to retrofit and deliver. Tis was a another example of military pushing the state of the art by financing new technology companies.

        • Jimr

          Was it ever delivered, the last I have heard it was still in Italy somewhere.

          • Hampus

            From what I understand the prototype is still in Italy but it will soon be sold to a civilian.

            During these month Rossi have built a second plant in USA that he have delivered to the military.

        • GreenWin

          Lu – you seem to have inside information. Can you tell us exactly what the 1MW container full of e-cats is – if not a prototype product? You suggest the U.S. military financed the building of Rossi’s 1MW e-cat?? That they are co-developers of the e-cat IP and hardware?? Can you provide evidence to back up your contentions??

          FYI a couple months ago the 1MW e-cat was shipped to the “military customer.”

    • jacob

      is this a guess,or opinion,what proof do you have,please give some names and dates and places to back that up ,Lu ,please

  • Pingback: How Essential is Public Funding of LENR Research? | E-Cat News Live Feed

  • Jason

    Not having unlimited resources to solve a problem forces the inventor to be more imaginitive and creative IMO. A project will fill both the budgets of time and money that are available. Government projects provide for virtualy unlimited time and money so government funded projects tend to take forever and be very expensive. Examples would be the F35 and hot fussion research.

  • Barry

    Every now and then A. Rossi makes a statement that raises a red flag for me. This is one of them. It’s discouraging because it is going to take a commercial product to make a breakthrough at this point. In the US politicians are much more concerned with their own agendas right now, then something as trivial as clean energy for all.
    As far as A. Rossi coming through for us, after reading his comment, I’m glad all the Cold Fusion eggs aren’t in one basket.

  • Tom

    Rossi should chuck it up on Kickstarter.

  • Filip

    Off topic.
    ERoEI is the answer to the COP discussion.
    See: http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=18714

  • wolfgang gaerber

    … once there is a peer-reviewed and accepted scientific theory on LENR, all reactors will stop operation simultaneously, triggering the need to look and investigate some new quantum concepts…

    The scientific honour can be only as honourible as its funding.

    • jacob

      wolfgang gaerber,peer-reviewed and accepted scientific theory peers,are the ones that held us back in the dark ages, Andrea Rossi calls them puppets and snakes ,and I call them overseers of the
      puppets and snakes.
      It matters not what they think anyways,they are a tool for the establishment,to keep things the way the are,including their buddies at the UL ,CSA,FDA,AMA and EPA

  • georgehants

    The answer to the topic question is directly related to why with 2 million unemployed the government does not employ the appropriate workers, to manufacture and fit solar panels across the nation free of all charges.
    How long would it take to produce all the country’s day-time power needs.
    The reason is capitalism, and peoples inability to react against a system that may have once been useful but now with enhanced technology, only productivity counts and all money and finance can be abandoned. leaving millions out of work to enjoy their lives and help others.
    We,I think are all being fooled.

    • Robert Mockan

      Not capitalism per se, but predatory capitalism, has failed. A debt based monetary system has failed.
      Governments, that do not provide legitimate government functions, have failed. The education system has failed. Are people smart enough to survive in the real physical universe? Funding of LENR would have indicated they might be.

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

        “Governments, that do not provide legitimate government functions, have failed.”

        I think that one in particular hits the nail right on the head. Virtually everything else can be traced back to initially, lack of proper regulation which allows the rot to set in at the edges, followed quickly by generalised corruption of government itself and all of its agencies.

      • GreenWin

        Mean like Depts of Energy paying lip service to alternatives whilst letting monopolies go their merry way??

  • chris robinson

    like the other (Italian) guru who is using since 20 years the taxpayer’s money to make ridiculous research on the cold fusion electrilytic processes. This is also why we count on our Customers to repay ourselves, while they ask for Taxpayer’s contribution. While they make mental masturbations with ridiculous theories totally groundless,

    Well i think we can assume from that comment that Rossi considers the WL slow neutron theory to be total rubbish . I wonder if (NASA) Bushnell or others will react to this blast . They appear to consider WL to be the prime candidate for the phenomena at this stage.
    It appears that Rossi may be moving closer to Robert Goddes theory as he does not now appear consider fusion to be the primary factor for the energy release . BTW does anybody know who the “Italian Guru” might be. ???

    • Dickyaesta

      Prof. Francesco Piantelli?!

      • Barry

        I would lose a lot of respect for AR if it was Francesco Piantelli. Peter Hagelstein put him just about on the top of the list as far as CF researchers. In fact the funding that got cut at MIT was for experimental research regarding Francesco Piantelli’s nickel / hydrogen work. I’m not sure, but I think MIT has, for the most part, worked with palladium / deuterium.
        Good story for the Boston Herald seeing they were part of the story way back when.

        • GreenWin

          Barry, wouldn’t it be justified to see the Herald cover Hagelstein’s work? Or to cover the rebirth of cold fusion in any way?

          I think AR is miffed at scientists who are not entrepreneurs – who don’t jump to make a commercial products. i.e. spoken like a true entrepreneur.

          • Barry

            I have to confess GreenWin, in my more inspired moments (usually after my second cup of coffee) I thought of approaching the Boston Herald. Why isn’t a reporter jumping on this? It’s all quite a story isn’t it? I mean with MIT, in a way it’s “Déjà vu all over again”. But after the caffeine wares off I think what really has to happen is someone has to come out with a commercial CF product. Forget the governmental funding. It’s all messed up anyway.
            A lot of CF people seem to be sitting on secrets. It’s a lot like scientists who trying to make purer (non-yellow) artificial diamonds. They are very hush, hush about their secret techniques. It’s a good sign though, seems we’re right on the verge. I sure hope one of them comes through soon.

        • dsm

          Agree 100% –

          But because Rossi rarely explains himself he leaves it open to speculation, that adds poison to the well of what he posts. What he said about Widom & Larsen was pretty vile allowing that they did nothing to him to justify such an appalling and unprovoked verbal barrage.

          Rossi has no peer reviewed theory of what he is doing. So, attacking Widom & Larsen seems dysfunctional in the extreme. What provoked it ?.

          Re the Italian Guru, the only researcher I am aware of who has done 20 years of Pd + D (notice Rossi said electrolytic research) is Franco Scaramuzzi.
          .
          QUOTE
          Since the Fleischmann and Pons announcement, the Italian National agency for new technologies, Energy and sustainable economic development (ENEA) has funded Franco Scaramuzzi’s research into whether excess heat can be measured from metals loaded with deuterium gas. Such research is distributed across ENEA departments, CNR Laboratories, INFN, Universities and Industrial laboratories in Italy, where the group continues to try to achieve reliable reproducibility (i.e. getting the phenomena to happen in every cell, and inside a certain frame of time). In 2009 ENEA hosted the 15th cold fusion conference.

    • dsm

      NASA will ignore Rossi’s rant just like they now ignore his promises and work.

      Rossi is not showing his best side in this startling outburst.

      DSM

  • georgehants

    Peter, or anybody know how the transmutable chicken ended up, does Nature Transmute.
    Or is this another subject for science to hide and debunk without the definitive research.

  • Stephen

    … virtual particles… lepton conservation law… what is this guy talking about?! WL theo (which might well be pure BS and completely wrong) describes a sort of variant of an electron capture process, i.e. something that in general is not only possible: it is a matter of fact.

    I think all this only proves once more how much this guy does not have a clue and how arrogant he is.

    On passing… you cannot just bet on applied research. Using such an approach we would NOT have lasers, transistors, etc… as these devices are based on previous NON-APPLICATION-ORIENTED research efforts. You have to thank people who were obsessed in understanding the weird and possibly insignificant inconsistencies which led to quantum mechanics… or people who decided to play with (the once useless) semiconductors. Are you aware for instance that people studied semiconductors because they were interested in their possible applications in thermoelectrics? Surely nobody had IBM in mind at the time, even by far ;) Guess what: solid state thermal converters remained so far a lame inefficient niche application while the transistor is one of the most important discoveries of the past century.

    Conclusions: (i) research is not predictable, otherwise one would not call it “research”; (ii) one should try to be less arrogant.

    • georgehants

      Stephen, Rossi I think is responding to the “arrogant” “opinion expert” theorists, that spend all their time pulling apart the work of real scientists and do nothing but talk rubbish themselves.
      Theory of course is important but only as a guide as to what to research, having the experimental Evidence as in Cold Fusion is far more important.
      Until science stops picking and choosing what is real by DOGMA and follows Evidence and open-minded theory nothing will improve.

      • Stephen

        I don’t like arrogance but it happens. In any case AR here is step forward in arrogance here. And he is being so based on very questionable arguments.

        Remember AR is supposed to have a working device. In principle he should be able to wipe out any criticism in a finger snap. He is NOT a victim.

        • georgehants

          Stephen good points, but every scientist attacked by “opinion experts” is a victim.
          Science must rid itself of these self-appointed gods of Dogma to have any chance of regaining the respect that has been lost by their continual denial of subjects outside of outdated reductionism.

          • Hampus

            Rossi accuse scientist for being “only talk”. Why is he complaining about this in his blog? He could easily just prove that he is telling the truth. Instead he just talks about it.

            Ironic isn’t it?

  • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

    I think Rossi has at least one professional scientist who occasionally contributes here, on his side re. the WL theory. My knowledge of particle physics is on a par with the bloke who fixed my car yesterday, but WL does seem to involve ‘believing six impossible things before breakfast’ as Dodgson had it.

    The ‘hydrino’ theory also proposes a new (supposedly impossible’ behaviour of the hydrogen atom, but there seems to be some support for this, and there are even several commercial products on the market (‘Brown’s gas’ welders) that claim to utilise a new state of hydrogen. (Searching on ‘Brown’s + gas + welders’ will currently get about 19,000 pages on Google).)

    It seems to me that AR has a very strong point. First get the damned things working, THEN testbed a working laboratory device to gain data by tweaking variables. When you have enough data, then is the time to try to come up with a theory that can make predictions that can be tested. Before that point, most theorising is just ‘bricolage’ as Rossi says.

    • Lu

      Actually W-L Theory involves no new physics. It is only an application of existing physics. This is one reason NASA and others seem to embrace it with the caveat that it is only a theory and needs to withstand experimental scrutiny.

      Rossi’s view strikes me as completely opposite. He claims to have a working reactor but hasn’t yet divulged a theory for what works. Any previous attempts to talk about what is going on strikes me as ridiculous hand-waving (a recent radio interview comes to mind). He also has said that his notion of what is going on has changed significantly over the past two years.

      I always thought the Rossi’s explanations and WL Theory were at least compatible and I’m a bit surprised at Rossi’s criticism of the theory although with Rossi one never knows what he is saying and why. Understanding what is going on probably would lead to many patents so it’s understandable why a person like Rossi is maintaining his silence.

      Theory is extremely important in my view. It will take a crude system (perhaps like Rossi’s) and turn it into something that achieves it’s full potential.

      • Robert Mockan

        If the Widom-Larsen theory is correct, it may render LENR obsolete. And no, that is not a typing error. One of the ramifications of “heavy electrons” that the W-L theory is based on, is that they can absorb gamma rays. In fact they absorb gamma rays so well they could replace the massive radiation shielding of conventional nuclear reactors, with plasmon generated “heavy electrons” made in lightweight semiconductor panels. With the already advanced development of conventional nuclear power that means we
        could immediately have vehicle applications like personal space ships. And that is in the science fiction sense of being able to recline in an RV sized rocket that could lift off from earth, fly to the moon, and land, in 4 hours. Or fly to Mars and land, in a couple weeks. The ONLY reason this has not happened before is because gamma ray shielding weighs many tons, for even the smallest nuclear reactor using uranium. This kind of application is something LENR will never be able to do. It is the difference between a megaton thermonuclear bomb, and an E-Cat hot water heater.

        • GreenWin

          Robert you know of course the Widom patent IS for gamma shielding. Interesting though that no product development (we know of) is going on with those guys. They seem to tack on energy applications to their patent – which strikes me as most odd since it should properly be subject of a completely different patent application.

          Here’s a fanciful scenario – fission motor powers my personal starship. On my way to a monthly confab on mars – the W-L gamma shield panels lose power, short, are kabanged by micro-meteors… shield fail GreenWin cooked to crisp… starship space junk.

          Trolls don’t have a monopoly on disaster!

          • Garfield

            A failure caused by a micrometeorite is not the worst disaster. You get a fried GreenWin in worst case scenario ;)
            Imagine a failure during lift off. Say a rocket engine explosion…

          • Robert Mockan

            Widom and Larsen published about the gamma ray shield in 2005. The concept of “heavy electron” creation in LENR materials was criticized by Hagelstein, but Widoms’ rebuttal was comprehensive and at the time Hagelstein did not reply. That would seem to indicate acceptance of the possibility. So can a gamma ray shield be built? (Has it been built in classified government labs?). I too would like to know, because the personal space ship becomes very feasible with that technology, using uranium fuel. There have been nuclear rocket engine designs where the explosion of thermonuclear bombs behind the rocket propels it. A lightweight gamma ray shield would allow many constructive changes in the design. Unfortunately even with thermonuclear power it would only be able to travel about 8% the speed of light. Even the closest known star system, Epsilon Eridani, with known exo-solar planets, is 10.4 light years distant. A trip there would still take about 130 years. But for putting around the short distance between planets in our solar system, a gamma ray shield would enable tourism to most of them, and their moons, using nuclear engines.

        • Robert Mockan

          Correction: Will, not having a gamma ray shield is not the “only” reason we do not have space ships in the classical science fiction sense. There is also the small problem that earth governments would be terrified of the technology, especially if people took it into their heads to ..ah… shall we say, seek justice for many years of perceived wrongs imposed upon them, by governments.

          • GreenWin

            LOL!! Damn Robert – that’s… probably true!

            BTW, Peter Thieberger Senior Scientist Brookhaven NL has torn WL to shreds. Even promised to eat his hat if they win a Nobel. He’s doubtful of the gamma shielding claim and wonders where the 784keV comes from.

          • jacob

            According to an ancient library located under the great Pyramid of Giza ,discovered by a team of 11 people from Egypt and one from the UK author ,the discoveries were captured on thousands of micro film in the 1980′s and brought to Bonn,Germany to be translated and to be in a language ,where it is written about the first civilization that arrived on
            earth 576000 years ago ,from a planet call Anwar,2000 light years away, and it would only take weeks for them to arrive ,warp 5? speed of light squared 5 times?
            so much for the idea of gamma shield.
            that would be comparing the speed of a child’s tricycle to a the speed of light,we have been deprived of a lot of knowledge and we can all blame the Smithonien Institute for a lot of it.

            I guess KNOWLEDGE is power,
            only reserved for the ELITE

  • Alexvs

    For the first time I agree totally with Mr. Rossi regarding his intention of doing things without governement intervention.
    On the other side, if he has something real the best way to progress would be putting it on market earning money. If not in USA or EU in other places where regulations are not so severe. He should not blame those who are trying to approach LENR via theoric research and considerations with no other help than their own resources.