NASA Answers Questions About LENR Research

Many people have been wondering about the level of NASA’s interest in LENR. Some are excited that they are looking into the subject, others are concerned that a government agency might be spending tax dollars on unproven science.

Keith Cowing of the web site NASA Watch is concerned that the agency might not be following its stated protocol; on his site he asks, “How do NASA’s Chief Technologist and Chief Scientist allow this stuff to be funded with taxpayer dollars without going through any of the agency’s standard peer review processes? Or do Rich Antcliff and Lesa Roe just fund this stuff with local center director’s discretionary slush funds and not tell HQ what they are doing?”

Because of this concern, Cowing sent some questions to Dennis Bushnell at NASA’s Langney Research Center, and received some responses which you can read here. Not surprisingly for a government agency, it seems that to undergo any project you have to go through some fairly stringent processes, and Bushnell explains in his answers how and why they started the research. The budget assigned to LENR research is quite small — a little over $200,000 per year so far. Bushnell explains that, “Langley’s Center Leadership Council (CLC) made the original decision to support the LENR research. The annual C&I continuations of this funding were approved by the Langley Science Council, which is comprised of Langley senior scientists.”

So it seems that this research has the official blessing of the leadership at Langley. Bushnell states that Joseph Zawodny, who has put out a couple of videos about his research interests, is the person who is heading up the effort. It’s small scale research at the moment, but it will be interesting to see what develops out of this project.


  • georgehants

    From Cold Fusion Now –Ruby Carat does it again.
    -
    Too Close to The Sun from BBC Horizon recounts the story of cold fusion from the initial announcement in 1989 through developments in 1994 when the video was released. Multiple interviews with major players include Eugene Mallove speaking on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s bungling of cold fusion data, misrepresenting the actual creation of excess heat from their test cell by claiming they saw nothing. A later analysis by Mitchell Swartz of JET Energy revealed the blunder, though it was never corrected.
    -
    “The cold fusion episode will be looked upon as one of the greatest travesties against justice and understanding that has ever occurred in the history of science,” says Mallove.
    http://coldfusionnow.org/1994-bbc-doc-profiles-early-history-of-cold-fusion-underground/

    • Filip

      What I have learned from the BBC doc from 1994 is that there was in fact a lot of money and effort put into Cold Fusion dispite of what is being told endlessly on this site by most of the bloggers, so it’s a lie, but nothing apperently came out. Maybe that is why the academic world and gouvernments don’t want to put new money in the CF field.

      • Filip

        It is very frustrating. Can anyone explane me why?

        • Filip

          They just gave up on CF. It doesn’t work. The End.

          • Barry

            Filip, Some times it seems CF stories are like the ‘Boy who cried Wolf”. We would hear and see all of these promising results with no fruition for years.
            I may be fooling myself, But now I think there really is a wolf and he’s about to come out of the forest in a big way.

    • GreenWin

      Yes George. Ron Parker and Bellinger – the two major culprits at MIT – who started the attack dogs by claiming on Boston radio that F&P were “frauds.” And Johnnie Huizenga backed them up with his pretentious, false book.

      As it turns out it is the hot fusionists who appear to be the real frauds. In the words of one of their own founders, Dr. Robert Bussard. Having taken $$250 billion over the last 60 years and given us ZERO useful energy. That’s ZERO… as in absolutely NO, NOTHING, NADA energy after throwing $$$billions of taxpayer money into their black hole.

      Where’s Mr. Cowing (or any honest journalist or skeptic) on this boondoggle??

      • Barry

        GreenWin, Someone should write a book “Hot Fusion the Fiasco of the Century”.

        • GreenWin

          On further review Cowing has no science degree but did work as a “grunt” for NASA for 3 years. He claims to have “managed payload accommodations” – presumably lifting boxes or booking payload hotel rooms;)

          He is unqualified to critique the value or science of NASA’s LENR research.

  • georgehants

    Laboratory Technician
    BlackLight Power, Inc.
    Job Details
    The successful candidate will fabricate, characterize, and modify anode and cathode materials, and assemble, operate and maintain experimental electrochemical cells and systems, assist in the design and construction of bench scale systems to perform these projects, and support the PhD team in this R&D alternative energy laboratory.
    http://jobs.nj.com/jobs/detail/48905751?contextType=rss

  • georgehants

    From E=Ni+H
    NASA LaRC Responds to Critic’s Inquiry
    Posted on June 7, 2012 by Admin
    http://e-catsite.com/2012/06/07/nasa-larc-responds-to-critics-inquiry/

  • georgehants

    The World is Quantum not classical.
    Science News
    From universities, journals, and other research organizations
    Breaking the Limits of Classical Physics: Light’s Quantum Mechanical Properties Demonstrated
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120607105817.htm

    • jacob

      georgehants ,thank you for that info,if is was not
      for quantum,we would not exist.

  • Pingback: NASA Answers Questions About LENR Research | ColdFusion | Cold Fusion | Free Energy !

  • Zamboni

    God revealed to Andea Rossi the secrets of the LENR phenomena through inspiration and not to any body else – That gift cann’t be bought by money.

    • dsm

      Yup,

      And the devil is trying to steal the invention off him !.

      So who is the devil ? – we are told, anyone who is not an unquestioning Rossi believer.

      DSM

      • Zamboni

        God is much stronger than the Devil.
        Devil is always the loser.

        • alex

          not in a democracy my friend.

      • jacob

        since the universal Creator was born out of darkness and became light and love and loved it evolved into the first planet seed and grow through love into a planet ,the first planet became a sun,with more star seeds into more planets and through love the first solar system was formed ,now there are billions of galaxies,created by love ,love creates ,hate destroys,us humans can create and built anything ,the sky is the limit,or is it.
        We are here on earth because we have relatives right across the galaxies.
        COLD FUSION is very real,it exists, even the sun radiates gamma rays. But if we work
        with a limited Knowledge and can not understand how the Universes were formed,we lack basic understanding ,things are not what they appear,if you look at a solid piece of nickel ,it appears solid,if you could see the atoms ,and could see the electrons spinning around the atom you may wonder by what power do these electrons spin,few can explain it,in case of black light power ,an anode and a cathode they work to set a chain reaction maybe related to the magnatron in the micro wave or the old style picture tube TV,every one that knows any thing about free energy knows they are free energy devices on their own,they excite electrons, Mr. Tesla knew this very well, and he was able to amplify
        voltage and amps a hundred years ago,the story is always the same ,according to Wikipedia Fraud ,Overunity.com who are run by our Peers,or should I say ,Our Taliban(teachers) to only teach us what they want us to know,based on what they want us to know we can not begin to understand the nature of things,there are dozens more free Energy technologies already being used ,but how can we built these machines with the limited knowledge we have been granted.
        The devil as people call him is darkness,and even darkness has to evolve into light and love.
        Matter is created by light,if you study scalar waves you will know what I mean.
        as I said we can create and built by inspiration and imagination,from godly qualities.

        • Filip

          Teachers teach us what they know and what they have learned themselves. Creativity is not given to everyone.

          Evil doesn’t exist only chaos where we make some good out of it.

          It’s an opinion like yours, I respect yours, I wonder if you are able to respect my ideas.

          Greetings.

          Greetings.

          • jacob

            Thanks Filip,you have had some great input and also the same for Green Win,Peter Roe,Hank mills,Robert Mockan,and many more.
            As a matter of fact I Value everybody’s opinion flat out,because it is a true and honest reflection of their Knowledge ,but considering most people have be misled on the path of knowledge by our peers,who wrote our curriculums ,which is the the same the world over,and now last year got a curriculum for 5 year olds for preschool,to make sure everbody is on the same page.
            Teachers are forced to use these curriculums whether they like them or not.
            I can’t blame anyone for having a sceptic opinion on
            new free energy LENR ,Blacklight,Hidro,BB motor corp.,Stanley Meyer,Robert Adams,Troy Reed,John Bedini,
            Griggs ,Tom Bearden,Peter Lindeman,Nicola Tesla,Don Smith,Richard Clem,Joe Cell,there are hundreds of free energy inventors that did not make it past the level of Pons and Fleischman and were simply ignored ,threatened,discredited,died or went missing,because our current science and energy policies are not ready for it yet ,Nicola Tesla was asked about a new technology he was experimenting with ,he said ” humanity may not be ready for this for a hundred years” and he was right.

            I specially value posts from people ,that help me
            learn the truth ,so I can have a better understanding of reality

  • GreenWin

    It’s important to note that the “NASA Watch” website is run by K Cowan, a full-on skeptopath. Which means pathological skepticism. Cowan has already refused to publish a number of pro-LENR comments – not for legit reasons – but because he is too much of a coward to tolerate reasoned argument.

    While the NASA information is of value to the LENR community – Cowan and his fussy little web site – is a complete waste of time.

  • Johnny B. Goode

    With all the hype about the “end of the Mayan calendar”, and the begining of a “new era”, Andrea Rossi would be a marketing GENIUS if he schedules the official launch of the commercial version of the E-Cat to the markets to the date of December 21, 2012.

    That would give him a lot of FREE adverstising. That would multiply the publicity effect.

    If I was the head of the Marketing Department of Rossi’s company, I would schedule the official launch for next December 21.

    Can you imagine the video ads? A narrator says: “Centuries ago, the Mayans predicted that a new era would start on December 2012. Now, this new era is set to arrive. Coming next December 21: the E-CAT! The new era of energy technology!” And them some sci-fi movie music theme!!

    • jacob

      What about the planet Nibaru,that is going to miss
      planet earth in 2013/ 2014

      • Robert Mockan

        Miss it??

        Darn, I was all set to find out if people would turn into zombies when the apocalypse
        happens. See here:
        http://www.cracked.com/article_15643_5-scientific-reasons-zombie-apocalypse-could-actually-happen.html

      • jacob

        Robert,We are the zombies

        • Robert Mockan

          People can be very suggestible.
          Indeed advertising acknowledges this in conditioning people to be consumers, and leading them to avoid mental effort, especially if involving analysis of efforts being made to control their behavior.
          The brain has no built in filter that separates fantasy from reality, and the more suggestible can easily behave in strange ways if they have been exposed to such behavior on their television or in movie theaters.
          The zombie theme is prevalent in the media because zombies, like robots fighting, or people fighting against machines or vampires, does not violate movie ratings, and does not focus on the real problems that have been, and are being, created by irrational “authority” in our societies. Fortunately although the brain function leading to suggestibility is present in all of us, being aware of the propensity allows one to compensate for it, by deep introspection of all mental functions, and place the blame for any inclination to obey “conditioning”, to the evil people who want to control others, and will do anything to obtain that power. Eventually the sane will dispose of the insane, and peace will reign.

    • AstralProjectee

      If there is something to that Mayan astrological stuff, it is very interesting that we are entering a new age of abundance just at the time the Mayans predicted a new age.

      Unfortunately we could be hit solar flares from the sun coming in 2012 to 2013 that could potentially devastate the entire world and economy according to NASA.

      Peace!

      • Filip

        self fulfilling prophacy.

        remember the millenium bug, the year 2000, airplanes where going to fall out of the sky.

        • Robert Mockan

          That bug was expensive to kill. The airplanes kept flying because the potential software glitches were fixed before the date fields reset to the wrong time. Same for all business apps that needed date text string routines reprogrammed to do the correct calculations. Planes probably would not have fallen in any event, because they would not have been allowed to take off unless the software was fixed.

  • dragon

    If Rossi will keep quiet, there is always Defkalion, Brillouin, Nickenergy, Athanor, George Miley, MIT-NANOR and maybe a few others to wait news from.

    I will be patient… by the end of the year if no significant proof shown to us… somebody will be called LIAR. I hope not somebody we know.

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

    Hank Mills did a tremendous job in his post in trying to clarify the extent to which validation studies and demonstrations have already been done. I just hope someone not already in the choir is listening!

  • Robert Mockan

    Yes, it IS amazing. But LENR would have military applications, so the low funding remains a puzzle. For example what could be done, “..The Manhattan Project began modestly in 1939, but grew to employ more than 130,000 people and cost nearly US$2 billion (roughly equivalent to $25.8 billion as of 2012[1]). Over 90% of the cost was for building factories and producing the fissionable materials, with less than 10% for development and production of the weapons.” (From Wikipedia).
    Put just 2 billion into LENR,(in todays’ dollars) since we have the factories and laboratories, and what could be accomplished!

    • GreenWin

      LENR was declared black back in December – hence no pubs, and deceptive budgets. Donnie & Marie: “We keep secrets?”

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

        No funding at all might seem suspicious, but low funding looks like a small covering bet on something they are not too hopeful of.

        Behind the scenes it’s a fair bet that things are very different. The question is really whether NASA or DOD are quietly doing separate research of significance, or whether the effort is a combined one, with money also being spent on buying up all those who seem to have workable systems, like Rossi, DGT, Brillouin, Miley et al., etc. Or both.

        Either way, US efforts will be focused on trying to ensure that the technology ends up exclusively in US government hands, to be dispensed as they see fit. I hope many others are now pursuing similar goals, although I’m sure that my own government (UK) is entirely stupid enough to continue to ignore CF until the last nuclear fission multinational has gone bust, and they have no other options.

        • GreenWin

          Peter, the fundamental technology will bypass exclusivity due to its simplicity and access. Then the Athanor experiment in Italy and Open Source distribution will distribute the basic science to the student population. There ARE ample opportunities for cool stuff like propulsion and anti-grav apps. LENR is well capable of generating gravity wells – which, when matrixed up provide for “lift.”

  • Hank Mills

    The Ridiculous Demand for Excessive E-Cat Proof

    I enjoyed following the E-Cat saga in the year 2011. Although I still enjoy following it to this day (things are really getting exciting with 600C steam), last year was particularly interesting. Just about every month there was a new TEST of an E-Cat. Each test seemed to utilize a new scientist, a new design of E-Cat, or a new test method. The conclusion after each of these tests was that the E-Cat worked, and produced a huge amount of excess power. Both tests with steam and tests with hot water as an output confirmed the huge amount of excess energy produced. It was also calculated that the huge amount of excess power could not have been produced by any non-nuclear, hidden power source.

    As the tests continued, things got more and more exciting as the test of the one megawatt plant neared. That test also turned out to be a success. It was conducted according to the guidelines of the engineer (with 30 years of experience in thermodynamic systems) chosen by the military customer. The one megawatt E-Cat plant ended up producing almost 500 kilowatts of power for several hours. What was even more exciting, was that the customer’s consulting engineer signed off on the results. He agreed the test was a success. The only negative he noted was that there were a few leaking gaskets.

    To any reasonable person, the tests in 2011 were proof that the E-Cat technology was capable of producing large amounts of excess energy via novel nuclear reactions. However, for multiple reasons, certain individuals tried to belittle the technology. Some went so far as to claim all the tests were failures, and that Andrea Rossi was a fraud. They spread the disinformation via interviews, blog posts, articles on their websites, and comments on various blogs. they tried to create every problem they could to come up with an explanation convincing enough to make people doubt that the E-Cat was real and worked.

    Now, some of these individuals may have been honest skeptics who for some reason thought Andrea Rossi was conning innocent people. However, I think the most vocal of the critics had a specific agenda to discredit the E-Cat technology. In my opinion, it was because some of them were competitors. By dismissing and attacking the E-Cat technology far and wide (over and over again) some people would start to question the success of the tests. Sadly, their efforts worked to a degree, and many people were influenced by the propaganda.

    To this day, there are individuals who are calling for Rossi to perform additional tests. I am all for additional tests, but the problem is that they are claiming the previous tests were not open, did not have third party scientists present, and for multiple reasons were not valid. This is very far from the truth.

    Actually, many scientists and engineers participated in the tests of the E-Cat. Just a few that come to mind are Christos Stremmenos, Dr. Focardi, Dr. Levi, Mats Lewan, and the engineering consultant of the military customer. There were many others too, I just cannot remember them off the top of my head. These third party scientists watched the tests, observed the tests, took measurements, were involved in how the test was conducted, calculated the input/output, and did the math to determine the results. To say that no third party tests have been performed is simply not accurate. In addition to the public tests, there were private tests as well. The DOD, DOE, Ampenergo, and Defkalion all performed successful tests of E-Cats.

    Yes, perhaps there has not been a test in which an E-Cat was placed in an underground lab, filled with the top scientists from a hundred universities around the world testing it for weeks or months. However, it has been tested over and over again by qualified individuals. We have the results of many of these tests, and they prove the E-Cat works.

    However, all the tests in 2011 are not good enough for some individuals. They want new extensive tests of the E-Cat, because they cannot accept that the previous tests show the E-Cat works. I think that there is nothing wrong with wanting additional tests, but demanding them to “prove” the E-Cat works is an excessive demand for proof.

    There is a mindset out there — inspired by some of the worst cynics on this planet — that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This idea is false, ridiculous, and absurd. A claim of something extraordinary can be proven with the same amount of evidence as a claim of something that is not extraordinary. If you want to test a car with an internal combustion engine to see if it works you can put gasoline in it, drive a few miles, and easily determine the vehicle works. To prove a cold fusion powered car worked there would be no reason to do anything different. However, the cynics would have someone drive the cold fusion powered car ten thousand miles before they admitted it “may” work.

    As I have said before, there is more than a reasonable amount of proof that the E-Cat works, and produces huge amounts of excess energy via novel nuclear reactions. I just can’t see how any reasonable person can think otherwise when it has been tested repeatedly, has been tested by multiple scientists, has been tested by multiple companies, and of course nickel-hydrogen cold fusion has been proven as a real phenomenon for well over ten years.

    The following are a few of the thoughts I have had when considering the evidence in support of the E-Cat technology. Maybe they will benefit some of the honest skeptics (there are many) that simply are sitting on the fence. I do realize that nothing will change those competitors and cynics who have an agenda.

    1) EXISTING TECH – Nickel-Hydrogen fusion is a real phenomenon that was proven before Rossi came along. It is not like it is a totally new concept. There have been many tests of Ni-H systems before the E-Cat was invented, but none of them could produce practical amounts of power. Actually, it is pretty easy to produce excess energy with Ni-H systems, but the output is usually small.

    2) MULTIPLE SCIENTISTS INVOLVED – There have been countless tests of the E-Cat by many different scientists and engineers. I refuse to believe that these scientists and engineers from many different parts of the world, from many different universities, and with years of experience could all be totally wrong about the E-Cat.

    3) MULTIPLE TYPES OF TESTS – The types of test performed were different from each other. Not only one type of test was performed. Some tests utilized the production of steam, and others utilized the production of hot water (phase change verses no phase change). Large gains of energy were detected in both types of tests.

    4) SELF SUSTAINING OPERATION – In many tests the E-Cat self sustained for extended periods of time with almost ZERO INPUT WHATSOEVER. Kilowatts of output were produced with perhaps a hundred watts or less of input power, which was only used to power the radio frequency generators, sensors, etc. This is simply phenomenal. In one test Dr. Levi produced an average of 15 kilowatts of output for 18 hours with only about 100 watts of input power. At one point, the output spiked up to 120 kilowatts, and the output had to be reduced.

    5) DIFFERENT MODELS ALL WORK – Different sizes, shapes, and types of E-Cat units were tested. The first E-Cat units were large, with a reactor core of one liter. Then smaller ones were made with reactor cores of 50cc. these were tested as well, and proven to work. Later on, the modules for the one megawatt plant were built that utilized flat plate reactor cores. They also produced excess power. It seems like every design of E-Cat just works, despite the changes made.

    6) OUTSIDE COMPANIES CONFIRM RESULTS – Multiple companies tested the E-Cat and have admitted it worked as claimed. This includes Defkalion, Ampenergo, and the military customer. Also, I know that the DOE and DOD have performed or at least participated in tests that showed huge gains of energy.

    7) NO REASON TO LIE – Andrea Rossi is risking his reputation, career, financial well being, and future on this technology. He has sold everything he has to support the development of the E-Cat, and would be literally throwing his life away if it did not work. In addition, he would be risking the future of his wife and family.

    8) HOME E-CATS EXIST – Certain scientists have reported seeing the home E-Cat units that are being tested, and they claim they are totally stable and work great. They are not fictional or made up. They are being developed and are headed towards the market place.

    9) TRANSMUTATION PRODUCTS – Samples of the material from inside of the E-Cat have been tested and determined to contain copper, when none should be present. The metal the reactor core is made out of is a kind of steel that does not contain copper, and there is no where else for the copper to come from.

    10) DEFKALION’S CLAIMS – I don’t like writing or speaking about Defkalion, but they claim to have produced large amounts of excess heat utilizing nickel and hydrogen. I do not think they are anywhere close to producing the amounts of excess heat the E-Cat has produced, but I think their experiments (if verified) provide additional confirmation for Ni-H fusion. Of course we have zero proof they have produced any excess heat at all, because they refuse to post test results.

    11) WANNABE COMPETITORS EMERGING EVERYWHERE – Although Ni-H fusion has been around for over ten years, it is only since Andrea Rossi allowed the first test of the E-Cat that a new wave of companies are emerging and making claims. It seems that since the E-Cat came on the scene, Ni-H fusion has became extremely popular. Also, I know by first hand experience there are competitors that are going around trying to attack the E-Cat, slander Rossi, and promote their own company’s research. Their own words make it clear that they think the E-Cat works, but they want to figure out how it works so they can claim it as their own.

    To any reasonable person, I think there is more than enough proof to conclude that the E-Cat works as claimed. To say we need more proof that the E-Cat works is being cynical. Some healthy amount of critical thinking is a good thing, but demanding even MORE proof when you already have an abundance is downright silly.

    The one thing holding this technology up from being accepted by the mainstream media is not the need for more evidence, but excessive skepticism. Those who have been manipulated by the competitors and cynics who have attempted to “muddy the waters” are now making the situation even worse. However, the good news is that the MARKET will settle this issue, and when the E-Cats are being sold across the USA the truth will be obvious to everyone.

    What I am looking forward to is the data from the extended test of the new high temp E-Cat that produces 600C steam. Although I am already convinced that the E-Cat works, this data will be exciting to study.

    • http://lenr-canr.org/ Jed Rothwell

      I disagree. I think the tests were inadequate, for the reasons I gave here:

      http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?p=166

      I think Mats Lewan agrees with me.

      • Robert Mockan

        Do you have any ideas on what the RF source is doing to “stabilize” the reaction? My impression is it slows the reaction rate down because there is a thermal power surge from the catalyst that begins when it is turned off.

        • alex

          RF + stray electrons = radiation in the form of x-ray and gamma. A microwave oven pretty much does the same thing, only also accelerates the radiation with a magnetron.

          • Robert Mockan

            These gamma do not appear to be from RF electron acceleration. The 511 Kev energy of the gammas is the precise energy resulting from an antimatter positron mass annihilation with an electron mass. It has become sort of cliche to refer to Einstein, but this time his equation really does apply. E=mc^2.

        • alex

          Sorry, my point is, the RF source probably isn’t the acting force in stabilization, but more the method to keep reactions going. My guess the stability comes from the design of the internal chamber. The higher the percentage of active surface area in a sample of nickel powder the more predictable the reactions become. If you think of it like a bed of hot coal, and you have a few unburnt coals in the mix, it would be an uneven heat, and will more likely extinguish itself, rather than stay hot for a long time.

          • Robert Mockan

            This has been an ongoing assumption by just about everybody. If the reaction is due to hydrogen matter wave interference within, or between, the potential wells of the nickel lattice (as it appears to be), it may be the RF acts to synchronize the waves and reduce interference rather than contribute to it. Assuming Rossi really is using RF as a control mechanism, perhaps he will enlighten us soon with data plots showing the relation of energy generation from the catalyst, and RF. Many other questions. What is the frequency, the waveform, how applied, where applied… and so on.

      • Jim

        So check out this summary of tests and results then consider that Brillioun and SRI have an agreement in place to produce a molten salts boler using the LENR technology. Now take into account SRI International’s 50 year connection with Military research and that NASA has redacted pages of LENR information in a review of disruptive technology. Get a clue the world is in the process of changing dramatically with respect to energy production.

        • Robert Mockan

          The atomic powered jet engine for airplanes was designed and built to heat air with uranium fission in molten salts that were then sprayed into the inter-stage compressed air of a jet engine. Although the engine ran in powered tests, there were a couple problems. One is that the radioactive fission waste products were entrained in the air, and went out the engine nozzle with the hot air (but the salts were recirculated to continue harnessing the contained uranium fission reaction). Not great for the environment. And two, the gamma ray shielding weighed as much as the aviation fuel load of a regular jet airplane, and more. The atomic airplane was not seen as commercially practical at the time.

          A molten salt LENR reactor, if the temperature can be made high enough, and the power density great enough, would not have the problems of atomic power using uranium. But a temperature higher than 600 C, and a COP greater than 6, is needed.

          • Robert Mockan

            If a future advanced LENR reactor operating temperature reaches at least 1500 C (using other materials than nickel), and the COP becomes greater than 20 (for example 50), aerospace applications would become easily feasible.
            Until proven impossible, there remains hope that LENR technology has a future in aerospace propulsion.

      • Jim
    • Lu

      I wonder what would happen if Hank Mills and Mary Yugo shook hands? Poof?

      • zero

        More like “BOOM”, followed by the sound of time and space unraveling.

    • jacob

      Thanks Hank ,for giving a lot of great information to us all and thanks for indirectly helping to make
      LENR a reality for the world and its people .

      Again thank you Hank. You are helping to make this world a better place for many,don’t be discouraged by those who do not get it ,until they see and touch
      a working LENR unit,they won’t get it even if they want to .

    • GreenWin

      Hank, trolls demanding excessive “proof” (not Jed’s type) are… trolls. Everybody knows Rossi has told the skeps to take a flying leap – he don’t need pubs, academia, government, or high priest “blessings.” He’s avoided the gauntlets. It p*sses em off.

    • dsm

      Hank

      What you are calling proof & what most engineers & scientists would call proof, seems to differ greatly.

      What I see you offering is ‘opinions’ & calling the proofs.

      Just take what you said about Defkalion as this is a glaring contradiction in your position. Ref your point 10. You say they have proven nothing but Rossi has then you again quote several ‘opinions’ on Rossi’s eCat never any university sourced certification of proof and you more than anyone know that Rossi walked away from tests by several universities as well as a test by NASA. There is a glaring contradiction here. His biggest mistake was walking away from Essen & Kullander’s offer that Uppsala would do a certification. But Rossi uses their ‘opinions’ and has these up on his official ecat web site.

      From my own perspective, I have been in contact with a former senior NASA official (Jim Dunn) who was part of the NASA team that visted Rossi in Italy for the purpose of evaluating the eCat and they took along a major US investor who was ready to invest large money in the eCat and Rossi. They withdrew when the eCat would not work.

      Jim claimed months ago (long after NASA gave up on Rossi) that Defkalion had a real working LENR reactor. He provided detailed specs. But although I know Jim, I don’t accept just his word because I, just like any engineer or scientist will only accept a certified proof of such a global world changing technology. Too many deluded inventors, in the past, have led the world up garden paths with their extra ordinary claims.

      It is stunning that you say Rossi does not need to provide extraordinary proofs. It seems to be your constant position the Rossi’s word is enough !. Amazing !.

      Rossi was the person who went to the world (publicly) in late 2010 and said he had a commercial ready LENR reactor that he invented in 2007. He then said he would allow it to be tested. But he never has allowed it to be certified by any viable institution that can do this level of certification.

      Now all we here is waffle. Always a new promise.
      - ecat
      - 1MW ecat
      - 12 1MW ecats sold (then not sold)
      - NASA want to buy one (but they didn’t)
      - Then the ‘HOME eCat’
      - Then the new eCat mark II
      - Then the new eCat mark III (600C)

      but *NEVER* an independent validation. It is very hard to understand how you can so publicly claim Rossi has had his device validated because if he had, then the world would be into the new era you trumpet. The press would be all over him & the science, the Nobel prize committee (Kullander has input there) would be nominating him for a Nobel prize.

      Hank, your idea of proof is so weak as to be scary.

      DSM

      • alex

        Circumstantial evidence is enough to put you in prison for 10 years, if there is enough of it. I think, what Hank’s angle here is the lack of hard facts does not trump the overwhelming abundance of corroborating witness testimony. LENR is conceptual and under-tested, but it is here to stay, and will only gain momentum, unless a serious well funded study to disprove it surfaces. This would only be funded by those who have something to loose, but would have to happen before enough people believe LENR is real. It only takes 10% of the scientific community to believe in it, to establish a phenomena that will be taken seriously.

      • alex

        It just so happens there is a major study to disprove LENR underway:

        http://goo.gl/waUSs

        • dsm6

          The rivals of eCat etc: etc: etc: are legion.

          Have you heard of the Papp engine ? – Gene Mallove rated it as a distinct possibility. Or, the John Rohner version soon to go on public sale (if you can believe this). It is every bit a rival to eCat.

          http://pesn.com/2012/02/25/9602044_PlasmERG_Preparing_for_Manufacturing/

          I am fascinated by this engine as evaluated by Hank Mills and Sterling Allen – I would *LOVE* it to be real and to come to market.

          Am I 100% convinced it will ? – no
          but that doesn’t stop me wishing it will. There is a big difference between dreams and reality and unfortunately delusion & lying play a big role in why so many amazing new technologies evaporate.

          Proofs and certified proofs are what saves us from delusion after delusion & extraordinary claim after extraordinary claim.

          NASA’s Zawodny was not being stupid when he said extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. Technology commentators who state or claim otherwise are naive in the extreme (even unfit for their job).

          DSM

          • georgehants

            DSM, Interesting that you see a difference in proof for things that are arbitrarily deemed “extraordinary”
            -
            Please write a comment outlining the different and “extraordinary” proofs that you would require for say Rossi’s E-CAT against a kettle.

          • dsm6

            George

            Someone claiming to be walking on water is extraordinary !

            Claiming to have invented the greatest energy in history (Focardi’s comment) is extraordinary !

            If you think otherwise then perhaps you should explain your POV 1st but please please please stick to the topic on hand & avoid the characteristic sideways & lengthy trips into world history unrelated to the claims in front of us.

            Cheers

            DSM

    • GreenWin

      Notice how trolls argue against the hard evidence put forward by the topic of this article??? Skeptos in particular use circular reasoning and “reframing” argument to avoid having to admit that NASA’s response to Cowan not only confirms unequivocally NASA’s official commitment to LENR research – but rubs Cowan and the skeptos face in it.

      The facts are we are witnessing an organized release of formerly classified information on US government agency commitment to LENR. This release is part of what is called “technology transfer” – a program to apply black project technology to civilian use (they pay for it after all.)

      We can be grateful to DoD, NASA, SRI, SPAWAR, Navy, several National Laboratories for participating in this transfer process. Had Rossi & Focardi not pressured these departments with their inventions – they would have happily kept LENR and their classified research – in the black.

  • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

    I am not concerned about taxpayers money. If it were up to me I would scrap one of those completely useless missions to some godforsaken planet to research something that nobody really cares about and spend that money on LENR instead. What I am concerned with is the lack of clarity at NASA. The above article does not satisfy me. I don’t want Bushnell or Zawodny to come out and say it. I want NASA to officially come out and say it. For all we know the $200K might be for a dual use project. I worked at NASA for 15 years and I had direct experience with the technology transfer process. I have seen projects hijacked that on the surface look one way and can be presented to the management and accounting as completely legitimate but look under the surface and you will notice they serve a completely different purpose which happens to coincide with the needs and wishes of some corporation the guys who work at NASA own. Notice they conveniently left the name of the $200K project out of the above article?

    • Ged

      Check out the second link, it clarifies those question completely. Though the official name of the project isn’t given beyond “LENR access-to-space rocket”, only one person, Dr. Zawodny, is in charge of the project so it isn’t a dual use. I’ll just post the pertinent questions and responses from NASA here for those who don’t see or follow the link:

      1. Who is funding this Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) research at LaRC?

      Langley is funding LENR research as an initial, exploratory study of a low technology readiness level, high-risk, high-payoff technology through its Creativity & Innovation (C&I) fund and the Center Innovation Fund (CIF).

      2. How much has been spent to date on this LENR research and how much will be spent?

      The average yearly cost for the approximately 3.5 years of the research thus far is about $222,000 for a total of about $778,000. The research is ongoing, and another $212,000 is budgeted for the remainder of FY 2012.

      3. Who is the PI listed on this research?

      Dr. Joseph Zawodny

      4. What individual(s) made the decision to fund this research?

      Langley’s Center Leadership Council (CLC) made the original decision to support the LENR research. The annual C&I continuations of this funding were approved by the Langley Science Council, which is comprised of Langley senior scientists. With regard to CIF, the LaRC Chief Technologist approved funding of LENR research using the CIF peer review process.

      5. Was a formal proposal submitted?

      A proposal was presented by the PI for consideration to the Center Leadership Council and another proposal was submitted to the Center Innovation Fund.

      6. Was this LENR research peer reviewed prior to being given funding?

      It was reviewed initially by the CLC. C&I funding continuations are contingent on an annual peer review by the Langley Science Council. Both the CIF proposal and the C&I continuation proposals were peer reviewed.

      10. Are contractors, subcontractors, consultants, or advisors employed to conduct this research? If so, please identify these individuals/companies/institutions

      An activity was issued under NASA Langley’s cooperative agreement with the NationalInstitute of Aerospace in Hampton, VA, to scope an LENR access-to-space rocket. To date, this is the only contract action taken by NASA Langley in support of LENR research.

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

        What makes this guy Cowing at NASA Watch so significant? I’ve never heard of his blog. Dragging him out of the shadows seems to serve the agenda of people who don’t want the E-Cat to work, or at least don’t want to compete with it. All that his questions seemed to do was to evoke a solid response from NASA that answered them in detail and resolved the issues Cowing raised. He won’t be “cowing” any LENR advocates anytime soon!

    • Robert Mockan

      The funding is undoubtedly for dual use. The patent application they have is for generation of heavy electrons in a controlled way, not specifically for LENR devices. The application mentions the most important application, that would be as a gamma ray shield. Such a shield would greatly reduce the mass of nuclear power systems used in aerospace, and would make immediately feasible lightweight nuclear turbojet and rocket engines using uranium fuel. Just the kind of technology NASA needs.

      • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

        When I used the words “dual use” I meant something completely different. I meant to say “NASA can deny it is working on LENR” if anybody in the mainstream media or of serious consequence asks and at the same time Bushnell and Zawodny et al can snow everyone else and say “NASA is working on LENR” when their buddies on the ecat forums want to know.

    • PJ

      Your statement about “godforsaken planet nobody really cares about” once again underscores your incredible naivete about the need for non-translational research. Any scientist who actually creates understands the seeds of that creation are more often in the simple observation of facts of nature. Fire was unlikely to be the invention of a government or corporate sponsored research. It was first borrowed from a forest fire, most likely, and then some bright forebear of ours realized as they were making flint axes they could create sparks… that could create a fire.

      People like you simply don’t understand invention. You gain “credibility” by critique and destruction, but never through building anything.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      NASA should stick to its primary mission,
      concocting Global Warming Fiction.

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

        Iggy you are being ‘US-centric’. The IPCC and the University of E. Anglia have also contributed massively to this worthy effort.

      • GreenWin

        Don’t leave out the ubiquitous UK “Met Center.”

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

          And the BBC. Not to mention the guvmint’s “department of energy and climate change” whose sole purpose seems to be to usher in a new age of nuclear fission, and b*gg*r the facts.

          Some clown on the radio the other day was really hedging his bets, he said something like “whether this (human CO2 emissions) leads to rising sea levels or another ice age”. There didn’t seem to be any null option. So it doesn’t matter what we panic about – just so long as we panic.

          • GreenWin

            LOL Peter! Tearing of hair, gnashing of teeth, wearing of sack cloth encouraged.

    • jacob

      Charles,no wonder you are a skeptic,you have seen the corruption first hand ,as you said you worked at NASA,and if you had a high level security clearance ,you would know a lot of hidden (from public view) secrets ,that would make your head spin and have absolutely no reason to ever trust anyone again.
      If you can not trust the one you are closest to ,you will never trust anyone else if your life depended on it.
      THe save thing to do is, do not ever believe anything at all,that way you can not ever be disappointed ,it’s the save thing to do , that way you don’t get hurt ever again and you are a hermet in your own fortress (body)
      If you would allow your self to think outside the
      box,and start trusting again ,new doors could open up for you and you could learn new things instead of hanging on to the familiar old ways that bring more comfort than new uncertain new
      ways that distort your old reality,since the old reality was just a dream or illusion, and was fake, I wish you well.

      • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

        First off I’m not a LENR skeptic. I believe the LENR proponents are going about it wrong and are failing as a result. Secondly I would never pass a security clearance. Impossible. When I worked for NASA they didn’t have security clearances. Thirdly it’s not about trust. It’s about opening your eyes and seeing what’s happening here. It is very easy to lose your reputation. It can happen in an instant. Regaining it is a long slow tedious process. Bushnell and Zawodny and these kinds of articles and announcements and way of doing things aren’t helping the cause one bit.

        • GreenWin

          On the contrary Chuck, these clarifications demonstrate for future use how inadequate NASA’s LENR budgeting is. It also sets the groundwork for the legal battles to come over why NASA has adopted WL theory when it has been debunked by at least one highly qualified government scientist (at BNL)

          We ae going to have to face facts – mainstream science has failed the human race – dramatically. THIS case will prove that to billions of people when they are told that government and academia colluded 22 years ago to destroy the cold fusion potential. The collusion started somewhere in the 60s when taxpayer millions and then billions were poured into hot fusion – and now 60 years later and $250billion tax dollars spent – we ZERO useful hot fusion energy.

          Every skeptic who is not a paid troll or toadie should start dissecting the people behind the 60 year hot fusion FRAUD. So described by a father of hot fusion Dr. Robert Bussard: A FRAUD.

          • http://none.com Charles Ponzi

            GreenWin the fact that you feel that NASA has a LENR budget proves my point. NASA does not have a LENR budget. What NASA has is two LENR zealots working for them who managed to trick everybody into thinking that NASA is working on LENR, when it’s not.

          • GreenWin

            Ah hah… Chuck minces past the hot fusion FRAUD evidence to old school argumentation “reframe” technique. It is entertaining to watch this tap dance to defend comrades in crime – hot fusionists who have effectively stolen billions from the human race and delivered absolutely ZERO useful energy to us.

            NASA’s answers to skeptopath Cowman’s questions confirm legally, scientifically, NASA’s growing commitment to the science of LENR.

  • Ron

    The American people spend more on football than on research. We glorify entertainers not scientists. We “fund” campaigns and social media, not energy and advanced buildings. We import engineers instead of paying our own what they are worth.

    The first step to correct this is to ban funding of all college sports and use the money for science and engineering scholarships and equipment. Second is to build a city in the US like Masdar and let these science students do internships for its design.

    • Robert Mockan

      Masdar? I would prefer a city more like EUREKA (of the science fiction TV show). It is fictional, I know, but could be real.

    • GreenWin

      Ron, get real. Nothing wrong with football – it actually provides revenue to football colleges so than can BUILD research centers and academic facilities.

      What is wrong is how the research dollars have been strangled by a small group of self-appointed priests. These guys see earth as their personal fiefdom. They keep humans stupid by suppressing knowledge – particularly technology that would free them from the yoke of taxes, mortgages and utility bills.

      As for importing engineers – they may get more open and valuable education elsewhere – since much of our science is hidden, suppressed or black listed.

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

    I suppose it is a good thing to have someone watching NASA. Maybe we need Department of Energy Watch and Department of Commerce Watch, etc. but I must say I find Keith Cowing’s arms-akimbo attitude a bit irksome. He also needs to learn to write.

    • dragon

      Of course he is irksome. I suspect he has an agenda to stop Cold Fusion altogether if he can. But he will not be able to.

    • GreenWin

      Cowing’s opponent agenda is becoming clear. He refuses to publish comments that support NASA’s research on LENR. Likely he thinks of himself a high priests who destroys careers of those studying outside the Cathedral.

    • Karl

      There wouldn’t be too many space explorations with information sneaking of each research “small” project undertaken by NASA. To my opinion, this guy has an obvious agenda to discredit CF/LENR activities.

  • tq

    It is just a matter of testing reactions.Why would they need more until they start making serious devices like a power generator for the VASIMR engine.

  • Barry

    How can the government support a CF research group when CF research groups are putting down each other’s findings? Until we have substantiated, repeatable science, I’m afraid there won’t be much $ going around.

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

      I didn’t know that CF research groups are putting down each other’s findings. If you know something of that why don’t you write up a story and submit it to Frank for posting here? I’d like to read about that.

      • Barry

        It would become more of a gossip story, too negative for my likes. What has discouraged me in the past is what Valerio Ciampoli stated in the Atom Unexplored, at the end ( from 13:05 on) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Orja48N83c&feature=relmfu

        Then to hear what A. Rossi said about “Widom, Larsen and acolytes and the “Italian Guru” and there’s more, but you get my point. No offence to Hank but he has said things that make me wonder about Defkalion and Bushnell and Zawodny. The first video J.Zawodny was in, sounded great and then it got cold water poured over it. Then a second came out and Hank and A. Rossi put that down. Others have cast stones at A. Rossi. Who the heck are we to believe? No wonder there is press and government funding issues about Cold Fusion.

        Personally I wish someone will take the noble path. What would Einstein of done if he discovered CF. Try to keep it secret until he could sell it for forty million?

        I do believe the non-greedy is the path of least resistance. That’s why the Pirelli High School story has touched my heart with their generosity. And if Robert reproduces their ANTHANOR from data he got on the web from an Italian High School, it would be such a circumventing path around all the lack of press, secrecy and greed.

        • GreenWin

          Barry, please note that the old school science in Italy is trying to suppress the Open Source Athanor experiment. They have petitioned the Education Dept to stop “teaching” this new science. These are desperate people Barry. Anyone who would crush an Open Source project like Athanor – is (have to say it) evil. Watch this video for more background:

          http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/cold_fusion

    • http://www.lenrforum.eu/ Alain

      There are battle inside the field, like in any field… look at battle in theoretical cosmology…
      in fact battle between LENR and mainstream physics is one such…

      about repeatable scienc, there is. SPAWAR and Iwamura provide replicated results.
      some could be replicated, but to be honnest, as it is explained in “Betrayer of thetruth” of Wade&Broad, there is no incentive in science to replicate. because only innovation is paid.

      it happend with Iwamura replication in the US, when the replicator changed the protocol and claimed it is false.

      for initial failure of LENR experiments SPAWAR explain well the cause. Fleishman&Pons can be accused to of not explaining how complex was their protocol in reality (month of cooking of the electrod, high hydrogen loading, unreliability).

      note that the first test on germanium, showing diode effect, were very hard to replicate because of metalurgical limitation of that time.

      today, nano structures allow good replication

  • Pete

    You have missed the part that the research has been ongoing for 3.5 years without any results(publications) but a single patent application and a promotional video it seems.

    • Ged

      Yet it has internal peer review and administrative oversight, evaluated each year.

      The fact they haven’t published in the literature in that amount of time isn’t as big a deal as that Cowing person wants to make it out to be (any long term experiments can take this long before there’s enough data for publication, such as animal work in biology). Especially on such a potentially sensitive topic as this (need some seriously strong data). But, hopefully they have something in the works now. If it reached 5 years of no publications, then I’d really be asking questions.

      • Pete

        And what makes 5 years so special? Why not three or two?

        Three and a half without visible results but the internal reports/reviews?

        I mean this are scientists, right? And all they have to offer for public is a promo video?

        • Ged

          Because science takes time. I -am- a scientist. It can take years to get a well fleshed out paper produced. You can’t just take any old results you get from one experiment and publish–you have to do diligence to understand the variables surrounding your results, and that takes time. Biology is pretty fast paced, and it still takes years sometimes, and what these guys are doing is cutting edge.

          Thinking something is amiss just because they haven’t finished their work in 3.5 years is ignorant of the scientific process. 5 years is special in the sense that the majority of science project across all disciplines are ready for publication by that time. But there are exceptions: some types of animal work can take -decades- to publish, due to the need to run the experiments over decades of time. What if these guys are running their device for 5 years to get full data on it, and then will publish?

          The video means they have something, or they would never say anything. It also shows one of their experimental testing devices. I would imagine once the results are in from that device (which is evaluating many of those parameters I mention above that need to be fleshed out before publication) that they may well publish.

        • Ged

          Also, 5 years is special as that’s the length of a typical grant this size funding a line of research in the sciences.

  • jacob

    It is an ” OFFICIAL ” funding ,and it a start.
    But to be allocated 200.000 a year ,is a ” JOKE ”
    what can be accomplished with so little?

    That only pays for coffee and donuts and one lone
    ” Scientist “

    • http://www.lenrforum.eu/ Alain

      one scientist (maybe more is underpaid, intern, or subsidized by private corp), the lab rent, and some chemical…

      it is the usual research budget for LENR after-work research from 20 years (benevolent work, after-work squatted lab, and borrowed chemicals).

    • Robert Mockan

      A joke? More like a tragedy. The unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost more than $200,000 every…minute! At least we know what the government priorities are. And it is NOT energy independence from oil.

      • GreenWin

        True Robert. Some estimate $$1,000,000,000.00 a DAY is spent on the unnecessary wars and war prep. And this clown at NASA Watch is whining they’re spending the coffee budget on a technology that can arguably END THESE WARS permanently.

        At least end a major reason for these wars.

    • Ged

      $200,000 is enough to do real research. We biologists sometimes have to scrape by with that little ourselves, especially with the current funding crisis in the sciences.

      Consider the incredible low cost of the ingredients, and the amount of work $200k can pay for is actually substantial. All they need is a foothold of empirical data, and then everything will start to ramp up into serious mode.

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

        Maybe the Kimmel fellow who donated nearly $6 million to the U of Missouri for cold fusion research could offer a substantial grant to NASA for this work? That’s what the money is for, no?

    • Ged

      Oh, actually I stand corrected. A huge, RO1 NIH grant is over 1 million dollars spread across 5 years, which works out to $200k-220K per year.

      So, for a biologist, this is actually a huge amount of money they are getting per year, on par with our -best- grants (and hardest to obtain).

      Hopefully that gives you some perspective to how much research money this actually means.

      • http://www.electric-sailing.fi Pekka Janhunen

        Same for us (physics, space physics).

        • Ged

          Compared to defense spending, we scientists get peanuts. But at least there’s a lot of us in parallel. It’s amazing how much we accomplish with so little, when you think about it.

          • PJ

            And it’s amazing how little is accomplished by the military with so much…

          • Robert Mockan

            >PJ

            But the military has SO MUCH that even with $400 hammers and $200 toilet seats it manages to make some neat toys.