National Instruments Deeply Involved With Many LENR Projects (Briefed EU)

Thanks to E-Cat World reader ‘un passante’ who sent the report of a talk given by Stefano Concezzi, director of National Instruments’ Science and Big Physics Segment. The talk was given at yet another meeting about LENR — “Towards a non-polluting energy revolution” — a meeting held today, July 2 in Rome, Italy.
A recording of the meeting’s proceedings is available (in Italian) here.

Here’s the report — thanks very much un passante! Italian seems to be an essential tool in the LENR world!

Concezzi gave a list of NI collaborations at the moment:

Kim (hope the spelling is right), Purdue University – mathematical model – software applications – to be presented in august

Hagelstein, MIT mathematical model – software applications (different theory)

Los alamos national lab

University of Missouri

University of Bologna, Levi – he mentioned a sponsorship for a lab of the physics department. so here we go beyond a simple collaboration. he also spoke about Levi as the “heir” of Focardi (I guess this is also a way to keep in touch with Rossi)

ENEA
INFN Frascati (Celani)
Kobe University
Osaka University
Texas University, Austin
Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)
Stanford Research Institute
Naval Research Laboratories

i.e. National Instruments is deeply involved with LENR research collaborating with chosen scientist and scientific organizations by giving them specific software support and instruments.

I say chosen because he mentioned that a process of choice was made for budgetary reasons.

He was cautious when expressing certanties about the phenomenon but he said (specifying it was his opinion) that he was optimist that both a working mathematical model for the phenomenon will be developed and that the experimental data showing excess heat are not measuring errors.

He also said that NI had the same presentation in front of the European Community ten days ago. (his exact words, he didn’t specify further).

Hopefully an italian speaker with a better english than mine will give more and better details.

The message here seems to be that National Instruments is moving quickly to make a presence in the emerging field of LENR technology — and while they are cautious about making a definitive assessment of the reality of cold fusion, they obviously see a tremendous commercial opportunity here, and they do not seem shy about announcing that they are ready and willing to work with this fledgling industry. As LENR projects expand there is going to be a need for the kinds of hardware and software systems that a company like NI provides, and it will heartening for researchers and companies to know that there is an experienced and serious company who they can work with for their instrumentation needs.

In addition to this, a new video of Dr. Rob Duncan of the University of Missouri has just been released on the National Instruments community web site. Duncan’s lecture is entitled “The Mystery of Cold Fusion”.

  • Peter Hunr

    National Instruments and Siemans are not dummies. The can see it coming and are in prep. Their interest goes well Beyond Rossi and his efforts.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Question for those who are UL knowledgeable. Can you compare the E-Cat to a similar certification situation, like maybe the Microwave oven or similar invention, to get an idea how long the process will take?

  • un passante

    Partial transcript (italiano):

    (…)

    Qual è il masterplan che una società può avere? Innanzitutto è trovare, analizzare i risultati, di istituzioni pubbliche e private, di ricercatori in buona fede che vogliono presentare i loro lavori e fare una doppia verifica, un doppio check, di questi lavori. Se possibile, replicarli.
    Determinare quali sono i top 10, semplicemente perchè abbiamo risorse limitate, se no sarebbe interessante intervistarli tutti. E stabilire delle cooperazioni e sfruttare le capacità dei nostri prodotti per accelerare la ricerca in questo campo.

    Queste sono le ricerche [si riferisce ad una slide] che noi abbiamo sponsorizzato o con cui lavoriamo:
    La prima
    (ricerca) è col Prof. Kim della Purdue University, una famosa università negli Stati Uniti, e si basa sulla teoria della condensed matter, dunque da Bode-Einstein, qualcosa che ha quasi 80 anni come teoria. Trovare il modello matematico e portare questo modello matematico alla disponibilità di qualsiasi studente.
    Dunque stiamo lavorando con la Purdue University, col Prof. Kim, e presenteremo ad agosto, un modello matematico, dunque dei tools, che possono essere utilizzati da tutti, messi a disposizione sul web.

    La stessa cosa con il MIT – Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Prof. Hagelstein, o Hagelsteen come lui preferisce essere chiamato, che si basa sulla teoria dei campi quantici all’interno degli elettroni.

    (…)

    if I have time I’ll go on with the transcript. google translate is your friend

    • un passante

      Ma anche col Los Alamos National Lab, con l’University of Missouri, con l’Università di Bologna, dove…

      Un aspetto non citato finora è che, a prescindere dal Prof. Preparata, due scienziati italiani, due professori universitari che hanno fatto progredire la scienza in maniera molto significativa sono stati un professore dell’Università di Siena [Piantelli] e un professore dell’Università di Bologna [Focardi]. Entrambi sono ancora vivi, entrambi lavorano ancora.

      Bene, uno di questi ha un successore, il Prof. Levi dell’Università di Bologna, Dipartimento di Fisica. Noi abbiamo sponsorizzato il loro laboratorio.

      Stessa cosa con l’ENEA. Una collaborazione che sta andando avanti. Ma anche con l’INFN di Frascati [Celani], con l’Università di Kobe, di Osaka, con l’Università del Texas in Austin, con il Commissariato dell’Energia Atomica francese, con il Stanford Research Institute e con i Naval Research Laboratories degli Stati Uniti.

      Dunque sia in Giappone, Stati Uniti ed Europa. E, di nuovo, questo per essere sicuri di non avere nessun aspetto territoriale.

  • GreenWin

    Materials for Emerging Energy Technologies
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION
    Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
    Directorate G – Industrial Technologies
    Unit G3 – Materials
    E-mail: xxxx

    Section 3.4 starting on Page 25
    Low Nuclear Energy Reactions in Condensed Matter

    A nice overview of the current status and call to action. Below is a cursory selection:

    “The research is currently limited by economic and technical reasons, particularly in Europe. Funding the research should be the target to achieve a critical mass on a multidisciplinary level. There are only few academic institutions working on this research field and an increasing number of these institutions need to be involved, along with a network, particularly in Europe.”

    http://ec.europa.eu/research/industrial_technologies/pdf/emerging-materials-report_en.pdf

    And the beat goes on…

    • Ged

      Oops, all our stuff is in the other article, whew.

  • georgehants

    Steven Koonin seems to be making a fool of himself again by protecting money makers, could explain his past Cold Fusion bias.
    -
    Former Department of Energy official Steven Koonin expressed unwarranted confidence (PHYSICS TODAY, January 2012, page 19) that “energy needs to happen through the private sector. It owns, builds, operates essentially all the energy infrastructure in the country, and I don’t think we have any intention of changing that.”
    I offer the following example to illustrate why I take issue with Koonin: During the night of 30 November–1 December 2011, residents of the West San Gabriel Valley, about 15 miles northeast of Los Angeles, experienced a severe Santa Ana windstorm that produced hurricane-force gusts. Thousands of trees were blown down, and power outages were widespread. The area is served by two utilities: Community-owned, not-for-profit Pasadena Water and Power (PWP), which provides electricity for the homes and businesses in Pasadena; and privately owned, for-profit Southern California Edison (SCE), which powers the surrounding communities.
    Pasadena itself was probably the hardest hit, with about 1200 downed trees and nearly $30 million in damages. The wind speeds there during the event were at least as high as, and perhaps higher than, those in the surrounding communities. Nevertheless, only 10% of PWP customers lost power during the windstorm.
    Meanwhile, Altadena, Arcadia, La Cañada Flintridge, and San Marino experienced total blackouts. In other nearby communities, such as Sierra Madre, South Pasadena, and Monrovia, at least 80% of homes and businesses lost power. In a front-page story in the Pasadena Star-News on 13 January 2012, SCE admitted that 75% of its customers in the area affected by the windstorm lost power.
    In addition, while nearly all PWP customers had their power restored within 48 hours, many SCE customers had to wait much longer, some as long as a week.
    The performance of SCE during and after the windstorm was so bad that it is now being investigated by the California Public Utilities Commission. Simply put, private-sector, for-profit SCE put in a dismal performance compared with the not-for-profit, community-owned PWP.
    Perhaps Koonin needs to reconsider his belief that the private sector, with its focus on profits and stock dividends, can reliably provide for our energy needs.
    http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i7/p10_s3?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+physicstoday%2Fpt1+%28Physics+Today+magazine%29&bypassSSO=1

    • D Hull

      I recently sent these comments to Brillouin Energy, which as you know is working with SRI in the US to validate this technology.

      I greatly admire your technological achievements and hope that successful commercialization will occur. I see that you seem to be targeting large enery producers, with the goal of replacing their coal or petroleum base sulution of heat -> steam -> turbine -> electricity generation. If these large companies invest in your technology, they may reduce their costs and eliminate the air pollution etc, associated with carbon based fuels. However, do you believe that the consumer will realize these economies? Are you planning on developing a complete system that will generate the heat and electricity in one package, also scaling down to supply small individual units for the home?

      While your solution provides, admittedly, an enormously superior method to industrial power generation, one flaw in the current system is the fact that these large producers are in effect, a single point of failure. If they experience problems, all of their customers are impacted, which happens to areas affected by severe weather (tornadoes, storms, and etc.). This is a problem with our current power ‘grid’.

      Availability of small home units could be an additional solution, where power companies would provide technical support to these individual users. This solution removes the problems of a failing power distribution system, base on a network of physical power lines, which , we have seen can be broken by various weather systems or even area overloads, resulting in brown-outs, etc.

      I am sure that you have considered these points already, since they are so obvious, and the goal of any commercial entity is to make money. The modular home market is another area of consideration. Can your technology be licensed to companies with this in mind?

      Basically, I am in awe of your achievements,

  • Andrew Macleod

    I guess the tipping point has been reached. The snowball is rolling fast now.

  • Jeff Clark

    Heres the poop on UL. I do a lot of testing for a laboratory that is not UL. We are, however UL certified.
    1. If you buy a product that is not UL listed and your house burns down because of it, your insurance company will probably not pay.

    2. The biggest factor (and I have seen this many times). If you produce a product as a “first of its kind” and force UL to write new standards around it, then your product becomes the precident that all competitors must meet or beat. A lot of times when a competitor finally comes up with a design that meets the requirements that were written around your product, they have infringed on your patents. Its a strategy thing when you have a “first of its kind” product. It is very difficult for competitors to meet the requirements without infringing on your patent. So its not really the first to market…its more like the first to UL. Excellent move by Rossi to be there first.

    • Lu

      Thanks for this information. I was aware of the insurance issue. I also know companies sometimes attempt to patent improvements to competitor’s products so I am not surprised at the other strategy you refer to.

      Can you speak to UL requirements across different jurisdictions, i.e., do they vary considerably or frequently non-existent? What kinds of UL requirements would you venture the E-Cat to conform to, being an electrical device which produces heat using a novel fuel, and is expected to be inserted into a water-based heating system, or produce non-potable hot water? This may be outside your area of experience but any info would be appreciated.

      Finally, how indeterminate is the process? Is it really a bureaucratic black hole Rossi is making it out to be? Again it might depend on the application and the novelty of the product.

      Thanks.

      • Jeff Clark

        When you deal with UL, you are really at the mercy of the engineer assigned to you. Even existing standards are open to interpretation which sometimes leads to confusion. Rossi may be in for a long ride with this one. Every material and component in his devise must be either UL recognised or certified. Then when you put all the recognised components together, the whole unit must be tested for safety. Im not sure how UL is going to deal with the E-Cat core. If we assume it is a regular space heater with a resistance coil, then we can look up the UL standard for space heaters. Spill tests, Tip tests, throw a blanket on it and see what happens. Even the cord that plugs into the wall needs to have at least 10 different tests done on it as well. I dont know if UL is actually capable of stopping E-Cat from happening. They can, however, slow it down to a crawl. Rossi would have to hire lawyers to prod UL into not dragging its feet. In the end, he will have his certs. Im sure of that. Just may take a couple of extra years.

    • Josh

      Jeff, I don’t know where you get your insurance information, but most home owner’s policies are ‘accidential direct physical’ loss policies. UL or not, if your house burns down (and it isn’t done on purpose by the home owner), the insurance company will pay. I’ve never seen a non-commercial insurance policy even reference UL approval in their policy/contract. Read yours, you won’t find UL mentioned, and if it isn’t mentioned, they’ll be contractually obligated to pay based on what is in the policy.

      • Lu

        I had heard the same thing about insurance companies but you may be correct.

        I have also heard that retailers won’t sell products unless they are UL certified, otherwise they may acquire liability. This may not apply to the E-Cat although at one time there was talk the Home Depot may sell the E-Cat.

        • Ged

          It makes sense that retailers would require a certification like UL before they’d sell a product. You’re right that there might be a liability to them if they sell uncertified equipment; and explains why everything is certified in stores.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Jeff Clark, Lu, Anyone: Thanks for the info. Can we compare the E-Cat to Microwave oven? The Microwave had to be controversial when getting UL certification. How long did it take? Who got the oven certified? Did politics get involved?

  • georgehants

    What can be done, to change the proven horrendous shortcomings that Cold Fusion has shown are endemic in much of science.
    We should all feel proud of the premier of occupations, yet it is clearly shown to be a hotbed of incompetence, even fraud, of a self-serving academic administration where almost nobody, usually only Nobel Winners and retired old men are the only ones willing to stand up and talk the Truth.
    Where any possible advance or discussion, beyond excepted Dogma, faces the wrath of the establishment, backed up by an army of sciences closed-minded disciples.

    • georgehants

      One does not have to like the report, all that matters is is it the TRUTH.
      -
      Need for Transfusion in Heart Surgery Questioned in Study
      By Nicole Ostrow – Jul 2, 2012 9:00 PM GMT
      Jehovah’s Witnesses, whose faith forbids them from blood transfusions, recover from heart surgery faster and with fewer complications than those who do get blood, in a study that may change thinking on current practice.
      Patients who are Jehovah’s Witnesses had better survival rates, shorter hospital stays, fewer additional operations for bleeding and spent fewer days in the intensive care unit than those who received blood transfusions during surgery, a study today in the Archives of Internal Medicine showed.
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/need-for-transfusion-in-heart-surgery-questioned-in-study.html

  • GreenWin

    Looks like with National Instruments sponsoring Dr. Levi and a LENR lab at University Bologna we have University Bologna and University Missouri leading the world in LENR research.

    NOTE: Cal Tech, MIT, Stamford, Penn State, Oxford, Princeton, Harvard, Cambridge, U East Anglia! are nowhere in sight.

    • GreenWin

      Qualifier: Dr. Hagelstein at MIT excepted of course. But the rest of the USA’s foremost technical university is absent.

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

        ‘At’ MIT but apparently not ‘of’ MIT, if recent events are anything to go by.

    • jacob

      would it be correct to assume that the Universities of Missouri and Bologna are independent enough to chose their own path with the least amount of interference from outside forces dictating their research?

  • Lu

    I started researching UL certification. Rossi has given the impression that the manufacture of the E-Cat depends on UL certification. Rossi also refuses to give any information about the status of the process other than it is ongoing, has stated details are under NDA, and that they have retained a company to manage the process.

    Two UL FAQ questions jumped out at me. (http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/corporate/contactus/faq/)

    1. Do I need to have the UL Mark on my product in the United States? Is there a law stating that my product should have a UL Mark? Does our product require UL testing?

    2. Submitting New or Innovative products

    The responses are very interesting and I separate them below. Perhaps this is the official UL comments and actual practice may differ but I have to say the Rossi’s actions with regard to UL certification of E-Cats does not pass the smell test for me. I had the same issue with Rossi and his 90 day guarantee of the E-Cat.

    • Lu

      Do I need to have the UL Mark on my product in the United States? Is there a law stating that my product should have a UL Mark? Does our product require UL testing?

      Manufacturers submit products to UL for testing and safety certification on a voluntary basis. There are no laws specifying that a UL Mark must be used. However, in the United States there are many municipalities that have laws, codes or regulations which require a product to be tested by a nationally recognized testing laboratory before it can be sold in their area. UL is the largest and oldest nationally recognized testing laboratory in the United States. UL does not, however, maintain a list of the jurisdictions having such regulations.

      If you plan to market your product nationally or internationally, it is advisable to obtain UL Listing. If a limited marketing program is anticipated, check with the municipal office having jurisdiction in the particular areas to learn the local retail ordinances or product installation requirements applicable in that area.

      Many companies make it their policy to obtain UL Listing not only to minimize the possibility of local non-acceptance, but also as a matter of corporate policy and commitment to minimize the possibility of risk in the use of their products.

      • Dave from NJ

        I think in CA it is against the law to sell there without a UL certification.

        • Lu

          My daughter sells hats which she makes and I’m pretty sure they are not UL certified.

          • Stephen Taylor

            And she probably does not need a permit from the local building code enforcement entity to install said hat upon her head. On the other hand a heating or electrical modification would likely require a permit.

          • daniel maris

            You are being misleading. Rossi does NOT specify UL approval. He refers to certification in general – he may use the term customers certification or safety certification.

            I think there is bound to be an issue with a domestic heating device and it will be caught by some regulation.

            • Lu

              Rossi has specified UL certification, if this is what you are wondering about.

          • dfnj

            Products that you plug into a wall outlet.

    • Lu

      Submitting New or Innovative products

      Sometimes customers may seek the UL Mark on a product that has applications or features that are not anticipated by existing product safety standards. When this happens some questions that may be asked include, but are not limited to:

      Is the product covered by an existing standard?
      Does it have features that are not found in products of similar types?
      Is the use or application of the product different than similar products?
      Does the product pose a danger to users?
      Are other similar products already on the market and are they certified by UL?

      If UL’s technical experts determine that a product has new or innovative design considerations, applications or unusual features then a team of UL staff will review the details of the request. This team will determine if additional requirements will be developed to address these designs, applications or features. If UL decides to move forward with developing the necessary requirements, a quote for a New or Innovative Preliminary Investigation will be issued. This quote will be for the development of any additional technical requirements that are needed to an existing standard or the development of a completely new standard. Once the Preliminary Investigation is completed another quote would be issued for the actual certification project.

      Please note that in some cases UL may make the business decision to not evaluate or develop requirements, at this time, for a certain product and to not include it as part of a UL Mark certification program.

      Contact the customer service representative closest to you for more information.

      • GreenWin

        Lu, UL could be influenced to drag their feet on any part of this process. It is clear that any appliance for residential use needs some certification to meet local and State safety codes. What specifically do you disbelieve Rossi has done?

        • Dave from NJ

          I think Rossi is telling the truth that they looked into the process of certification. But when UL quoted him the price they shut their mouths. UL certification is ridiculously expensive!

        • Dave from NJ

          I think Rossi is telling the truth that they looked into the process of certification. But when UL quoted him the price they shut their mouths. UL certification is ridiculously expensive!

          • jacob

            OK,DAVE what does it cost to get UL certification,and is there a per unit cost later, like a royalty or something,I ask and don’t know the details,what UL> charges,I know they were a nonprofit org. but I don’t think they are anymore.

            • Jeff Clark

              I know it costs over 2 thousand dollars just to get a piece of wire certified for flame testing.

      • Lu

        Overall the issue I have is the whole cloud of secrecy about this process and the potential impact that it may have.

        It appears from the FAQ that UL certification is not strictly required. Any UL certification derives from local jurisdiction requirements. I’m not entirely sure about this but this may be at the city level, county, or state in the US. Furthermore, these requirements will vary across jurisdictions. Some states may have only minimal ones (e.g., electrical) while other states may have other (e.g., emission) requirements for a particular product type.

        If there are however such local jurisdiction requirements it is for some known product type, like a electric heater. Rossi has refused to answer what kind of product UL is is going for. Similarly if it is a known product then the process should be straight forward and predictable and Rossi should really be able to disclose more information than he has although I agree he cannot really say how long it will take. What kind of appliance is the E-Cat?

        On the other hand, the E-Cat clearly is not like any other appliance even if it functions similar to one. Rossi is advertising it as a heat producing device that is inserted in line with an existing heating system. It may function as some other product (although I cannot identify which) but it clearly is a new and innovative product in operation. In this case the UL may completely decline certification. Rossi has indicated that the UL will provide product requirements in order for the E-Cat to be UL certified. Given the revolutionary nature of the E-Cat and the lack of understanding of how it works, I find it difficult to believe that the UL would undertake this effort and complete it by say early next year, if at all.

        I once asked Rossi that when the time comes and the E-Cat is offered for purchase what kinds of assurances will we have that it works before we send him money. I was hoping he would say something like there will be product demonstrations etc. But what he said was there is a law that provides for a 90 day (or maybe 60 day) guarantee of which we can avail ourselves. After I told him there was no such law and any such guarantee was based on the integrity of the company selling the product, Rossi appears to have banned me from asking more questions! This UL certification area reminds me of this as well.

        Sorry about the length of the response!

        • Stephen Taylor

          I really see nothing contradictory in the certification efforts. I am concerned that it may be a difficult hurdle.
          Warranties are full of legal requirements which vary from state to state. If you read a warranty it will sometimes say “unless otherwise required by law” and “except in this or that state” and similar caveats. Perhaps warranties are voluntary but once offered they seem to have legal constraints and obligations. (Just an observation and I have no special knowledge of this area.)

        • Ged

          I honestly am not sure what you are trying to get at. Nothing about UL certification “fails the smell test”. It’s extremely wise for any manufacturer, especially on a new technology, to seek a certification. And since UL is the most trusted, it would give much greater consumer confidence and less liability in his product.

          Nor do we know how long UL will take. And it’s also smart Rossi is going ahead with production preparations, but not actually producing until UL certified. That way, if any revisions are necessary, it won’t require throwing out stuff he’s already produced.

          Really, UL will be looking at the safety, which Rossi has directly stated (such as emergency shutdown methods and the like). It’ll evaluate the power in, and how that is done safely, and the power out, and how that is dealt with safely. It’ll also investigate all possible catastrophic failures and how those can be handled safely.

          It’s empirical testing, and I see nothing that would make them take over a year at it; though none of us are experienced with the UL process and can say for certainty how long it usually takes. Rossi was probably told by them it’ll take months, which is why he passes that on to us.

          Again.. I don’t know what it is about this that you are trying to say is wrong. Help me out here.

    • jacob

      The company selling the product will have to have liability insurance to protect themselves,would they be better off to get their products safety approved by UL. in order to receive insurance coverage?

  • Andre Blum

    looking at the Rob Duncan clip was an hour very well spent.

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

    I hope there will be a better video of Dr Duncan come along later with better audio. The coughing, sneezing, choking of people in the audience was very distracting.

  • qc_jym

    If you looked at the stock market lately, NI has been going down by 8% and is on a steady fall. This might be a way for them to raise the bar again.

    If you have acces to Info-Labview, you will notice a thread entitle “Labview Everywhere” where most of the forum user expressed disappointment at NI marketing strategy. Their vision of what is needed seem to highly differ with their customer’s need.

    Lets see how far this venture will take them!

    jym

    • GreenWin

      .

    • GreenWin

      NI stock closed today at $26.96 and has held steady average at 27 for past 6 months. Last year they issued a 3 for 2 stock split and a $.15 per share pre-split cash dividend. Last year’s sales rose 24% year over year. For the full year, NI’s profit was up 539% and revenue grew by 29%. This stock is solid.

      • QC-JYM

        Good work GreenWin, I stand corrected!

        jym

        • GreenWin

          As was my first draft!

  • Dave from NJ

    Viva Italia!

    You will know LENR is real if oil does not break $90 per barrel March 2013.

    Google “trading economics NYMEX Division light, sweet crude oil futures” about the 4th hit down.

    Der Ölpreis wird Ihnen sagen, ob es echt ist.

    • daniel maris

      I guess it’s difficult for the oil and gas market to differentiate between the threat from LENR and other alternative energy candidates at present, but certainly if commercialisation of LENR is genuinely within reach then we should see some effect on markets soon.

      • http://www.decisionstrategies.com Steve Jacobs

        I am from the petroleum industry and LENR is now being watched closely. An article was just published in the July Journal of Petroleum Technology. I authored it. LENR is definitely on the radar.

    • GreenWin

      Dave, I don’t want to have to write this again. Watch the video – listen to what Dr. Duncan is telling you.

      “If you think the excess heat effect is not real – you are being oblivious to data. I know it’s real…”

      If you disagree with the evidence for excess heat (the signature effect of LENR/cold fusion) show us why Dr. Duncan is wrong with your own evidence, or quit intimating LENR is a hoax. I am sick and tired of reading irrational denials of hard empirical, scientifically proven evidence. Thanks.

      • Wes

        The key is whether the excess heat can be refined from the “novelty” experiments to become a reliable, efficient, and safe form of commercial energy. We simply do not know that, yet. By way of example, experiments involving static electricty can be quite dramatic, yet have little appicability as a source of power. LENR may never make it out of the novelty force category, or may prove to be the “Holy Grail” of energy.

    • Anonymole

      Recent expansion of oil discovery and production may put a crimp in that March 2013 timing.

      http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/26/us-oil-supply-harvard-idUSBRE85P1GA20120626

      With or without LENR, oil may unfortunately start to drop in price. Not a good thing in my book, but there it is.

  • Don Witcher

    Rossi’s take

    Antonella
    July 2nd, 2012 at 4:56 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    I think you know that Stefano Concezzi has stated today in Rome that NI is sponsoring the research on LENR at the University of Bologna. That was great news for us followers!
    Best,
    Antonella
    Andrea Rossi
    July 2nd, 2012 at 5:24 PM
    Dear Antonella:
    As I always said, we learnt from them and they have been very generous.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Stephen Taylor

      Wonderful and consistent.

  • Stephen Taylor

    Concezzi’s (National Instrument’s) comments regarding the University of Bologna and Professor Levi are powerful. “Sponsorship for a lab in physics” and Levi as “the heir to Focardi” are statements of involvement and support. (Long live Focardi!)

  • Hampus

    More and more companies and scientists are showing there support for LENR research, while the “skeptics” are suddenly gone. This most surly be the start of the cold fusion revolution!

    Mahatma Gandhi: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you , then you win.”

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

      Far from gone I’m afraid (take a look at ECN) but thankfully kept at bay on this blog by Admin.

      • georgehants

        Thanks to Frank again and I think any genuine evidence or opinions against Rossi et al are welcome.
        So it is no good the trouble makers implying that this site is full of, in their distorted debunking tactics, believers.
        Just fair honest people, willing to let the Evidence speak for itself and not abuse everybody and everything, not in keeping with their very unpleasant views.

  • daniel maris

    This is excellent news!

    Surely it can only mean that NI consider the anomalous heat effecte genuine and most likely a reuslt of LENR. Furthermore, they must be viewing LENR as a potentially huge commercial growth area, one they mean to dominate by establishing excellent relations with all the lead scientific teams.

    What does one make of the absence of Rossi from the list? Who knows? We shall see.

    • Ged

      It is very interesting indeed. NI is investing a lot into this, way more than we’d previously been thinking from the evidence we had before this.

      They obviously are expecting a huge return on investment. I can’t help but wonder if there’s anything else NI may be up to in this field that they aren’t ready to talk about yet, due to trying to avoid corporate competition.

      Most of all, I really want know what their mathematical models are that they are providing to labs, and how did NI develop them.

  • artefact

    “He also said that NI had the same presentation in front of the European Community ten days ago”

    At http://europa.eu/newsroom/calendar/ in the “more search options” I find two entries about energy:

    - European sustainable energy week
    When: 18/06/2012 – 22/06/2012
    Where: Brussels, Belgium
    Topic: Energy and natural resources
    http://europa.eu/newsroom/calendar/event/285052/european-sustainable-energy-week

    - Rio + 20: UN conference on sustainable development
    When: 20/06/2012 – 22/06/2012
    Where: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Topic: Environment, consumers and health | Energy and natural resources | Agriculture, fisheries and food
    http://europa.eu/newsroom/calendar/event/366090/rio–20-un-conference-on-sustainable-development