Update from Brillouin Energy

I recently inquired of the status of Brillouin Energy because I noted that they had been removed from the scheduled list of presenters at the upcoming ICCF17 conference in Korea. I received the following response:

Hello Frank,

I am the Chief Financial Officer of Brillouin Energy Corp., and we have recently switched point persons for our web-site email address. Going forward, these messages will reach me first for review and distribution amongst our team. Our Founder and other senior team members are extremely busy leading our technology efforts, and we are attempting to become a more efficient company today, as we concentrate our efforts on top priorities.

To answer your question more directly, one of our senior partner colleagues at SRI in Menlo Park, CA, Dr. Francis Tanzella, will be attending and I believe speaking at ICCF-17, and you will be able to hear about the kind of work that we are collaborating on together, through him. That’s our status at the moment, and all we are prepared to say at this time, other than what is posted on our website. When we can share more news, we will do so.

Best Regards,

David Firshein
Chief Financial Officer
Brillouin Energy Corp.

The ICCF17 schedule shows that Dr. Tanzella is on the speaking schedule. His biography is listed as follows:

Dr. Francis Tanzella is a Senior Electrochemist at SRI International. After earning his Ph.D in chemistry from UC, Berkeley, and studying Electrochemistry as a post-doctoral at the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. Tanzella worked as a chemist at E. I. DuPont, Inc. He later joined SRI as part of the Electrochemistry Program. At SRI, he used electrochemical techniques to monitor chemical reaction rates in many processes, including hydrogen in palladium. Dr. Tanzella has helped develop the LENR electrochemical and calorimetry program at SRI, and has been instrumental in the advancement of the field since its inception. Dr. Tanzella has published over 75 papers in LENR and related subjects

Brillouin has mentioned in the past that they were going to be working with Michael McKubre at SRI International — it looks like also they are involved with Francis Tanzella, another person who appears to be very qualified to be able to evaluate their technology. Just looking at the ICCF17 schedule there are a whole host of very interesting presentations with most of the top names in the LENR world present (except for Leonardo Corporation). Hopefully there will be comprehensive conference proceedings available at some point.

  • Interesting to see Brillouin and SRI join forces.

    All invested in LENR should be concerned about history repeating itself.

    Alexander Graham Bell vs. Gray (patent race)
    Tesla vs. Marconi (patent race)

    It sounds like LENR is getting ready to break into the world one way or another, and time is of the essence for those invested.

    It is obviously a patent race already. Working model vs working theory…

    This technology has the potential to revolutionize the planet with multi trillion dollars worth of sales. I am surprised we are not seeing more LENR mergers.

    Why not get every scientist involved in LENR under the same roof and agree to share in this wealth. People are already risking their fortunes on various entities so somebody is set to lose big.

    I think whoever brings the device to market first should be the winner, so Andrea Rossi deserves all the credit, as he has already sold some devices.

    It will be an interesting few months ahead.

  • georgehants

    The Changed US Patent Law – America Invents Act
    David J French
    July 30, 2012 – “The most significant feature for discussion in these posting, patentability requirements, will come into effect on March 16, 2013. The US patent law of 1836 was a revolutionary piece of legislation. Patent laws around the world were then quite primitive. Even the US patent law from 1791 two 1836 fell into that category. The US revisions of 1836 created a Patent Office with a Commissioner of Patents, a mandate for applications to be examined and strict criteria for when a patent could be granted. Foremost amongst those criteria were the “novelty” requirements. …. I predict that there will be a lot of problems arising in the course of working-out the consequences of the America Invents Act. The patent profession in the United States does not know what meaning is going to give be given to the expression “available to the public”. …. Additionally, the new US law is unique in allowing an inventor to achieve the equivalent of a patent filing by “publicly disclosing” their invention. This is a stunning initiative in the world of patent legislation. It was hardly discussed in Congress and I doubt that more than a dozen or so people understood its potential consequences as the legislation was being passed.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      So George, am I correct that after March 16, Rossi might as well publish his invention, assuming it’s novel? The only thing he would stand to lose is “industrial secrecy”, which would likely be revealed anyway via reverse engineering.

      I would prefer “1st to market” rather than “1st to publish”, or at least require marketing
      within a reasonable period of time, because that would prevent a deep pockets company
      from sandbagging an invention.

      • GreenWin

        Iggy, you may be correct, but remember this Act applies only to US patent law – not international law.

    • GreenWin

      This looks to have several good new turns for inventors. The first as French points out is the defacto secure of patent filing by public disclosure. It is something like prior art or even US copyright where you receive copyright protection simply by publicly distributing a work with a proper copyright notice. This does not obviate a need to prove originality but it does provide a powerful mechanism to circumvent an obstinate or overburdened patent office.

      On first blush, the American Invents Act – encourages inventors large and small to put their inventions in the public eye without the confiscatory costs of patent attorneys and fees. Splendid.

      • Robert Mockan

        Writing up and filing a patent application need not be expensive. To allow an “inventor” to obtain intellectual rights by merely disclosing their invention to the public does not remove the need to describe precisely what they are disclosing, and the claims that are being made. For an inventor to have any protection the public disclosure would need to have at least the accuracy and completeness of a patent application filing. This Act is not going to offer additional protection, in my opinion, but rather remove it.

      • dogman

        just to be clear, even if self-publishing can block others from getting a patent, an inventor still needs to actually file a patent application within one year of the self-publication. So this is not the same as copyright law. self-publishing does not give you any rights to exclude others from making/using/selling the invention.

        Mr. French explains it better toward the end… “But the scope of what qualifies as prior art has been broadened. That is the killer: if someone else publicly discloses an idea anywhere in any way then this will defeat your right to file a patent for that idea even if you invented it independently. The difference between the old law and the new law is whether the public disclosure occurs before you think of the idea yourself, or before you file an application describing your idea, (or publicly disclose your idea in a complete manner – equivalent to filing an application).”

        I don’t think this is going to be as big as a deal as Mr. French seems to think it will be. This change in the law is really only intended to address the issue of independent inventorship of the same invention that happens to occur within 12 months of each other(which is currently addressed in so-called Interference proceedings at the USPTO). While this type of conflict certainly does happen, its not that frequent relative to the thousands of the patent applications that are filed every year.

  • georgehants

    Joseph Fine
    July 29th, 2012 at 9:53 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    I’m not sure why I didn’t ask these before.
    Various operating temperatures have been mentioned for the various reactor designs e.g. 120 deg C, 260 deg C, 600 deg C and now 1000 C. (Also, hints of 1200 deg C).
    1) Can newer E-Cats/(‘Tigers’) be adjusted to operate at any operating temperature value in the range of 250-1000 degrees C? Or, by default,
    2) Can the E-Cats only be operated at one of a few fixed temperatures? e.g. 600 or 1000 deg C.
    3) In the case of the recent design with a 600 degree C temperature, could that core be operated at a lower temperature of 550 or 580 degree C (for example) to accommodate a particular turbine device or technology?
    4) A similar question: Have you reached a design state where you are able to set an operating temperature to be at “X” degrees by merely adjusting a control setting? That is, do you have to redesign the core for each new application? That may be very interesting work, but that seems more difficult than entering parameters into the control system.
    5) More of the same: Can you operate the E-Cat/Hot-Cat/Tiger at one temperature and for some reason change the set point “on the fly” (i.e. while running) to a higher or lower temperature to generate more or less heat (and generate more or less power)?
    6) And since I forgot, a repeat question: How long does it take for normal start-up? I recall it used to take about 1 hour of external drive before the E-Cat gets to its set temperature. Is that still the case, or can you reach the operating point much sooner? What is the time for a shut-down? Does that time depend on the operating temperature?
    I thought I would run out of new questions by now.
    But reading the other comments and questions here gives me new ideas.
    You too have many good ideas.
    Do you think this Blog still helps you as much it did a year or two ago?
    Best regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    July 30th, 2012 at 7:50 AM
    Dear Joseph:
    1- yes
    2- not necessarily
    3- yes
    4- yes
    5- yes
    6- start up 1 hour, shut out 1 hour.
    Does not depend on T.
    Warm Regards,

    • s

      As possibly stated previously, the temperature of the fluid flowing past the reactor is important to calculate efficiency. (max efficiency = 1- (ToutK/TinK), where Tout/Tin are the temperatures of the actual fluid and not the reactor.) Can you post what he now claims the fluid output temperature is?

      • Robert Mockan


    • Ged

      Very interesting. How to control the reaction to increase or decrease its speed is a curious question. Internal pressure? Temperature driven vibration rate of the lattice? I think the latter is more likely from what I can understand of the theoretical equations.

      To increase output temperature (power), you need a faster vibration of the lattice to give a faster reaction rate (basically, hertz). So, easiest way seems to be you’d likely have to drive the core temperature with electricity to the set point where it can keep up a higher temp out. The core temp would occasionally have to be boosted with electricity or stimulation of some kind, it seems (since you’re drawing heat away from the reactor rapidly to supply your output power). So by scaling back the energy in, you can lower the reaction rate (output power) and thus control dynamically the temperature out from the reactor. This also would fully explain the startup/shutdown times for the E-cat and LENR in general, in agreement with theory.

      The slow startup and shutdown times he lists there are well in agreement with all we see experimentally about LENR.

      • Robert Mockan

        From many of the comments being made about this we all seem to be on the same page about what Rossi is doing, even if we have not verified the precise procedure.

        There are only a few ways that kind of control could be enabled. This would seem to support an activation method using either hydrogen pressure cycling, or electricity in some way. And with the latter, we would be looking at either pulsed current conduction through the catalyst, electromagnetic radiation of some specific wavelength (that is, radio waves), or both. To be able to adjust temperature with a front panel knob implies either acceleration of the reaction rate, or an increase in the number of reaction sites, by controlling the amount of activation. The gas load and unload times for the reaction is consistent with diffusion of gas into and out of the catalyst, to start and stop the reaction. Perhaps also just heating and cooling of the catalyst by conduction, with electric current to heat it and letting it cool off to shut it down.

        • Ged

          Those are great thoughts and ideas. I can see how that catalyst control (or hydrogen release?) would work with this set up, and how it could be pretty fine grain tuneable. Be fun to one day learn exactly how fine control is achieved, and if it’s through which one or multiple methods.

  • s

    This post might upset some ecat fans but here it is anyway. The COp of 6 is electricity to thermal of around 100C. From the carnot equation, and assuming 294 output temp and 373 input temp (100C) you get a maximum ideal heat to electrical efficiency of ~ 21.1%. This might give a maximum electricity out to electricity in of ~ 1.27. However, the real world efficiency is usually less than the ideal. So, assume a real world efficiency of 15%. This gives electricity out to electricy in of ~ 0.900. Remember that the electricity used as input to the Ecat was probably generated at much higher than the ~100C temp the ecat might put out.

    • Many people have come to the same conclusion on this blog: COP6 is not enough to make electrical conversion viable with any known technology. No-one is likely to be ‘upset’ by this. The LT unit can still be a viable heat source under some circumstances (but is probably too expensive in many cases). There now appear to be many advances on this early type, and there seems to be every chance that the calculations will change (possibly drastically) when the full facts about these are known. Rossi probably has good reasons for sticking to the COP6 story, but it is unlikely that it represents a real physical limit, any more that the 1 hour start/stop time that he frequently quotes.

      EDIT: I see that the latter surmise is partially confirmed in Renzo’s post below.

      • Omega Z

        There’s direct conversion technology in development that may be available within a few years. Rossi has implied something to that effect for home E-generation. No details from Rossi yet.

        JTEC is developing a Thermal Electric that may eventual covert at 60% at 1100`C. There’s also another TEC device in development, but don’t recall what it’s called at the moment with similar possibilities. Given the home E-cat will be at lower temps, the Efficiency will be lower.

        Many are of the Attitude that if it can’t supply your entire home, What good is it. That’s the Wrong attitude. Besides, a 10Kw E-cat would never supply your peek demand. Even at 60% conversion, you would need a minimum 50Kw E-cat.

        Here’s a different approach.

        CHP… 10Kw E-cats with a 20% conversion TEC would be self-sustaining. You still need a heat sink. In this case it could be used for heating/cooling & hot water needs. You then only have the cost of refueling every 6 months without Requiring/adding to your Electric bill.

        This could in effect reduce your Utilities by 75%+. In reality, you will probably need 2 10Kw E-cats for most homes, but they would still be self-sustaining.

        What’s important is what it will cost for the whole combined system.

        • Miles

          Source: http://www.e-catAustralia.com/

          1) E-CAT-Australia Home unit 10kW (Available early in 2013).
          2) Cost of E-cat approx. $2000 (to be announced).

          • Miles


            Source: http://www.e-cataustralia.com/order-and-buy/domestic-10kw/

            10KW Home E-Cat Heating Unit
            Estimated Price $2000-2500.00
            Estimated 6 months re-fill cartridge cost $150
            Estimated Lifetime 20 years

            I hope the e-Cat Domestic is able to produce electricity by that time!! I’d rather wait for it to have that functionality.

            It then states: “Easy to retrofit into existing water heaters and heating and cooling systems to seriously reduce customers’ electricity and gas bills.”

            “Remember, when you have thermal energy, it is easily converted with known technology into cooling – air-conditioning. All you need to do is bolt on your heat extractor.”

            “This will give you an estimated 80 % saving on your electricity and gas bill.”

        • Robert Mockan

          Yeah, COP 6 stinks for electric power, but you could get hot water, and seriously reduce the cost of distilling sea water.
          I could live with COP 10 at 20% conversion. Half the electric power out feeds the input to keep it cooking.
          No problem if that is a max, because after all is said and done… no fuel weight, logistics, or fuel cost! So first order of business when I get an E-Cat- pull the activation limiter out and run it fast and hot! And if it blows it blows, so next time fix it so it does not. Come on Rossi, stop goofing around and fix it for at least COP 10! Save me the trouble of replacing your circuit boards.

      • jacob

        maybe the COP of 6 was set as a limit to get mayor financial backing from big players in the industry.

        Mr. Rossi if you agree to a cop of 6 in your addressing the public,we will back you.

        why else a COP of 6

        We all know the cat can function in self sustain mode.

    • Ged

      Your calculations look spot on. That’s why it seems pretty impossible for a home e-cat to generate electricity. Of course, Carnot equations only apply to heat engines, and there are supposedly some emerging technologies that may help convert heat to electricity though other methods, at these temperature differentials, above a 15% efficiency or so–closer to that 21.1% Carnot theoretical. That of course requires those technologies to succeed and arrive on market.

      Better to bank on the high temp e-cats.

      • Chris

        I don’t get what you mean to say. Which Carnot equations only apply to heat engines? What do you mean by heat engines?

        On a closer look at your post, you don’t seem to be claiming ways are known to consistently violate the 2nd principle of thermodynamics, but your wording is confusing, making it almost sound like it for a sec.

        Perhaps you mean that gas-and-piston heat engines tend to have a high degree of irreversibility? And that Peltier devices are better? Yeah, maybe that’s what Proia means when he talks about upcoming electric e-cats, i dunno, but it still makes much more sense to use higher temperature for non thermal energy uses.

  • artefact

    I don’t like the following website at all but there are 2 very interesting videos of Roger Green and the two indian scientists with Rossi:

    • Lu

      Control system from ABB. Random viewing of video to find this.

      • Lu

        At 25:20 of second video.

      • Omega Z

        Apparently Gary Deleted the Videos….

        Apparently Gary Deleted the Videos….

        Apparently Gary Deleted the Videos….

    • Sanjeev

      Thanks for digging this out. The videos are interesting. The more your hear Rossi, the less you doubt him, because its simply not possible to make up hours and hours of info in real time.

      Anyway, time will tell.

      But what’s strange is that Roger Green handed over the videos to a website that is anti-Rossi. Something fishy here.

      • Ivan Mohorovicic

        In these videos Rossi even agrees that water transition to steam makes heat calculations difficult. I don’t know what Gary Wright had in mind but after watching them entirely I feel I have less reasons to doubt Rossi than before.

        • Lu

          I agree. Also Rossi seems very proud of his work. That’s harder to feign.

    • Lu

      About 20:45 of the second video, Rossi talks about changing out the control systems out for the customer. Delivery in 2 weeks from February 24th. Delivery to the US. Presumably first 1M customer is US entity.

      There is a lot of stuff in the videos. Sometimes it is difficult to understand what Rossi is saying. Everything however seems to be consistent with what Rossi has stated before. Just more detail.

    • Lu

      23:50 of second video: Bill Donovan working on direct conversion of heat to electricity.

    • Shane D.

      Many have questioned why Rossi sticks to the COP 6 and he answers this in the first video in response to one of the Indian buyers… paraphrased:

      They can attain much higher COP Rossi says, but he prefers to throttle it back for the customers due to safety concerns. He then makes an analogy to selling a Formula 1 racecar versus a Ford Fiesta… the racecar being harder to handle then the Fiesta.

      Put ever more simply by me: It’s a bucking bronco at max COP and a tame pony at 6.

    • Lu

      27:35 Video 2- “The day that we will be able to put them in series, that day we will be able to make electric power .. with efficiency.”

      So to generate electricity with the Carnot cycle Rossi runs them in series. Steam output from one goes into the next E-Cat. He needs an E-Cat that can run at higher temperatures–which he now has.

      • Omega Z

        Apparently Gary Deleted the Videos….

        Apparently Gary Deleted the Videos….

  • Renzo

    Cures answers some questions:

    “The ultrafast phenomena that can cause problems are only a hypothesis that arises from the fact that there is not a theory. The practice says that there have never been any, but as long as the theory does not confirm it, this hypothesis will always be around the corner. With certain phenomena the speed of electronic control is not enough.”

    “1) If Rossi discloses “in toto” the report, he violates a commitment. It may be that he will disclose the extracts. Anything will do for marketing reasons.

    2) Certifiers do their job, but also those who produce it must take into account also the most unlikely event. If an event has a probability of one in one hundred thousand to come true, once you sold a million pieces it becomes an almost certain event

    3) I do not know what Rossi has in mind, he’s not a professional physicist of condensed state of matter, which requires knowledge of quantum mechanics, difficult, specialized and counterintuitive. He likely has an idea that could not be the right one, but until now it worked

    4) If one wanted, the Home Ecat would be ready in three months. But safety certifications require caution. It will take a significant period of testing of the products used in industry. And, in my opinion, only after the approval of the theory that is yet to be determined

    5) Because Rossi has met academics with unwarranted hostility, as happened to the Athanor, but long before that. He does not trust them. Irreproachable demonstrations were made but cannot be disclosed due to client.

    6) An engine for propulsion must be developed starting from the present external combustion engines. For ships no problem: steam turbines. For trains could use the same steam turbines in a small scale. For cars the situation is more difficult. There were also recent examples of powerful steam cars Saab, VW and others, but it is a “virgin” field

    7) This story of the COP …. I summarize. There are two versions of the module Ecat. A “wet” that generates hot water mixed with steam, and a “dry”, which generates high temperature. That “wet” is turned on with a COP 6 at first, then you turn off the external power supply and the module goes on without any external power. The COP becomes infinite. The “dry” one, more recent, has a COP which is still subject to change and is still high enough to deal with the vapor. But, I repeat, the COP has not yet definitively settled”

    • Ged

      Someone needs to hook them up with NI, who say they have confirmed the ELTB theory results. Problem solved for anyone looking for a comprehensive theory with plenty of math and predictive power, and experimental backing.

      I wonder what he means that the COP is not settled for the hot cat. Might just be the translation; but it sounds like it’s not fully stable in the sense that the input needed to keep the high temperature reaction up is variable still.

      That also makes sense, since such high temperatures will be heavily stressing the metal crystalline matrix, on top of feeding enough gas into the matrix at such higher rates is going to be a challenge.

      Interesting info indeed. Sounds in line with all we know, and CURES seems to be both reputable and on the inside.

      • Omega Z

        This may be associated with a slim Rossi hint of higher COP possible, but not guaranteed.

        ->Andrea Rossi July 5th, 2012 at 5:25 AM

        Dear Francesco Toro,
        Good question.
        I said “possibility”, not “guarantee”, though.
        Warm Regards,


        Scroll down to: ECAT Technology Updates

        The high temperature E-Cat reactor currently in test also opens up for applications with Stirling Engines. The new reactor is smaller in size and has a charge of 1.5 grams and more shielding than the original reactor. The new progress also gives the possibility to increase the COP for industrial applications.

    • Lu

      Thanks Renzo!

      I find the information about COP of 6 very interesting. Rossi has always stated the COP is 6 total for the whole operation during the drive and self-sustaining modes. Cures is implying otherwise.

      • Ged

        Indeed. To maintain self sustained mode, I would suppose the output rate of the reactor would have to decrease, so as not to drain the core’s temp. That’s really the trick, as I see it. Probably why he’s always stuck to the COP 6, as that’s using a much easier to control input to keep the core temp stable over long term energy out.

  • dfnj3

    I think Brillouin Energy had the best information on their site until they make all their videos private. I imagine they are getting lawyered up and the lawyers shutting down the distribution of free information. I sure hope at some point they update the progress on the new boilers they are creating with SRI.

    However, as with all technology, a little bit of power corrupt’s peoples souls. The person in power thinks their consumer is scum and the overbearing use of power is justified. No matter what the technology, I think human nature is so corrupting people will continue to exercise power at the expense of others. Take blog censorship for example. A site master can be ruthless. I am pretty convinced at this point no technology breakthoughs are ever going to make any difference in the world because people love to treat other people like Hundescheiße.

  • dragonX

    I found this by chance…
    New Cold fusion researchers in the open:


    One researcher (Andrea Di Vita)is from Ansaldo Energia S.p.A.

    • dragonX

      So, if Siemens works with Rossi and Ansaldo will be a Siemens asset, that means that Andrea Aparo, Senior Advisor R&D for Anslado Enrgia is THE FIRST PERSON remotely connected to Rossi that is going to a public Cold Fusion conference.

      • Ged

        Interesting indeed. We really must get all the information out of the conferences this month… looks like it’s going to be huge.

    • Shane D.

      Good to see some young faces coming into the field. For all the respect I have for the early pioneers and what they endured to keep the torch lit, I think it time for the next generation to take this to the next step of theory, applications and hopefully commercialization.

      New eager minds with no preconceived biases to limit their imagination combined with their obvious high intelligence should make for good things to come in LENR.

    • Sanjeev

      Good find.

    • daniel maris

      Hang on – when I look at it, the text say he is tagged with nuclear fusion not cold fusion.

      There ARE some who are tagged with cold fusion and it is certainly pleasing to see cold fusion and LENR listed along with all those other branches of science.

      • dragonX

        When searching for Cold fusion, we can see that Andrea Di Vita is there, even if he is tagged to Nuclear Fusion, Plasma Physics, Relativity, and Statistical Physics.

        So there is no mistake about him being interested or even related to Cold Fusion also, especially that his colleague (or boss :-)) Andrea Aparo is going this week to a Cold Fusion conference.

      • Sanjeev


        This link shows he is following cold fusion as a research interest, but he may not be doing it.

        Andrea Di Vita was one of the attendees in Rossi’s Oct 2011 Ecat demo. So yes there is surely a connection.

        • dragonX

          Here you go: “Andrea Di Vita was one of the attendees in Rossi’s Oct 2011 Ecat demo. So yes there is surely a connection.” thank you Snajeev.

          As a semi-joke, can you ever be more deeply related to Cold Fusion, than to be ONE of the attendees of the Rossi’s Oct 2011 Ecat demo :-)? These days, I think not. 🙂

    • GreenWin


      you recall of course that Andrea Di Vita was one of the scientists who attended Rossi’s October 28, 2011 1MW demo in Bologna. DiVita was interviewed briefly and told the reporter his job (at Ansaldo Energia) required him to stay abreast of cold fusion. He indicated that he was attending the demo to evaluate a relationship with Rossi/Focardi.

      What is more interesting is the struggle for control of Ansaldo at the moment. It is jointly owned by Italy’s biggest defense contractor and an American energy investment company. The Americans are not particularly interested in selling to Siemens AG at the current offer (around $1.3B)

      • Omega Z


        2 years ago that would have been a good price & Siemens could have easily walked away with it.

  • georgehants

    Must just thank Frank and everybody for their time in keeping up with events.
    This page is a little community that is very important.
    If only the whole World would pull together in such understanding and tolerant harmony.

    • Andrew Macleod

      Cheers to that!

    • Filip47

      I’ve learned alot…proud to be amoung bright minds!

  • Ivan Mohorovicic

    Offtopic here, but there’s some interesting LENR @ NIWeek information on 22passi, mostly in English:


    • AB

      Brilliant. It looks like National Instruments became very interested in LENRs after making contact with Rossi.

      The support of a respected company such as NI is going to help CMNS a lot in getting accepted as legitimate science.

      • Ged

        Also indirectly supports Rossi, as NI must have seen something that truly excited them. If his work was a complete dud, they would have just ran the other way.

        Can’t wait till stuff finally gets out in the open. All this behind closed doors going ons are just teasing us. At least it’s giving our detective sides a good workout.

      • Omega Z


        National Instruments has been involved with LENR for sometime. At least 2008 possibly before. Providing controls & software to SRI & others.

        Only after getting involved with Rossi did they accelerate their involvement. This would imply Rossi had made a big jump in LENR TECH.

    • Lu

      One of the sessions, “Big Physics and Science Poster Session”, lists a number of people from Defkalion. Included is James Dunn who (as Jim Dunn) recently wrote a summary of the LENR Conferance at Williamsburg on PESN. Could this be a mistake or a different James Dunn?

      • Ivan Mohorovicic

        I think he’s the same person.

        His presentation contained a never released before photograph of DGT’s test unit. Remember? He’s probably involved with them.

    • Ged

      Whoa, there’s a lot more going on during this NIweek than I knew. Really looking forward to this, as it’s a great prelude to ICCF-17.

    • dragonX

      I see Andrea Aparo, Senior Advisor R&D – Ansaldo Energia Spa will be there.

      Isn’t Ansaldo Energia the Italian company that Siemens wants to acquire for 1.6 Billion $?


      • Ged

        A lot of coincidences no? I can see very much why Siemens wants their gas turbine tech (especially since they’ve been making money, and natural gas is on the rise), but this will also net them the cold fusion research. Out of all the gas turbine companies they could have snagged, they paid a heck of a lot for this one and its cold fusion side projects.

        • Omega Z


          Ansaldo Energia also sets up custom designed power plants for customers. This is probably the part of Ansaldo that interests Siemens the most. Also the fact that these are on going contracts with these customers for decades.

    • Visitor

      NIWeek 2012
      One of the topics at the Big Physics and Science Summit:

      “The Quest for Alternative Energy—Anomalous Heat Effect (a.k.a. Cold Fusion)

      Several labs around the world are trying to replicate the phenomenon known as “cold fusion.” While the term has evoked controversy, many research facilities have observed over 200 instances of intense heat. This demonstrates either an unknown physical event or a need for better measurement and control tools. In both cases, NI can provide the tools to accelerate innovation and scientific discovery. The Big Physics and Science Summit brings together experts to discuss these anomalous heat effects, the status of theoretical research, experimental results, and the prospect of commercializing this technology for daily energy needs.”

      One of the topics at the Energy Technology Summit:

      “Electric Power Generation: Today and Tomorrow

      Electrical power is essential for the prosperity of mankind and plays a vital role in our energy future. However, there are several methods to generate electricity, each one with unique benefits and drawbacks. The Panel will bring together a group of power generation experts to discuss the current and future state of the industry, major challenges, governmental obstacles and possible solutions. This group of passionate experts will represent fossil fuel, nuclear, renewable and “virtual” power generation. Please join us as these industry leaders discuss one of the most relevant topics for society today”

  • Niemand

    And there is another roadblock for Defkalion folks:
    After some real announcements with real data tests, validations etc. there is very high probability of some energy commodities will go down. Maybe moderate, maybe more then moderate.
    During 2008 world consummation of oil was lesser of 4% (in words: four percentage lesser) and markets translate this fact to drop oil prices from 143 USD to some 37 USD.

    This time excuse will be more important/relevant.
    And there is next roadblock for Defkalion:

    Because Canadian dollar (CAD) is highly correlated to fluctuations of energy prices, every time when Oil prices go down, this same time Canadian Dollar go down too.

    And this is next excuse for prospective investors etc:

    Defkalion future success is intertwined with their new Canadian
    jurisdiction, i.e. next time investors will whinning:
    Because all world know news about LENR, energy prices go down
    and Canadian dollar go down too, OUR INVESTMENTS in Canadian incarnation of Defkalion will be DEBASED !!!
    Ugh, uughh, this is bad, very bad. You must find new jurisdiction, otherwise our investment will vaporised.

    This is not attack on on some markets laws, this is very small piece of future events: Canadian denomination of investments is not optimal. I cannot this told/write to Defkalion folks, because I am already banned by them.
    Folks, help them !!

  • daniel maris

    Tanzella doesn’t sound like your average scammer. Wonder what the sceptics think about him.

    • AB

      > Wonder what the sceptics think about him.

      That he’s a gullible, incompetent idiot of course. Everybody knows that LENRs is a scam, so if he falls for it, he must be gullible and incompetent.

      • Filip47

        That’s irony I suppose?

        • AB

          It’s sarcasm. I didn’t specify it because I think most regular readers here by now know what I really think about LENR.

          • Filip47

            Pfff, I was affraid you were getting delusional from the tension 🙂

            • AB

              I’m just making fun of the skeptics whose world view only remains intact when *everyone* involved in CF research is either insane, incompetent or a fraud.

            • Ged

              Which is quickly turning into an “everyone is insane but us” argument.

  • Sanjeev


    They usually make announcements through this blog.

    The most interesting thing about iccf is that, this is the first time when common man has become aware of this event, and that’s only a handful of people, when I say common man. Its been going on since 16 years….

    Thanks to the blogs like this, because mainstream news is busy licking feet of corrupt politicians, greedy rich people and obscene celebrities.

    I always do my best to spread the news, that’s all we supporters of lenr can do.

    • For a while after the October demo I tried to make people aware of what is taking place directly, at gatherings of family and friends etc. Not any more. The most common reaction (apart from blanking over and immediately trying to change the subject) was ‘That’s ridiculous – if anything like that was around it would be all over the papers and news’. What surprised me most was the vehemence with which a few individuals who actually knew nothing about CF and often little about science in general, denied that anything like that would ever be possible. Almost as if they actually feared such a possibility – something I just can’t get my head around at all.

      • artefact

        Same with me. I only told some selected people. They asked me why that is not in the news. I told them why (my opinion). Most of them did not ask me again and I do not tell them again something until the proove is at hand. Then I will remind them of what I said and I will be happy.
        If they refuse too much to accept LENR now I do not care. They are not key people.

      • Neil Hambleton

        Same here. Even my own son [B.Sc.(Chem.)] gets quite angry about it and says he’ll believe it only after I’ve taken delivery of my E-Cat!

      • Sanjeev

        Ya I agree. I also learnt it not to push things which are too removed from the day to day reality of an average person. Anything that is too noval, gives a kind of shock to a person who is deeply conditioned by the society and media etc. I guess this is what some people call “Shock Level – 4”. (You can google that to see some interesting stuff).

        All I do is let those who are ready take it, and forget about those who are not ready.

        • I would put LENR only at ‘future shock level 2’ I think. It’s difficult to imagine how ordinary people would react to some of the things listed at http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/09/27/future-shock-levels/ for higher shock levels!

          • Sanjeev

            They will faint !

            An infinite energy source will necessarily lead to SL-4 future. Very few people understand this. Even many lenr enthusiast believe that lenr will only provide cheap electricity or hot water, drinking water etc, but the implications of such a tech are tremendous, unlimited possibilities really.

            • Totally agree. The only limiting factor will be the time needed to close the loop for the monetary returns. One has to remember that LENR is not the only technological way of achieving the unlimited energy. There are many promising fusion technologies out there which will accelerate the development to the SL4 even further, because the technologies will start to compete …

          • Robert Mockan

            All SL below 5 can be experienced once we have physical immortality (that incidentally is obtainable by all people living today, but I no longer waste my time trying to communicate how it can be done). And SL5? That is what comes after everything else.

            If any person is interested in immortality, I still have one article posted on my web site about it.

          • GreenWin

            Ha ha!! Something to brighten my day! It is SOO boring stuck in these clunky cars (er, human suits.) Please speed SL2 – 3 along before the tedium takes its toll (purposeful alliteration due to said tedium 🙂

      • Robert Mockan

        I talked about the subject based on my research of positive results of experiments written up in scientific journals in 1990 with a few associates at work. The response I got was if it was not a hoax it would be in the newspapers and on TV. By 1991 the media was only quoting the critics and skeptics saying it was pathological science done by incompetents and idiots, and implied that any person who thought otherwise must also be an idiot.
        I have always given critics, skeptics, and the media, all the attention and respect they deserve. Especially any that puts to question my research ability, clear thinking, and an IQ they could not hold a candle to.

      • Karl

        I have normally a similar experience and even in my dear family among wife and very skeptical kids. The kind of joking about my interest in it stopped recently. I believe it was related to my wife’s chat with my brother in law, a top research manager in Shell. I had a chat with him about Rossi a year ago but I have not had any time to do discussed it afterwards. We all know that Shell is involved in CF/LENR research.

      • Hear, hear! No one I know are even remotely as interested in the possibilities of these new technologies as I am… I’m up on clouds (though there are some big holes in some of them…), and my friends and family just ‘zone out’ whenever I mention something on this topic.

        • Filip47

          Well, you’re not alone, if it can makes you feel better 🙂

          • Filip47

            You should see their faces when I bring up singularity 🙂

            • Allen McCloud

              Oh I know exactly what you mean Filip47. I talked about LENR and singularity related topics at my brothers house warming party this past saturday, lol. I love my family but they are friggin clueless. 😉

      • AB

        In my experience, people instinctively conform to society. If society doesn’t tell them that it’s revolutionary, then they won’t consider it revolutionary. Conformity makes sense from an evolutionary point of view – the collective identity creates bonds and holds the tribe together. Disagreeing with the collective identity was often a death sentence in ancient times. When it comes to the pursuit of knowledge this is comformity is unfortunately an obstacle.

        What about the people that believe in cold fusion despite society telling them that it’s an illusion?

        My theory is that these people come in two types: the first type are people who back in 1989 formed their own opinion before society adopted a predominant view on the subject. The second type are the people who were confronted by life (changing) experiences that opened their eyes to the state of conformity that many live in. This allowed them to gain a more subjective and inquisitive (rather than collective) view on things. They didn’t think it was necessarily impossible even when society told them so.

        • A 3rd category may be natural rebels – individualistic and self-reliant people who tend to reject external ‘authority’ and therefore have no problem adopting contrary views, if that’s the way the evidence seems to point (or even against the evidence, if they like the idea). I think there may be more than a few such individuals posting here.

          • georgehants

            Peter it’s people who when you bring up a subject like for example math are immediately attracted to Godel’s incompleteness, anything that is odd, unusual, makes everything exciting.
            Science spends much time trying to make things fit a Dogmatic theorem instead of chasing after the slightest thing that does not fit, that is where the answers lay.
            It seems most people have a terrible insecurity where they need an “expert” to tell them how to think and what to believe.

            • “anything that is odd, unusual, makes everything exciting.”

              Exactly, George – odd, inexplicable, unusual all point to new possibilities, and that keeps things interesting. I don’t understand anyone who doesn’t think like that, which means I probably don’t understand most people!

            • GreenWin

              Hmm, there is a distinct change of tone in these remarks. I for one am delighted to read them. Indeed, the fun of life IS the unpredicted; the anomalies and curios challenging the status quo. Once people accept the idea they know very little, the universe becomes a cornucopia of the undiscovered. But then, I’m an old Frost guy… “Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and I, took the one less traveled by.”

        • Robert Mockan

          There is another type. These are people who learn about and base their thinking process on logical decision making algorithms, and combine that with professional research methodology. That includes using the scientific method, but also much more. And when able to devote their time and efforts to changing thought into substance, as in a laboratory, or in a corporation developing technology, then the world can be changed. Unfortunately the debt based monetary system that has been imposed upon societies limits progress when one has to spend their invaluable irreplaceable life time attempting to raise funds to obtain access to the workplace and equipment needed to perform the required research and development. Even the “education” systems have been compromised and politicized, to the extent that the most natural of processes, that of learning how to think, is inhibited in our “modern” societies. Who would ever have thought than even reading, writing, and arithmetic, might not be “taught” effectively in present day schools even taking 20 years to do so, when kids, if not intentionally inhibited, can learn these tasks in a couple years.
          There will have to be an accounting of that atrocity someday.

  • I’m still waiting for the papers from the last big conference….

    • Ivan Mohorovicic

      I think Jed Rothwell said he would post the ILENRS-12 conference proceedings at some point. Maybe they are not ready yet?

  • Just as a reminder for anyone in danger of losing track (like me), the 17th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-17) will be held in Daejeon, South Korea on August 12-17, website at http://www.iccf17.org/.