U.S News and World Report on Cold Fusion/LENR

This article was published today in U.S News and World Report.


An excerpt of the article which is actually rather positive:

“But what has inspired hope within this small community are several recent developments: LENR demonstration projects recently initiated at respected places like MIT, the University of Missouri, and the University of Bologna; public presentations by executives at one of the world’s largest instrument companies, National Instruments, apparently designed to attract the top LENR researchers into a project to test and quantify observed LENR effects; and a July report from the European Commission’s research and development center that LENR at least has sustainable future energy technology potential”

101 Replies to “U.S News and World Report on Cold Fusion/LENR”

      1. Depends on the herd instinct. So far the herd seems to settled on the idea that “cold fusion” is discredited and lunatic fringe stuff. This perception is of course reinforced by various lobbyists (representing hot fusion, fission, hydrocarbon, solar, wind etc) constantly feeding misinformation. But if one breaks the herd and is seen to be moving into nice new media pastures the others will follow in one mass.

      2. A triggering event for the landslide might be if a technology billionaire or VC firm with interest in batteries, electric cars, wind or solar gets involved. That’s a finite list and it’s possible to imagine a contact campaign. One might fear that they would protect their current investments. However, people at that level appear to be most interested in being first and having high impact, and they have become successful from knowing how to dump losers as much as recognize winners. Again, focusing on the action point, what are the degrees of separation from these contributors to that finite list of individuals?

          1. And, yeah, I know about the clown. No time for that stuff in the Valley.

            I just keep looking for action points. You never know when a pebble might start a landslide.

            But maybe it’s time for LENR Connect…

        1. There was such a grant given to the University of Missouri by a wealth individual like that. At least it’s a start.

  1. Name dropping on wikipedia: The term often connotes an attempt to impress others; it is usually regarded negatively, and under certain circumstances may constitute a breach of professional ethics. When used as part of a logical argument it can be an example of the false authority fallacy.

    Perfect example of name dropping in this article. MIT is dropped into the conversation as if MIT had anything whatsoever to do with LENR. Officially it does not.

    What the LENR folks have managed to do is to elevate name dropping from a practice to a finely tuned science.

    1. Oh. Another starved troll asking to be fed.

      The paragraph is factually correct aside from including University of Bologna in that list.

        1. Chuck, you think even MIT’s pointed ignorance of Prof Hagelstein won’t become future “name dropping?” Watch how they squirm and point to their token Hagelstein when they’re called to answer for the actions of 1989. And the recent subversion of Peter’s third party funding.

          Frankly, if MIT emerges from this housecleaning with ANY federal funds for anything, it will be miraculous. And merciful.

      1. I never said anything about MIT taking a position. I merely said that they aren’t doing anything with LENR in the first place. To use MIT in an article about LENR is name dropping pure and simple.

        1. At what point does an organization become “officially” involved? If paid workers at an organization are doing something, how is that not official? Do you need a direct public statement from the top President of the entire establishment before it’s “official”? No. Any time research is done at a university it is property of that university and attributed to them.

          No administration tells us scientists what to research; but they still get the glory.

          1. An organization becomes officially involved when the main office (or media relations, pr, what have you) admits that it is involved.

            If the LENR community claims that an organization is involved but the organization fails to admit it in public wholeheartedly then the LENR folks look bad.

          2. I agree with Ged, AB, et. al. above.

            You are splitting hairs.

            MIT is a part of this story one way or another. Needless to say this will lead you nowhere. At the end of the day LENR is real, and it is here to stay. Only pato-skeptics wont except that.

            There should be more Jeff Nesbit’s in this world, writing about LENR, regardless if he is “dropping names” (which he is apparently not).

          3. Remember there has also been a MIT official short course on LENR last january. “Cold Fusion 101: Introduction to Excess Power in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments”.

    2. Face it Charles, we are past the tipping point and things are moving towards the goal at an increasingly rapid rate.

      1. I caught wind of LENR the last time there was a wave of media attention.

        I still can’t say with certainty that I know what to do with my ranch construction plans. On ranch west in Southern California I dug a hole for the propane pipe to the water heater. I would love to just use an electric water heater. On my ranch east on the Polish/Czech border I am holding off on paying $6000 USD to install natural gas heating. Actually I only use the place June-August because heating the place outside of those months is ridiculous. 330m2 is a real big space to heat and before I do that I would have to spend about $15-20K to insulate the place with exterior styrofoam insulation.

        In a nutshell, I have a dog in the fight. I would like to know one way or another if LENR is something I can depend on so that I know how to address my heating/cooling needs on my two ranches. I have to say it’s one big confusing mess.

        1. My sympathies for your predicament. It explains the level of frustration apparent in some of your posts. Well, you know this Rossi/DGT thing should break pretty soon one way or the other. By September or October maybe the situation will be somewhat more clear. Temporizing may not be an option for you but if it is….??

        2. Chuck, SoCal ONLY needs heat for water and (depending on altitude) winter heat – why not go with NG/propane? It’s CHEAP as there is an enormous glut right now. It is a 1″ gas line to the house. When the e-cat heater gets its certification (now dependent on Obama Administration in US) put one in and quit refilling the propane tank.

          These are luxury problems Chuck.

          1. The e-cat heater is Rossi getting way ahead of himself without thinking through if everything fits before making up stories. If I were to guess, I would say that Rossi feels that bringing attention to the field of LENR with lies and falsehoods will somehow bring much needed attention to the field of LENR in general.

            As for my problems, yes they are luxury not necessity. In my case. You don’t need to look very far to find cases where LENR is a necessity, not luxury.

          2. On the contrary, Rossi’s approach is the ONLY reason we are where we are. Randy Mills has and HAS had a practical working energy solution for years now. His products have been blocked in various ways. But he has always maintained it would be impossible to block commercial LENR forever.

            Rossi intuited a commercial product specifically NOT submitted to stacked biased, hostile third parties for validation. He would keep his trade secrets AND avoid attack prior to optimization. Looks like he was right on. He got his 1MW unit built and working enough to gather support and launch the sequence of events continuing at NI Week. Actually, a brilliant campaign in the face of overwhelming odds.

      2. What’s accelerating is the visibility of the research, the “buzz” around the e-cat and so on. But as far as I know, there asn’t been any significant *scientific/technologic* progress since many many years. The positive results we get today are the basicaly the same one we got 10 or 15 years ago.

    3. It’s carried out by a researcher at MIT, by his lab in MIT. Therein, as with -all science- done at any university, it is officially attributed to that university. Again, no university tells us scientists what to research, but it is all officially part of their research since they host us; they get some of the glory, even though topics of research are our personal choices.

      Therein, I utterly disagree with you, and the attribution to MIT is completely correct and in keeping with all such reporting practices.

      (there are exceptions to this, rare as they are, such as medical universities which limit the scope of the field of research to be done; universities that specialize in certain fields like agriculture, or research institutes which may have an overall field mandate in place)

      1. I bet if you asked MIT if they are doing any research in LENR the answer would be either NO or they would ignore your question and not answer.

        I asked NASA point blank. Sent an email to public-inquiries@hq.nasa.gov. I asked them if they are working on LENR and if so what is the name of the organization that is working on this task. I mentioned Joe Zawodny for context. Included a link to the fancy videos we’re all familiar with. No response.

        1. Good old Charlie Ponzi, you’re going in circles. This is the same thing you said months ago. Verbatim. If you looked into it you would realize Peter Hagelstein had a class on CF last Jan. And Mitchell Swartz’s NANOR was demonstrated there. When I made a video of it you said I never visited MIT.

          My advice, put in the $6000 natural gas unit for your ranch.

        1. It’s probably because the “Ponz1 Scheme” term is a banned due to abuse by trolls.

          Admin, I wonder if it’s possible to lift filtering restrictions to registered or authenticated (white-filtered?) users?

  2. I will comment optimistic to facts and pessimistic to words or rumor of facts (rumors which in the end are only words).

  3. Come on Guys I know it has been said before but without Frank giving us all this great website to discuss, without problem people, we could not enjoy so well the wonderful things happening.

    1. Infact I can only agree to that! Its a wonderful journalistic work the results of which I enjoy since one and a half years now. It combines passion for the subject with the necessary amount of remaining “on the ground” and keeping an honest and objective view. Very very well done, Frank!

      1. daniel, sorry but I think my point in general conversation is clear.
        Trying to turn my meaning is not a good trick.
        To help, problem people are the ones who have been removed meaning it is generally excepted they do not debate fairly or accurately.

    2. Hear hear George. There is much to be appreciated and I would recommend all interested in professional LENR applications, to consider Frank’s new LENR Connect service.

    1. Jeff Nesbit is now the Director of Legislative and Public Affairs at the National Science Foundation. Implications anyone?.

      1. President Obama will be directing the NSF to present an LENR funding program prior to elections. But federal research especially in light of the negative attitude they themselves are responsible for – will trail “Edisonian/industrial” applications.

        However, for savvy Dems and Pubs, sponsoring a bill to fast track development of a very low cost, green, abundant energy source is a VOTE MAGNET. So far only Randy Hekman (MI candidate) and Senator Bruce Tarr (MA) have seen the light.

        1. Could be better than that for the dems if the military have been working with ecats since last October as I believe they have. They are not weaponry but can be a great leap forward for military infrastructure, which is just as important as weaponry, as Napoleon and Eisenhower were fond of pointing out.

          1. Good point Don. As DOD is the largest consumer of petroleum on planet, this would make good political hay and practical savings. Plus Navy esp deserves credit for vision and insight.

    1. There’s an old lady in my town that refuses to believe that airplanes are real. Whenever a plane flies by we tell her to look up but she never does.

      Some people believe what they want to believe.

      1. Yeah some people keep closing their eyes to what happens, just because theorists have no certain model of it. Neither did Oersted, when he saw the compass needle swing, or so many other past discoveries. According to such arguments, we should still disbelieve superconductivity.

        The most hilarious scene in the musical Chicago is the one about Kitty, the pineapple heiress. As she points the pistol at her boyfriend, he claims to be alone in their bed. When she screams “Whaddya mean, there’s two girls with you!”, he rebukes “Are ya gonna believe whatcha see or what I tell you?” She doesn’t swallow that. She just pulls that trigger. Once for him and once for each of those girls.

  4. Info from Vortex.

    Photo of Defkalion representative at Niweek…


    In the photo from left to right:

    Alexandros Xanthoulis (Defkalion GT founder)
    Frank Gordon (SPAWAR)
    Andrea Aparo (Ansaldo Energia spa)
    Peter Hagelstein (MIT)
    James Truchard (National Instruments co-founder and CEO)
    Michael McKubre (SRI International)
    Robert Godes (Brillouin Energy Corp.)
    Stefano Concezzi (National Instruments – Big Science director)
    Robert Duncan (University of Missouri)

    important bunch of people…

  5. Tim Harrell
    August 8th, 2012 at 8:10 AM
    Dear Andrea,
    Have you considered experimenting with E-Cat under various (extreme) pressures? Might auto-ignition and more precision self-regulation be possible using a Tight-Cat/Loose-Cat control, possibly unchaining from electric drive?
    Thank you for your continued good work!
    Best Regards,
    Tim Harrell
    Andrea Rossi
    August 8th, 2012 at 10:09 AM
    Dear Tim Harrell:
    We are already there.
    Warm Regards,

    1. I think that’s some of the basic stuff that was worked on first. Might be able to push to greater pressure extremes now that there is such a equipment and resource backing behind him; but I am not sure what role if any pressure plays in this (other than gas loading).

      1. Why not take the nickel and hydrogen into
        the plasma state and work on some solutions
        from that perspective.

        Output and COP may go thru the roof!

        The plasma would have to be contained adding
        to the cost of the device, but go you may
        go to warp drive!


        1. That would be hot fusion, with all the kinetic limitations and problems we already face. Unless nickel somehow changed all that (which we have absolutely no evidence for when looking at natural hot fusion phenomenon like stars). Certainly won’t know unless we try, but that again requires the hot fusion reactors to attempt; and I doubt those people will go for trying that with their crazy expensive apparatuses.

  6. I suspect (i.e. it’s a guess) that the U.S. government will publish some interesting and positive information about successful LENR developments shortly before the presidential election. Why? Add high level governmnet inside knowledge about LENR and political logic and you get happy news postponed until election eve. On the other hand, the happy news may go mainstream on its own before that.

    1. Dunno Fib, news that there’s plenty for everyone is downright depressing for the old school. Then again, everyone can change, right?

      1. But it is interesting that as of today the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has suspended all licensing of nuclear power plants, indefinitely.

        1. I found the following source references for the news:



          The freeze/suspension is on USNRC issuing final decisions on NEW licenses and on NEW license renewals for nuclear power plants until the agency decides how to deal with the issue of spent nuclear fuel

          1. I saw it in the NY Times Science section online. The significance is huge IF and WHEN LENR makes its public bow. The court ordered NRC to review waste disposal strategy – there is effectively NO real solution except burying it. But there is evidence that LENR research particularly in Japan is aimed at the fuel rod mitigation business. Energy AND waste mitigation from one new source.

            A strategically downsized grid with LENR-based district power plants, residential LENR-based CHP and micro-grids – can eliminate need for any new nukes.

            There is minimal business disruption IF utilities and energy companies elect to participate constructively. If they do not, they will be modern ice houses. You cannot sell ice to people who make their own… er, except for parties.

          1. There is a need to understand better the reaction. If the process is neutronic, especially Widom-Larsen, it is possible that LENR be able to incinerate without too much hard radiations…

            if LENR is not enough, the today’s solution is fast neutron reactor, dedicated to incineration, as Areva is working on with CEA.

          2. These people claim to be offering an ‘energy from nuclear waste’ reactor: http://www.globalenergycorporation.net/Tech.aspx

            There is now nothing explicit about LENR on the site, but an earlier version spoke of a microwave-stimulated LENR core that generated high energy neutrons. It seems to have been considered expedient to remove some of this information, but the nature of the technology it is clear from what remains (‘GEC Fast Facts’). Perhaps now that CF is coming out of the closet the LENR info may reappear at some point.

        1. I think it will. What politician does not want to tell constituents “I will cut your power and heating bill 75 percent?” It is a politician’s dream. Who will vote to kill this bill in Congress? Or Parliament? Only those not planning on re-election or unwilling to shrink spending.

  7. The problem with any new technology that has the potential to make lots of money is and has always been secrecy. It plagues LENR research more than even the hard to reproduce issue itself. Probably continues to it quite a bit actually. This is why a PUBLIC research program is needed.

  8. Guys,

    It is not Hot Fusion, Cold Fusion or LENR, IT IS HAWKING RADIATION from the evaporation of micro/quantum black holes

    1. So you are saying that the nickel and hydrogen
      under pressure creates micro black holes and
      radiates energy?

      I like that concept, it resonates.


        1. Hawking radiation is black body radiation that is predicted to be emitted by black holes, due to quantum effects near the event horizon. It is named after the physicist Stephen Hawking, who provided a theoretical argument for its existence in 1974,[1] and sometimes also after Jacob Bekenstein, who predicted that black holes should have a finite, non-zero temperature and entropy.[citation needed] Hawking’s work followed his visit to Moscow in 1973 where Soviet scientists Yakov Zeldovich and Alexei Starobinsky showed him that according to the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle, rotating black holes should create and emit particles.[2] Hawking radiation reduces the mass and the energy of the black hole and is therefore also known as black hole evaporation. Because of this, black holes that lose more mass than they gain through other means are expected to shrink and ultimately vanish. Micro black holes (MBHs) are predicted to be larger net emitters of radiation than larger black holes and should shrink and dissipate faster.

    1. Interesting too how Mark Gibbs the Forbes cub reporter, says he spoke to Dr. Truchard and there is no implicit endorsement of LENR. Yet the YouTube video of Dr. Truchard’s keynote reveals VERY enthusiastic support.

      Gibbs: “Note that while many commentators have tried to imply that National Instruments is somehow backing cold fusion research, thus giving the field a big credibility boost. I recently talked with the founder of National Instruments, Dr. James Truchard, and the truth is that NI is selling instrumentation systems to the cold fusion field as they do to many other fields. The inclusion of a cold fusion track is because there are many organizations interested in the field rather than NI implicitly supporting it.”

      Even a half-as$ed reporter would’ve learned about the Celani demo and NI’s implicit support by assignment of three NI engineers to build it.

      Steve Forbes, Editor in Chief Forbes Media, should order a correction to the record. Clearly what Gibbs writes and what is “the truth” are two different things. I expect to see a lot of old media collapse like this under the LENR juggernaut – caught in their web of half-truths and distortions used for centuries to tame the sheeple.

      1. I may have read this wrong, but didn’t Truchard give the impression that NI had been subsidising LENR research?

        1. He said explicitly that they provided support both to those who were trying to show the validity of the phenomena and offered it to those who were trying to discredit it. To his knowledge only those trying to show validity accepted the support. NI obviously has to take this kind of evenhanded approach to keep all its customers happy.

          1. The very lack of “skeptics” serious enough to use NI equipment to validate LENR experiments demonstrates the underlying agenda – kill the science before people find out.

    1. Corporate Control.

      Ego Control.

      Got to have the theory.While the children freeze to death
      Starve to death. Ect… Ect…

      Control, Time, more testing, test test test ad naseum

      While humanities addiction to oil drives us to the
      edge of the cliff.

      Mad men for better words

      Confused by too much education.

      This entire video reeked of corporate control.

      Mental Masterbation


  9. Very careful reporting,not extreme,not giving out much of what is really happening,save, thoughtfully written to keep his job as reporter.

    US news can now say,we informed the Public, and will be seen as more credible news in the future.

    THe news media will have to step up to tell the story as it is, before long,and be truthful,US news made a baby step,but it is a start.

  10. So, was I the only one who was bothered by the glaring errors in the US News and World Report blog post?

    There are a number of factual errors and some really bad characterizations about the current state of research.

    His tone paints it as if it’s all still a bunch of kooks in their basement. At times you would think he was writing about UFOs, not research being done at NASA.

    I tried making some corrections in the comments section of the article, we will see if they help refocus his point of view.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *