Energy in the Political Debate

I had wondered earlier this year whether the news of LENR would hit the mainstream during this US election cycle, but it doesn’t appear that it will be a topic that will come up in any campaigns this time around. The Popular Science story on Rossi and the E-Cat is the closest thing we have seen to what could be considered mainstream media coverage, but from all accounts (haven’t seen it yet — checking my library daily) it is an inconclusive and cautious article which raises the usual questions about Rossi and the E-Cat, but provides no real conclusion.

I watched much of the US Presidential debate this evening and couldn’t help wondering how different things might have been if the candidates had been aware of the breaking E-Cat and LENR story. There was plenty of discussion about energy in terms of costs, security of supply, and jobs in the energy sector. Oil, gas, coal, and traditional alternatives came up, but unsurprisingly nothing about a technology that could turn out to be the most significant scientific and economic issue of our age.

It seems likely to me, however, that whoever is the next president of the United States, or whoever is in position of power in any nation, will sooner or later have to deal with the reality of a new energy source that could turn the world on its head, and make possible a new economic and political reality.

If the E-Cat, or any another powerful LENR source, is verified conclusively and becomes common knowledge, it seems to me that it will lead to a period of intense debate in the public arena, with competing entities trying to protect their own interests, and the general public appealing for access to cheap and secure energy. It could cause a lot of headaches for politicians who currently have fairly stable bases of support.

So we may not hear cold fusion mentioned on the stump this time around, but maybe in four years things could be quite different.

  • Sam Blankenship

    The following “National Transition to LENR Power” speech written by Sam Blankenship was prompted by an adaptation of President John F. Kennedy’s speech titled, “On the Nation’s Space Effort” delivered at Rice University on September 12, 1962. The first adaptation of the Kennedy speech with a LENR focus was written by Gregory Goble and appeared on Coldfusionnow.org on September 4, 2012.

    I am grateful for the model speech prepared by Gregory Goble. Hopefully, my efforts here will help the develop a still more appropriate speech.

    “Imagine President Obama giving this speech or one similar as an October Surprise. The imminent surprise of cold fusion is which politician, industry, or company will announce it first?”

    Address to the Nation: National Transition to LENR Power
    Written by Sam Blankenship
    September 11, 2012

    Among the duties of the President of the United States are the duty to provide national security, the duty to promote the general welfare, and to secure our way of life or as our Constitution states, “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

    Historically, the fulfillment of presidential duties has relied on the abundance of our natural resources distributed throughout our magnificent land, the energy and vitality of a diverse population guaranteed liberty under our Constitution, and motivated by an economic system that rewards initiative and hard work, all protected by a committed and adaptive military.

    Today we are a strong, progressive, educated nation; but we face extraordinary challenges that demand adaptation and change. The challenges we face are the most serious ever faced by our nation and our world. Indeed, the challenges we face are global; but they always have been global. It is that now we must recognize our challenges as global. Fortunately, we now have powerful tools with which to address these global challenges.

    Our immense successes have generated huge problems. The global energy system is principal among the successes that have generated huge problems. We have come to rely heavily on the burning of fossil fuels to produce our energy. Initially the burning of a finite energy source caused us anxiety about its depletion, then we began to worry about the pollution produced from burning fossil fuels.

    We began to notice that acid rain from sulfur and nitrogen oxides were destroying forests far from the sources of combustion. Scrubbers were added to power plant smoke stacks to reduce the problem. Power prices went up.

    More recently the effects of burning coal, natural gas, and other carbonaceous fuels to produce carbon dioxide have been strongly associated with global climate change. Global climate change has political and scientific dimensions.

    Scientifically, it is easily proven in the laboratory that carbon dioxide absorbs heat. Mathematically, it can be calculated how much carbon dioxide is entering our atmosphere daily as a result of burning fossil fuels. Logically, it can be deduced that because carbon dioxide absorbs heat , the more carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere, the more heat is absorbed by the atmosphere. That simple analysis doesn’t begin to adequately model what actually is happening to carbon dioxide in the world system. However, complex computerized models also indicate that the burning of fossil fuels is contributing to climate change.

    The complexities of climate change also contribute to disagreements regarding the role of fossil fuel burning in its development. Important to resolving the role of fossil fuel burning in producing climate change is the advice of climate scientists. The advice of the large percentage of climate scientists is that carbon dioxide produced by human activity contributes significantly to climate change and that is the position of this administration.

    The consequences of climate change are serious and cannot be ignored. Ice caps are melting. Severe weather as tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, and flooding is increasing. Changing weather is affecting wildlife migrations and vegetation patterns. Food supplies and housing are being affected.

    Given that human activities are contributing to climate change and the consequences presented by climate change, what must be done? Remedies for reducing the carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere primarily include techniques of sequestration of the carbon dioxide and generally appear unacceptable over long periods of time. It is reasonable to conclude that we must make changes to our energy programs.

    On September 12, 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave an address at Rice University in Houston, Texas, about our nation’s space effort in which he committed our nation to a program that would take our nation to the moon.
    Today, I am committing our nation to an energy program with potential results which will rival those of the space program.

    As with President Kennedy much about the new energy remains uncertain and the descriptions that follow are subject to change. When President Kennedy set us on the path to the moon, there was no Saturn rocket capable of reaching the moon, but the President in the tradition of our country boldly led and we are a better country for the vision he had.

    A new and promising energy source has been discovered and means for using this energy source are being developed. This new energy source derives from experiments announced in 1989, by Martin Fleischman and Stanley Pons at the University of Utah. The new energy source became known as “Cold Fusion.” because it produced more energy than could be attributed to a chemical process and it was produced at relatively low temperatures.

    Because the new energy appeared to derive from processes unknown to physicists and because many physicists were unable to reproduce the results, it largely was dismissed. Recently, several scientists have achieved outstanding laboratory results and inventors have developed energy devices with commercial potential. Companies now are preparing to bring these new devices to market in a matter of months.

    The new devices vary somewhat in design and operation, but typically use either water or hydrogen as fuel in the presence of nickel. Because the reaction process produces energy by literally converting some of the hydrogen to energy, the amount of energy produced is huge for the consumption of very little fuel.

    One company says that in its device an amount of water the size of the eraser on a number 2 pencil produces the energy of two 48-gallon barrels of gasoline. The devices generally are cheap to build and operate. The devices produce no radioactive waste nor radioactivity detected outside of the device. Early reports indicate that a device that could furnish heat for a house would cost less than a $1000, last for 20 years and cost about 8 percent of your current heating bill to operate. The device would fit on a table top.

    While currently the devices produce steam only, development to attach electrical conversion units to the steam devices is underway.
    Various government agencies already have been involved in research of this new energy and devices. NASA and the Defense Department have made substantial contributions to research in this new energy field.

    The national budget implications of this new energy are minimal as far as developing the energy devices themselves. There may be substantial budget implications for the training, retraining of workers, teachers, and others. I will be presenting a comprehensive program to Congress soon.

    The innovation potential of this new energy is tremendous. We will announce the creation of a Department of Innovation which will assist manufacturers in further developing new energy devices and creating new products that incorporate the new devices. Certification of these devices is beginning.

    I will be asking the Department of Labor to develop programs that will insure that no one is disadvantaged by job dislocation and that all profit from what must be a win-win result of this transition.

    We are establishing a web site that will distribute further information and provide for you to enter your ideas.

    Thank you.

    President of the United States

  • vaulcan

    Where are all these home ecat units that were being mass produced in the United States and were to be ready for the market by Christmas. Seems to me the whole thing is a scam. What will happen next year when the super hot cat is invented, then I suppose the hot cat will be withdrawn. This is like the Wright brothers inventing the airplane and then not putting it on the market because they think they have figured out Jet technology. I think it is unprecedented that a company would set up a factory to manufacture a product and then not put it on the market because they think product mark 2 is better.

  • Chris

    Who cares what the US president thinks?

    What the Chinese think about it has far more bearing to environmental concerns, and the Chinese care about one thing and one alone: whether it works. If they think it does, Rossi ought to make a licensing agreement with them for the whole of the People’s Republic, such that they can manufacture it as much as possible for internal use.

    But Rossi will be far too afraid of them selling his secrets to others, he’ll just keep being careful of who he delivers it to and this will keep things on low throttle for as long as he needs secrecy and is able to keep it.

    • Sam Blankenship

      I have emailed LENR information to several political campaign and news organizations. I also have cautioned them about getting ahead of LENR developments. Political organizations must carefully build components capable of assiessing and managing economic impacts of this new energy.

      Judging from pronouncements of what I believe to be coded words,I feel certain that major political campaigns are preparing to announce significant LENR development studies following elections. Some see this developing along the lines of Kennedy’s announcement of the moon-landing project.

  • Voodoo

    Folks, is there some volunteer, who have access to last issue of Popular Science and is capable note here in blog some 2-3 most interesant sentences from article about Rossi, which was not been previously published elsewhere ?

    Thanks

  • NJT

    If verified, this result is absolutely phenomenal, Pay close attention Mr. President and Mr. Ronmey or chance getting caught with no place to go but OUTA HERE!

    Steven N. Karels
    October 17th, 2012 at 1:26 PM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Some clarification please on your comments.

    a. I therefore understand the total amount of time the Hot eCat spent in self-sustaining mode (SSM) was 218 hours?
    b. The 218 hours consisted of a number of separate SSM periods, ranging in duration from minutes to hours?
    c. During those SSM periods, no electricity was used to heat the Hot eCat, the electricity only supplied power to the control system?
    d. During the SSM period, the surface temperature stayed within some range. Can you specifiy the temperature range while in SSM?

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 4:40 PM
    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    a. yes
    b. yes
    c. yes
    d. 1030/1070 °C
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Robert Mockan

      Item b is a puzzle. What could possibly explain the erratic time intervals needing external electric power? This question is not the same as asking why it needs it, but the erratic nature of needing it.

      This means that if you have 2 reactors the time intervals of electric power would not be the same between them, even though the total time of needing it is the same?

      Very strange. By far the strangest detail Rossi has ever mentioned.

      Of course this is fixable, but a lot more information is needed to figure a good solution. Worse case just use multiple reactors in a power system to stabilize average power out. Best case would be fix whatever is going on with the LENR catalyst so it doesn’t turn on and off like that.

      In an application like for a plane engine, the average COP of the heat source needs to be kept constant, otherwise one takes a nose dive into the ocean?

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

        But isn’t erratic behaviour the very nature of all previous cold fusion experiments also, even up to the point of often being unrepeatable? If it would run predictably and smoothly, the phenomenon would have been harnessed a long time ago regardless of any scientific naysayers. Rossi has seemingly been able to reduce the fluctuations to a manageable level. It would be more surprising, I think, if he would have been able to eliminate them completely.

        • Karl

          Because of unpredictable reactor behaviour, could it be a reason to arrange a considerable number of reactors to even the energy output and control it better?

          In the 1 MW case about just over 100 tubes and working together.

          I recall from this summer that Rossi also mentioned that they aimed at 100-200 watt reactors, thus potentially much small tubes.

          Let’s say 100 x (100-200) Watt = 10 – 20 KW for a home heater.

          He could potentially use the same or similar electronic technology and logic as were described in Zurich for the 1 MW.

          Could this be a reason why he is not talking any longer the initial flat packed home unit? Once 1 MW is working a similar model could be made for the home unit based on much smaller reactors.

          To my understanding the initial home E-Cat were based on one (flat) reactor packet reactor only and as such probably did deliver a much more unpredictable behaviour.

          • Voodoo

            Very probably old flat Home E-Cat is flawed and lower efficient then 2. gen.

            I am thinking it is not necessary to have 100 smal reactors for next gen home e-cat.

            Economically viable is for example 36 small reactors á 300 Watt = 10,8 kW (thermal)
            i.e. some 2,5 – 3 kW electric after conversion
            (minus self feeding) plus 7 kW waste heat for home heating.

            • Peter_Roe

              The ‘Mk 1’ COP6 reactor was obsolete from the moment the first ‘hot cat’ was fired up, and the ‘home’ e-cat idea also died at that point (it was already unwell for several other reasons, technical and political).

              On the other hand, Rossi needs to sell a few Mark Ones to raise funds for hot cat development, so I think the compromise (tangentially confirmed by Rossi at Zurich) is a deal whereby if you buy a 1MW plant, you get at-cost upgrades as the tech moves on.

        • Robert Mockan

          Many have had problems, but I recall Jed Rothwell saying that some LENR experiments are 100 percent repeatable.
          I think it was on the Vortex-1 web site sometime in the last few weeks.

      • buffalo

        the erratic behaviour of all lenrs appears consistent with some sort of translational assymetric exchange of energy occuring.my theory is the input heat energy is speeding up hydrogen spillover cycling between nickel and co-alloy(eg.copper) clusters or within pure nickel itself(defect sites),and that would lead to a kind of ‘jet’ of ionized H2 plasma from one point of lattice focused on2 adjascent point in lattice.type of nano particle accellerator perhaps.that would slow down when heat dissipates of course,requiring further input.

        • Robert Mockan

          Some kind of event with a random vector energy dissipation that causes local LENR activity shutdown? And then electric power applied in some way starts LENR up again?
          Yes, that might be. With all the questions that remain how the energy from LENR is dissipated without destroying the nuclear active sites, to suppose there are steps in the whole LENR process more critical than others seems reasonable. And if those steps are disrupted LENR stops?
          Perhaps a physical orientation of the crystal structure of all the nickel grains could be accomplished in such a way that disruptive effects to critical process variables can be dissipated harmlessly?

          This is worth thinking about more, in my opinion.
          Thanks for your comment.

    • phlatbeer

      Isn’t it possible the “natural” run of the e-cat was interrupted to interpret or alter the usual function of the device to change circumstances, and observe the response/s over different time shifts?

      • Robert Mockan

        If that were the case one would think Rossi would realize that is critical information he should have revealed in the demo data.

        So, I guess possible, but not likely since he said nothing about doing that?

    • ivan_cev

      This Questions are great, could some body ask if the control is in base of heat or radio waves?
      He does not answer my questions any more.
      If you put the question to elaborate then he will not answer it.
      This is how I asked if electricity was absolutely needed by the e-cat. he said no.

      • HeS

        @ivan:”This is how I asked if electricity was absolutely needed by the e-cat. he said no.”

        So answer is obvious. Control is based on temperature. Temperature monitoring is fundamental in every Ecat experiment.

  • vbasic

    I was so sure the first 1MW plant was sold to the US Navy, I thought we were going to get an ‘October Surprise’ from the President. Especially since Rossi spent so much time here in the US this year. But now that he’s back in Italy a lot, I guess not. So either the plant wasn’t as powerful as hoped (only .5 MW ) or it went to someone else. I do think if the US got it and it worked well and they wanted to buy more, the President would be talking about it. Unless the troubles at Solyndra, Fisker, and A123 caused him to be quiet on all alternatives, even if the US has it.

    • NJT

      Mistakes were and will always be made in exploration of science, that is just a part of the process, but no reason to put your tail between your legs and run home to momma because of a few failed efforts to move ahead.

      LENR is a NOW proven verifiable fact of science. These politicians need to crawl out of the holes they have been digging for themselves and see the CURRENT light of day. This science is on the move and it is past high time they get off their asses and with the program of moving our countries and our world ahead…

      • ivan_cev

        I believe we should be sure the e-cat is real before making so many conjectures

  • Omega Z

    @Frank Acland

    Posted Below by….
    Mickey on October 17, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Zurich Conference Papers Available
    Links to ecatworldnews which leads to clicking for futher info taking you to Gray Write other site.
    ——————————————————–

    Posted by Me
    Soooo What we have here is a Master of Deception.

    You post a tidbit of Info which takes people to a Gary Wright Web Site, Using a suedo version of E-catworld & adding news.

    Any Info requires an additional click on that site that takes you to shutdownrossi of which we all know is Gray Writes site.

    So Gary Write has to stoop to Deception in order to get hits on his Web Site. So Low. Does he get paid per hit I Wonder???

    ADDED: This is done on many other sites as well. MO- Method of Operation

    • Mickey

      You must have a very low opinion of the readers here.
      Do you think they cannot think for themselves?
      Do you think they need or want your ridiculous expose of every post and link on this site.
      .
      You guys remind me of the book burners. Those who think every person must be “protected” from every thought that does not agree with theirs.
      .
      Are we still living in the Dark Ages?
      .
      And you had to post your comments twice – afraid your hit piece wouldn’t get noticed?

      • Peter_Roe

        Omega Z (and Greenwin earlier) is absolutely right. Your post is no more than a sleazy ‘bait and switch’ tactic designed to send people to Wright’s nasty little website on a false pretense. Exposing this kind of misrepresentation is entirely appropriate. Please do not waste any more of our time.

        • Mickey

          I beg your pardon.
          .
          You are 100% wrong in your assessment.
          .
          The link I provided DID NOT send anyone anywhere.
          .
          The document is downloadable directly from that site.
          .
          You DO NOT have to go to Gary Wright’s website to get and read the document.
          .
          Get your facts straight before you accuse me of anything.
          .

          • Peter_Roe

            OK, I’ve checked properly and that does seem to be the case. I apologise for my completely unjustified comment.

            However your apparent association with Gary Wright is unfortunate as his name is not popular on this blog, any more than the generally anti-Rossi tone of your website.

            • Omega Z

              Peter

              Wasn’t necessary to Apologize to this guy.

              My provocation obtained the response I expected. Validating my point. To put me on the defensive against all other posters then attack me. His M.O.

              These 2 sites were already connected sometime back. Their the Same but Separate.

              You nailed it. Bait & Switch. How many people download. Most point click & read. No download.

              But thanks anyway.

  • GreenWin

    This might become political. A reasonably well matched small steam turbine for hot-cat steam. Even at the low end of 7500lb/h steam @ 60psig, this gen produces about 100kWe. Plenty for home/small business, heat/chiller, appliances, plug-in EV, hot water, and sell-back to the grid.

    http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/groups/public/documents/marketing/05-810-003-25.pdf

    Undoubtedly fossil utilities will find this “politically incorrect.”

    • Omega Z

      Thanks GW

      Added this to my collection. I’ve done a little checking into various Generating tech. Especially those that can be incorporated into CHP as that helps make it cost effective.

      Also looking into scroll compressors. Some are redesigning them for low temp generators. Most are expensive, but Mass production & competition may bring down costs. I think Low Temp (300`C) makes it more likely E-cats will make it to the consumer. There’s already precedent set. Gas Range/Ovens.

      As you know the compressors work with various gases/refrigerants & it appears they could be very efficient given a little time. I have experience with compressors & my concern is the Life Cycle. Their great for intended use, But energy production changes the load factor in a very negative way. New materials will probably be required.

      As to sell back, I don’t count on it in the U.S. If I did, I would look more to a Co-Op system as every customer is treated as a shareholder. Excess profits not needed for maintenance or expansion is given back to the customer periodically.

      In this case, someone who produces a lot of energy but uses it can justify the expense where those who have a similar investment but cant use it get a return justifying the expense. It balances out if you know what I mean.

      I would Note that in early 2011 I came across a system(Don’t recall the name) that looked like it may have serious Future potential, But apparently so did G.E. as they bought it up. The Locked in price will probably prevent it from being of cost/benefit use in the future. A serious Concern. Suppression by cost instead of absence of availability.

    • hempenearth

      Very useful GreenWin. Thank you

    • NJT

      It should definitely right now especially be political. We are talking about the biggest social/big business changer right now occurring in our lifetimes, and nary a peep from those who currently lead and who wish to lead our nation into the future. How asleep can they be? Astounding indeed!

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

      From the microturbine broschure: “Quiet operation, 85 dBA”.

      • Peter_Roe

        i.e., somewhat noisier than the maximum sound level permitted by US law for motorbikes travelling at speed! – “motorcycles manufactured in or after 1979 cannot exceed a noise level of 84 decibels (dB) when traveling more than 35 mph on a paved street or highway”.

        Actually that’s a bit surprising – other examples given are a snow blower or city traffic heard from inside a car.

        • GreenWin

          Gents, without checking I think the spec is for a non-baffled, acoustically untreated device. Combine active phase shift and acoustic tile and the number should drop ~50%.

          Also, these systems are generally designed for basements or HVAC rooms.

    • Pedro

      Price is a little steep…. there is an example calculation that says that at an annual saving of $187,000 pay back time is 2.5 years… this means that the price for the thinky is more than $450,000.

  • georgehants

    Would anybody disagree that “Science training” should mean hypothesis, theorise and research, following Evidence.
    The scientific establishment thinks it means giving a religious decree of Dogma stating for example —
    There is no Cold Fusion
    There is no creator.
    there are no UFO’s.
    There is no Placebo Effect.
    There is no Telepathy.
    Animals have no Consciousness.
    Humans have no Freewill.
    The Universe is a machine.
    The Mind does not exist.
    Etc. Etc. Etc.
    Has anybody ever known science to be wrong.
    ——
    Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
    ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
    University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

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

      The scientists I know do not say: “there is no X”. They say: there is no (or no compelling) evidence for the existence of X, or that X is not necessary to explain observations and experiments.

      Although I must admit that cold fusion seems to be some kind of an exception. There many scientists seem ready to say “there is no CF”.

      • georgehants

        Pekka, that sounds O.K. until you compare all the subjects with Cold Fusion.
        If you now read your comment again, you may agree that it then sounds rather hollow, simply an escape clause.
        Saying there is no Evidence when one is simply disregarding and denying the Evidence is surly not very scientific.

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

          I didn’t understand your comment. My points were these:
          (1) I don’t agree with you that scientists would often say: “there is no X” where X is creator, UFO, telepathy, consciousness, free will, mind. Because I think that instead they say: “there is no evidence for X” or that “X is not a necessary assumption”.
          (2) I however do agree with you that they often say: “there is no cold fusion”.

          IMO, they are correct at (1) and wrong at (2). In other words, it seems to me that there is no widespread irrational denial among scientists at (1), although such exists at (2).

          • georgehants

            Sorry Pekka, not put very well.
            What I meant was that Cold Fusion is an exception because more research is being done on a phenomenon that lays itself open to proof.
            The other subjects being more difficult, without very careful investigation are easier to debunk.
            The statement you made of the views of others —

            “They say: there is no (or no compelling) evidence for the existence of X, or that X is not necessary to explain observations and experiments.”

            They are still denying Cold Fusion even with what now seems indisputable Evidence.
            The point becomes “hollow” in that” it is clearly a pointless non-scientific opinion.
            Until one excepts that the Evidence needs to be looked at unbiasedly and fairly one cannot reasonably make such a statement.

            • Omega Z

              George

              You were mostly on target when you pointed out “Science training” Or Better stated would be the Education of Science Students.

              Tho I don’t think it’s your Intent, you inadvertently throw all into the same pot so to speak. Most of these students do as taught. Which is the Problem. They should be taught to keep an open mind to anything. I separate these from the Dogma. There victims of the system. The Dogma comes from the top. That’s what needs fixing.

              Robert Duncan is a good example of how it should work. He was sure CF had been debunked, But was open minded & upon seeing the evidence
              to say wait, Somethings going on here that needs looked at.

              I would suspect even with the System we have, there’s many Scientist that are Open. They just keep there mouth shut & watch. I wont even call them Cowardly. They have their livelihoods at stake. Families to take care of. It’s like David & Goliath except they have no sling.

              Even McKubre of SRI has said they should stay silent until they’ve reached a secure period in their careers.

              Take Note George that their are at the very least a 1/2 dozen people who come to E-catworld on a daily bases who are involved with Science/Research. Who know they will be directly or Negatively affected by LENR & are still supportive of Rossi & LENR research. Their Open Minded. They deserve our respect.

              It’s only Natural they would take it offensively when you throw them all in the same pot. Cast a Smaller net.

              Or as I would say, Most Politicians(Not All) dance to the same tune regardless of Party affiliation.

              I would say Narrow your target George, Your Scatter shots tend to cause a lot of Collateral damage to the Innocent.

              Have a good day George & a glass of wine for me while your at it. I’m all out of Whiskey.

              • Tony76

                Good post.
                Yes, the problem is not “Science training”, the problem is politics and selfish behaviour in all spheres. Science is no exception.

                The anti-dote is obligatory logging of decisions and allocations and transparent access by the public to that data.

              • georgehants

              • georgehants

                Omega, thank you.
                I have a very narrow target.
                To help to put right the terrible crimes committed in the name of science.
                I have no interest in the number or status of those who disagree with me.
                I make very simple points —
                Science should talk only the Truth.
                Science should follow Evidence and not opinion.
                Science should research every phenomenon of the natural World.
                There should be no Dogma, no pre-judgment, no dictates of what is and what is not permissible.
                Etc. Etc. Etc.
                I believe that anybody that has witnessed the corruption and clear distortion of Cold Fusion and does not feel that, things must change and that they would like to help change them, is in error.

                • phlatbeer

                  There is no creator.
                  there are no UFO’s.
                  There’s more evidence of UFO’s than there is a creator

                • georgehants

                  phlatbeer, for your certain knowledge, can I assume you are in contact with your personal creator.

    • ivan_cev

      George, Science is just ok, it advances and evolves slowly as new research and evidence mounts. actually today we live in the best world ever and the prospects for the future are great.
      The scientific method is correct, some people may manipulate it a bit like in the case of cold fusion, but you have to admit that after 23 years, we still do not have independent replication of a particular experiment and as consequence no peer review, maybe celani will change this.

      • georgehants

        ivan, you said —-
        “but you have to admit that after 23 years, we still do not have independent replication of a particular experiment”

        I ask, why do you think it is that after 23 years we have not moved further.
        What “scientific method” are you saying is correct —
        Please put that method clearly for me to see.

        • GreenWin

          Troubles arrive with those unwilling to name and root out corruption in their ranks. There can be no recovery for old science until it admits it has become deeply ill. The spectacular failure of hot fusion is a giant red flag.

        • Ivan_cev
          • georgehants

            Ivan, I do not visit Wiki-rubbish, as proven by it’s coverage of Cold Fusion it is not a reliable source of information.
            What ever scientific methods it is advocating, clearly, by the Cold Fusion fiasco, must be either not being followed correctly or is in error.
            If a method is in error then time for it to be reassessed and changed.

            • ivan_cev

              pathological fanatism is not healthy George.

              • georgehants

                ivan, you are simply abusing with no content.

    • Sandy

      George:

      “Free will” does exist. Free will is a political ideology; i.e., an explanation for human behavior that justifies a socially sanctioned system of rewards and punishments. Please do not make the MISTAKE of using free will as though it is a scientific theory.

      The behavior of an organism is determined by its physiology, its history of reinforcement and punishment, and its current environment. This scientific theory is the foundation upon which behavioral science is based.

      • georgehants

        Hello Sandy, could I ask, are you agreeing with the reductionist explanation of Freewill (Laplace) or do you believe that we have an independent ability to transcend any programing to attain our freely chosen goals.

        • Sandy

          George:

          If an alien came to Earth to study human societies the alien would observe that in some societies humans use a DOCTRINE called “free will” to explain human behavior. The alien would observe that in some human societies free will is a religious doctrine (especially in a theocracy) and that in secular states free will is a political doctrine.

          Free will is an ethnographic FACT but a religious/political doctrine cannot be used as a scientific theory.

          Behavioral scientists subscribe to the theory that human behavior is DETERMINED by a number of variables. They do not assert that human behavior is controlled by an invisible entity that has a capacity called free will.

          Social scientists sometimes make the mistake of using free will as though free will is a scientific theory. I strongly object to that practice. That practice is anti-scientific.

          A prosecutor can assert that a defendant has free will and is therefore culpable and deserves to be punished. But please recognize that free will is just an assertion. It is not a scientific hypothesis that can be subjected to experimental testing, so it cannot become a scientific theory. Free will cannot be weighed or dissected or examined under a microscope or analyzed with a gas chromatograph. Free will is an assertion that people use to justify assigning credit and blame, and then issuing rewards and punishment.

          Free will is a social convention; free will only exists by agreement. In that sense, free will is like a corporation. A corporation is a “legal fiction”; it only exists because we declare that it exists.

          I have no problem with you or anyone else asserting that humans have free will. But I want you to recognize that free will is a religious/political doctrine, NOT a scientific theory.

          • georgehants

            Sandy thank you.
            I respect your beliefs.
            Of course your interpretation is simply opinion and not based on Evidence of any kind.
            I personally like to believe that there is more contra- Evidence, that we are more complicated than a pre-programed robot unable to make choices beyond deterministic programing.
            The Quantum has quite clearly taken us beyond the outdated idea of having any knowledge of reality, so at this stage I think, to make a claim of knowledge beyond the Evidence must hold more that a little Faith.

          • freethinker

            Interesting. This is so out of context admin, so remove if annoying.

            But what you state is only valid in the observer frame of reference. In the objects frame of reference your statement is completely irrelevant.

            I have a free will, it manifests itself to me in a very individual manor and must be related to the integrated sum of all my experiences: relations, emotions, thoughts, dreams, and yes – rewards and punishments – over my lifetime so far. My free will is ME.

            I surely agree that it would be impossible to capture any “free will” frame of reference into nuts and bolts Science.

            With that said, I think the following phrases of a well known contemporary artist sums it up :

            “I am, whatever you say I am, If I wasn’t, then why would I say I am?”

            and

            “Will the real Slim Shady please stand up”

            • georgehants

              freethinker, if a scientist believes that their every thought, every action, is predetermined and not under their conscious control, then clearly they will have very little concern for the outcome of their actions or words beyond self-preservation.

    • hadamhiram

      Seriously, can we cut it out with the asinine anti-science spam?

      It’s a very stupid strategy to alienate and make enemies of real scientists, like myself. Your post reveals you to be completely ignorant of scientific method, scientific practice, the process of peer-review, the complex reality of scientific politics, and the most basic elements of the philosophy of science.

      Your tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense about UFOs and telepathy belong somewhere else. Your ravings are an embarrassment, and LENR does not need to be associated with such idiocy.

      Is there a Moderator that can help keep this spam off the forum and make room for intelligent, informed and productive discussion?

      • georgehants

        hadamhiram, as you are a scientist, you may rather than abuse and dismissal, like to put up a scientific response to my comments.
        Are you saying that UFO’s and Telepathy are not, like Cold Fusion, solid scientific subjects.
        Are you saying that science only investigates reductionist steam engines and pre-Quantum phenomenon.

        • georgehants

          hadamhiram, I may add that your comment would seem to be a perfect example of what P&F and many other scientific Rebels have had to endure.

          • Omega Z

            georgehants

            Some of the Topics you bring up would probably be better if taken to the E-catworld Forums. Many are Controversial & distract from the Main Topic here which is the E-cat.

            I would also add that many of the phenomena you bring up, I would agree needs looked into due to life’s experiences, Tho probably during better economic times. Resources are limited & as of now I would prefer they focus on the LENR. I consider it to be urgent.

            I would also note George that over time you have contributed a lot to E-catworld. You have pointed out many articles that have been of much interest in LENR. So don’t get upset or leave. Just move some of the off topics to the forums for those who are interested in those topics.

            Most of us are here for the LENR info, E-cat, Celeni & such. Many of us have limited time to follow & already have to deal with the Psycho-skeptics.

            If we are off topic, I would prefer it were connected to the E-cat, Such as available Electric conversion, Turbines, TEC devices Batteries & such. Present efficiencies, costs, etc… Absorption cooling systems aftermarket things. But even then during slow spells in E-cat info & also to be taken to the E-catworld Forums. Presented here only to bring attention to it. I consider these to be a very important to future E-cat success. Therefore only semi off topic.

            The E-cat is after-all just part of the overall Game plan.

            I’d note that I also have a vast array of interests & sometimes it’s really hard to stay on Topic, Especially when someone else goes off topic.

            But we then End up with dozens of posts that distract from the E-cat, Distracts from the Newbie’s who happen upon this site which can be discouraging to them. It hurts E-catworld & the E-cat phenomena we want to see succeed. And I’ll confess, I’m guilty of this too from time to time. We just need to reign it in a little. WE need to do this if for no other reason then Respect for Frank Acland who has provided us this great site.

            Have a good day George & a better tomorrow.

            • georgehants

              Omega, I disagree, in that my topics are directly related to why the E-Cat and Cold Fusion and many other scientific subjects have been delayed for 23 years.
              Discussing the E-Cat is interesting but it’s reality was determined years ago when Rossi (if genuine) first found his effect.
              All talk since then has achieved nothing.
              My philosophy is to change things that are clearly in error.
              I believe that anybody who does not feel the same way about the terrible crimes that science is perpetrating on the population, needs to re asses their thinking.
              I am discussing our children’s Future.

              • telecommuter

                Give it a rest.

                What alternate approach do you propose to replace the scientific method?

        • Ivan_cev

          UFO is a physical imposiblility to our current understanding, unless you could travel tens of hundreds of year ligths to some star in the universe.
          It may exist, but is in the realm of the improvable, unless we live in more than 4 dimentions (time included), or they came from the future, or there is an aberration in space etc etc, just speculations.
          Be sensible and do not mix things.

          • georgehants

            Ivan, you said —-
            “UFO is a physical imposiblility to our current understanding,”
            I think you have said that Cold Fusion is beyond Known science, therefore cannot exist.

            • ivan_cev

              I said this before, you seem to live in an alternate reality. your enthusiasm is good but you keep shooting all over the place.

              • georgehants

                ivan, would you be kind enough to show anything I have said that is divorced from the reality of science or the handling of Cold Fusion.
                Thank you.

    • LilyLover

      Summary:
      If it enslaves you, it is true.
      If it sets you free, it is false.

  • georgehants

    tomconover
    October 17th, 2012 at 10:55 AM
    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    In the test results, 218 hours of self sustained mode was identified.
    1) Is it true? 218 consecutive hours in ssm?
    2) If not true, how long are the ssm event durations?
    3) Does the Hot-Cat still require one hour power, one hour ssm segments?
    Sincerely,
    Tom Conover
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 12:45 PM
    1- 218 hours of ssm is true
    2- the duration is regulated by the control system, are not regular, dependon many factors: can be 1 hour, 2 hours, or minutes
    3- no, the Hot cat works differently
    Thank ou very much for the wish, I need it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Robert Mockan

      It sounds like what Rossi is saying is that, even with a constant radiative power output, the reactor requires time intervals of electric power input that vary erratically.

      It would seem to indicate the LENR active catalyst has large variations in thermal power generation even under conditions that one would think should provide a stable constant thermal power generation.

      If true, then that is very interesting. What could be changing in the LENR catalyst to cause such an effect?

      • ivan_cev

        To me this is mind blowing, how such a complex control system could be implemented over two wires conducting electricity to a resistive element, telepathy?, How big an complex could be this control system that have to read parameters and adjust at none know intervals? How Rossi gets the reading of the parameters, with the infra-red camera?
        it sounds like science fiction to me.

        • Robert Mockan

          It might be done just sensing the temperature from the reaction with a thermocouple somewhere in the unit. Temperature low, give it some juice. Temperature high, less juice. If he has a set point controller with low hysteresis it might “chatter” given normal variations in reaction rate, thus temperature. If very little hysteresis the control circuit might even react to variations in air currents around the reactor that cause small alteration in convection heat loss to the air. If we add to that the possibility the catalyst itself needs to be “zapped” with current going through it every now and then, it might explain the seeming erratic operation of his control circuit. Having worked extensively with set point controllers when employed at a company back in the 70s, my best guess would be the solution to a “chatter” problem would be to reduce positive feedback and go to proportional control circuit.

          • Ivan_cev

            Yes, but I posted before that this is improbable as the average temp in the report is 1050, it does not left much room for differences in temperature (nickel will melt at 1400), also in the “independent” report we see the curve of energy output, (calculated in base of temperature) and there are no fluctuations.
            So you could safely discard that possibility

          • Ivan_cev

            How you define: “hysteresis” ?

            • Robert Mockan

              In the regular electronic sense. It is the on-off differential designed into a set-point controller. For example the circuit turns off when the temperature sense measurement voltage is a bit higher than the set-point voltage, and the circuit turns on when it is a bit lower. That way a set-point controller will not react to the variations of temperature within a range as determined by the hysteresis. I also commented a few days ago that it is unlikely Rossi could safely utilize a set-point controller so close to the catalyst destruct temperature, as you point out, but it might be possible depending on the precise operation characteristics of the reactor and the hysteresis adjustment. For example if he can compensate reactor core temperature variations with hysteresis the outside surface might average 1050 C without exceeding reactor core destruct or shut down limits. Without more information I disagree we can discard this possibility. We simply do not know yet what the internal state of the reactor is when it is operating.

              • Ivan_cev

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis

                Basically is a delay in a input being transmited or reacted by/to the output, exist in dynamic systems. like magnetic hysteresis,
                hysteresis only exist in high frecuency proccesses. If a proccess is slow the effect disapears. You seem to be talking about something different here.

                • Robert Mockan

                  No. Same thing. The concept applies to different subjects.

                  The link you provide gives the general description, that is “..Basically is a delay in a input being transmitted or reacted by/to the output..”.

                  The context I use it in is that of process control in manufacturing (my position manufacturing engineer).

                  The magnetic hysteresis example you mentioned applies the general description to the phenomena of hysteresis in magnetic materials. It is not wrong, just a different application of the general description.

                  In process control systems, like for example used in robotics assembly today, but 40 years ago simply called automatic control with set-point controllers, hysteresis may be applied as part of the controller transfer function. It is sometimes also called the Schmidt component of the function.

                  Today control is implemented using a PID, or proportional–integral–derivative controller, with the control transfer functions programmed into a microcomputer, but 40 years ago when I worked on set-point controllers, we implemented the function using a resistor-capacitor network, (with a few discreet transistors as active gain components being used to compare inputs), that would act as a voltage divider in a feedback loop (from output to input), of the comparator circuit.

                  The voltage division of the feedback could be adjusted (that is adjusting hysteresis), by adjusting a potentiometer in the feedback network, such that a state change of the comparator would occur,when desired, after the set-point was passed, either with the sense voltage going up or down, that would minimize circuit triggering by small random variations of the sense signal voltage (by containing them in the comparator null zone. In electronics unwanted stuff is called noise, and you try to nullify it so it does not affect circuit performance.)

                  (That last is precisely the general description of the delay in the input being acted upon by the output).

                  When the comparator did change state it would do so to effect the process being controlled, but only when it was really desired, and not for every unwanted transient signal.

                  In the context of process control the hysteresis is not frequency limited to some low level.

                  Does that help?

                • Ivan_cev

                  I think in the sense you explain the hysteresis is the consecuence of the control you trying to apply.

      • GreenWin

        The rate of available H1 and Nuclear Active Areas – i.e. nano-fissures with available condensed matter. The surface geometry of the catalyst is a large variable.

      • Thinksforself

        What if the reaction is mildly endothermic?

        I’ve read many theories/posts claiming that steps in the transmutations claimed in LENR are endothermic. Maybe the reaction Rossi is relying on doesn’t generate much heat or none at all, but does generates low level gamma, x-rays, etc. at large enough levels to explain the power output. Rossi has said in the past that much of the heat is caused by absorption of low level gamma. If you insulated the core thermally, but with materials that were close to transparent to higher energy rays the heat would largely be generated outside of the core area containing the reaction. You might need to keep heating the core to maintain the reaction.

        Just a W.A.G. !!!

        • Robert Mockan

          Research about physical reactions of hydrogen and metals has shown there are endothermic as well as exothermic reactions having to do with absorption and desorption. This is just the physical reactions and not LENR, but your point is well taken. The electric power needed to activate LENR catalyst, re-activate LENR catalyst, and so on, could be influenced by endothermic reactions not directly related to LENR.

  • Mickey

    Zurich Conference Papers Available
    .
    http://ecatworldnews.com
    .

    • Omega Z

      Soooo What we have here is a Master of Deception.

      You post a tidbit of Info which takes people to a Gary Wright Web Site, Using a suedo version of E-catworld & adding news.

      Any Info requires an additional click on that site that takes you to shutdownrossi of which we all know is Gray Writes site.

      So Gary Write has to stoop to Deception in order to get hits on his Web Site. So Low. Does he get paid per hit I Wonder???

      • Mickey

        You are 100% wrong in your assessment.
        The link I provided DID NOT send anyone anywhere.
        The document is downloadable directly from that site.
        You DO NOT have to go to Gary Wright’s website to get and read the
        document.
        Get your facts straight before you accuse me of anything.

    • GreenWin

      “Mickey” is a Gary Wright pseudo-troll. Don’t feed it.

  • frip

    There is an article in November discover magazine on lenr.

  • georgehants

    tomconover
    October 17th, 2012 at 10:55 AM
    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    In the test results, 218 hours of self sustained mode was identified. Frank on E-Cat News Live Feed stated today that “The Hot Cat, developed by Andrea Rossi, just completed a rigorous test in which it has run for 218 consecutive hours in self sustained mode.”
    1) Is it true? 218 consecutive hours in ssm?
    2) If not true, how long are the ssm event durations?
    3) Does the Hot-Cat still require one hour power, one hour ssm segments?
    God bless you Andrea, your work and spirit reflect love for all.
    Sincerely,
    Tom Conover
    —–
    Andrea Rossi
    October 17th, 2012 at 12:45 PM
    1- 218 hours of ssm is true
    2- the duration is regulated by the control system, are not regular, dependon many factors: can be 1 hour, 2 hours, or minutes
    3- no, the Hot cat works differently
    Thank ou very much for the wish, I need it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Casey

    Rossi promised to start up robotized plant to make 1million domestic E-Cats/year. Since he can not do it now as he said, there is no problem since the same robotised plant, can make 1 million 10kW modules to build 1000, 1MW E-Cat plants, which will be more profitable for Rossi. The new version of Hot E-Cat look even simpler in design, so it is mere of receiving safety certification for the small modules. Since the Hot E-Cat is in testing period, it need to design proper assembly of the small modules,into 1MW plants.

    • Ged

      That seems to be the game plan change. It makes sense; as domestic safety certifications are much harder to obtain.

  • http://www.quantumheat.org/ Bob Greenyer

    As we are agnostic here at MFMP and our goal is to prove and promote the New Fire, I felt it important to share that Piantelli has had his US patent application published with just prior art dating back to 2008.

    http://images3.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20110249783A1.pdf

    Interesting times.

    B

    • Peter_Roe

      Thanks for the link, Bob. Lots of bedtime reading there – Piantelli seems intent on locking down quite a wide area.

      It would seem that either USPTO is changing its policy, or simply that by avoiding any trigger words, the patent became acceptable. ‘Nuclear reaction’ OK, ‘low energy nuclear reaction’, not OK.

      This caught my eye: “[0233] Generator 50, furthermore, comprises a means, 61, 62, 67 for triggering the nuclear reaction, consisting of: [0234] a means for producing an impulsive electric current through an electrostrictive portion of the active core…” In other words, Piantelli is setting off the CF reaction using a surge of current through his metal substrates (including nickel). I think Rossi must be using something similar (the second pair of ‘heater’ terminals on the latest hot cat).

      I’m about 80% sure that this is where the power for extra ‘controlling’ heat goes in the e-cats – to give the reaction a kick at intervals, not to somehow dampen it down (with apologies to Pekka, LCD and others who have produced some very clever theories as to why extra heat might control the CF reaction).

      • Max S

        I think this is an A1 patent, not yet examined. Anything would be published till here (even Rossi got to this stage).
        Wait after the patent examination is completed before drawing any conclusion.

        • Pachu

          This patent looks a lot better than Rossi’s one, yet the well stablished scientific facts or the abundant proof is still missing.

          • Max S

            Pachu,
            I totally agree with you, it is much more professional than Rossi´s patent (for reference, his patent is US2011/0005506 A1).
            But also here there are no examples and no experimental data shown, which would be a problem of insufficient disclosure.
            My 15 years of experience with patents tells me,
            because of these intrinsic weaknesses, the patent office may reject either one (not even any “political reasons” required).

    • Robert Mockan

      For completeness here is the other important link to the Celani patent application information.

      http://images3.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20120134915A1.pdf

      Celani describes his procedure for activating nickel or nickel alloy surface that Piantelli says is critical for making the metal LENR active. Even though these are applications, and not the issued patent, the description Celani provides is quite specific.

      It would seem that any person with the information from these researchers should be able to make LENR active catalyst that works.

      The question is still what exactly is Rossi doing to increase COP?
      Is it mostly just a temperature effect? Many researchers have noted over the years the LENR effect increases with temperature.

      Once you have a LENR catalyst composition that can withstand the heat, like what Rossi seems to have,
      could just letting the temperature run up to 1000 C be critical for COP=12 or more?

      • NJT

        Also, the time in self sustain mode is important here for the high hot cat COP is it not?

        • Robert Mockan

          Absolutely. The more time in SSM, the higher the average COP.

      • Robert Mockan

        If the reactor NEEDS to operate at 1000 C to have COP=20, that is hot enough to use it as a radiative heat source that could be completely sealed and self contained. If Rossi were to use the same cylinder design as his demo that put out about 15 kW, but increase it to 100 cm long and 25 cm diameter, it would radiate about 90 * 15 kW = 1.35 megawatts given the increased surface area. From a cylinder about 3 feet long and less than a foot in diameter!

        That would be a convenient power level for buildings, cars, boats, planes, and so on. With an easily feasible 20% conversion efficiency, and COP=20, that would provide 270 kW shaft power, and 3/4 of that, or 202 kW, would be available for propulsion of the vehicle. It only comes to about 270 horsepower, but adequate for a light single engine prop plane or boat. Since the power system is self contained one could easily travel trans globally with a plane or boat, at no cost beyond that of the power system. No fossil fuel costs, no having to re-fuel for months, and no fuel weight, needed!

        This would effect not just the energy generation industry, but the entire physical economy!

        • Robert Mockan

          Correction: Oops! Must have been a senior moment. Not 90 times, but 9 times area. All the the power numbers knock down to 1/10 the value given.

          What does this mean (beside me getting senile?).

          It means, Rossi, you need to INCREASE the power output of your reactor!

          (Or everybody is going to have a carry around a much bigger cylinder to get a measly 1.35 megawatts). For the house, boat, even the plane, maybe feasible. But the car, Rossi, the car! How can you get 1.35 megawatts into a car given your obviously too low a power demonstration unit design?

          We need to keep the heat on Rossi.

          We need megawatts, not stinky little kilowatts.

          • Ivan_cev

            Robert, Prior doing this wonderful calculations, first we need to confirm the ecat works!

            • Robert Mockan

              What would you accept as confirmation?

              • GreenWin

                A verification signed by Sir Isaac Newton would be suspect. What would Newton, an anti-Trinitarian and occultist, know of nuclear energy?

                • jacob

                  haha

              • Ivan_cev

                A publication in the Nature magazine!

              • NJT

                Romney or Obama stating the now obvious and substantiated fact that LENR is real would certainly help development for all including Rossie’s e-cat…

          • GreenWin

            A combined cycle steam turbine would get the conversion ratio up closer to 50% yielding about 75kW electric energy. This, driving a pair of 20kW brushless PMAC motors would nicely power a cruising vessel. Enough to drive a 20M vessel around the world at 10-15knt.

            • Peter_Roe

              Make that a few hundred kW and you would have enough to propel a rigid airship, with the waste heat providing and controlling lift by circulating hot water through helium lift cells.

            • Peter_Roe

              Swan Hellenic could run the cruises, with insightful historical commentary as you hover quietly over the Parthenon, sipping your gin and tonic.

              • GreenWin

                Sounds divine.

    • atanguy

      I think that we are going to have a patent war as soon that someone put an LENR device on the market. Piantelli’s patent covers probably Rossi’s Celani’s Brilloin’s devices.
      It’s a pity as, for sure, it will slow down the technology. I think that,since you can patent anything,I’m going to patent the word “Patent” 😉

      • Peter_Roe

        Or patent the concept of a ‘machine’, so no-one can make anything more complicated than a hammer without paying you royalties…

    • Tony76

      Full disclosure of art. A properly written patent application.

      Unlike a competitor in the field best know for blogging and patent applications referencing magical undisclosed “catalysts”.

  • LCD

    Did anybody catch when Romney said that one of the ways he’s going to create jobs and increase wages is by pursuing energy policies “that weren’t around when Bush was in office”

    Of course you could make the argument that it means something else but I couldn’t help thinking that he was talking about the ecat, DGT, etc, lol. Specially since we have a video of him mentioning Cold Fusion.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xABnbUMK6Ew

    • NJT

      Romney appeared to come close, but no cigar for cold fusion (LENR, FPE) as yet! We do know from his past comments that Romney is somewhat aware of this new energy source, so maybe he just might use it as a last shot across the campaign bow. He could definitely argue the facts on the present US Energy Departments avoidance for R & D in this realm as well as the abysmal performance of the US Patent Office policies toward cold fusion. He may have nothing to lose and everything to gain come the next debate.

      • NJT

        The research developments we have seen from VERY reputable sources, over the past couple of months concerning LENR breakthroughs does definitely require a serious public look-see from our US Government agencies (Energy Department, etc) instead of the crapola dished out by them, their agencies, and the MSM. These politicians will have to face the music sooner rather than later and now is the time!

        • Omega Z

          NJT

          Romney has hinted CF on several occasion now.

          There’s little doubt That He & Obama are aware of whats going on.
          It’s just probably not Politically safe at this time to bring it up. Not until a successful Electrical production has been verified fully feasible..

          • NJT

            Omega, your comment does not make any logical sense to me. LENR R & D is NOW proven and a verifiable fact of our lives – face it. Why not let the rest of the world in on this verifiable biggest secret that could help save mankind from itself?

            These politicians currently running for government offices – they are presently acting like stooges for the fossil fuel industry! Hopefully that will soon change…

            • Omega Z

              NJT

              At this point it would open a hornets nest.

              We have a new technology. COP>6 Etc,Etc..
              Ah, Whats COP.
              Has it produced more electricity then it uses? No as of yet it hasn’t produced any & So on.

              With out Official verification, If Romney Brings it up, It’s political motivation. Imagine the spin. Election manipulation.

              If Obama brings it up, Hows he to explain this to all the Union people who will lose their jobs in the Fossil fuel industry. Also political motivation. Manipulation.

              Basically without more validation this could be political suicide. Claims of manipulation.

              All the Average Joe will see is maybe, hopefully, sometime in the future. It will take time for the masses to understand. Were still waiting on Mainstream Science to get it.

              No, an election cycle wouldn’t be a good time to bring this out. Both candidates would realize this. Even a good thing can go bad.

              This needs to remain non Political.

    • Casey

      >>>>>“that weren’t around when Bush was in office”<<<<<

      With this words Romney mean new leases and drilling on federal land.:)

      • Omega Z

        Casey

        These were available.

    • Lemuel

      I didn’t see the debate that you quote from but my guess is he’s talking about ‘fracking’ which is being widely heralded in the US as their ‘new energy’ source…..
      The big energy companies there are promoting the big F as the way forward and its big business that are behind the politico’s…..

      • Omega Z

        Lemuel

        Fracking has been used for well over half a century. Presently they use hydrologic pressure which is more efficient & controllable. They use to use an actual explosive gel with Steel shot to hold open the cracks.

        The Big advance has been directional drilling. Down & out, or up, or a spoke pattern. This allows recovery of Oil that was left in the past because it was to expensive to drill enough wells to get to it. Kind of like a sponge. Drill the middle, recover the bulk, leave the rest. Now you can drill the edge, Right angle across the mass to the opposite edge & recover a lot more. Fracking just opens a larger area where in the past it just opened up the main bore whole hoping the Oil would flow to it. Today they use a type of ceramic instead of steel shot as there’s no explosion and it doesn’t deteriorate as quickly so there’s no need to refrack a well latter. If it should wax up, they can steam clean it.

        Fracking isn’t the problem, It’s just an expensive process usually contracted out to the lowest bid. Even by the Big Corps. It’s the contractors who are likely to skimp on the process/rules/regulations causing problems. They play the Odds. 1/20 has a problem? To avoid this there should always be a Government inspector present threw out the process with penalties stiff enough to mostly void the possibility he will turn his head the other way. 20 years should suffice. This is something that would have net zero cost to the consumer. It’s just neither party has the political will or knowledge to implement & Enforce.

        That said, we still need to work away from Fossil fuels & LENR is the economical way to do this. Oil will eventually cost so much that we’ll dive into an Economic depression like we’ve never seen before. The New Dark Ages.

    • LCD

      I should point out that he didn’t actually say energy “policies” but instead “technologies”. I don’t know why i wrote that.

    • atanguy

      I doubt that Romney with his support from oil,gas, coal and nuke companies will do anything that could risk to stop the flow of money he gets from them. Obama looks better in this respect in my opinion.

      • NJT

        So you are saying, when LENR in some form or another eventually hits the market, Romny (if he makes it as president) will have to eat a lot of crow ( and likely choke) for his big supporters from the nukes, coal, oil and gas money men. Well, so will Obama because he is right now (as the big man-president of USA) suppressing this world shaking research!

        • atanguy

          Last night,Mitt Romney pledged to expand offshore drilling, reject investments in clean energy, and proudly proclaimed, “I will fight for oil, coal, and natural gas.”

      • Omega Z

        atanguy

        These aren’t the people that’s concerned with LENR. Well Maybe Coal, but even it will be around for a long time. Just much smaller. Most of the push back is coming from other places.

        In reality, we should only hope that LENR can develop fast enough to offset the Oil shortage due to price. At $30 a gallon, Oil companies wont make much if any profit. You have to sell product to make a profit.
        Power Companies don’t need Nuke plants if they have E-cats So those effected are small potatoes in the grand scheme of things.

        No, most of your push back will come from those who will lose power & prestige in the power shift. Those in a position where it’s hard to adapt or change. Those which many of us aren’t aware of.

        For those who like to ploy the Political Dogma, Fossil fuel business contribute to both parties. Who gets the Largest share depends on who has the power at any given moment. Both persuasions are vested in Fossil investments. However Investments can be moved to the New Fire.

        However, if you persist on political shenanigry , Republicans want to protect Oil profits. Ok, Democrats don’t want to forfeit those millions of blue Collar Union jobs(Votes). If the Dogma is factual, LENR will never see the light of day.

  • georgehants

    It is now to become criminal and antisocial to say that science is wrong and that Cold Fusion does exist.
    The High Priests are letting out their true natures.
    —–
    From Scientific American
    Antiscience Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy
    The United States faced down authoritarian governments on the left and right. Now it may be facing an even greater challenge from within.
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy

    • georgehants

      National Academy of Sciences
      World science academies release report to promote research integrity
      AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, and TRIESTE, Italy — To encourage researchers around the world to adhere to universal science values and ethical behavior.
      http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/naos-wsa101712.php

      • HeS

        @:”to promote research integrity”

        More power to scientific bureaucracy (and censorship).

      • Peter_Roe

        Wrong target (big pharma ‘researchers’ excepted). Its the institutions and journals that need a brand new set of ethics.

    • Peter_Roe

      “evolution, human-induced climate change, vaccines, stem cell research”

      Don’t you just love the way that to question AGW or the safety of vaccines is slipped in with those who question evolution or want to stop stem cell research. Subtle propaganda at its very best.

      • georgehants

        Peter, below — “despite years of scientific training” —
        What they are saying is that even with all the possible scientific brain-washing Dogma, most scientists disagree.
        If scientists where free to state their views without fear of retaliation by peers and the establishment the World may be a better place.
        ——
        Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
        ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
        University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

      • georgehants

        Peter, below — “despite years of scientific training” —
        What they are saying is that even with all the possible scientific mind bending Dogma, most scientists disagree.
        If scientists where free to state their views without fear of retaliation by peers and the establishment the World may be a better place.
        ——
        Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find
        ScienceDaily (Oct. 17, 2012) — A team of researchers in Boston
        University’s Psychology Department has found that, despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose.
        http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017102451.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29

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

          A closely related deep-rooted belief, I think, tends to pop up in the cold fusion context: people think that it sounds too “good” to be true and therefore is likely false. As if the truth or falsity of a physical phenomenon would somehow depend on its utility value to man.

          • georgehants

            Pekka agreed, but much of popular belief is hidden because, especially scientists are afraid to stand up against the pressure of authority that is dictating what they are allowed and what they are forbidden to believe.
            This religious dictatorship must, I think, be removed, to allow a Wonderful unknown freedom to enter science.
            To follow for just once in it’s history the Truth.

            • jacob

              can’t see how this corrupt system can be changed,it is very much established with solid foundations and are well protected and fortified.

              Maybe a mayor global collapse in a form of a stockmarket crash, predicted to happen by ‘ insider Wealth Alert’ in 3 weeks time ,if true ,could be a catalist,I really don’t know.

      • GreenWin

        These are the methods developed by Herr Goebbels, master propagandist. To accuse doubters of pet theories like ICF hot fusion, AGW, Darwin, Newton the same as religious “Creationists.” It is high propagandist clownery.

        The doubting of the high priests continues as one by one their pet projects collapse into boondoggledem. The $4B NIF is a good example. The highest priests and experts said THIS is the grail of hot fusion. The failure of AGW to cow the public is another. Holes in Darwin & Newton keep opening. And attempts to make a triumph of a boson are short-lived.

        The ivory towers of science are being dismantled. A small team in Italy has given us what appears to be 20+ times more than all 60 years of hot fusion research. Wonder why there are “antiscience” beliefs?

        http://fire.pppl.gov/NIF_Science_Clery_092112.pdf

        • georgehants

          GreenWin, as Peter says it is all psychological warfare to them.
          They do not say that nobody would be anti-science, if science only follows the Truth with a completely fair and unbiased mind.
          They make out that those fighting for say, Cold Fusion are questioning the authority of the church of science and are therefore committing treachery against the population.

          • GreenWin

            Yes George. As the general population awakens to the manipulations of the orthodoxy, it will either change dramatically, or collapse. The treachery is to wield ignorance as a club. The crumbling church of science has been caught red-handed – and THAT is a crime against humanity.

            • Andrew Macleod

              Agree 100%

      • Tony76

        AGW is based on consensus of an exclusive club. It is not based on scientific examination of data, with accurate error bounds, nor is it based on risk, impact and probability.

        AGW is another good example of politics that contaminates all fields of human activity.

    • atanguy

      Basically this article is right, it attacks the antiscience conservatives who want to put their religious believes above any scientific facts. For example, you have the right to believe that earth has been created 6000 years ago or to deny Darwin scientific conclusions or the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. But all of those believes should be assessed by the scientific method and it proves that they are all false.
      Facts are stubborn.
      By the way the article doesn’t mention cold fusion contrary to what you imply.

  • Voodoo

    What will doing 4000 Chinese companies, if Rossi refused to sell them production licenses ?

    These companies simply will producing Shanzaied LENR and some of them will even pay voluntarily fees to Rossi.

    This will ultimate proof of his broken strategy.

    Vivaldi invented his music pieces, however today 40 millions Chinese children play and “Shanzaied” (indigenous variations) his classical music.

    • Casey

      Then, it is needed to organize production plants, like the Taiwanese Foxconn, employ 1 million workers and made under own control, production for all world as the Apple company is doing with their electronics, made by Foxconn.

  • Al D

    We know that NASA and possibly DOE is following e-cat and consequently, I’m sure that Obama is aware of it. After Solyndra tho, I think it would just be too politically risky to talk about it now or provide any easing of the way.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      What made Obama a laughing stock was giving huge loan guarantees to shaky companies(which happened to be owned by big Obama financial supporters). It’s a form of laundering tax money back into campaign money. How did you like stimulus spending to build an auto plant in Finland?

      LENR doesn’t need tax money. LENR just needs an even break in the USPO and with the regulators.

  • http://HamsterFusion Sam

    Well unfortunately I assume that a lot of the money to the campaigns comes from competing industries since Energy is the nr 1 Industri in the world.
    I hope to be proved wrong but actually I think the US election is actually negative for someone like Rossi or Dr Bob who would like to enter the market with “competetive” technologies.

    • Mannstein

      A lot of money comes into the campaign from people like Sheldon Adelson an Israel firster and Las Vegas casino operator under investigation by the FBI for criminal activity.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Over 90% of Obama’s campaign contributions are nontraceble because they are under the $200 reporting limit. It is widely suspected that this is Middle-Eastern Islamic oil money laundered through thousands of credit card accounts. Approximately 1/2 of all the visits to Obama’s fund raising site are from foreign countries. It is illegal for a candidate to accept contribution from foreign nationals.

        It is also illegal for dead people to vote. There is one county in Illinois that has twice as many GimmeCrat registered voters as there are living citizens in that county.

  • Filip47

    The only problem is that it’s not verfied by a third party, as soon as that happens everything will change. It’s all we need, one proof, just one.
    A ‘Yes He Can!’
    And Rossi is not able to give one, why?
    I am starting to get very skeptical again. Sometimes I feel like an idiot, maybe I am. Maybe most of us are, Rossi included. Soon this all will be over, for better os worse.

    • Casey

      As Rossi said many times,the real proof will be product on the marked.
      So, he will not reveal secrets of the E-Cat, until he get his patent and proper certifications.

  • Peter_Roe

    The only real argument about energy provision in the UK seems to be between the tories, who want fore fracking and a new generation of gas-fired stations to make use of the cheapish gas, and the libdems, WWF and something called the ‘climate change committee’, all of whom are signed up to ludicrous ‘carbon elimination’ promises and schemes.

    The upside if Camoron wins would be that modern gas generators would be very simply converted to packaged cold fusion units. Personally I would be up for new power stations fuelled entirely by polar bears if it meant no new nuclear fission.

    • Peter_Roe

      Previous comment moderated. The only candidates I can see are ‘arg ument’, ‘clim ate change’ or ‘ludicr ous’, which would all seem to be a bit over-sensitive. Hopefully this comment will make sense later!

      • timycelyn

        As a test:
        argument, climate change, ludicrous.

        Added in edit – it didn’t go into moderation

        • Peter_Roe

          Thanks for testing, Tim. In that case I have to conclude that the moderation filter has somehow become sentient, and has taken a personal dislike to me and my comments! (Or possibly you might see some other possible ‘trigger’ when the comment becomes visible – beats the cr*p out of me!).

          • Blanco69

            Yes Peter, maybe Ecat world is moderated by Skynet as well as our good friend Frank!

          • georgehants

            Ha ….

          • Robert Mockan

            WordPress filters can be organized in different ways, and sometimes there are unintended consequences. Just be happy your browser does not take a dislike to you. Then it would not update web pages every time you visit, but instead display something from your cache that no longer exists. I have written commentary more often than I care to think about that simply … disappears… when I try to post it. Not even a moderation notice. I usually trace the problem to my evil browser. Even now I can feel it watching me with those horns and beady little yellow eyes.

          • Robert Mockan

            Just be happy your browser still likes you. Mine does not always update web pages every time I visit. Instead it prefers to display pages that no longer exist, even though I tell it to always update. Writing a comment to post on a page that no longer exists might be enough to confuse WordPress. Then there is the ISP itself that might be making problems for you. I have ATT, that is not a bad as AOL, but getting there. You sure you did not say anything, anytime, anywhere, that might put you on a “list”, for automatic moderation? Sometimes webmasters have to be careful what kind of .. low life (heh heh).. they allow to post, if the comment is not politically correct. Also, remember, Frank is a writer and author. You misspell something, and maybe off with your head!

            • Peter_Roe

              Now I do feel digitally unloved – my browsers (Chrome and Firefox) do exactly the same thing. I must have pissed them off, too!

              • Omega Z

                @ Robert
                @ Peter

                Make sure your settings are set for refresh every-time.

                Of coarse with updated versions of your browser, there’s always the possibility they broke something. Occasional glitches. So watch for update fixes. Also if there is no fix available for a glitch & you can verify there is one you can file a report.

          • atanguy

            PARANOIA EXISTS guys!
            Look behind you!
            😉

            • Peter_Roe

              Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they are not out to get you!

              • georgehants

                Brilliant.

                • Omega Z

                  +1

                • Peter_Roe

                  Not mine, sadly. It was quoted in the Mel Gibson film, ‘Conspiracy Theory’ but its older than that.

  • Omega Z

    Frank

    We know 2 politicians are aware. Bruce Tarr of Massachusetts, Another I don’t recall his name off hand who has actually had some involvement with LENR.

    It’s unlikely Romney & Obama aren’t up to speed on this. It may just be that it’s not worth the Political Risk at this time considering that 1. CF has a bad rep & 2. At present only capable of producing hot water While still requiring a substantial amounts of Electricity. Most of the Public would have trouble comprehending what COP>6 would mean. A lot of campaign time would be needed to bring them up to speed.

    Once hooked up to a Generator producing substantially more Electricity then it uses, Then Politicians will talk LENR.

    Considering this involves many more people, Corporations & scheduling problems that slow things down, I’d be surprised if this were to happen or confirmed before June 2013. Realizing Rossi is just now starting to grapple with producing the steam output at pressure required. Also it will have to work with a ready designed off the shelf turbine as proof of concept. No Corporation, Not even Siemens will design a special turbine until after proof of concept. Rossi will have to make do with the best existing match up.

    If this is accomplished but has a few problems due to Turbine design, Then Siemens or any other Turbine Manufacturer would be more then willing to spend 10’s of millions on a Purpose designed Turbine, But not before.

  • John

    If (and that is a big if) LENR is real then it will take a long time to ramp up to speed. We’re talking 10+ years. I’m sure that society can cope.

    • g

      From a political perspective the US will do anything to decouple its reliance on middle east oil. LENR will not be left in the hands of industry for long. All governments have the ability under patent law to compusorarily aquire (or licence) a technology in their national interest. That seems the most likey path. Inventors will be paid a license fee and still get rich.

      Rember the west is broke, anything that can reduce captital and ongoing costs in this environment will be a revolution that will be driven by current economic necesity.

      • Peter_Roe

        g, – that’s a very interesting possibility that hasn’t been discussed before. As well as assuring the end of oil and gas dependency, and the risks of nuclear fission, it would certainly kill many other birds with one stone; continuing government energy revenues assured from licensing, centralised control of who gets to use the technology (avoiding massive loss of asset value within the existing energy market), inventors get paid and no-one gets hurt. Licensing would probably mean no private usage of CF but might eventually permit car manufacturers to use it, along with railways and merchant shipping.

        I don’t like any form of government control of these things, but this could possibly be the least malign path, at least it could be if politicians didn’t use it to hand exclusive control to their friends, and line their own pockets in the process.

        • Blanco69

          Yes, this may be a easy fit for governments who would otherwise be seeing their oil related tax revenues falling off a cliff.

          • astralprojectee

            If that is the case then the Republicans would obviously be the most hurt by cold fusion IMO.

      • NJT

        Very good “alternative” suggestion that could presently save our world and let the governments maintain control (taxes, etc)…

      • Daniel Steward

        You must be thinking of some other US government. This one is firmly in the pockets of the Oil and power industries and has shown no real interest in upsetting that particular applecart.

    • Allen McCloud

      Actually it’s not a big if. Time to wake up John.

      • John

        I “borrowed” the word “if” from Admin who used it in this post. Scroll up and have a look for it.

        • Omega Z

          John

          It’s (and that is a big if) that becomes objectionable.

          Most of us have cruised here for quite awhile & we pretty much assume the “If” is auto implied in most cases. If your relatively new to e-catworld, you probably weren’t aware.

          Although contrary to how many of us post, we don’t have blind faith. It’s odds & percentages & they can change from day to day.

          But I’ll do you one better. I think your time frame is short if your talking about E-cat having deep market penetration. For so many reasons. But then That’s just my opinion. Would be glad to be wrong.

    • Barry

      I don’t know John, when the Ecat is out of the bag, I would say it will be more like 1-2 years. On a positive note we may be witnessing our last presidential debates (in the US) over the issues of big oil.

      • Peter_Roe

        That would be so in any kind of free-for-all, Barry, but I think that introduction of CF is more likely to take place within a rigidly controlled environment in order to minimise losses to existing energy concerns. John’s 10+ years sounds about right for gradual replacement of other forms of grid generation, and would allow nuclear stations to wind down within planned lifetimes.

        • Daniel M. Basso

          You are forgetting China. I think they would exploit the huge consumer market before anybody else [and that would benefit society as a whole, IMHO]. That was Rossi’s initial goal, but from his most recent statements that seems to have changed.

          • Peter_Roe

            The Chinese govt want to be a player on the world stage, and will probably go along with any decision to tightly control CF taken by Western powers through Bilderberg etc. If not, there are always import controls (on safety grounds of course). That situation couldn’t last for long though, and in this event things might change quite quickly in the West.

          • Omega Z

            @ peter & Daniel

            I don’t think China would pay much head to the rest of the World before they fulfilled their own needs. Nearly or all they produced would stay in China for decades. If they sold any outside of China, it would only be for the Capitol required to pay for their own.

            • Peter_Roe

              True, but just the knowledge that the Chinese were using CF widely would have much the same effect outside the country as availability.

              The simplest solution for all concerned would be to restrict the use of CF to state/corporate entities, i.e., no private use. The latter would empower people, and no government wants that.

        • Barry

          I guess my hopeful vision is a home unit that can be purchased off the shelf of the local hardware store. Once CF technology is stable there will be a rush to bring such a product to market. The larger systems can follow.

          • clovis

            Hi, Barry.
            actually the reverse is happening,Dr. Rossi has said
            that he can build cheaper than the chinese, by robotics, but he decided to go with the 1 mw plant instead, which makes more sense to me, in order for this change to take place it must be in some kind of orderly process, or all kind of trouble may take place.
            so it makes sense to start where the most good can take place, and that is helping small company that uses that range of power, and relive them of the power cost that they incur, and they will take off, and once things are stable then use the robotic’s to give us our own power source and then we will be truly energy independent.– thank you.

            • HeS

              +1

        • http://HamsterFusion Sam

          Well I might be wrong but most nuclear plants are operating beyond planned lifespans. They just do some upgrades and use them another 20-30 years.

          They actually continued to run Tjernobyl for many years after one of the reactors exploded 🙂
          Quite sad!

          • Peter_Roe

            You’re right. I probably should have said maximum possible lifespans (to extract every last penny of profit, regardless of risk).

            • http://HamsterFusion Elias

              There is a good video of when Dr Michio Kaku speaks on the news about the Fukushima catastrophe. “They lied to us!!!”

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4k77vjeEL0

              Actually organization that is supposed to protect us from Nuclear dangers played against us. Even after the melt downs they would not inform the society and continued their lies.

              I used to believe that scientists should rule the world, that they where pure rather than bankers who plays with numbers but after seeing some statements about Cold Fusion I would have to say… We need a social revolution!

              Information & Technology can save all our problems!

              • Peter_Roe

                The speed, uniformity and extent of the Fukushima cover-up, the depth of deception that followed, and the ongoing disregard for the interests of ordinary people is a true eye-opener about the real nature of those who control the world.

              • GreenWin

                A good video to show to politicians, safety experts, and the MSM when discussing CF. Why would any sane person pursue new fission reactors, when we have the now huge library of data for successful CF.

                “They lied to us…” Michio Kaku

              • Iggy Dalrymple

                The truth is the nuclear industry is considerably safer than oil and coal. Alarmists love to hate nukes because when they think about nuclear power plants they can hear Hitchcock music in their heads. Of course LENR should be the safest of all energy producers.
                ~~~~~~~~~~~
                Coal (elect, heat,cook –world avg) 100 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
                Coal electricity – world avg 60 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
                Coal (elect,heat,cook)– China 170
                Coal electricity- China 90
                Coal – USA 15
                Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
                Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
                Biofuel/Biomass 12
                Peat 12
                Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (0.2% of world energy for all solar)
                Wind 0.15 (1.6% of world energy)
                Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
                Hydro – world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
                Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)
                http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

        • Jim

          I can accept the part about the government supporting the winding down of utilities’ investments in fossil and nuclear energy assets. I do not see workable mechanisms for the suppression of distributed LENR.

          This is predicated on the assumption that the “secret sauce” of high COP is not that tricky to manufacture. Once the secret is out, what can stop 100,000 garage-based engineers world-wide from trying it out?

          Some organization as wildly effective as the the US Drug Enforcement Agency? I don’t know about the UK, but here in ‘Merica, we don’t brook no guv’mnt innerference with our privat prop’ty.

          • Iggy Dalrymple

            Once a robust LENR energy producing reactor is demonstrated to the USPO, along with 3rd party verification, the patent office should issue a patent. If the patent office refuses, the inventor would have grounds to sue and take it to the Supreme Court.

            If at the time the patent is issued, if many manufacturers have gone ahead and copied the invention without permission, then it could result in a massive patent infringement case, dwarfing the Robert Kearns intermittent windshield wiper system case, in which Kearns was awarded $40,000,000 from Ford & Chrysler.

            The later a patent is issued, the more lucrative to the inventor because the 18 years doesn’t start ticking until the patent is issued, yet once issued it is retroactive.

    • Andrew Macleod

      LENR is real, that debate is long over.

      • Peter_Roe

        Not on ecatnews it isn’t!

        • timycelyn

          Well, over there they probably still believe the world is flat, that birth control can be achieved by reducing the number of storks, and that gravity is a communist plot.

          😉

          More to be pitied than censured….

          • NJT

            ++++Right on the mark!

    • Warthog

      The reality of LENR is no longer in question, except to the most diehard skeptics. Rossi’s version may not be, but the fact of the existence of “some” (and probably more than one type) high energy nuclear process happening in these systems has been proven (replicated) MANY times.

      • ivan_cev

        Whart. Could you document the replications?