Engineering News Covers E-Cat Tests

Engineering News, a South African weekly trade magazine which covers news in all industrial sectors has published an article by Jeremy Wakeford entitled “Interest in LENR device resurges as independent report is released”.

It’s an accurate summary of the test, covering the key points that have been mentioned here many times — the COP, energy density, lack of radiation detected, etc. When the author talks about a resurgence of interest in LENR he really is talking about the blogosphere — remarking that few mainstream sources have covered the story so far.

In conclusion he states:

“If further testing proves that the E-Cat works as claimed, then the reported energy densities suggest that this could be a massively disruptive technology – and a clean one at that. Given how badly the world needs cheap and clean energy, it is a wonder that LENR is garnering so little attention.”

That’s something I’ve wondered about myself many times. To my way of thinking this is something that deserves wide coverage and discussion in the media throughout the world — it’s an alternative energy that should now be considered alongside solar, wind, fuel cells, biofuels, etc. which are discussed widely and frequently.

  • Roger Bird

    Could someone explain in layman’s terms what the quantum ring theory means and what it says the (new) structure of the atom is?

  • Al S

    Having read this diatribe, I could not resist responding to the URL below as follows:

    http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/06/06/open-letter-to-rossis-academic-e-cat-promoters/

    I must comment on the tone of the article, URL above. Your personal opinion, to wit: “… your preprint does not reflect well on you or your institutions. …” in my opinion is premature, and reflects negatively on potential progress in any manner other than the process of scientific exploration that you espouse. There are a myriad of dismissed mavericks, whose ridiculed works, today define the technical environment in which humanity lives. Why did you not simply await the production of mass e-Cats, the thousands of users accumulating the results of LENR-generated power, and save yourself such poor reflection your dismissive treatment of the preprint will elicit? What, pray tell, frightens you so gravely? I do not believe you are saving a sacred scientific methodology by your detailed negative observations. You, sir, hinder progress, here and everywhere, promulgating treatment of a new and growing field of knowledge so aloofly. Please come back down to earth and smell the roses, it’s a new day outside.

    • Roger Bird

      I doubt if opposition like Krivit’s is hindering Rossi. People read Krivit’s so-called writings and say, “Hey, I think I’ll check it out.” So, from my perspective, Krivit can put down Rossi all that he wants. Just make sure, Krivit, that you spell his name right.

      • clovis

        +1

      • Zephir

        Krivit is in close connection with Piantelli (2nd founder of cold fusion at nickel), who just hopes, he will make the same business like Andrea Rossi. All Krivit’s motivations are business competition. After all, A. Rossi doesn’t claim something qualitatively different, than Piantelli is claiming. The COP ~ 6 of Andrea Rossi doesn’t differ from COP = 3 of Piantelli so much.

    • Andrew Macleod

      In the article he states that “Rossi was contracted to produce thermal electric chips” when in fact he was contracted to do a feasibility study.

      • Bob

        You would have to ask how come they approached Rossi and paid so much money to do any work for them in the first place. I don’t think they would have made the offer to dozens of people. Something must have given them the impression that Rossi had something which no-one else had in the way of producing high efficiency thermo-electric conversion chips and I would assume that ‘something’ was claims made by Rossi.
        On the basis of the results of a test supposedly endorsed by a known university, Rossi was given a large contract to supply a number of high efficiency thermoelectric converters.
        Most of them did not work at all and none worked anywhere near the efficiency of the device previously tested.
        Rossi said that the devices failed in the scale up from laboratory samples to the mass produced devices.
        I find that hard to believe in this day and age where the most improbable and complex devices can be reliably mass produced so effectively that they are highly reliable and profitable.
        Also, if it was only a ‘scale up’ problem then why hasn’t this relatively simple problem been remedied so as to make the direct conversion of low grade heat to electricity now possible. The need is still there. This same technology could be used with great effect in generating electricity from Rossi’s latest invention and yet it seems he has totally abandoned his own invention.
        Which I might add is a repeat of the Petrol-Dragon episode. It’s not as if that project was abandoned due to a lack of waste to convert.
        No matter how enthusiastic we might be about lenr, these previous episodes do not inspire any confidence that we might not be going down the same road again.
        I think this goes a long way towards explaining why mainstream media is giving it a big miss.
        That is why there needs to be some continuing test programs to address any and all concerns about the recent tests, and to convincingly dispel any doubts that what was reported, is in fact beyond dispute. So far it is impressive, but not beyond dispute.
        From what I can gather, that is the intention of the organisation which financed the last test. I hope it continues as planned.

  • John Littlemist

    Ethiopia’s need for energy raises tension in Africa. Hopefully LENR will make warfare obsolete soon.

    http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/News/2846/17/Diplomacy-is-the-key.aspx

  • Roger Bird

    Have you geese seen these two:

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/06/a-veterans-voice.html

    http://www.dailyenergyreport.com/seducing-the-columb-barrier/

    Two most excellent articles. I fear that LENR will get so popular that I won’t have enough time to read all of the excellent articles. (:->)

    Dr. Jeong Kim is very impressive, and although my wife is a Korean television addict (she’s not Korean), she is not impressed.

  • Sandy

    The main-stream media is owned by the members of the Bilderberg Group; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group. They do not allow the publication of reports that would be detrimental to their financial interests. Favorable reports about Cold Fusion/LENR would be detrimental to the value of their investments in the petroleum industry so they do not allow favorable reports about LENR to be published in their media.

    “We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”
     
    “It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”
     
    — David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberg Group meeting in Baden, Germany.

    • Methusela

      I think they know and are planning for it.

      http://oilprice.com/Finance/investing-and-trading-reports/Why-Are-the-Big-Financial-Institutions-Selling-Oil-BIG.html

      What else do you think the “financial crisis” is about?

      Sub-prime? As if.

    • LCD

      That may be true although I have no faith that it is, but you don’t need something like the Bilderberg group to do the suppression.

      Modern scientist and science do a bang up job of that all by themselves for the simple reason that you might be able to take subjectivity out of the scientific method but you can’t take emotion out of the scientist.

    • Roger Bird

      Trust me, they are not all powerful. Your Daddy was all powerful when you were 2 years old, but he is not the Bilderbergs. You might try getting your Daddy issues out of this discussion.

      • Sandy

        Roger: They are not “all powerful” but they are extremely powerful.

        “The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market competition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic ‘super-entity’ that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.”

        Vitali S, Glattfelder JB, Battiston S (2011). The Network of Global Corporate Control. PLoS ONE 6(10): e25995. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025995

        And, Roger, I never knew my father. He was shot to death in Vietnam about 2 months before I was born.

      • Sandy

        Roger, Karen Hudes has crossed swords with that “super-entity”. Ms. Hudes is currently being criminally prosecuted on a bogus trespassing complaint that was solicited by the U.S. Justice Department. She tried to expose 135 billion dollars of fraud by the World Bank and now the Bank and U.S. Government are trying to legally crush her.

        “A former insider at the World Bank, ex-Senior Counsel Karen Hudes, says the global financial system is dominated by a small group of corrupt, power-hungry figures centered around the privately owned U.S. Federal Reserve.

        The network has seized control of the media to cover up its crimes, too, she explained. In an interview with The New American, Hudes said that when she tried to blow the whistle on multiple problems at the World Bank, she was fired for her efforts. Now, along with a network of fellow whistleblowers, Hudes is determined to expose and end the corruption. And she is confident of success.

        Citing an explosive 2011 Swiss study published in the PLOS ONE journal on the “network of global corporate control,” Hudes pointed out that a small group of entities — mostly financial institutions and especially central banks — exert a massive amount of influence over the international economy from behind the scenes. “What is really going on is that the world’s resources are being dominated by this group,” she explained, adding that the “corrupt power grabbers” have managed to dominate the media as well. “They’re being allowed to do it.”

        World Bank Insider Blows Whistle on Corruption, Federal Reserve
        http://www.globalresearch.ca/world-bank-insider-blows-whistle-on-corruption-federal-reserve/5336492

    • Robyn Wyrick

      David Rockefeller stated “The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination”?

      Many laughs later.

      Sorry about this, but my bu115#1t0meter just popped.

      • Roger Bird

        Was that your BU115H1T meter?

    • Bento

      I know two people who have attended the Bilderberg group in the nineties, they were not impressed, it’s more like a Lions club delux.
      They all have different interests, impossible to organize such a conspiracy.

      • Bento

        Media is chaos, politics are chaos, science is chaos, all run randomly by personal interest. DSK is the best example.

  • Roger Bird

    Please stop whining about how the mainstream media should be following this story. It doesn’t help any; no one wants to hear whining. But do keep telling your friends and family and keep posting LENR supporting messages in places that are even sort of relevant. I use Google News to search for news articles like “global warming” or “energy” or “energy policy” or “pollution”, etc.. I find an article that allows comments. I have a copy and paste short comment and paste it into the comments. Then I customize it for the article. I don’t tell my elected representatives about LENR+. They are by definition dependent thinkers. It is a waste of time and I don’t want the government involved anyway. The farther we get without the government getting involved the better.

    • Kim

      Your government comments are spot on.

      Respect
      Kim

    • tq

      This looks like an episode of the outer limits. The world we know is coming to an end and only a bunch of people is aware of it, and if you tell someone, they think you are a fool.

      • Roger Bird

        It is not coming to an end, but a lot of people are hurt and damaged because of pollution and poverty and lack of necessities.

  • Robert Ellefson

    More cracks appear, and Robert Park’s influence grows weaker, weaker…

    • Roger Bird

      My image is that the grand canyon of incredulity (1988) shrank to a gap only a few meters wide by 2006 when only the brave could jump across it. Now, in 2013, only the fearful and the uninformed can’t merely step across a canyon that has become a crack.

  • khawk

    And no teardown quote from Krivits either. Perhaps this is a day for progress.

  • GreenWin

    A month before the E-Cat verification, David Niebauer general counsel for Brillouin Energy, wrote a very good overview of the Coulomb barrier to nuclear fusion:

    http://www.dailyenergyreport.com/seducing-the-columb-barrier/

    With the new US Congressional investigation into taxpayer funding for ITER, the last great hope for hot fusion may be fading. However, the advent of LENR brightens.

    • LCD

      “This concentrated energy allows some of the protons in the hydrogen to capture an electron, and thus become a neutron. This step converts a small amount of energy into mass in the neutron. ”

      It’s not a small amount though, it’s more than what it takes to break the coulomb barrier. This is not well explained and makes LENR advocates seem stupid.
      And although you put 2.4 units in and get 24 units you have to explain why no dangerous radiation is observed and why conventional fusion does not occur even as a side product. Maybe this is all explained somewhere but I haven’t seen it.

      For the GTBEC by Kim it has this fact working against him. The temperature at which BEC occurs is inversely proportional to mass, protons and neutrons are too massive for BEC at Rossi temps, so there is even less chance heavier nuclei would BEC at Rossi temps, even including blackbody distribution. Additionally exp results suggests that higher temps enhance the effect which is counter productive to BECs. BEC’s can occur at higher temps when densities are higher, but there again doesn’t seem to be enough evidence that densities should be too much higher than the density of Ni.

      The only reason why BECs as far as I can tell can still make sense is a combination of effects. Non-equilibrium distribution of free energy in the lattice (non isothermal- Ahern’s idea of anharmonic oscillations) produces locally COLD spots in the lattice. That along with slightly higher densities may be enough to see BEC’s.

      Just my thoughts.

      • GreenWin

        “…you have to explain why no dangerous radiation is observed…” From what I see the WL patent claims to neutralize gamma. The USPTO gave them the patent so… it must be true.

        • LCD

          So I understand you are being sarcastic, but the claim needs to be proven and it has not been.

      • LCD

        the oilprice article is actually well written, Godes may have something but it’s not obvious how a chain reaction would form. If Rossi’s process is similar but not from a wet cell (as i understand it) then these two different methods with probably similar physics may shed light on the phenomenon behind it all.

        http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Scientists-must-Study-the-Nuclear-Weak-Force-to-Better-Understand-LENR.html

  • Svein

    It is good to see that mainstream media is picking up on this in an honest way with out trying to ridicule or muck it. Also the comments are maybe 90% positive compare to the normal 90% negative.
    It feels like we are in for a change to a new era. Let the new fire warm us all, and save the world.

  • Barry

    Engineering News- ”The LENR effect used to be called ‘cold fusion’, a label now regarded by those in the field as a misnomer, and one which tainted the field when early experiments, in 1989, by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann could not be replicated.”

    It surprises me how many sources say LENR used to be “Cold Fusion.” It’s as confusing as “The performer formerly known as Prince.” I don’t think CF researchers are even close to a consensus on discarding “Cold Fusion.” Think of “ICCF” or Peter Hagelstein’s “Cold Fusion 101” course. “Cold Fusion Now” “Cold Fusion Times” and on Rossi’s site “Cold Fusion Revolution.”
    I appreciate the article but I would argue SP and MF’s CF phenomenon could not be replicated. They were after all “The match that ignited a great fire.”

    • AB

      The Fleischman & Pons effect has been replicated many times since the critics decided that it could not be replicated.

      Mainstream opinion on this topic is frozen in time and reflects the prevalent opinion of 1989. Few are aware of subsequent results and advancements.

  • Hopeful

    Jeremy Wakeford writes:
    “…this could be a massively disruptive technology…”

    How is LENR a disruptive technology?…even if it fails to fulfil the promise?

    Why are such words being used by “responsible” journalists, does that use not cause disruption of many minds, even neutral minds?

    • lenrdawn

      I don’t think you understand what “disruptive” means in this context. It isn’t negative in any way. “Disruptive” technology means it has the potential to replace whatever technology there is fulfilling the same purpose.

      • artefact

        Yes. Here is a good description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        “Disruptive”, by definition, means that certain segments of the economy will be negatively impacted, and other segments, positively impacted.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          +1

      • LCD

        It doesn’t matter what wikipedia says it means. What he and many others are trying to say is that once the technology is out in the public domain, there won’t be a soul on the planet who’ll go unaffected by it and you’ll classify everything from that moment on as “before LENR” and “after LENR”

        Things like will it be beneficial or detrimental to mankind over the long long term are so unknown at this point that it’s pointless to talk about it.

        Yes it looks promising though.

        • Roger Bird

          I will stick with my prediction that the amount of suffering that is the result of poverty (lack of fresh water and food, lack of shelter and warmth, etc.) will decrease, and the amount of suffering that is the result of excess (drug addiction, i-pad addiction, sex addiction, no purpose, lack of sleep, too much partying, suicide, etc.) will increase. This is to say, our suffering will become more and more caused by our own personal individual actions and not by society or other big issues that we have no control over. But of course, there will still be earthquakes and tornadoes and other natural disasters to redeem us from our selfishness and jadedness.

    • Pedro

      I agree that there is a difference between the ‘neutral’ meaning of disruptive and the way many people will interprete the word… It has quite a negative intonation. There must be better words that have a mote positive inclination.

    • Wes

      Russia’s main revenue comes from the sale of petroleum products, most of which is consumed as fuel. If an alternative energy source (i.e. LENR) effectively eliminates that revenue stream, approximately 100 billion people in Russia will likely get upset. They also possess about 47% of the nuclear weapons in the world. This could be very disruptive.

      • Roger Bird

        I would suggest to them that they dismantle their nuclear weapons and use the business portion for nuclear reactors. I understand that the stuff makes great nuclear energy fuel.

      • Warthog

        There aren’t “100 billion” people IN Russia to get upset….more like 100-150 million.

        • wes

          Good catch.

  • GreenWin

    Engineering News Online is one of 14 industrial publications from Creamer Media. The audit from Effective Measure shows some 41,000 unique weekly visits. Their main newsroom is in Johannesburg with bureaus in Toronto and Perth. It is likely their true independent status amidst the gaggle of knowledge monopolies, makes them unique and unafraid to publish.

    It should be increasingly evident to readers of global media that knowledge monopolies have issued orders to bury the E-Cat verification report and most other LENR news. One need not speculate why this would be, given the sordid history of attacks and organized denial against CF and its researchers.

    But there is always a unique link somewhere, and Engineering News, widely read by the mining industry in SA, may find low low cost heat and electricity very interesting. Here’s a link to their recent energy page: http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/page/energy

    The preponderance of attention is to boiler manufacturing. Sooner or later someone in fracking, refining, mining, or other process heat-based industry will find E-Cat irresistible. With commercial heating elements being introduced, the publishing and academic gate keepers become powerless. Nothing will stop the adoption of ultra low cost process heat. It would be magnificent irony were LENR to find a commercial home in the petroleum and mining industries.

  • theBuckWheat

    Should e-Cat and other LENR technology become commercially useful, it will result in much lower energy costs. While capital costs of power distribution will not change, the incremental cost per kwH will drop. Suppose this lowers retail electricty prices by a third. What effect will that have on personal prosperity? Not as much as it may appear. But also, will it effect international economic and power dynamics, which are distorted because of the tremendous amout of money that presently flows to countries that export oil.

    What domestic political changes will quickly come about when, for example, Saudi Arabia doesn’t sell as much oil? It has been estimated that the Saudi socialist state is not sustainable should oil fall much below the current world price. Will e-Cat and LENR hasten the day when radical Islamists overthrow at least some of the governments of Arab OPEC members?

    Also, what will happen when coal usage quickly drops? What economic changes will happen when the US and Europe stop importing so much oil?

    Some US facts:

    * The average percentage of household income spent on home energy bills last year was 2.7, the EIA reported, or about $1,945 for heating, cooling, appliances, electronics and lighting.

    * While the households in the highest 20 percent of income stayed below 3 percent of income spent on energy bills, the households with the lowest 20 percent of income spent about 6 percent on energy.

    from:

    The Poor Spend Twice as Much of Their Income on Energy as Rich Do
    By Susan Graybeal

    http://news.yahoo.com/poor-spend-twice-much-income-energy-rich-194600410.html

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      I believe the natural gas market will be disrupted first. The oil industry should have ample time to wind down and adjust. Large integrated oil companies will further diversify into chemical production and out of exploration.

  • ajg

    @clovis & @italo
    As far as i know and as a 5 minute google lookup “proved” Andrea Rossi has an engineer-titel but no Dr. I know it’s a bit of cherry picking to point that out, but it’s really no help for the credibillity of the topic if there is something wich is that easy to be proved as false info.

    • lenrdawn

      I think you’ve got that backwards. He’s got a Dr. in philosophy and no engineering title.

      • Robyn Wyrick

        Please correct me if I’m wrong but I think “Philosophy of Science” in Italy is a solid science degree – not a Philosophy (humanities) degree.

    • GreenWin
    • Italo R.

      He is graduated in Philosophy of Science.
      In Italy those men are called “Dottore”

  • Philippe Goulet

    It’s actually better for the few informed this way because we can possibly make investment in the technologie before the masses do. An addvantage of a couple of minutes or hour can make a big difference to the price of a share with such big news. Let’s say a certain big respected business goes on with the announcement that they are starting production of these reactors. We would be in for a hell of a stock price rise in real short time.
    Hopefully, we will hear it first here so we can make such a fast buy move on these shares before the sharp price rise.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      +1

    • AlainCo

      good idea but be careful.
      I’ve discovered LENR the year the web was invented, and my R&D center was dissolved after Internet bubble, so… hum… afterward we tried to be modern to support financial modeling and securitization… finally we do web application…

      like Internet, it is a gold rush, thus more than 95% companies will explode, and the survivors will be like Microsoft (oops), google, apple (hum), IBM (oops reloaded), DEC (oops dead)…

      best advise is to keep a big safety blanket and invest few bucks in all existing risky LENR companies. That is the Barbel method pushed by Taleb.
      You can also bet against any know prediction, it is safer. bet all Energy prediction will go bust, all financial prediction, will go bust… quite safe. bet it will be more risky than anticipated.

      seriously, be careful, even best technology, best companies, go bust.

      I would have invested all my soul in altavista, and some friends all in baltimore, and google/verisign took all.

      • AlainCo

        by the way if you have deep pocket (or if you advise deep pockets), look at Defkalion partnerships, LENR-invest, and yet to come similar initiative. better to support an ecosystem because an ecosystem benefit from failure of some startup to get stronger, while a company simply die. It get stronger facing big players, while a lone startup just surrender to weight.

    • Robert Ellefson

      For whom is it better to keep the wool pulled over the public’s eyes? Does this argument have a morally defensible basis somewhere, or is it motivated simply by unabashed greed?

      • Philippe goulet

        I would say that morally, my statement could be defended by the fact that investments in LENR will make the technology more widespread. I see investments, in a free market, as some kind of vote that you give to a certain business, technology or product. That vote says “ I believe in this technology, business or product. I want to support it and I wish as much people as possible could benefit from it”.

        When I invested in TESLA’s IPO back in jul 2010, I was confident enough that my investment could lead to better market penetration for their technology. Fortunately, because of people like me all around the world, TESLA’s business is in much better shape today. I would also say that it has probably pushed other car manufacturer s to start designing similar products, spreading, what I think, is a better way to transport people and goods. TESLA’s technology has already reached, and will probably continue to reach more and more people, positively affecting their lives.

        That being said, I am absolutely not an investment expert, I do NOT wish to suggest investments in this field, but personally I am definitely on the lookout for a news conference about the commercial production of these reactors. I cannot build and distribute Rossi’s device on my own, just the way I could not have built and distribute TESLA’S technologies but, I can surely give my “vote” to a serious business that will do just that.

  • Gérard2013

    Wait and see just a little longer!

  • clovis

    Hi, Frank.
    I too agree that it seems like that they the msm have been told to stay silent.
    And i am wondering, why Dr. rossi doesn’t start a full campaign to open up this area, so the world will know whats going on.
    is it because he too is trying to keep it quiet, until the grand press conference. when all will be revealed.

    • Bob

      Mainstream media told to be quiet and they remain quiet? Really?
      Who, here on planet earth has that sort of power?
      Considering a past president of the USA couldn’t even keep quiet something he did with a cigar in the privacy of his own office, I find it hard to believe any person or group of people have that sort of power ovger the media.
      If the media want to talk about it then they will. The fact that they have not means they still don’t consider it proven beyond the possibility that they will be seen as gullible fools if they publish something on it and it all turns out to be a giant hoax.
      A few more independent tests like the last one should go a
      long way to fixing that situation.
      Maybe for the next one they can invite along the Swedish test people who flunked the same E-cat Ht which is shown glowing orange hot in that picture in the last report. I would love to know on what basis their results differ from those more recently found.

    • mcloki

      Technically there is nothing to report. HEat is produced. There is no report , no theories, no diagrams, charts, Explosions. so no news. LENR won’t make the Mainstream until there are reportable stunts. You know. E-Cat evaporates swimming pool of water, Makes tea for thousands. Heats Arctic shed for months costs only a nickel. Right now it just promising experiments. Hey here’e your stunt. Combine a Rossi e-cat and a Turbine, strap it onto a pickup truck and drive the vehicle electrically around Europe. It’s a marketing stunt, does nothing but distract from the actual important science of the project, Science that needs to be done. But at least it’ll get mainstream attention. Mainstream media will be interested when there are real world applications for it.

    • Thinks4Self

      The msm isn’t covering Rossi because many of the young reporters that covered Fleischman & Pons in 1989 are now editors and lead reporters. It is hard to get someone to talk about things that result in them eating crow. This goes for academia as well. Many people will defend their public point of view to the end even if they know it to be wrong, just to prevent admitting publicly that they were wrong. It is human nature not a conspiracy.

      • Roger Bird

        Thinks4Self, good insight. But, when they retire and have nothing much to think about except their performance this lifetime, we might start hearing some confessions, especially as LENR+ comes on strong.

      • GreenWin

        We have plenty of evidence of past suppression of CF and its research efforts. The latest and one of the most egregious is the destruction of Peter Hagelstein’s research grant at MIT. MIT has been the viper pit of anti-LENR activity for 23 years. It has brought them the karmic embarrassment of having their hot fusion program terminated.

        Be assured, the order is out… issued by the school’s headmaster. But a truly worthy master would heed this quote:

        “Mistakes are the portals of discovery.”
        James Joyce

  • Italo R.

    Yes, but it seems that so far Dr. Rossi doesn’t want too much publicity.
    Maybe he wants avoid at this time too much noise around his technology until the market will speak for him.

    • clovis

      +1

    • Hurley

      Yes, He doesn’t need publicity until he is ready to sell with the design and manufacturing in place. Once this is done, his big USA partner can make an anouncement to come and see it. He will not have enough facorties to fill the orders.

      • NJT

        +1