Elforsk Publishes New Report on LENR

The Swedish energy R&D institute Elforsk has published a new report providing an overview of the history and current state of research in the field of LENR. The full document is only available in Swedish, but an English language summary is provided:

Are we on the verge of a new era when it comes to environmental and sustainable power generation? Is there anything new coming up around the corner, which could revolutionize our way in generating heat and electricity and driving tomorrow’s vehicles? Those are the questions that have arisen owing to the field Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) again has been shown attention.

This report is an overview of the field Low Energy Nuclear Reactions or what it sometimes is called Cold Fusion. Devices and arrangements, which are declared to be based on the LENR technology, are now beginning to being demonstrated at some different locations in the world. The energy efficiency of those devices is said to substantially exceed the supplied energy needed to start and stabilize the process. If this is right – which is in question by many – we are confronted with the unexpected, that there is perhaps a new process which by far surpasses conventional fuel based energy conversion. Furthermore the devices are said to work without any appreciable environmental disadvantage. Or are those results now being shown consequences of error measurements and wishful thinking?

As can be seen above, the report is non-commital, most likely because like many others, Elforsk does not want to put their full weight behind something which they feel could turn out not to be sound. Nevertheless, Elforsk has funded the E-Cat 3rd Party testing, and may be funding the current round of testing that Andrea Rossi says is ongoing. Obviously the organization is taking LENR seriously — otherwise why put time and effort into this report?

Follow this link for access to the full report in PDF format:

http://elforsk.se/Rapporter/?rid=13_90_

Here’s a link to a Google translation of the full document:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsupersync.com%2Felforsk.pdf

  • bachcole
    • Fortyniner

      It has the look of an oldish article rehashed with additional comments designed to undermine any credibilty (“— but for some reason E-Cat doesn’t seem to be talking about that just yet.” “— we should remember that Rossi is still being incredibly opaque about how his cold fusion tech actually works.” “— check out that tell-tale power cable that’s still plugged in”

      This conforms rather well to what GreenWin is calling the ‘new script’. Start covering cold fusion in a superficial manner, but omit references to convincing developments and include plenty of disparaging comments. But I’m sure its all one big coincidence…

      • GreenWin

        Makes one wonder, the level of great praise that will be heaped on the first orthodox skeptic (Garwin, Huizenga, Koonin, Ballinger etc.) who says, “I was wrong about cold fusion.” Not only will they garner a prominent place in ethics and human history – they will protect their families from eternal ridicule. Amazing the power of amends; to enter into the next world with a clean conscience.

        • Fortyniner

          Blow me – I swear I’ve just seen a flock of pigs fly past my window..

          • bachcole

            I think that there may be a language issue with your post, Fortyniner. Even I wouldn’t say what you just said in American English. “Blow me” is a very aggressive and offensive phrase that I would reserve only for the worst people.

            • ecatworld

              Not a problem in the UK — more like ‘knock me over with a feather!’ Luckily I’m bilingual 🙂

            • Fortyniner

              Sorry, Roger – over here we sort of ignore what you yanks do with the language. As Admin says, in the UK it’s just an old fashioned expression of surprise. ‘Well I’m dashed’ would be an alternative – but don’t tell me what that means in the ‘states’!

            • US_Citizen71

              Nautical reference ‘Short for Blow me down!’, they also smoke fags and keep dry with bumper chutes! England and the US two countries separated by a common language.

              • Fortyniner

                Correct, as is the closely related ‘I’ll be blowed’ (but ‘bumper chutes’ must be a bit too recent for me).

                My late father would have said, “Well I’m buggered” (which would certainly give rise to a surprised expression) – until he noticed the disapproving glare from my mother. That probably crosses the pond without any need for translation.

  • Hans

    Ake gissar att du är svensk. Av nån tidigare kommentar att döma så förefaller du vara initierad. Vet du om det har kommit nån 1M watt`s anläggning till Sverige än (showcase) MVH.

  • blanco69

    There’s an article in the Times today reporting that Vattenfall have hired Morgan Stanley to find a buyer for its 30 turbine offshore wind farm off the north west coast of England. This wind farm represents about 25% of Vattenfall’s UK capacity. If you are sitting on a valid LENR claim either from Elforsk or someone else it makes sense that you’d be dropping wind assets as fast as possible. Are we seeing Vattenfall realigning its profile?
    I guess time will tell.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      hum, not so sure it is related.
      in big corps, allowing a skunk-work team to investigate in next revolution, does not mean the headquarter accept the revolution.

      anyway, it is more probable than many similar speculation I’ve heard, since wattenfall is not as big as Exxon… maybe(I hope) Vattenfall have big problem, and they maybe use LENR as the Noah Ark.

      This is what usually happen for new technology… new entrants and desperate incumbent can take the risk to jump.

      but my main hypothesis is that it is business as usual. maybe helped by lowering of subsidies, and crashing of the market.
      note that I read that one member of govt/parliament have clearly asked to stop the “green” things, because the citizen are desperate about the cost…

      • Fortyniner

        That was probably the UK’s prime minister David ‘Atomic’ Cameron, who was supposedly overheard telling an energy minister to ‘get rid of all the green crap’. Normally I wouldn’t have a good word to say about the man, but on this one thing I agree.

    • Buck

      Blanco69,
      IMO, it boils down to a set of questions: When the writers of the ‘Elforsk LENR Report’ presented the results to the executive committee, were there additional opinions and conclusions discussed, were there additional presentations to clarify these opinions and conclusions before they were purposefully not included in the final report. If ‘Yes’, then what were they and why were they excluded?

      Two additional elements enter the analysis. First, it is assumed that the LENR phenomena is 100% real and not a fraud. In addition, the existing leading LENR companies (Rossi, DGT, Brillouin) are working on operational LENR devices with success, i.e. broad commercial introduction, seemingly just a few years away.

      Second, the depth of research done for the ‘Elforsk LENR Report’ by the credible researchers allows the researchers to come to a similar conclusion stated in the paragraph above. IMO, the report outlines a depth of analysis that drove the researchers to that conclusion.

      I am of the opinion that the researchers convinced the executive committee by the simple proof that the ‘Elforsk LENR Report’ was written up and disseminated; the published report is the smoking gun.

      With this above scenario, it becomes reasonable to assume that Vattenfall is prudently capitalizing on opportunities to sell assets that become ‘valueless’ with the implementation of LENR and to dispose of these assets under the guise of other reasons to prevent a market crash in ‘valueless’ assets.

      • GreenWin

        It does appear from the cover story carried by biz journals that Vattenfall’s divestment of wind, gas, coal and nuclear assets is due to over-expansion in EU. But it certainly is coincidental that the Elforsk LENR Report lists only a Vattenfall contact for its authors. We are likely to see more “stranded” asset sales in all energy sectors.

        • Buck

          I agree.

          Also, what is interesting is Vattenfall’s decision to move into new markets like the Baltic region. It is over-expansion if you can’t sell competitively. But, if you plan to provide the lowest cost zero pollution alternative, over-expansion quickly becomes something else.

      • bachcole

        I agree very much. We don’t see behind the news. I don’t even know any of those 2013 Levi testers, and I am convinced. Just think if you had a beer in a Swedish version of a pub with one of the testers. Just think if you KNEW one of them before the testing took place. Just think if you had known one or more of them for years before the testing and had plenty of beers with them in a pub. What if you were married to one or slept with one or were best friends with one. What if you spoke the same language as half of them? Conviction would spread like wildfire.

        • Buck

          Roger, curious way of making your point. While you agree, it seems you don’t like the chaining of assumptions into a conclusion which allows one to infer additional opinions. 😉

          • bachcole

            I am sorry that if you understood my post as that, which I don’t even understand what you are saying. What I am saying is that if I (or we) who don’t even know the testers, who are across a great ocean and a big language divide can be convinced, think how impactful the testers personal reports will be with those they have known for years and worked with for years and perhaps even live and slept with and who speak the same language and who they can meet in person repeated.

            • Buck

              Roger, thank you for the explanation. My mistake.

              • bachcole

                As usual. . . . . . . . . . (:->)

      • Fortyniner

        What does seem to me a little odd is that this report and the Levi tests amount to critical insider knowledge, which you might expect to be circulated privately rather than published openly. Not only did all this cost money, but any party taking it seriously and acting on the information could gain a distinct commercial advantage.

        There is also the question of divestment. Surely, again from a commercial POV, wouldn’t it make far more sense to keep this information within Vattenfall/Elforsk while a disposal strategy is worked out and put in place, rather than alerting potential buyers to the reasons for selling, with the danger that this could break deals.

        The whole thing seems too public spirited for a private institution – or perhaps I have just had too much contact with a certain breed of executive that I would classify as borderline psychopathic (actually, well over the line in one case in the gas exploration industry).

        • Buck

          49r,
          the only important point I can raise to explain the ‘public spirited’ behavior is the peculiar nature of CF’s history. If no effort at educating the public occurs then it might be virtually impossible to get the ‘snake oil’ through any sort of Gov’t regulatory process.

          Can you imagine the comical discussion between a crazy hair Woody Allen like inventor and a John Cleese/Rowan Atkinson like bureaucratic about getting virtually unlimited free clean non-toxic energy by mixing a little nickel and hydrogen together at ‘room temperature’. Oh, and if you do it right, it will transmute lead into gold or at least nickel into copper. God, just thinking about it makes me laugh at the skit.

          Regarding experience with executives in the fossil fuel industry . . . I get your reference from 1st hand experience. The final bowling ally scene in “There Will Be Blood” fits the ethos perfectly.

          Theater aside, I firmly accept that there are the extremely clear eyed, pragmatic politically adroit executives who are wiling to put their arms around the Gordian knot because of the profits as well as the gift of a better environment for their children and their children’s children. NRG’s David Crane would be an example. I expect he is something of a hero to his five children.

    • Fortyniner

      The German consortium RWE/Npower has also just pulled out of the ‘Atlantic Array’ project – a huge offshore wind farm off the SW English coast. Dots could be joined, but it is most likely coincidental.

      http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/26/renewable-energy-rwe-drops-uk-turbine-project

      • Buck

        49r, am I correct in understanding you that you see RWE/Npower’s decision is a mere coincidence to Vattenfall’s decision to divest the wind farm?

        • Fortyniner

          Probably not entirely unrelated, but I don’t think there is any connection with recent developments in LENR. The decisions were most probably made independently some time ago. More likely they have both seen the direction of the wind changing in regard to renewables subsidies in the UK (‘Get rid of all the green crap’ as Cameroon is reported to have told a minister).

          Cameron killed tidal power almost as soon as he entered office, and now it looks like the turn of wind power. To his way of thinking it seems that “there can be only one” when it comes to filling the self-created energy generating shortfall, and that ‘one’ is nuclear fission.

          • Buck

            49r, thank you for the clarification. I hold a different perspective of Vattenfall’s motivations which includes their assessment of LENR technology.

            • Fortyniner

              Fair enough – you could well be right.

              • Buck

                Who knows. Your insight into the energy politics of the UK adds insight into the Vattenfall-LENR dynamics.

                In your estimation, how do you think the UK citizens will respond to LENR?

                • Fortyniner

                  That’s what our US friends call a ‘no brainer’ – it would be welcomed with open arms by the mass of people, assuming that no attempt was made by vested parties to introduce a fake ‘fear factor’ through propaganda. (To minimise this possibility IMHO, the term LENR, and indeed any terminology with the word ‘nuclear’ in it needs to replaced ASAP with a more neutral name).

                  Generally speaking there is little fear in the UK of managed change, and none at all of new technology, especially if it promises to make life better. Those educated enough to at least partially understand CF would realise the potential, the rest would simply accept it. Add to that the fact that virtually everyone here is fed up to the back teeth with ever-climbing energy costs and blatant unregulated profiteering, the whole AGW/carbon thing, and ‘austerity’ in general, and I think most people would tear down steel gates to get at it if they knew it was possible.

                • GreenWin

                  I’ve been liking the term “NanoPlasma” to replace LENR. Since the name CF makes SO many mainstream guard look silly. Perhaps a “NanoPlasma Generator” would limit the onset of apoplexy in the ivory towers.

                • Buck

                  GW, if Brillouin ‘wins’ the race then their CECR (Controlled Electron Capture Reaction) might be the term.

                  Time will tell.

                • Fortyniner

                  Yes – that would also fit the bill rather well – unthreatening and completely meaningless to most people!

                • GreenWin

                  Gents, I am interested to hear your thoughts on speculation I have just posted in the “Always Open” thread. Could NRG’s David Crane (distant to Frasier?) be in league with Dean Kamen AND Dr. Rossi?? NRGBeacon10 unveiled.

                • Buck

                  GW, I’m willing to speculate until the cows come in.

                  Humor aside, if Elforsk (Vattenfall) has made a strategic decision to fund LENR testing and make public diplomatically phrased reports on pending LENR implementation, then it is entirely reasonable to think that other energy companies will choose to act on that vision.

                  I loved your find about the home CHP unit with the Deka Stirling engine.

                  IMO, this is the sort of series of events which shakes the trees and causes others to assess the situation and potential begin their efforts to get on the band wagon. It leads my intuition towards saying “there is a change in the wind.”

                • Fortyniner

                  GW – sounds a bit science-fictiony, but plain ‘plasma generator’ would be good (if plasma actually features in the ‘winning’ system). Personally I’d like to see something completely dull, such as ‘nickel-hydrogen boiler’ or ‘electrofusion generator’. Of course, if Brillouin are the fist to come up with the goods, then ‘Brillouin boiler’ will do nicely.

                • bachcole

                  I don’t want to limit the onset of apoplexy in the ivory towers.

                • GreenWin

                  LOL! You must be invested in alternative healthcare Rog.

                • bachcole

                  A little of my resentment showed it’s ugliness. Sorry about that; I’ll try to stifle it next time. (:->)

                • Fortyniner

                  I shared the sentiment completely. I’ll have to try to live with myself.

                • Buck

                  49r, then Vattenfall will have a relatively easy time of it when the day comes.

                • Fortyniner

                  They wouldn’t have any problems from the people of Britain – only from those who ‘represent’ them.

                • Buck

                  I think you people across the pond would say “bloody hell”.

    • bachcole

      Excellent catch. I believe that it may very well be a realignment. Since I eschew conspiracies or the mind reading of people we don’t even know, I am not usually party to those kinds of discussions. But in this case, I think that we have a winner.

    • Omega Z

      I View it as insider trading.
      To Start, All existing Energy Generating capacity will continue to be used. It will take decades to replace this infrastructure.

      That Said, Just the beginning of LENR coming to market will devalue the Assets to some degree. Gradually more so with time.
      Thus a Corporation/Entity aware of it coming, will reduce their exposure to these assets. Even tho still a profitable endeavor, It will not return the Original Profits envisioned. This would be Bad for Stock Value.

      Those unaware at this time will buy out those assets at a reduced cost. They Also will inevitably Not get the envisioned Returns on their investments. BUT, Ultimately, Few if any will lose money in this divestiture, They Just wont realize the Expected Returns on investments.

      Note that Most of the Big Oil has dumped Oil Reserves at a Discount. But also Note that those reserves were 20 plus years out. Not short term 20 years or less. Also, those reserves will still be available at a later date, but purchased at what will likely be at a lower value.

      All this Could Just be coincidence, But that would be a lot of coincidences & all are forward looking 2 decades down the road. Comparable to a progressive LENR Roll-out.

      • Buck

        OZ, your point about Big Oil dumping long term reserves, +20 years, I have not seen that analysis. It sounds reasonable. Can you point out the source analysis for that assessment. Thank you.

  • bachcole

    TIME magazine is looking for their Person of the Year. I don’t know who should be or is going to be person of the year this year. But I do know who is going to be Person of the Century in the next 5 to 10 years.

  • tlp

    “very little added energy or momentum is
    required”

    • NCkhawk

      Tip – How does one prove the following is enabled as part of the spec?

      “Consequently, because the atom spacing in these clusters is
      so small, very little added energy or momentum is required to
      cause them to overcome the Columbic repulsion barrier and
      react.”

      This is very different from his issued patent and the “may penetrate” verbiage. Words greatly matter in patent world.

      I’m all for Dr. Miley’s continued string of victories with the USPTO and like his incremental approach. Wishing him the best and hope the verbiage gets thru the examination process.

  • tlp

    His earlier patent is already granted:

    https://www.google.com/patents/US8440165?dq=US+8440165+B2&hl=en&sa=X&ei=42WUUrTPH8rYtQbDrIC4Dg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAA

    This is mentioned in Elforsk report:
    However, the U.S. Patent Office USPTO rejected all
    patents in LENR area. Despite this, George H. Miley with
    now LENUCO managed to get a patent, U.S. 8,227,020 B1 with
    title Dislocation site formation techniques issued July 24
    2012.

    It includes almost the same sentence:

    Due to close spacing and this fluctuation, these ions may penetrate the Coulomb barrier of a neighboring ion causing nuclear reactions provided there is a sufficient flux of ions to transfer momentum to the stationary cluster atoms.

    This just released patent application is extending that already granted patent.

  • Buck

    I emailed Mats Lewan for his perspective. I forgot to ask permission to share his response, but I am hoping that his position as ‘disseminator of news’ as well as the nature of his response does not offend. Here is his response:

    Elforsk is the common R&D entity of the Swedish power industry. Its reports are often public, as this one. Anyone can download the report here: http://elforsk.se/Rapporter/?rid=13_90_

    However, I suppose the motive for doing and publishing the report is that the Swedish power industry identifies a need to follow this development and be prepared in case the technology leads to commercial products that might have an impact on the power industry. In that way it
    could also be seen as a kind of opinion statement, saying that members of the power industry but also people in general should be open to what may come out of LENR.

    Kind Regards

    Mats Lewan

    • GreenWin

      Greatly appreciated Buck. Mats has been a good arbiter reporting on LENR developments. As you point out to Roger, Elforsk is a representative body that will need to maintain decorum in what will inevitably seem disruptive to the global energy industry. They appear to do just that with this “positive skepticism” report.

      • bachcole

        I did like Buck’s viewpoint on the article, BUT I won’t be sending copies of the article to other people. The first article with the colorful front page was quite sufficient, and I feel that for me both articles convey the same level of certainty and the previous article was more readable and more fun to read. (:->) I will await something more spectacular to send to newspapers and friends and such.

        • Buck

          Roger, time will come when there are more news pieces to share. 🙂

      • Buck

        I like the phrase ‘positive skepticism’. I am guessing this will be how LENR will be discussed by TPTB or MSM as we optimistically get closer to LENR implementation.

  • bachcole

    Is it just me, or do you find this report to be a bit cowardly. Is this an example of socialist group-think. Or is this how they break the news to a skeptical world. I have more confidence in 2013 Levi et. al. than Elforsk does. Yeah, they sort of get to “when” from “if”, but “if” should never have been seen in that report.

    • Buck

      Roger, I think it is closer to ‘breaking news to a skeptical world’.

      IMO, it is important to recognize the position of respect they look to preserve as the R&D arm of $22B Vattenfall, serving Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom.

      Being optimistic, there will come a time when they must approach the regulators of these nations about implementing LENR. Maintaining an image of reasonable, pragmatic, and strong servant to the public seems to suggest a conservative soft selling of the technology which will turn the energy world upside down, IMO.

      • Fortyniner

        Although it perhaps shouldn’t be forgotten that the world is only sceptical of cold fusion because of the disproportionate influence of a few noisy scientists and the consistant repetition of their views in various media (but especially online) whenever the subject has been raised. This has now become something of a Pavlovian reaction – an ebedded ‘meme’ – that could stand in the way even if there has been some change in the plans of TPTB

        • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

          right.
          your analysis on “meme” propagation, “pavlovian” is a good complement. It get an habits, an evidence, like white milk and black coal. I see LENR used as evidence of bad science… stupidly mixed xith perpetual movement… claimed as impossible by physics… all clearly stupid, but uncriticized because so common…

          the beginning is also right, few loudspeaker, with closed mind, strong ego (the biggest reason), strong funding (not the biggest reason)…
          then bad luck because it tooks more than 1 years to work well, and there was many errors, bias, which created an honest feeling of pseudoscience (like false neutron finding, bad calorimetry…)…

          but then, the groupthink, the mutual assured delusion started to solidify.
          and as you say, this group-think get implemented as a “memeplex” that is comfortable, practical, sexy…

          • Pekka Janhunen

            This meme thing is indeed real. As another example of a meme, people seem to like to believe that Mars is dry and with thin atmosphere because it has no magnetic field, i.e. that somehow the solar wind would have ripped off water and atmosphere. This kind of theory is on shaky grounds for many reasons, one is that if the solar wind is eroding the atmosphere, why is there any of it left. It is much more likely that Mars is dry because simply because it’s cold i.e. water mainly occurs as ice below the surface, and the atmosphere is thin because much of the CO2 is found frozen in the polar caps.

            Early science fiction portrayed Mars as Earth’s sister planet which is only more dry and without oceans. Maybe people are subconsciously worried that Earth might suffer a similar fate. When they learn that Earth has an invisible magnetic field while Mars doesn’t, they are relieved: that must be it! Thinking of different solar distances (only factor 1.5) sounds more fuzzy and insecure.

            Thinking of catastrophes and radically new situations causes stress. People prefer clear boundaries between us and potential chaos, such as magnetic fields, Coulomb barriers and movie screens.

  • Fortyniner

    Is he still there? I thought he’d been moved on by the publisher.

    • Buck

      You are thinking of thinking of Mark Gibbs who used to work at Forbes

      • Fortyniner

        Must be.

  • Fortyniner

    Unfortunately, just another ‘thought experiment’. I suppose its understandable that those who have been fiddling around with LENR for a time would want a piece of the action, but I don’t think that these ‘virtual’ patents will amount to the proverbial hill of beans when set against operating CF reactors (or against the corporate lawyers who will be defending big bucks IP).

  • GreenWin

    Thanks tip. There is a LOT of interesting theory in this application. A quick overview reveals discussion of thin film multi-layered electrode fabrication, super conductivity type II, magnetic flux, soft-X-ray spectra, and highly condensed hydrogen states:

    “Because the density of hydrogen or hydrogen isotopes in these sites approaches that of metallic hydrogen, they are termed “clusters” and can be viewed conceptually as in FIG. 2. Consequently, because the atom spacing in
    these clusters is so small, very little added energy or momentum is
    required to cause them to overcome the Columbic repulsion barrier and
    react.”

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Manual translation of first page of Introduction:

    1 Introduction

    Is it possible to build devices that are cheap, safe and produce heat and electricity at a fraction of today’s cost level? Can these devices be used in stationary and/or mobile applications? Are they safe and sustainable?

    In this report we give a summary description about a handfull of such techniques which in a sense can be classified as Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). But because much of what will be described is not yet validated and accepted by the science world, significant question marks exist. But the question is if, nevertheless, a new knowledge is emerging which maybe supports the hoped-for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions? The consequences of a eventual breakthroughs can be significant.

    1.1 Is there a new type of energy conversion mechanism?
    The breakthrough of quantum physics in the beginning of the previous century led to the development of today’s nuclear power. During the last 70 years we have learned how to master many fission processes both technically and commercially and we are now trying to develop fusion technology not least by the ITER project.

    At the same time, in some parts of the world attempts to develop LENR technology have been ongoing. It is an area which is viewed by many with great scepticism and [with the attitude that it is] in principle impossible to realise and even more impossible to explain with today’s knowledge. The development has been first and foremost driven forward by experimentalists and entrepreneurs. The knowledge about what has been achieved has not spread in the normal academic quarters, but often through other media. Inventors have often positioned themselves against established scientists and it has happened more than once that LENR technology has been refused as pure falsification or wishful thinking. Still, part of the reported results cannot be rejected offhand. Nuclear reactions can possibly occur in special environments which are not yet understood. The laws of nuclear physics of course continue to be valid even in those environments.

    On 23 of Mars in 1989, researchers Fleischmann and Pons presented their sensational …

    • pg

      Thanks a lot

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I try to manually translate the Conclusions part (section 6, Slutsatser):

    6 Conclusions

    Which conclusions can be drawn from the ongoing research and development when it comes to phenomena that have something to do with LENR?

    6.1 Where do we stand concerning LENR technology today?

    At present, LENR technology is no longer about believing or not believing, but rather about having a constructively sceptical approach and to accept that certain LENR devices appear to output more energy than they reasonably should with classical assumptions about the underlying processes. It will certainly take time before all aspects around this branch of technology have been exhausted. A bunch of validations of LENR technology is going on. Various devices have been patented. Some of them have been built. A lot have been tested by more or less independent attempts. Studies are going on in defence industries, space industry and others. Various companies are supporting tests. Some universities are beginning to give courses and others get to grips with other basic studies that can have a connection with LENR. Which companies will first commercialise the technology remains to be seen, though.

    6.2 Where to find the explanation(s)?

    At this moment it is difficult to judge the degree of “scientificity” behind the proofs, validations and results that are being presented. But maybe that is of secondary importance? “Results are results” and theories will come later. LENR technology should possibly be able to stand for a breakthrough paradigm shift in the energy sector. The investments that are now being made should urge us to reflect and to be careful with positive scepticism. The material that we went through in this study indicates that the reported LENR phenomena can be interconnected with:

    * Strongly nonlinear processes
    * Presence of electromagnetic fields
    * Stimulation of the systems’ various eigenresonances in plasma state or solid state
    * Plasma phenomena in totally or partially ionised gases and in so-called dusty plasmas
    * High energy exchange through various conceivable nuclear reactions, transmutations, etc.

    6.3 Where are the biggest challenges?
    If LENR depends on quantum mechanical processes, it’s probable that some nonlinear effect is involved. Most likely also some electrodynamical effect with resonances is involved. This implies that scaling up can be difficult to control. Likewise, it appears that the number of control parametres and guidance are not so easy to get consistent with each other. How do thermal and electrical processes interact?

    The E-cat reactor which was developed by Leonardo Corporation needs external heat to operate. The external source also appears to be necessary for running the device safely. Other LENR devices are building on excitation of the system’s resonances. The knowledge of how these are selected, driven and controlled are still company secrets that do not appear in patent descriptions. At the same time, this shows that challenges of the LENR technology, should it work, are that the process is complicated, but this does not necessarily imply [programmatic?] complexities. A likely development scenario is that a whole lot of trial and error experiments remaing to be performed to possibly master precise control and repeatability. Safety issues must be meticulously studied, especially a [possible] apperance of high energy particles and radiation, magnetic fields etc.

    • GreenWin

      Many thanks Pekka!!

      • Fortyniner

        Thanks for taking the time to do that, Pekka. The actual text seems to be much more positive than the English summary might indicate.

    • ecatworld

      Great work, Pekka! Thanks very much.

      • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

        thanks too, I relay

    • Bruce Williams

      Pekka, thanks a lot for this effort and for your contributions to this important work over a long period.

  • Bruce Williams

    The so called Google “Translation” is a joke : I would really love to read a proper translation ASAP.

    • bachcole

      I second that!

  • GreenWin

    There is a clear pattern of new LENR publicity unfolding. Recently the UK Guardian wrote of “cold fusion” as the ideal solution to rising costs of UK natural gas. Wall Street Journal has documented the CEO of American Electric Power saying, “AEP is considering helping its customers install their own generating facilities.” Germany’s largest magazine Der Spiegel Online has introduced LENR under the non-commital script in its SCIENCE section.

    Now Elforsk, the R&D arm of EU energy giant ($22B annual) Vattenfall, is further warming the waters for LENR and Andre Rossi’s E-Cat implementation. The commercial incentives are pushing agitated academics into a self-designed ignominy. It is only a matter of time before one of the Orthodox priests admits to LENR… and its development by his fellows. Uplifting to watch the slow, steady metamorphosis of human knowledge to learn of abundant, clean, green energy. And unlikely that without the theatrical disruptions of Dr. Rossi, none of this would be unfolding today.

    • Fortyniner

      The Guardian (aka ‘The Grauniad’ due to an unfortunate reputation for sloppy typesetting) seems gratifyingly out of step with the control freaks. Recently they have reported on the true situation at Fukishima, Snowdon’s revelations (which got their offices turned over by state goons) and now they have touched on CF. Good for them – long may they continue on this path.

      • GreenWin

        I have noticed that the current PR script calls for “positive skepticism” which means editors of CF articles can claim to have been joking. But the Guardian appears to exercise journalistic independence on “verboten” content – which will keep or expand their readers.

      • GreenWin

        Fortyniner, you will be amused I think by the new in-step Guardian piece where the climate gang tells us 90 companies have caused man-made global warming! Oddly they leave out the carbonated libation people, who I believe has caused unfathomable harm to climate AND intestinal fortitude. “Just 90 companies caused two-thirds of man-made global warming emissions” Guardian, 20 Nov

        • Fortyniner

          Yes, they do toe the AGW line with some enthusiasm, and I have to agree with AlainCo that their ‘coverage’ of CF may not be entirely honest. Nevertheless, a small crack in the dam perhaps.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      note that the guardian article is a nasty joke to ridicule alternative energy

      i feel few pattern from my techwatch:
      – strange development of critical articles using cold fusion for bashing pseudo science… uninformed people…
      – shy maintream articles who pretend to be negative but try to discuss of that impossible
      – developping number of people trying the spread the existence of LENr, but mostly underinformed, only e-cat, late information…

      LENr is for me a real time experiment of sociology and information spreading…

  • Buck

    Frank, I have a simple question: who is on the Elforsk mailing list? Who potentially will receive this report?

    • ecatworld

      Good question, Buck — sorry that I don’t have the answer.

      • Buck

        The Vattenfall website indicates that they operate in the following countries:
        Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom.
        http://www.vattenfall.com/en/index.htm

        With the presumption that Vattenfall gains the ability to implement LENR solutions, this amounts to a very large potential scope of impact.

      • GreenWin

        Elforsk represents amongst others, The Swedish Energy Board. Swedish Energy has member companies engaged in the production, distribution or trading and sale of electricity. Here is a list of members likely to receive the LENR report: http://bit.ly/17UeE2I

        • Fortyniner

          They seem to have missed the Swedish manufacturers of bicycle dynamos and wind-up torches. Everyone else seems to be in there!

          • GreenWin

            Indeed. I also did not spot a piezoelectric shoe maker. Some of these purveyors will be disappointed to find their niche threatened. Then again, the opportunity for Do It Yourself LENR kits grows. Possibly, just like a certain Homebrew Computer Club that Jobs and Wozniack catered to.

  • Sanjeev

    The report is extremely well researched. I’m very pleased with the
    contents. It looks like Vattenfall is seriously involved in matters of
    lenr, the writer has done a good job.
    I found this new info about DGT-

    “They claim to have licensed its technology to approximately 20 companies for
    the operation of various products. Two of these companies have been
    presented as one of Europe’s largest car manufacturers and one of the
    world’s largest mobile phone company.”

    Its very obvious who are in the game. I did not find any references for this statement anywhere.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      nono it is public, … maybe more analysed than my old brain memory…
      all came from tovima, or from some interviews…

      some say citroen or fiat, but there is no evidence , just free assumption.

  • Buck

    A +50 page report is a serious effort by Elforsk. And, if one sees it through the lens of 100% belief in LENR phenomena, then it has the flavor of being an early gift of the holiday season.

    • Fortyniner

      For fellow monoglots, I’ve bought forward the translated list of contents for the report that I posted on the last thread before I realised this one had been posted!

      Contents
      1 Introduction 1
      1.1 Is there a new kind of energy conversion ……………………………………. …… 1
      1.2 How it all started ……………………………………… ………………………….. 2
      1.3 A controversial research ………………………………………. …………………… 3
      2 Forms of State on LENR 4
      2.1 What is meant by LENR technology? ………………………………………….. …………. 4
      2.2 What are explanatory models ? ………………………………………….. …………. 6
      2.2.1 Explanatory models on ball lightning and other plasmoids ……… 7
      2.2.2 Some Explanatory models around ultracold neutrons ………………… 8
      2.2.3 Other explanatory mechanisms around low – energy fusion ……………….. 9
      2.2.4 Rydberg and Bose-Einstein – state elements in nuclear reactions ………. 10
      2.2.5 Hidetsugu Ikegami hypothesis of pycnonuclear fusion ……………… 12
      2.3 How much is spent on LENR developments ? ………………………………………. 13
      2.3.1 R & D efforts within the academic world and the authorities … 13
      2.3.2 R & D in companies …………………………………….. …………………… 14
      2.4 Ongoing research in the LENR field …………………………………….. ….. 15
      2.4.1 Credibility of practical experiments ……………………………………. .. 16
      2.5 EU research ………………………………………. ………………………………….. 17
      2.6 State of commercialisation………………………………………. ………………….. 18
      2.7 Applications of interest ………………………………………. …………………… 20
      3 Validated energy systems 21
      3.1 Validated plasma equipment ……………………………………….. ………………. 21
      3.2 ” validated ” nickel-hydrogen LENR plants …………………………………. …. 22
      3.2.1 E-Cat Leonardo Corporation …………………………………… ……….. 22
      3.2.2 Hyperion Defkalion Green Technologies ………………………………. 24
      3.2.3 BEC Brillouin BoilerTMBrillouin Corp. . ……………………………………. 25
      3.2.4 CIHT cell – BlackLight Power ………………………………….. ……. 26
      3.2.5 NANORTM Jet Energy …………………………………….. ……………… 28
      4 Possible applications of LENR technology 29
      4.1 Electricity and Heat ……………………………………… ……………………. 29
      4.2 Automotive Applications ………………………………………… ……………………… 29
      4.3 Aerospace and Space Applications ………………………………………. ………………… 30
      4.4 Transmutation of Radioactive Waste ……………………………………… ……….. 31
      4.5 Consumer Products ………………………………………… ……………………… 32
      5 Questions Concerning the Utility (of LENR)…………… 33
      5.1 Market Scenarios ………………………………………… …………………………. 34
      5.2 Environmental and safety issues ………………………………………. …………………… 35
      5.2.1 Unrecognized negative characteristics …………………………………….. ……. 36
      5.2.2 Security ………………………………………. …………………… 37
      6 Conclusions 38
      6.1 Where does the research on LENR technology today ? ………………………………… 38
      6.2 Where is the explanation / why ? ………………………………………….. ………….. 38
      6.3 Where are the biggest challenges ? ………………………………………….. …. 39
      7 References 40
      7.1 Articles, reports and minutes …………………………………….. …………….. 40
      7.2 Website Hosting ………………………………………… …………………………………… 44
      8 Appendix 47
      8.1 Patents ………………………………………… ………………………………………… 47
      8.1.1 U.S. ………………………………………. …………………………………. 47
      8.1.2 Asia ………………………………………. ………………………………… 48
      8.1.3 Europe ………………………………………. ……………………………… 48

      • Buck

        Thank you 49r

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    Not much new, but it is s synthesis of current knowledge.
    They talk of non classic LENR claims, like Papp engine, and pre F&P LENR.

    Not strong position… Listing theories and being cautious.
    Listing companies, reminding that there can be complications, but remind that there are many tests by third party, which deserve interest.

    The real breaking news is that it is public.

    it should be what you find on wikipedia:

    who update wikipedia?

    • bachcole

      You update Wikipedia. Except that if you try to update LENR or a similar subject, someone else will QUICKLY come along and “down”date Wikipedia. ALL encyclopedias are very conservative. It is the nature of encyclopedias to be slow to keep pace with technological and scientific change.

      • GreenWin

        That wikidpedia controls its hearsay content on non-orthodox content is rather predictable. Who better to keep pagan revisionists at bay than horrified cave dwellers themselves?

    • GreenWin

      Who update wikidpedia? A tiny cabal of troglodytes??

      • bachcole

        Usually anyone can.

      • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

        no troglodytes, they are admiting facst when they see them…

        it is priest, with a degree in wikipedia laws.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      What would happen if one would make a new wikipedia page for, for example, “LENR studies sponsored by Elforsk AB”?

      • bachcole

        I don’t know what the policy for new articles is. I only do edits.

    • Sanjeev

      I wouldn’t bother updating the wiki, its well guarded and moreover, a bunch of biased wikipedia editors can not stop the march of a tech as big as lenr. Instead update the important people who would publish articles on this report. A good place to start is to send this report to journalists who recently wrote about lenr.
      Other good places are sites about green techs, future techs and alt energy sites. Usually common people and companies frequent such sites and spread the important info via forums and tweets etc.
      Also good to inform your local energy companies, they will be the first to adopt a new tech, as the giants move very slowly. All energy producers must switch to lenr sooner or later though.