It’s been an interesting day. I went to bed thinking about the E-Cat and Cherokee Investment Partners, and woke up to the news release from Blacklight Power. Throughout the day I have been going through a crash course in BLP, Randell Mills and the hydrino theory, and trying to get a picture of what is going on. I have seen quite a bit of discussion about BLP over the years, but never really delved to deeply until now.
I decided to take a look at what others are saying about BLP, and they range from the very scathing to the strongly supportive. Of particular interest to me is what qualified professionals who have been to BLP and tested their systems have to say about them. Fortunately there are some validation reports on the BLP web site which contain third party reports from individuals and teams. Below are excerpts from some of these documents:
Dr. W. Henry Weinberg, Professor of Chemical Engineering, Materials Engineering, and Chemistry, University of California, Santa Barbara, January 2012
To summarize, when first hearing the claims of BLP, it would be irrational not to be very skeptical, and prior to meeting Randy Mills I was very skeptical. However, after visiting BLP, having participated in experimental design and execution, and having reviewed vast amounts of data they have produced, I have found nothing that warrants rejection of their extraordinary claims.
Terry M. Copeland, PhD., MIT January 5, 2012
In summary, BLP has successfully fabricated and tested CIHT cells capable of producing net electrical output up to 50 times that input to maintain the process. Some cells have produced steady power for over one month. The power generation is consistent with Dr. Mills theory of energy release release resulting from hydrino formation. No other source of energy could be identified. BLP has achieved a historic success for a technology that could be directly commercialized as an alternative form of power generation.
K.V. Ramanujachary, Professor, Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Rowan University, November 2011
The net electrical energy gain . . . for many different systems, configurations, and modes of operation were 162%, 340%, 385%, 167%, 195%, 456%, 735%, 182%, 151%, 425%, and 186%. Typically, steady electrical power was continuously measured from the cell for more than a week and up to more than 30 days before the cell was stopped and the contents were analyzed by a cascade of characterization tools.
Nick Glumac, Engineering Consultant, Mahomet IL, Jan 31, 2012
The energy produced is small, but not insignificant . . . As such it is critical that accurate measurements of voltage and current be made here to insure that excess power is being produced. In my opinion, BLP is making measurements of the appropriate level of accuracy to resolve the power output and conclude that it is far in excess of the input.
ENSER Corporation, 4 April 2012
In summary, BLP has successfully fabricated and tested CIHT cells capable of producing net electrical output several times that of the input to maintain the process. Some cells have produced steady power over the course of sixty days. The power generation is consistent with Dr Mills theory of energy release resulting from hydrino formation. No other source of energy could be identified.
UPDATE: Thanks to those who pointed out that I ommitted from this list a second report from ENSER Corporation published in Jeanuary of 2013.
This report has the following conclusion:
ENSER has independently fabricated and tested CIHT cells at their facility. The CIHT cells continuously produced net electrical output of approximately two times that of the input to maintain the process. The power generation is consistent with Dr. Mills theory of energy release resulting from hydrino formation . . . The hydrogen permeation successfully stabilized the anode at power densities permissive of multi-kilowatts per liter in a final CIHT cell product. An improvement of at least ten times this power density appears feasible which may reduce the cost of materials to under $10/kW.
These seem to be very positive assessments from qualified testers, which certainly reflect well on BLP technology. One thing to notice is that these tests all seem to be working in low power ranges, mentioning milliwatts to watts, whereas BLP’s press release today talked about systems producing millions of watts. The documents above are all over one year old, so maybe there has been some important breakthroughs since then which have allowed for a major scaling up of power levels.
It makes you wonder what kind of demonstration BLP is planning. The press release was filled with grand claims and projections, such as having the ability to match the power output of the Fukushima nuclear plant with a liter of BLP material. Will it be a demonstration designed to impress or will it be showing a small scale system like the testers above worked with? Of course any system that shows net energy gain is really something remarkable — but I think expectations have been set particularly high with today’s announcement. Is BLP’s technology really ready to power the world? We shall see how it all turns out on the 28th of this month.