Company Claims ‘Focus Fusion’ Power Possible Within one Year

Thanks to Tim for prompting me to check into news about ‘focus fusion’ — a new form of ‘hot’ fusion being developed by a company called LPP Fusion. I have read about this New Jersey company in the past and they have made some news just recently being featured in an article by Sebastian Anthony on the Extreme Tech website.

Anthony is enthusiastic about Focus Fusion, saying that the approach that this company is taking is far superior to the large tokamak fusion reactors — instead using what is called a ‘dense plasma focus device’ to achieve fusion. A video on the site provides a graphical representation of the science behind focus fusion.

“To be honest it sounds too good to be true — but rest assured that Focus Fusion, at least to my eyes, is the real deal. This isn’t some kind of magical, inexplicable witchcraft like cold fusion: Focus Fusion appears to be based on cold, hard science. This could actually be it.”

According to the article, LPP Fusion has raised 3 million dollars over the last six years, but they are now seeking funds from the general public via an Indiegogo campaign to fund their research. They say that they are almost there, and with the help of the public they can reach their goals. Below is their video pitch from Indiegogo which includes some more information about their technology as well as their overall vision.

The Indiegogo campaign seems to be going quite well — LPP Fusion has raised over half of their $200,000 fundraising goal so far.

There’s quite a dismissal of LENR in the article as Anthony makes a contrast between cold and hot fusion. He writes:

“To be honest it sounds too good to be true — but rest assured that Focus Fusion, at least to my eyes, is the real deal. This isn’t some kind of magical, inexplicable witchcraft like cold fusion: Focus Fusion appears to be based on cold, hard science. This could actually be it.”

To my mind, while LPP Fusion is involved in some very interesting research, I think that the E-Cat has been developed much further than Focus Fusion at this point. From what I have read LPP Fusion has so far yet to achieve the break-even point in their testing — where more energy is produced than is input into a device. It still seems that LPP is in the early stages of development — and they may yet achieve success, but I think that Andrea Rossi and Co. are much further along in comparison: they have long since achieved the elusive (for hot fusion) break-even point, and now seem to be on the verge of industrialization of E-Cat technology. But having viable ‘hot’ and ‘cold’ fusion technologies available together would be quite a leap forward.

  • Obvious

    No

  • Gerard McEk

    As I read, they first fuse a boron atom with a proton, then the atom becomes unstable and splits in three alpha particles (Helium atoms). These particles will be highly energetic and a lot of Gamma rays will be produced, which will be difficult to screen, but for the alpha particles it is a piece of cake as a small layer of metal will do. Obviously the Coulomb repulsion for boron-proton is much higher than for tritium-deuterium used in the tokamak’s, so it is interesting that they claim that such a relatively simple system can reach the required pressures/temperatures with energies much lower than in these giant tokamak’s. For some reason I have doubts that they are so far already, but I hope they are and that they will be able to fuse in the near future.
    In comparison to LENR, I think they are too late, because I think LENR will be simpler, far more cost effective and without any serious radiation danger. It will be extremely hard to compete with LENR if either of these reach the commercial market at all.

  • georgehants

    From Cold Fusion Now
    Open Power Association Newsletter #11: New Office in London Opens
    http://coldfusionnow.org/open-power-association-newsletter-11-new-office-in-london-opens/

  • georgehants

    Will once again make the observation that the quality of most comments on page is very high and a pleasure to read.
    Many thanks to our large Admin dept. for this achievement in a subject so controversial as Cold Fusion.
    Amazing that a small Website is virtually the only place in the World where any of the scientific community, who wish to discover the Truth of one of the most outstanding scientific discoveries in history have to come to find their honest information.
    What a terrible reflection this is on official science.

  • Molarl

    Personally,i hope both technologies come to fruition. I can see the hot fusion reactors powering cities,but they have a more “centralized” powering,which means a means to meter…and keep prices high. That’s where cold fusion can sweep in,building basically house size reactos. They would basically make the hot fusion prices down,and cold fusion would free things such as automobiles,planes,etc. Together they would absolutely kill Big Oil. And i hope i’m alive on that day.

  • Omega Z

    I think this is just a competitive thing. All have taken an occasional Cheap Shot at the other.

    Two Good Friends competing for 1st place in a Race. Each will tell you the other is a slacker. Even when both are rated at the top of the heap.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    This is the propulsion system for spaceplanes that George Miley talked about. http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/03/george-h-miley-presentation-on-nuclear.html

    H(1) + B(11) > 3 He(4) 8.68 MeV

    It’s all good but as a chemist it doesn’t grab my attention the way LENR does. Chemists design catalysts that will lower the energy of activation of reactions. Banging two things together at high energies to get them to react just seems unsophisticated to me but I wish them well.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      PS

      By the way, the chemist who developed this witchcraft called Transition Rate Theory, Henry Eyring, was from the University of Utah.
      “…Several other chemists later received the Nobel prize for work based on it, and his failure to receive the Nobel prize was a matter of surprise to many. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences apparently did not understand Eyring’s theory until it was too late
      to award him the Nobel…”

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

  • friendlyprogrammer

    One of these days we will log on and see the report is out. I suppose my main energy hopes are with BLP at moment. I like the Rossi Ecat, but it is fraught with control, loading, low temperature issues, and it is likely have much blackmarket sales.

    The BLP device seems to have them very excited over there.

    This Hot Fusion device I see initially as a fund raising scam. We never saw Rossi raising funds from the public, and he would not take money from any investors who could not afford to lose the investment.

    • Ophelia Rump

      That information about the E-Cat is at least a year out of date. The most recent test is known to have had a sustained controlled run for six months. That amounts to cold re-hash, not a tasty dish.
      The blackmarket anxiety is just frivolous trepidation.

    • Omega Z

      Why do you think everyone checks in at least once everyday.
      We all absolutely know that if we took a weeks vacation and were unable to check in, the day after we left on our trip, AAAAARRRRGGG,
      Three Years And I Missed It.

      Everyone of you Know I’m Right.

      • artefact

        Yesterday I returned from my one week vacation in Italy (love it). I had no internet and listened to what people were talking about to find out if there is a revolution going on :)

        • Omega Z

          But it was on your mind all the time wasn’t it.

          Occasionally when it’s slow, I miss visiting for a day or so.
          When I finally check back, 10 new threads suddenly appeared.
          Makes you panic for a few seconds. What’d I miss, What’d I miss.
          Why so many threads all at once. :-)

          • artefact

            I just finished reading most comments that I missed.

            Yes, It was in my mind. I daily practiced holding my breath diving in a big swimming pool. While under water LENR was among my favorite topics to think about.

            I also checked the gas prices every time I saw a gas station …

  • Obvious

    The bottling plant story has been done the rounds, and was just an image they used, not representative of anything. Like putting images of electric cars on a green energy site, when they don’t sell cars or the batteries.
    If someone matched their *device* to a bottling machine (ie: hooked to H2 gas instead of CO2), well, that would be different altogether. But nothing of the sort has come up.
    I give SHT the benefit of the doubt on the plant pic. I am not quite ready to swallow the device using every theory out there including neutrinos from the sun explanation yet though.

  • jousterusa

    Frank, your comments on the readiness of LPP provoke some suspicion of FF in my mind. I wonder whether this is just one more effort, media-wise but science-free, to take any future attention away from the Hot Cat if the third party test results should make the Hot Cat break big in the media. Thanks for keeping us apprised!

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      And I suppose it’s just a coincidence that you posted on the last Friday the 13th on a full moon before the year 2049.

      • Ophelia Rump

        What is the significance of 2049?

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Year of the next Friday the 13th on a full moon.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Great thanks, I was trying to wrap my head around Asia-Pac security issues, that was all that came up in a google. It is very curious search result, It made me wonder very much what the objective of this 2049 Institute is, dealing with spying and security the US, Japan and China.
            I also wonder why they picked that year. Well knowing spooks it is doubtful to be anything good.

            I think you just confirmed the non-goodness of that date.

  • Broncobet

    My number one favorite for fusion are the people at skunk works,that always are making our weapons. They had a news conference and simply showed how they could do it and they didn’t need any money,(but maybe our government is giving them money),they showed how their method was better than ITER,then silence(they said to wait for 3 or 4 years) . The fusion people in Canada take a big ball of molten lead spin it fast and whack it with a bunch of hammers, I think it’s General Fusion. They had a presentation to investors with scientists and were kind of waiting for the scientists to say why it wouldn’t work,but they didn’t so it’s privately funded.If this E-Cat works and works well ,not just some anomalous, heat(great for science but not for energy),in other words it’s glowing red hot like the picture Rossi made then that would be great. All generate heat except for the LPP which produces electricity.(I know there are LENR claims for other forms of energy).

  • Achi

    “This isn’t some kind of magical, inexplicable witchcraft like cold fusion…”

    The motto of the scientific trade should read thus: “Nothing is truth. Everything is possible.”
    The whole idea behind science is searching for deeper understanding. Understanding is not truth. When we think we have found truth, we limit ourselves, and we can no longer search for a deeper understanding because we have “found” all there is. Only when nothing is set in stone as true can we achieve every possibility. I would choose inexplicable witchcraft any day, over something set in scientific “truth”.

    • Fortyniner

      It translates as: “Don’t look over there – look over here!” – like some huckster at a fairground trying to draw custom away from a classier and better established act nearby. It’s a level playing field for new entries in the energy market – they all have pretty much the same obstacles to overcome. If LPP Fusion have a viable system, then the market is where it will be validated.

      • Ophelia Rump

        I agree, and there is room for more than one approach on this planet where we desperately need at least one to come through for us.

        • Fortyniner

          E-cat will only indirectly alleviate the transport fuel problem (other than in larger ships and possibly railway locomotives) – probably via inefficient batteries or chemical reformation systems.

          As you say, we desperately need other sources – as many as can be developed. Perhaps when one ‘impossible’ technology (CF) is proven to be practical and is actually doing useful work, there will be less resistance to the investigation of other similar anomalies and the development of derived technologies.

          I hope Christopher C (below) is right to hope that there is something in Solar Hydrogen Trends’ claims but there seem to be a number of other, previously suppressed, systems that offer some promise (AlainCo listed some of these earlier).

  • Ophelia Rump

    One more question if you would be so kind, are they as credible as the video on their site makes them appear. Does Focus Fusion truly have the pier interest level that he indicated, in your opinion?

    • Broncobet

      They have been doing good work but had kind of humble beginnings,their theory was not accepted and is still not industry wide.Their website has been updated but they still have to scrap for money.They are easy to root for.It will be interesting to see results from the new electrodes.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Thank you for the excellent response.

  • Christopher Calder

    In other news, Hyundai’s Tucson Fuel Cell SUV is now being leased in California. If Solar Hydrogen Trends really can produce low cost hydrogen from water using LENR, they can easily hook up a smaller version of their device in the back of the Tucson SUV and prove to the world it really works. I have written both Hyundai and Solar Hydrogen Trends about this obvious possible demonstration.

    http://www.nasdaq.com/article/hyundais-tucson-fuel-cell-cuv-arrives-stateside-cm361466

    I am convinced that Solar Hydrogen Trends is not a scam. At worse it could be a case of bad measuring techniques. The truth about the efficiency of their method will be easy to prove. If they conduct one more independent test and it verifies the previous results found by AirKinetics, Inc., then the world will change very fast. If it is a case of improper testing of hydrogen flow, then they will quickly fade away. I suspect their device does produce hydrogen, but the quantity and costs are in question.

    • Obvious

      Did SHT do their demonstration last month? I thought it was going to be on the 16th, and even Bachcole was invited.

      • Christopher Calder

        Sterling doubted the flow quantity. We need more independent tests before we draw any serious conclusions. The stakes are so high on this one it should not be ignored. If you can make cheap hydrogen with LENR, I think that is a better and quicker solution than producing heat directly with LENR. We already know how to use hydrogen gas as fuel, and it would be easy to adapt to all transportation needs, from cars, to ships, to Boeing 747s.

        • Obvious

          50 cu ft/min is the same flow rate (of air) as a cheap $20 bathroom fan.
          Should be pretty noticeable, even at ~1/8 the density.

          • Christopher Calder

            “~1/8 the density”

            That is why I am agnostic about the recent demonstration. I have never experienced a flow of hydrogen gas coming out of a pipe. We need real experts to test the flow. Is the EPA certified company that did the first independent test really qualified? We need more tests!

            • Obvious

              The garbage bag filling test would work OK. I have filled bags with H2 made from aluminum foil dunked in HCl that fills a bag pretty quick. A not very sciency-looking measurement, but effective. It doesn’t take much Al foil to make a couple of garbage bags full of H.
              The low density of H gas may have messed with the velometer measurement in the demo with Sterling Allan, since it probably forces a rotor or vane to turn. Using H instead of air might be similar to trying to run a water wheel on air flow..

              • Omega Z

                Sterling went as an Observer. Ended up doing most of the test with little to work with.
                I give him high marks. Under the circumstances, he did an excellent job.
                Even his idea of using a 2 liter bottle immersed in a bucket of water tho primitive would have been reasonable accurate. Had they let him use it.

                The velometer would have worked had they been producing the volume they claimed. It has a minimum volume level in order to properly work.

                SHT wasn’t happy with Sterling’s report. They should appreciate that he gave them the benefit of doubt. He could easily have gave them the deep 6. Instead, He said it did produce hydrogen & it appeared to be in excess to useable proportions, Tho nowhere near what they had originally claimed. He stated that they needed to do another proper test with proper & calibrated equipment if they expect to receive proper validation. Even some of Sterling’s detractors gave him a thumbs up..

                SHT has no one to blame but themselves. They should have made it clear to those responsible for the test to bring said equipment in which to test it with…

    • Ophelia Rump

      If they have such a device, indeed they should hook it to an electric vehicle and drive it across the country.

      The vehicle should be stock, and provided by the manufacturer with only an adapter and mounts specified by SHT fitted by the manufacturer in advance.

      SHT should then carry in their device, plug it in in front of the manufacturer and media, and drive it across the country with only stops for media opportunities.

    • jousterusa

      At our HHO Games at the Museum of Science & tewchnology ion Tampa last January, we had a presentsation of an HHO generator that produced 30 gallons of hydrogen per minute using cheap aluminum powder, or even raw soda cans. Dr. Howard Phillips, a former chem professor at UNC Charlotte, was the presenter. Point is that it’s really easy and cheap to produce hydrogen from water and it always has been. Some people persist in thinking that this achievement is far off and unlikely.

      • Frechette

        The question which should be asked is how much electrical energy was used to produce the aluminum powder to begin with and how much hydrogen it produces from water. Running that amount of hydrogen through a fuel cell to power a vehicle will shed light on the actual cost per mile driven. In most cases with present electrical energy costs this turns out to be an equivalent gasoline cost of about $8 per gallon.

  • Ophelia Rump

    This sounds almost like an admission that Rossi is genuine and they only have a year left before it is game over. Tough deadline!

  • Job001

    Often the differences between competing research efforts prompt serious competitive childishness like referring to cold fusion as “magical, inexplicable witchcraft” Very silly nonsense.

    No science finds absolute truth but rather well correlated results that eventually come to acceptance. The fact that LENR is in early fundamental research stages (3500 reports shows it is a challenge but quite real, attracting real money) has nothing to do with magic, witchcraft or being inexplicable.

    What I don’t like about hot fusion is that it will be easy to use for monopolistic extraction of wealth (Big utilities) from humanity, LENR+ may ultimately allow improved local small scale economic improvements which would be the greatest benefit to society.

    Small mindedness has lost focus fusion some of my respect, perhaps they don’t care since they apparently pursue monopoly and Cartel funds and anti-social wealth extraction/concentration goals.

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

      In modern society, witchcraft is what works without a theory.

      the only reason cold fusion is rejected is no theory.

      The only reason XXX is believed is models based on a theory predict it.

      facts are just there to confirm theory or be rejected as artifacts and temporary discrepancies with the theory.

      • Job001

        LENR has many competing theories undergoing improvement as new data reveals improved correlation. For instance, the requirements of lattice near saturation, temperature thresholds, EMF triggers, lattice metal types, hydride “catalyst”, and so forth.

        For the amount of money spent LENR is progressing extremely well.

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

          no theory is still accepted, satisfying…
          from my survey I only see candidate among Kim/zubarev, ed Storms (my bet), maybe hagelstein… Brillouin is not finished, but as bottom up it may be good…

      • Ophelia Rump

        Well said, I would add only that theory makes no claim to be the truth, even if the theory is proven to be useful and predictive. Many theories have been predictive but later replaced by completely contradictory theories which were more predictive. Early theories on signal encoding of vision had hundreds of such good theories.

        Science is not an absolute and correct description of reality, neither are it’s laws.

        • heath

          I believe all scientists should be required to start any sentence regarding a “scientific fact” with the phrase “From what we know so far…” so that it is eventually it works into their psyche that what is “fact” now may not be fact down the road as our scientific knowledge improves over time.

  • Gordon Docherty

    A lot of the energy used in Focus Fusion devices is in creating the pinch point where fusion can occur: LENR does the same by creating Nuclear Active Environments (NAEs) at the atomic level. In effect, both approaches are increasing the probability of coulomb barrier tunneling. In the first case, magnetic inertial confinement and high energies are used to “crash” nucleii together, while in the second sympathetic resonance at an imposed frequency, together with geo-spatial confinement are used. Each can learn from the other and feed the other: perhaps a Focus Fusion device where the pinch point is focussed into a narrow collar or tube (of Casimir dimensions) might be a way of improving a Focus Fusion device, for example. At the “human” level, Focus Fusion would be too technically challenging for a home unit (for example, the core is operating at millions of degrees and some radiation is being emitted, as well as high energy electron and particle beams) but would be ideal for cores at the heart of high-power installations (for example, ships, factories, metropolitan-wide energy provision, shielded from the human living environment), all the while backed up by localized LENR (for heating / lighting / road-rail transport / “human environment” systems). I, for one, wish focus fusion systems, such as from LPP, as much success as LENR systems, such as the e-Cat and Brillouin Boiler – each have their own characteristics that make then suitable for concentrated, high-power applications (LPP) or lower-energy, “human-scaled” applications.

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

      since it will produce huge flow of neutrons, and shorter life isotopes, I rather see it interesting for fission waste remediation if LENR cannot do the same.

      • Broncobet

        They smack a proton into Boron 11 Giving carbon 12 which yields 3 Helium molecules hence very low radioactivity , ie no left over neutrons.They are very interesting.Their chief scientist,Levy ,claims the universe is not expanding.

  • GreenWin

    “This isn’t some kind of magical, inexplicable witchcraft like cold fusion…”

    “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.”
    — Exodus 22:18, The Bible, King James
    Refreshing to see Mr. Anthony takes the Orthodox view of unexplained phenomena.

    • Charles

      Salem MA tried to impose this scripture. On the other hand, if it is in a book of the Bible written by Moses under God’s direction, they must have existed. Their covens seem to be making a comeback and they aren’t cringing in fear. Is it example time?

    • Ophelia Rump

      Need a match?

      You would get a best quote of day award!

  • Andreas Moraitis

    “We need to raise $200,000 to fund the purchase of new electrodes for the final phase of research, to prove that Focus Fusion works.”

    They have not proven yet if their device works – and in order to prove it, they must first collect $200,000 for “electrodes”?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I’ve just read that they plan to use beryllium. Beryllium is indeed not cheap, but for $200,000 they would get about 400 kg. Presumably, the electrodes will stand the temperature only for a short time, so that they have to replace them frequently. This appears to be a serious obstacle for commercialization.

      • Obvious

        I sure hope they don’t vaporize the beryllium. Very, very, dangerous.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      I’m suspicious of their “need” for $200,000 from the public (although I made a small donation). I think their crowd funding scheme is their way of drumming up public interest. They’ve probably noticed how Rossi’s JONP has worked for him.

      • Broncobet

        Good for you, I wish I could do the same this is something that could actually work although, of course it has its detracters also.