Norwegian Think Tank Assesses LENR — “Success Cannot be Excluded”

Thanks to Sanjeev for finding an interesting document published by the Norwegian Think Tank Om Civita — which describes itself as a “politically independent think tank whose work will contribute to increased understanding and support for liberal values ​​and solutions”.

The report was published on June 23, 2015 with the title “LENR – A new, inexpensive and pollution-free energy?” It looks at the topic of LENR from a probablity perspective, trying to evaluate the probability of first, whether LENR is a real and commercially viable phenomonen, and if so, what its impact might be on the global and Norwegian economies, and on the environment.

The report looks at the history of cold fusion, current activity in the LENR field, and at some of the companies involved in R&D. It also tries to project the possible future impact based on research that has been done in other fields, such as the impact of the cost of oil on the world economy. The report does not come to any firm conclusion, but does pose some possible scenarios that could result from commercially available LENR. And it does recommend that the topic be monitored at high levels in government. Here’s an excerpt from the report:

The crucial question is of course: Will any of the projects succeed? The answer can be not determined with certainty by outsiders today. But it may be useful to turn to this issue: Can success be excluded? It is justified to doubt the companies’ optimistic statements, but based on the inspection and tests that have been reported by independent researchers success cannot be excluded. And if development were to succeed, even with lower profitability than the companies foreshadows, margins relative to the capabilities of today’s energy supply are so large that one can see the outlines of a real energy revolution. It would then be positive for the global environment and for energy consumers in both rich and poor countries. But LENR-based energy could be dramatically negative for Norway’s energy-based economy. Effects could – potentially – be so extensive that even a low probability that firms succeed indicate that development should be followed by public authorities. The follow-up must ensure a professionally qualified assessment and information leading activity in the field of scientific results and especially the industry-oriented projects.

The report does note that success for LENR could be particularly impactful on Norway, whose economy is heavily dependent on oil production. This is not the first time we have seen serious Norwegians looking closely at LENR.

The full document (in Norwegian) can be downloaded Civita note here:

A Google translated PDF of the text (not the images) is here.

  • MontagueWithnail

    I find it pretty scary that the report concludes LENR would be bad for Norway. If:

    – a Liberal think-tank from
    – THE most liberal, intelligent, and future looking petro-nation, and
    – one of three (with Russia and Canada) with a freezing cold climate AND
    – one in which oil production is already in steep decline (or at least new fields are very expensive and marginal)

    can’t see that in the long run LENR will be a GREAT THING, not at all a bad thing for Norway, then it bodes extremely badly for the rest of the world, and in particular the kind of reaction that we’re going from Russia and the Middle East (not to mentioned Texas – possibly the most scary of all).

    Will LENR cause WWIII once it becomes believed, before it can benefit any of us?

  • Ahoysilver

    I rest my case…

  • Oystein Lande

    Yes of course. The problem is that too much of anything will kill you. Too much water and the plant drown. Even drinking too much water will kill a human. So where is the limit where the amount of CO2 is too much CO2? It’s a dangerous game we are playing, possibly a russian roulette we will lose, if we don’t act to reduce oil consumption….Should we take the risk and continue the oil age until all reserves are used…, or better be safe than sorry?

    • bachcole

      Fortunately, this discussion is moot because Rossi et. al. are going to make it moot. Too bad because plants do best at about 1200 ppm CO2 and we are only at 400 ppm. This assumes of course that our addition to the total amount is increasing the total amount and not something else, like the warming oceans.

      • Oystein Lande

        Some plants may well benefit from higher CO2 levels, but not enough research have been done to conclude on what you say as a general fact. And acidification of our seas caused by CO2 may lead to more trouble than we need.

  • Omega Z

    LENR isn’t overunity. Like an ICE vehicle, you provide the spark & it burns fuel. The important difference is the energy density being many times greater then fossil energy.

    As to the Poor, It will be standard economics 101. Trickle down.
    That’s just the way it works. Poor people don’t by $70K cars.
    However, with scaled down localized power plants, All will benefit from cheaper electricity.

  • Oystein Lande

    What I think of a Senator that says “…global warming deniers should be imprisoned.”?
    I think he is entitled to his opinions as any other citizens in a free democratic society. Western democracies (and probably others) are holding the freedom of speach as one of their ground pillars. So any Senator or any citizens are entitled to their opinions, (but not necesarily their facts). What is a little surprising is that Senators with such extreme views (if he was serious) in any direction are actually being elected by the citizens. But it is actually possible to make a political suicide. Like the stupidity of Donald Trump on his views of Mexicans. Anyhow, I do believe we are affecting our climate system when we burn 90 million barrels of oil every day, 365 days a year..for decades…. Also acidification of our seas is a risk with uncertain consequences, that needs attention.

  • Omega Z

    We should quickly develop our Plasma Shields.
    On a more serious note, I read an NRL research report about 5 years ago that said that technologically, Nukes are obsolete. The research was completed & the U.S. can terminate a nuke at any point after launch.

    Termination can be done in1 of 2 modes. Physically destroyed or by causing it to detonate. The report concluded with- This technology can be fully deployed within 5 years. There will be no follow up reports as the project has been shelved.<-Many times this is Government speak for it's going Dark. Probably, 20 years from now, this will be made public.This is just 1 of several Government projects I have come across over the years that went dark.

  • Omega Z

    Replace Colorado with Illinois and this becomes my post.
    Yeah, it appears the same for most of the Midwest, yet there are those telling us were having a hotter summer then normal(In the Midwest).

    I can only assume these people are in 1 of the other infinite dimensions where all possibilities exist. Obviously, Should I disagree with them, I should either be shot or imprisoned. And they think I’m intolerant.

    • bachcole

      As I was walking the dogs this morning along the incredibly verdant creek that is usually dry, I thought how both sides pick and choose data to fit their perspective. There is so much cherry picking of data and downright lying that it is impossible by listening to the public discourse to know what the truth is. The only way to know, and even this is iffy, is to look at the data for one’s self.

      There is so much placebo effect, power of suggestion going on. Everyone thinks that this or that little bit of data proves their perspective.

      The road along the creek has become a path where one has to dodge the overgrowth. This is great except that one has to also dodge the mosquitoes. (:->)

      • Omega Z

        He he he.
        If your walking your dog along that path, I’d suspect mosquitoes aren’t the only thing you need to dodge.

        As to GW, If the facts are on their side, then why lie & deceive. The oceans are absorbing CO2. The oceans are warming up. It’s 1 or the other. It can’t be both. And sea level can’t rise in only part of the ocean. Especially by many feet. Water will find it’s own level. When all the sea ice melts, it will raise the sea level by X feet. apparently they didn’t study displacement. Or they out right lied.

        Southern California is suffering desertification because of GW. No It was always desert greened by pumping vast amounts of water there from other locations. Most water shortages are man made. You have enough water in a geographic location for 100K people & move 1 million in. What did they expect.

        There’s a huge list of Serious discrepancies & we haven’t even talked about the data yet.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          The problem of course is we don’t even have a basic math correlation between our output of CO2 and temperature. Worse is we output record amounts of CO2 in the last 18 years with the India/China boom. In fact we output about the SAME amount of CO2 in the last 18 years as the previous 75 (nearly all of the previous industrial revolution).

          However, in the SAME time frame we not seen any global warming.

          So you claiming that something is occurring due to our CO2 output, and yet the numbers and observations don’t support as such.

          There is not ONE model from the IPCC that been correct – in fact they are ALL wrong! And worse they base their predictions on models – not real observations. If you take read data, then you don’t see any global warming for 18 years now.

          The Great Pause lengthens again:
          http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/03/the-great-pause-lengthens-again/

          The drought is not any more severe or different then past droughts. However in the past (even up to the 1980’s) they increased water supplies with investment to keep up with population growth – they not stopped doing that! Imagine that, I used to grow up and hear about 3rd world counties that don’t have enough water. Now California does not have enough water or even electricity for that matter!

          And there been no increase in severe weather either (in fact we are at a historic low for hurricanes right now).

          And oh, if there is something in the data in the above link that you disagree with PLEASE quote the data and corrections you have.

          And in regards to global warming, I close with this STUNNING quote from the IPCC (inter government panel on climate change):

          >Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of Working group III IPCC,

          We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate
          policy…Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy
          separately from the major themes of globalization…One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”

          But hey, if you want to UN to have a global tax system on CO2, and let them take MORE of your money, then you start to grasp the motivation of these socialists looking to take your money and redistribute it! It is rather hard to find a socialist not looking to take more of your money – and the CO2 guilt trip is the card they are playing today!

          Again, if you disagree with the above data, do feel free to quote and correct it.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • bachcole

            Hard core hysterians won’t be listening since they are more interested in sharing their anxiety with other hard core hysterians.

  • Omega Z

    It is commendable that Norway is taking LENR seriously. Fossil energy makes up over 20% of their GDP. The sudden advent of LENR could be devastating to their economy if they don’t allow for the possibility.

    As I’ve posted many times, it will take decades to transition to LENR based energy. There will be an initial knee jerk reaction when people become aware of LENR causing a temporary price disruption in Fossil energy prices, but It will quickly recover to the standard supply/demand market.

    I find it highly probable that it will be 10 years before it has a permanent downward effect on energy prices. In time, Oil will stabilize to production cost plus a reasonable profit margin. Somewhere around $40 a barrel.

    For those who don’t see how this $40 a barrel is possible, It’s quite simple. As existing wells deplete, you just don’t drill new ones to replace them until supply & demand come back to equilibrium. It’s also possible in time that the $40 price could decline. Oil sands are energy intensive, but LENR would offset a lot of that making it much cheaper. One thing is certain. Oil will be around for a long while.

  • Gerrit

    I am very happy to see a think tank coming to the same conclusions I have made about the status of LENR. A great summary, hopefully we will get a better english translation.

    Hopefully IH will come forward with info in 2016.

    What worries me is that we see little results from SKINR and other institutions and no clear repeatable positive replications from MFMP, Parkhomov or others.

    And while “success cannot be excluded” we will have nothing until that success has finally materialized and been communicated.

    • Alex Ruiz

      Try to get facts together, remake your own conclusions and then check your level of happiness.

    • Frechette

      “What worries me is that we see little results from SKINR and other institutions and no clear repeatable positive replications from MFMP, Parkhomov or others.”
      We have seen this once before with the replication of the original Fleischman Pons experiment. The reason for lack of successful replication at that time was shown to be insufficient hydrogen loading of the palladium electrodes. (Michael McKubre) Replicators of Rossi’s e-cat may not have the recipe right just as in the FP case.

      • Private Citizen

        “The reason for lack of successful replication at that time was shown to
        be insufficient hydrogen loading of the palladium electrodes.”

        Can you point us to someone who has rectified this minor oversight and now produces LENR at will from a P&F reactor?

        • Omega Z

          There are many published papers on replication of P&F if you’re willing to expend the effort to look it up. Jed Rothwell on Vortex-l would possibly point some out to you.

          However, aside from replication, one also needs to be able to scale it up for useful work. Otherwise, it is just a Lab curiosity.

          • Private Citizen

            So who, again, is it replicating P&F at will? And why don’t we see links to this person’s demos on this site. Why doesn’t this person demo the technology at conferences? Is this person commercializing the tech? What’s the company name?

            Since you didn’t specify who, i assume if you’re not willing to expend the effort to look it up and give us the benefit of your research.

            • Omega Z

              I provided you a lead. Jed Rothwell on Vortex-l. He maintains an online archive library of 1000’s of papers. There is also PhD. Michael McKubre, who I believe replicated P&F’s work. If you choose not to follow up, then probably you don’t really want to know.

              I also pointed out that aside from replication, one also needs to be able to scale it up for useful work. I am not aware of any who have so obviously, you wouldn’t see it commercialized. Scaling up technology issues is not uncommon. Note that Graphene & OLED technologies have also had scaling up issues.

              “i assume you’re not willing to expend the effort to look it up and give us the benefit of your research.”
              Research is a paid profession. There are plenty of people out there ready & willing. How much are you willing to pay.

              • Private Citizen

                Don’t you think it odd that a live P&F replication isn’t the mainstay of CF conferences, where researchers of every sort strain to demonstrate CF in any form?

                Michael McKubre speaks at many conferences, but apparently doesn’t include a live demo of a P&F cell in his presentations. Interesting.

                We salivate here over every hint of a LENR demonstration. Why do you suppose an obvious P&F replication isn’t a common occurrence?

            • Frechette

              Check out this talk by Michael McKubre. He gives the criteria necessary to replicate the P/F experiment. He also shows the measurement data showing the generation of excess heat.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqeA8n37XFg

              • Private Citizen

                So why doesn’t he just replicate the openly specified P&F cell, instead of bragging about a huge 7 watts maximum in his own version?

                • Frechette

                  He’s done the experiment many times and showed it can be replicated. He reports his findings to a group of scientists at this meeting and gives the reason why the initial replications done immediately after the Pons and Fleischman came up negative.
                  He has demonstrated replication to colleagues and provides a recipe to get positive results. That’s how good science is done. Just because he doesn’t roll out his reactor with all the instrumentation to a scientific conference doesn’t mean he is a charlatan. If that doesn’t please you I suggest you visit his lab in California.

                • Private Citizen

                  You show no link to an actual P&F replication, just a hand-waving argument of true faith with a sprinkle of indignant rage. All i can find is McKubre generating a few joules, not enough to heat a gram of water a single degree.

                  Will be delighted to see some evidence of him replicating the P&F reactor that melted thru a lab bench and into a concrete floor, by simply rectifying the sloppy hydrogen loading oversight so often cited. You would think a think like that would be the top item at every CF conference, instead of no demos whatsoever.

                • Frechette

                  One doesn’t go to scientific conferences to set up an experiment for all to see. There just isn’t the time nor the facilities do do that in such a venue. Scientific confernces are a place where scientists report results on experimental or theoretical work they have performed. The attendees are there to critique the work ask questions etc. You obviously haven’t been to a scientific conference or else you would not be demanding that McKubre show up rolling in his lab bench with instrumentation data logging equipment calorimeters and so on. You also imply that McKubre is a charlatan or worse without knowng the man nor his standing in the scientific community. Shame on you.

                • Private Citizen

                  “One doesn’t go to scientific conferences to set up an experiment for all
                  to see. There just isn’t the time nor the facilities do do that in such
                  a venue.”

                  It is done all the time.
                  https://www.google.com/#q=lenr+conference+demo

                  “You also imply that McKubre is a charlatan”

                  No, the charlatans are the ones who claim he has replicated P&F’s experiment and significant power output. Show me the money, is all i ask.

                • Mats002

                  Here is a replication from a (for most people) trusted source claiming a double-figure watts for quite a long time: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19960016952

                  Why don’t they travel around and do demos do you think?

                • Private Citizen

                  This thread started with my musing why no one has simply rectified the hydrogen loading error blamed for poor replication of P&F’s simple cell, that heated about a liter of water form 30C to 50C for two days or more at a stretch without increased input power. No one has answers this question, as yet, but instead point me to lesser replications with faint energy signatures.

                  The extremely complex NASA experiment linked to found 7 watts of excess power (they are careful to always call it “apparent” excess heat) in a 28 liter cell. The abstract states : “However, the present data do admit efficient recombination of dissolved hydrogen-oxygen as an ordinary explanation.”

                  Even a tiny battery can light a 7W led for a long, long time without having to resort to atomic energy as an explanation for the power source. Why they don’t travel around with this 28 liter device that might warm a small fraction of a degree is probably because it is not extremely impressive or convincing as a demo.

                  I will be overjoyed to see clear evidence of LENR. Lugano is the most promising thing seen so far. Am hopeful.

                  Tak ska du ha for your research.

        • Mats002
          • Private Citizen

            So CF 101 is doing a P&F replication?

            I have watched at length the course presentations on the web and didn’t see that part.

            They were promising to distribute NANOR devices that generated milliwatts for open testing, but haven’t yet seen that either. Would be interested in the status of open NANOR testing.

            • Mats002

              Private Citizen – I think you have a very good question that needs a proper answer. I have not witnessed such experiments myself, but this link says “In 2012, the course was well-attended and featured a JET Energy, Inc demonstration of the NANOR, a nano-material, two-terminal component that generates excess energy gain using a dry, pre-loaded hydrogen fuel. Open to the public for viewing, the NANOR ran for months in Hagelstein’s office.”:
              http://student.mit.edu/searchiap/iap-BD6D0CF8E170B284E0400312852F4A61.html

              More answers can be found at lenr-canr.org – I am sure LENR experts can pick a better document –
              but I found this one much relevant to the question: https://www.google.com/url?q=http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcalorimetra.pdf&sa=U&ei=OsaiVa26NaabygPDjJmYAg&ved=0CAcQFjAB&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNHyywS3QQcD67j6U8i2Hy7yDedL1Q

              The document is written by SRI International (McKubre, Bao, Tanzella) and MIT (Peter Hagelstein), only 5 pages long and can be understood
              without a science degree in chemistry or physics. I would like to highlight a few parts:

              Last page under ‘Conclusions’ says this experiment is repeatable at will: “A total of 30 experiments demonstrated output energy release in excess of input by amounts larger than can be accounted by known chemical effects.”

              According to the document, the experiment was created for three main purposes:

              1. The original F&P PdD experiments made loading of D into the Pd lattice and stimulation to start the effect simultanously.

              This experiment make loading and stimulation in two sequential steps, decoupled from each other for better control and observation.

              2. Look for the upper limit of thermal energy released by a large and abrupt stimuli.

              3. The original F&P PdD experiments had to be runned for weeks or months until – at an unknown time – the effect starts. This experiment can be repeated within a much shorter time frame.

              For evaluating LENR experiments, two main methods seems to be important to do:

              a) Calorimetry

              b) Look for transmutations in the ash

              Only calorimetri was made in this experiment, but there are other documents at lenr-canr.org for further investigations.

              The result of all runs can be found at page 4, Fig. 3. Summary of excess heat from all wires tested.

              As an extra feature – but not as the main purpose of this experiment – they tried Piantelli/Rossi NiH instead of F&P PdD. What did they find out? See last page under ‘Conclusions’.

              This paper also indicates the importance of a stimuli other than heat only.

              • Private Citizen

                Thanks for the detailed reply Mats. It’s an interesting paper which further peaks curiosity as to why replication is not commonplace for such an earthshaking discovery.

                It is unfortunate that the measure of the excess energy, like the NANOR, is so low in this setup. My understanding is that 1 joule is sufficient to heat 1g of water .24K, so the ~2 joules they measure would not heat even a single gram of water one-half degree (and half of that heat is input). Not quite a cup of LENR tea yet, but interesting.

                • Mats002

                  Yes the famous cup of tea… Well during the years since 1989 other researchers invented new experiments, some of them could actually heat a cup of tea, Rossi said he was inspired by Arata and this paper describes his experiments, some was replicated by SRI/McKubre: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChubbTAinhonorofy.pdf

        • Frechette

          Yes, Michael McKubre at SRI International was the first to point this out. You can watch the presentation of his results on Youtube.

    • Omega Z

      “What worries me is that we see little results from SKINR and other institutions”

      And if Rossi handed over a working E-cat, you would in general see the same results from these institutions. They would study it for decades while filing patents & never produce a marketable product.

  • Observer

    Possible future: After successfully weaning itself off the dependence of fossil fuels, mankind finds itself in another Maunder Minimum by the middle of the 21st century. In an attempt to thwart the upcoming mini ice age we pump oxygen in abandoned coal mines and light them on fire in order to induce man-made global warming. Alas our ability to control the weather will again be vastly overestimated.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html

    • Omega Z

      Yes, we’ll all need E-cats to heat our green rooms to supplement our food supplies as with the last Maunder Minimum, food production was greatly reduced leading to famine & disease epidemics.

  • Observer

    It will be interesting to see who weathers the upcoming storm best: Well planned oil economies or Boom and bust oil economies.

  • Alain Samoun

    Bachcole,there are also governments who represent a consensus of their electors,that way majority governs but minorities still have rights to disagree but follow what the gov has decided until the next election.

  • Daniel Maris

    A more equal society will happen naturally when people are given the means to turn their homes into homesteads. Then people will become far more independent players in the labour market.

    Solar plus storage, or LENR, is just the beginning of this “home-hub” revolution. Other aspects will include 3D printing, food-growing and textile-manufacturing domestic appliances, and domestic robots.

    It took 500 years for globalisation to come to this peak – the next 100 years are going to be very different with the focus on the empowerment of the individual through these new technologies which make homes centres of production and communication.

  • Christina

    Bachcole

    Really, bachcole, even after the Disney outbreak? Vaccinating people is part of the “common defense.”

    Unvaccinated people are a danger to the whole country’s health. Talk to a microbiologist; my husband got his masters degree in it even though he became disable and hadn’t been able to work in it for the forty years before he retired.

    If we let people stay unvaccinated, serious unintended consequences could be a minor or major pandemic.

    Who wants to take that chance?

    Those who don’t want vaccinations haven’t researched the history of disease. It’s appalling.

    Respectfully,

    Christina

    • bachcole

      Quite the opposite is the case. People get vaccinated for childhood diseases and then get the disease in their adulthoods and DIE or get maimed. Getting hysterical about measles is hysterical.

      Anyway, that was not my point. I am a little surprised that you failed to get my point. I thought that you were smarter than that. My point is that socialist majorities often times tend to be tyrannical. You of all people should have known that.

      • Mats002

        You just answered my question and I am afraid you mix up communism with what kind of states Sweden and Norway are. But then again if you equals nationwide vaccine initiatives with tyrany – well – this is not a political discussion forum, so I have no more to say about this subject. Wonderful day!

      • Oystein Lande

        I see one of the authors also where the host of Mckubre that visited Norway nov. 2014. Anyhow, “socialist majorities often tend to be tyrannical?” Hope you are not confusing socialism with communism.
        Norway is far from a perfect society, but we have been lucky electing politicians that have made some right decitions in history. Like deciding 78% tax rate on oil companies operating in Norw.sector…and building a money fund for the future….or deciding free healthcare paid by the tax payers. I pay gladly my share. Should I win the wrong lottery and get cancer, I don’t need to worry about going bankcrupt, or not affording the right medicines, and dying prematurely because of not receving the necessary healthcare etc…….Ok I would prefer somewhat lower tax rates (we have 25% VAT and 35-50% income tax and 1% tax on net wealth). But then again I don’t need to pay for education when my children attend University some years ahead….so all in all high tax rates paying for free healthcare care, free education (all the way through Univ.), 10 Months 100% paid maternity leave for the mother (where the father has 10 weeks paid leave), 60% sallary for two years should I lose my job and not get another one during the period + etc…….are all benefits I believe serves the society well and keeps up the…not GNP but GNH = Gross National Happiness… ;-).

      • Daniel Maris

        I agree Bachcole – there seems to be complete hysteria on vaccination and childhood diseases.

        The reality is that there is some evidence that failure to expose children’s immune systems to “traditional” childhood diseases in a natural way damages the immune system and leads to increased cases of such diseases as asthma (which kills lots of children every year). Certainly, there is plenty of evidence that improved sanitation, improved nutrition and other public health measures are what have really made a difference to children’s health.

        There are also plenty of documented cases (accepted even by government) of serious damage to children caused by vaccines.

        We need a balanced, risk assessment approach, but the truth is that vaccination policy is in the hands of the big pharmaceutical companies.

        • ecatworld

          I think we’re getting quite a long way off topic here with vaccine debates. Not really the purpose of ECW

        • bachcole

          Nice. I would add that the topic has become so polarized that both sides are not listening to each other.

          Also, my son and daughter got the flu recently. Why didn’t I also get it. I am 69, she is 49, and he is 16. I should have gotten it. This is NOT an isolated incidence. The tendency to get a disease is a product of the germ and the general health and specific immunity of the person. But the general health of the person is basically TOTALLY ignored by the conventional medical establishment.

  • Mats002

    Sorry to interupt this conversation but as a Swede Norway is next door and our societies are much the same except they have all the oil. We are in our roots from last 100 years or so social countries so I like to understand the bold parted opinion of yours a little more.

    • bachcole

      If you will explain to me what you just said, then perhaps I can respond appropriately. (:->)

      In case you feel slighted, Sweden is also among my top favorite countries.

      • Ahoysilver

        Don’t listen to them, the socialist propaganda in Scandinavia starts first year of kindergarten, continues through 18 years of free “education” then increases exponentially while working 43 years in public service or state-owned companies. All the while the state run media is droning on relentlessly lest anyone forget the mantras… Should LENR be real the state owned power companies will probably be in the market to buy and implement.

  • georgehants

    People and Society, Social Structure
    A striking feature about Norwegian society is a
    strong egalitarian outlook and the absence of conspicuous social
    divisions. Great wealth is not obvious. There is little poverty and few
    slums or luxury homes. Apart from forested areas, there are few large
    private landholdings in Norway. Farming, forestry, and fishing are
    typically small-scale, seasonal, family activities.
    http://www.countriesquest.com/europe/norway/people_and_society/social_structure.htm

    • James Thomas

      Good for you Norway.
      Bernie Sanders points to Norway as one of the countries we should be more like. Crazy socialist-democrat-who-actually-cares-for-the-people that he is.

    • Omega Z

      Norway is a small country with a small population & their system is all afforded by exploiting large gas & oil reserves thus exploiting the world market for profit.

      With the advent of LENR, over 20% of their GDP will cease to exist and their lifestyle will suffer greatly. A Great Depression. That is why they can ill afford to ignore this technology.

  • bachcole

    In my unofficial and entirely mental list of the enlightenment, harmony, and insightfulness of various nations, Norway ranks near the top. I am confident that they will weather the LENR storm. They are already demonstrating this.

    • ecatworld

      Norway has a sovereign weath fund of $900 billion. Just recently they have divested their coal investments: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/05/norways-pension-fund-to-divest-8bn-from-coal-a-new-analysis-shows

      I wonder how they might use this fund to position themselves for LENR if they are convinced it’s the real deal.

      • Owen Geiger

        They could afford to invest in IH. They could even invest in the top several most promising LENR companies to spread the risk. If they wait too long though the cost will skyrocket once the information is mainstream.

      • Roland

        If memory serves the Norwegian professional publication aimed at 21,000 engineers and scientists recently ran an article on LENR and encouraged their readers to start thinking about how Norway should respond to the reality of a new technology that is going to effect their main economic driver, oil extraction.

        This is one of the reasons, in addition to ELFORSK’s involvement in primary research, why I think Norway and Sweden are going to be at the forefront in adopting and disseminating LENR based technologies.

        • bachcole

          Can Swedes and Norwegians read each other’s written material without any problems? How close are the languages?

          • Oystein Lande

            The languages are very close, and we understand easily both. Caused by 500 years of political unions between scandinavian countries, which ended in 1905 when Norways union with Sweden ended. Typically it is a little easier to read danish, but easier to understand swedish spoken language.

        • bachcole

          A language comparison:

          Andrea Rossi is the inventor of the E-cat and is working very long hours to bring it to fruition.

          Norwegian: Andrea Rossi er oppfinneren av E-cat og jobber veldig lange timer for å få det til å realiseres.

          Swedish: Andrea Rossi är uppfinnaren av E-cat och arbetar mycket långa timmar att få den till stånd.

          Danish: Andrea Rossi er opfinderen af E-kat og arbejder meget lange timer at bringe den til at bære frugt.

          And for everyone who doesn’t know it yet, Finnish isn’t even close: Andrea Rossi on keksijä E-kissa ja toimii hyvin pitkiä päiviä saada se toteutumaan.

  • Curbina

    Reading this selected snio, one can say that It’s kind of a tepid supportive position for LENR, but also, and obviously, a not so veiled, warning of LENR as a potential threat for Norway’s oil wealth.

    • ecatworld

      I agree, Curbina. We’ve seen particular attention paid by groups of influence in Norway who are not dismissing LENR — on the contrary, it seems to hold their attention, and is being closely monitored.

    • Warthog

      “snio” ?????? Whut dat???

      I suspect that the “sovereign fund” is invested in any and every thing EXCEPT oil (and now, coal).

      • Curbina

        “snio”=Norwegian word for: “I can’t write snip correctly before my morning coffee” 😀

      • Omega Z

        Actually, the “sovereign fund” was built from the Oil & N-Gas Profits. Those profits also provide for additional social programs beyond the “sovereign fund”. I don’t see them getting out of Oil & N-Gas until it is no longer profitable. It makes up over 20% of their GDP.

        It’s actually more important then it appears. A mere 200K Oil & Gas field jobs in the U.S. added a couple million new jobs in the trickle down effect. People who build additional new cars for those working in Oil/Gas, Home construction & everything else that entails.

        • Warthog

          Certainly the source of the money TO BE INVESTED came from OIl and Gas profits/taxes, but those monies are almost certainly not reinvested in more oil/gas company stocks. They much are more likely invested in many DIFFERENT economic segments. THE basic principle of investing is “DIVERSIFY”.