US Secretary of Defense Directed to Provide a Briefing on LENR to the US House Armed Services Committee

Thanks to Giovanniweb for posting an excerpt from a report on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services which discusses LENR. The full document, published on May 4, 2016 can be found here. Here’s the relevant text on page 87:

The committee is aware of recent positive developments in developing low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), which produce ultra- clean, low-cost renewable energy that have strong national security implications. For example, according to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), if LENR works it will be a ‘‘disruptive technology that could revolutionize energy production and storage.’’ The committee is also aware of the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency’s (DARPA) findings that other countries including China and India are moving forward with LENR programs of their own and that Japan has actually created its own investment fund to promote such technology. DIA has also assessed that Japan and Italy are leaders in the field and that Russia, China, Israel, and India are now devoting significant resources to LENR development. To better understand the national security implications of these de- velopments, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing on the military utility of recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 22, 2016. This briefing should examine the current state of research in the United States, how that compares to work being done internationally, and an assessment of the type of military applications where this technology could potentially be useful.

So LENR is getting an official mention here, and this committee is “directing” the Secretary of Defense to prepare a full briefing to the committee of the current status of LENR in the United States. It will be very interesting to read this report. It should certainly mention the work of Andrea Rossi, and it’s possible by that time that the ERV report will have been released, and the E-Cat QuarkX will have been demonstrated. Probably lots of the work we have been following with other researchers the replications that we have been following will also be brought up.

Having the US Defense department and Armed Services committee discussing LENR in terms of national security implications is going to be interesting. If they are seeing India, China and Japan getting involved in LENR research programs could be a motivation for the US to follow suit.

All in time for the general election in November.

Here’s a link to the relevant part of the document:

243 Replies to “US Secretary of Defense Directed to Provide a Briefing on LENR to the US House Armed Services Committee”

  1. A promising new technology which could better the lives of everyone on the planet and all these folks care about is the military application. Totally disgusting IMO. Do they have brains?

      1. and unfortunately it could result in suppression by the military (for all but thier own use).
        Maybe we can take some comfort from the fact that the staement has been around since 2009, or maybe not in view of the apparent recent progress.

    1. Putting aside military applications, successful industrial adoption of LENR will redefine national priorities.

    1. Of all of the alphabet agencies, I think DARPA is the one who might actually plant the seeds for bringing LENR to the masses, just as they did with the Internet itself.

      1. They didn’t help Randall Mills in 1990. AKA Blackllite… Just put it in the warehouse 13 please. … Obama said we would have BIG Trucks to tow Boats with, without gasoline. Hmm.

        1. Hi all

          In reply to wizkid

          Boats trucks hmm…

          Yes I guess some one wanted horse buggies without horses after the Internal Combustion engine was invented.

          But your boat and truck are going the way of the cart….

          Sorry to impinge.

          Kind Regards walker

          1. Most early cars looked like their horse-drawn predecessors, used the same wheels, suspension and so on. It takes a while to adapt and to think in new ways – especially for military minds.

        2. Maybe with LENR they would create a ship like the one used by SHIELD in the avengers film. Currently the energy cost is the only thing wich makes these kind of things do not exist. But with LENR they would have the resources to make the turbines run 24/7

      2. Good point – and another chance for US military resources to redeem their “souls”. I am reminded of the Manhatten Project, where it took the full resources of the US military together with the semi-willing cooperation of the best Allied scientists, engineers and technicians available at the time to produce nuclear weapons ahead of Germany and Japan. Arguably, not a good outcome in the full context of history and neither was the nuclear fission power that came as a “bonus” extra.

        But, this time, a broadly similar kind of massive international committment would hugely accelerate the development of LENR. The best civilian scientists would be spared the “reputation trap” that Prof Huw Price has recently defined and could all freely exchange information and cooperation in one single facility. That facility could easily afford all the resources that, IMHO, has always been necessary to fully explore and prove LENR. Those would include neutron, gamma and other radiation detectors (even if they might definitively prove that very little results). They would include top-class, CSI – grade radio-chemists who could forensically prove any transmutation that occurs and, of course, prove the excess heat phenomenon well beyond any remaining doubt. The military grade security would instantly rule out any questions of tampering or trickery that the likes of Rossi are still being accused of in some quarters. It would include top class theoreticians and money would be no problem.

        You get the idea. The only thing would then be whether LENR would ultimately be released for civilian use world-wide with no significant IP strings attached to it. Basically, they could buy out Rossi and co if all the patents granted so far really did prove to have substance.

        1. “Arguably, not a good outcome in the full context of history and neither
          was the nuclear fission power that came as a “bonus” extra.”

          One the contrary, it had probably the best historical outcome of any strictly military project. Used only twice in history, saved a net 1.5MM lives.

          Unfortunately, the civilian side of fission has a much worse record.

          Oh, and one does not need “CSI-grade radio-chemists” to prove transmutation. Any decent analytical lab with an ICP-MS can incontrovertibly prove transmutation (as has already been done and replicated by two of the top industrial firms in Japan IIRC Toyota and Mitsubishi).

          It is amazing to me that these two efforts have been totally ignored in all the arguments about whether “LENR is/is not real”.

          1. Yes, the two bombs did save a net million+ lives – Allied and Japanese – at the time but nuclear weapons nearly cost all the lives on the planet only 17 years later in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Today, the situation is no better with North Korea trying to play games of “chicken” with the US. And I think Obama’s Iran Nuclear Deal was just as weak and dumb as Donald Trump says it was.

            Yes, I know about the transmutation proof by Toyota and Mitsubishi but their chemistry labs are undoubtedly top class and they would have strictly preserved the whole “chain of evidence” on the way to the actual assaying – all CSI style – so that there could be no question of contamination of the tiny amounts of transmutation products that would have been present. That’s something that none of the backyard tinkerers, including Rossi, could possibly afford or have the discipline to do.

            What I’m saying is that, despite the comparatively simple recipe for the consistent generation of practical amounts of excess heat that might eventually emerge, LENR’s full exploration and safety certification requires far greater and more extensive efforts than have so far been reported on. A Manhattan Project – style crash program would be able to employ many different teams to check out the different branches. Half of those could broadly be assigned to the original electrolysis approach of F&P and half to the later, gas based, methods of Rossi and Godes. Within the latter, an entire team could be testing whether imposed E/M fields do, in fact, enhance the reaction and if they do at what frequencies and intensities they do so – the Fourier spectrum. Simultaneously, a team of theoreticians could be arguing why they should and about all the other new physics and chemistry questions that LENR stimulates. Simultaneously with all that, experimental chemists could be checking out whether Nickel really is the optimum transition metal or whether others would be better and, then again, whether protium is just as effective as deuterium (or more so) as, I seem to remember, a Chinese researcher has recently reported. Simultaneously with all that another team – of reviewers – would be reading and re-evaluating all the historical evidence going back to Paneth and Peters and perhaps before.

            All those many people would be rubbing shoulders inside a very friendly, information sharing, Google – style working environment – a total contrast to the spartan, top secret conditions of the original Los Alamos camp. In their midst’s would be sweet tempered facilitators whose job it would be to “herd to cats” – make it possible for the most visceral opponents (Rossi and Krivit??) to none-the-less co-operate synergistically (look it up).

            All that would take a lot of money and organisational skill but the US has done it before, not just with the bomb but with the moon race, and it could do it again. If not the US, then the same kind of European consortium that produced CERN, or perhaps CERN itself could step up to the plate.

            Yes, all that would require Huw Price’s “Reputation Trap” to be officially pronounced safe but, after all, there are huge numbers of people spending huge amounts of money on the ITER white elephant and, if they are honest, they must admit that it will never work (although recent startups in hot fusion offer hope). Yet they carry on. It will be a bitter-sweet sight for us “LENR martyrs” to witness the stampede of many of those “top class” people from ITER to LENR but remember that the stakes simply couldn’t be higher. The same world that barely escaped nuclear annihilation in 1962 will yet be drowned by rising sea levels unless it act decisively to master this one technology which could truly save it.

          2. 1- MAD has worked thus far, and continues to work. That is called “evidence” rather than speculation. North Korea can posture all it likes. The leaders there know if they actually “pull the trigger” , they and their nation will cease to exist.

            2- ANY commercial analysis lab that does ICP-MS as a routine analysis does exactly the same chain of custody documentation as a CSI lab. And that includes internal corporate labs as well. I’m an analytical chemist with forty years experience, twenty with one of the world’s largest chemical firms…ALL samples are recorded, identified, and records kept (including raw data). That is what lab notebooks and computers are for.

            3- Any serious tinkerer-level science sort will SEND SAMPLES OUT to such a commercial lab, so will have the advantage of the same high level of expertise as any corporate lab. Even universities nowadays have dedicated “in-house” specialty labs that do things like ICP-MS, GC-MS, and other sophisticated analyses for all university departments instead of each department developing “in-house” capability.

          3. 1) The fact that the world hasn’t been blown up since MAD has been in place is more a matter of blind luck rather than John Nash’s game theories. At the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis there was a long-submerged Soviet submarine that was out of touch with Moscow and had not received their order to stand down. It was being “peppered” by US surface ships actually dropping grenades on it as if to say “the next one will be a depth charge”! The Soviet captain was about to launch all his nuclear missiles when the “Political Officer” persuaded him not to. Both were later reprimanded(!) And there have been many other “near misses” on both the Soviet and the US side, since then. As for North Korea, the dictator is as mad as a hatter and may be ready to risk his entire enslaved country in a game of “chicken” with the US. Think about it: MAD doesn’t work with suicide bombers and there is certainly a very long, sad trail of your so called “evidence” for that, not speculation.

            2) and 3) The weakness in all this is that we are talking about the entire LENR sequence from beginning to end – Obtaining and verifying the contents and purity of the Ni, the LiAlH4 and any of the other intended and/or accidental ingredients or impurities, transferring them without contamination to the cell, sealing that cell, performing the heating and measuring experiment and then opening that cell without contamination, transferring the contents without contamination and finally analyzing the results in a “clean room”. If the certified lab does all that itself, in-house, fair enough but, from what I gather from Lugano and what probably happens in the backyard tinkerers’ labs, only the last step might be certain (if they even bother). Basically, if someone fronts up with a “sealed container” and wants it analysed, all you can testify to is what it currently contains (plus possible contaminants from the container itself). Its entire history up to that point is quite another matter and, in the absence of this total beginning-to-end audit trail, the results cannot possibly be acceptable in a paper submitted for peer review. That, in turn, is what mainstream science rightly still demands and what any huge US or European government sponsored program would also. But that would be sufficient. In the end, as I’ve noted several times in my own blogs on LENR, “rigorous observations and measurements have a “right to exist”, whether they conform to the latest scientific fashion or not”.

            But note the “rigorous”.

          4. I can only say that your notions about lab work and “what mainstream science requires” are seriously wrong, and that you should probably spend less time watching CSI-type shows. Do you actually have any science training???

            None of the work described here requires anything so elaborate as you suppose. Standard research laboratory practices are more than sufficient to satisfy “peer review”. needs.

          5. FYI, I have an MSc in nuclear physics (1970). My thesis topic was “A Tritium Gas Neutron Source” and most of it was spent worrying about possible contamination by Tritium – a not-so-harmless radioactive gas. I also had course to work with U238 (also not-so-very-harmless). The plan was to use U238 for its chemical ability in porous form to absorb the tritium although we tested it with hydrogen first. Note how similar all that was to Rossi’s initial use of Nickel. In researching the chemistry of U238, I found that de-classified documents from the Manhattan Project (there were some) contained a very thorough investigation by the expert chemists at Los Alamos at the time and I remain impressed by the thoroughness of all the work done there (even if it was not for a noble cause).

            The tritium gas target was intended to supply neutrons via the d + T -> He4 + n reaction (the “D-T” reaction). In the end, with all the fears of radiation, we settled for the Tritium being dissolved in Titanium and that serving as the target for the 14Mev deuteron beam supplied by the Aura II accelerator. There’s far more but that’s an idea of my early work.

            After that, I went into more prosaic branches of Physics R&D, including Acoustics, Vibration and Fourier Analysis, Image Processing and Machine Vision in a career of about 35 years. So, yes, I think I can actually claim a modicum of scientific training – maybe even research experience.

            Thanks for asking.

          6. But no significant chemistry. And no real knowledge of chemical analysis labs and practices, other than reading a few papers, which, given the radiation environment involved, were grossly atypical in lab setup to any “normal” analysis lab. Which basically makes you a barely educated layman in the area of sophisticated chemical analysis, especially by advanced instrumental methods.

            I say again, your idea of what constitutes “acceptable lab practices” bears no resemblance to the real world, either in industrial labs or in contract labs.

          7. – None of us are Poymaths, so we must rely on experts in all the various fields to build up a complete picture. Michael McKubre certainly does know about real world lab procedure and much more. Have a complete read of his take on the Lugano Report:

            Let me quote this paragraph from it:
            “From the perspective of a chemist I have several issues with this stated procedure. A small envelope? What kind of envelope? About 1 g? How much mass exactly? How was the starting sample taken? By whom, with what tools, using what procedure? The report states, “It should also be noted that our total sample was about 10 mg, i.e. only a small part of the total fuel weight of 1 g used in the reactor. The sample was taken by us at random from the fuel and ash, observing utmost care to avoid any contamination…An arbitrary sample of different granules is chosen for the analysis.” How big is a granule? How many were selected? One percent (10 mg of ~1000 mg) is a pretty small sampling unless we can trust the randomness of the sample. How was sampling randomized? By whom was this done using what criteria?”

            – That’s the sort of thing I was concerned about. All the sophisticated chemical analysis in the world is no match for sloppy thinking around the selection and collection of the samples – or at least the perception of it.

          8. On the contrary. The simple fact that the authors mention that the sample was randomized says specifically that they are aware of the possible problem, and have taken steps to avoid it. The fact that they didn’t spell out every minute detail of the randomization in the report is in the “nice to have but not necessary” category. The key datum is that the sample was randomized.

          9. Well, just in that one paragraph – out of 20+ – McKubre actually poses 13 questions and you have given your take on only one of them, basically: shut-up – its trivial. Is that typical of the way you dealt with questions from your own peers?

            In any case, you should obviously take his whole report up with McKubre himself – although at that point you’d probably need to reveal your real name and actual qualifications and experience. Good luck.

          10. Actually, yes. The objections raised in the part you quoted “are” largely trivial. I’m not about to go into a re-examination of the whole Lugano report and McKubre’s commentary thereof. Don’t have the time. Sorry if that upsets you.

            THE critical information from Lugano are the isotopic shifts from “fuel” to “ash”. That, in and of itself is sufficient to prove the existence of LENR, especially in view of the Toyota and Mitsubishi results.

            The relevant pieces of info needed for that are 1) a sample from the fuel, and 2) a sample from the ash, both randomized. The use of “an envelope” to hold, load or sample is irrelevant, as no possible contamination from the envelope can affect the results Likewise the total mass of fuel charge…irrelevant

            A 10 mg randomized sample is gigantic for a SIMS analysis.

  2. Some of the sentences sound somewhat familiar, maybe they are copied from some earlier report (DIA?) which was perhaps discussed here and/or in Vortex maybe 1-2 years ago. Large machines move slowly: it can take significant time for information to pass from the root to the top and then back down again.

    It will take a long time and lots of R&D dollars flowing to defence contractors to upgrade the military to LENR. The technology is disruptive, but the same is true for all current hot topics such as lasers, robotics and AI.

  3. soon we’ll have a new Disqus-user on this forum who’ll be asking loads of questions. Username will be something like ‘SecrDef007″

  4. What I love about these kinds of announcement is the continual beating of the drums in the background. The LENR deniers get more furious and outspoken with every new incremental advance, validation, and public announcement.

    It reminds me of the early days of Bitcoin when shills filled the Internet with pronouncements of evil and harm, repeated predictions of failure, and non-stop ridicule. Looking back at comment histories from the most vocal ones, they have faded away. Their comment histories go up to about 2014, then stop. Why? Because they were simply wrong or misguided. Now banks and institutions around the world are embracing the Blockchain, the tech that underpins Bitcoin.

    Something similar is happening with LENR, and particularly, LENR+. The vocal trolls will eventually, and quietly, slip away never to be heard from again.

  5. International competition is great. It put a men on the moon and put satellites and space stations into orbit. If Marianne Macy can compose a tell all LENR article in Infinite Energy Magazine about Rossi and his system, her CIA husband must know what is happening in LENR in detail,

    1. But wasn’t their secret agenda to delay it? If it was, they might be forced to do an about face if the rest of the world has the edge.

      1. Nah, they’ll just complain about safety– obviously they’ve got ours at heart — through “associates” and get what they can out of all their industries for as long as they can and just buy up the patents/rights through subsidiaries etc, and then a couple years later write an article about how their company is leading green technology.

      2. IMO, the options are to delay or contain LENR in order to reduce ‘disruption’ – i.e., destabilisation of political, military and other power balances, and massive losses on the part of the current stakeholders in fossil/nuclear energy infrastructure.

        Containment would mean legislation secretly agreed by all major countries, and would probably be triggered by a suitable misadventure in a CF R&D lab or demo, following a suitable period of public exposure to biased and agenda-driven information from the MSM. The purpose of the latter would be to first introduce the technology, then increasingly to introduce fears about the safety of LENR and to echo ‘calls’ for such legislation.

        The amount of delay required to offload soon to be stranded assets to pension funds and other naive investors (as is now in train for Saudi ARAMCO for example) seems increasingly unlikely to be sufficient, so this in turn means that a concerted move towards containment is now becoming more likely by the day.

        1. SO, if AR does have a “secret sauce” that he hasn’t yet divulged to IH (China etc) then it would be in the US’s national interest to take control.

        2. I believe that LENR containment will be near to impossible, especially because oil/gas poor countries like China, India and Japan will not be very willing to join. Besides that, it will trigger R&D everywhere in the world and it will soon be known that radiation and other dangers can easily be avoided. You need a ‘police state’ like behaviour of the democracies to suppress these kind of developments.

          1. “You need a ‘police state’ like behaviour…”

            Not really, you just need public consent – which would be quite easily manufactured using fear as the lever.

            If anything is perceived as dangerous by the population (radioactive materials, drugs, firearms) it becomes easy to introduce controlling legislation to ‘protect’ the public from the perceived danger. It would only be necessary to create the required atmosphere of fear by the usual methods of social engineering in order to create a demand for such legislation. Democracies and dictatorships alike would see this as a desirable objective and will in all likelihood quickly arrive at parallel solutions.

          2. If they do that, a BRICS country with more to gain from LENR than by playing ball with the west might be the best delivery method. The international terrorist goon squad might swoop in on them, though.

  6. Hi all

    A while back I wrote a report for a military audience.

    LENR will have a greater effect on the military than the machine gun tank, flight, and the Nuclear Bomb combined.

    Our Current military will be as out of date as halberds, shields and swords.

    Kind Regards Walker

  7. This has the potential to be bad knews for AR.
    I believe he is ahead of the field by a long way and
    the governemnt has the ability to take control of his patents if they have military applications.

    1. actually, it’s in the national interest – so, military or not, if there is too much dragging of heals, the government has the ability to take control of patents – a sort of last resort, if those in the field are acting against the national interest. Now, this could be used to suppress an invention, but as the rest of the world is happily moving along with LENR research, this would open up an LENR gap, much disadvantaging the strategic interests of the US. Further, it is always better to bargain from a position of strength, so a country seeking to suppress LENR in a world where others were capitalizing on the technology and knowledge would, economically speaking, “go down real fast”.

      1. Yes, it would be in the national interest but appreciate that there are conflicting national interests. It’s main objective, or one of them, is to supress leakage of sensitive information (miltary). I seem to recal it was invoked to prevent the spread of nuclear technology. Don’t forget AR is a european but he is openly commited to the US.

    2. The government cannot “take control” of a patent after it has been granted. The government agencies, including the military, have a chance to review patent applications prior to being published, and can cause a secrecy order to be imposed–which can cause the patent application not to be published and essentially buried for decades or longer. Also, if the government funded the development of the technology, then they have “march in” rights where they can take a forced license without having to pay for it.

      But, aside from these two scenarios, once a patent is granted and published, then there is no going back. It is available to the public for inspection from that point forward and subject to intellectual property ownership and the accompanying rights.

  8. Do not forget that the LENR is so disruptive to reduce public sector spending at least thirty percent. For this money saved to get plenty of neutralizing the negative effects. This is simply cowardice if we dare use it.

  9. I think the contributors here are owed a debt of gratitude for the unwavering hope and belief in LENR potential to lift this earth out of economic dead ends. Such a dedicated engineer/inventor as our Doctor Rossi lead many to have faith and see the glimmerings of public awareness grow into recognitions. Actions, such as 2017 NDAA House Committee bringing up LENR, take place! I kinda think maybe my energy-article comments in the Stars and Stripe newspaper had some leak-through influence. Whatever; the folks here do contribute to the advent of this world changing energy source. Thank you all!

  10. No doubt this will trigger serious R&D too. I am not familiar to the openness of this Defence briefing in the US. Will this be done publicly? Would media pick this up? When it turns out to be ‘disruptive’, would it become classified?

    1. I was invited by DARPA to propose a version of my work on 3-d printing LENR devices as a thermoelectric structural cylinder. In their office, I asked if it was OK to say “LENR” and “cold fusion”. The project manager looked at the ceiling for a second and said, “This is DARPA isn’t it”! However by the time the thing turned into a real document, the 3-d printed thermoelectric cylindrical had morphed into the tail pipe of a drone. No reference to LENR

      1. Please, do tell more about your “LENR devices.”

        What is the simplest formula to replicate?

        How much excess energy can you produce and in what form?

        Do you hold any patents on your “LENR devices?”

        Many here might find it unusual to casually mention in passing that one is producing working LENR technology commercially. Don’t tell me, the details are *secret*, but you can talk about generalities for some reason?

      2. Sounds like the project manager was overruled by a higher-up. Disappointing. I’m so unimpressed by those who fear the reputation trap more so than the advancement of humanity.

  11. ” the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing on the military utility of recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 22, 2016″

    I can save them the trouble. It’ll impact ev-er-y-thing the military does from what their soldiers can carry to powering their land, sea and air vehicles to long-duration autonomous surveillance to laser-weapons to the efficiency of forward base operations… and many more things. Not to mention restructuring the world geopolitically.

    At least maybe we’ll finally get a clearer picture of USG involvement.

    1. The US military is probably pi$$ed off by this proposed public airing of something they would prefer to stay hidden while they quietly hand out multi-billion dollar development contracts to the usual suspects.

        1. Probably a closed session if that’s possible, with the minutes classified as you suggest. Even so it’s likely that the military will see this as meddling by politicians in something that isn’t their concern.

          1. Well, the military *always* needs to remember that they are directed and overseen by civilian representatives. Even though the current Congress is filled with many anti-science idiots I have no problem with them directing the military to examine this issue and report back. Whether it annoys them or not (and I’m sure it does) they need to be responsive and suppress any gut reactions about meddling. They work for us.

          2. It would be quite simple though to prepare an anodyne report that emphasises the ‘unproven’ nature of claims made for CF, and assures the committee that the matter is being thoroughly investigated, while speculating on a few obvious possibilities such as upgrading propulsion systems in military vehicles and ships, and replacement of battery power in equipment.

          3. Well given that it seems to have come from 2009 we can be a little reassured that hasn’t illiciting any meddling (yet). BUT then things have, or are moving on a pace now.

      1. Yes, probably correct, which is why public forums such as ECW are so important to keep the information in front of the public.

      2. The days of enjoying some significance in the human history for the Roman Empire are numbered. Beyond self aggrandized propaganda, no one believes in or bows to its power anymore. 6 months max. Their reaction is meaningless. no one can stop the leaps of E-Cat. To bell the cat will have new meaning pretty soon.

  12. Their day (the day of the Russian LENR researchers) is coming too. I am sure that everyone here wishes them the best of luck in the race. They are heroes too even if their science establishment can’t see it yet.

  13. Huh?

    “a report on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services.”

    Why would you say something so patently (apparently) false? I notice this is typical of your comments, however.

  14. Thanks, I always wondered if the Russian establishment is equally intolerant of LENR as the western establishment.

  15. the potential backing of the US military (who could care less what anyone else thinks)
    the possibility of the e-cat disappearing for several years…

    oh.. so personally conflicted on this one.

      1. you gotta admit that this potentially can be huge for Rossi even though he’s not mentioned.. the implications that some very high level individuals are going to be asking questions and wanting answers… its whats not said that’s actually more interesting :).. and just the timing of it.

          1. i wouldn’t want to take that bet. I have stated before that Rossi deserves all the credit that can be lavished upon him. but there is a chance that he wont be the one that brings the best version of LENR to us. He’s not a businessman that seems capable of handling a potential world wide technology. dont get me wrong.. i mean no slight against him.. but there is a world of difference between a small local or regional business and a global business.

            Which is why i was initially happy about Cherokee getting involved.. they had the contacts for business at that scale. of course the crashing let down at the end .. you know how that has left us all feeling..

    1. I am not the slightest bit conflicted. If the US military is bad, it is because politicians and the people directed it to do bad things. If it is good, it is because politicians and the people directed it to do good things.

  16. What I mean is that I am reluctant/selective in talking about LENR at birthday parties still. Where I do, I still feel I put my reputation on stake. The thing might die a silent death for various reasons, like it did 25 years back.The message today, again, is that forces greater than me, and beyond this selective group of bloggers, are seriously looking at it.

    1. I did discuss LENR at birthday parties, but after 5 birthday parties and still no tangible evidence, I decided to discuss more common topics.

      1. That’s why I felt “unreal” when I talked about it at birthday parties. Seems there is more to the mutual paranoia about the subject than meets the eye.

  17. Hi all

    In reply to Guy Thomas.

    Tanks in era of trans sonic drones the size of a large kitchen knife with enough on board energy to melt a company of tanks. Hmm…

    Kind Regards walker

    1. the era of tanks dies with the advent of portable drones.. a tank cant aim upwards.. and a 10,000.00 drone with directed explosives can disable a multi million dollar tank (by landing on its top or going under it) without ever exposing the operator..

  18. In spite of many of the negative comments below, I think that this development is a major step forward in the LENR saga. This really opens up the subject for public discussion (regrettably, it is still several months away) and it will give LENR a much higher public profile than it has had to date.

  19. Евгений, an old report from 2015, I take it that such a possibility as Mr. Putin helping out has not happened.
    Atom Ecology
    March 19, 2015
    One can only hope that the brave Russian leader Mr. Putin might just pop over to Alexander’s Parkhomov’s Moscow laboratory for a few minutes and take a look at the future of energy.
    With contribution of just a simple smile and handshake by Mr. Putin he might usher into this world a limitless clean source of energy for the future. Of course he might also just say to Dr. Parkhomov’s university “give this guy whatever he needs.

    1. I think that most leaders are wary of doing something like that due to potential political backlash that gives their opponents ammunition to use against them. the topic of this thread holds both excitement and trepidation at the thought of the curtain of silence that the military can put over a project.. they can make you disappear for years on a scientific front until they are satisfied or ready to present their findings (if they are inclined to do so and not classify it)..

      If Rossi suddenly was supported by the military for research there would be very little heard from Rossi anymore though the backing of such research would more than likely advance said project faster than him stumbling along the way he has.

      When you ask for leaders to get involved.. it really is a two edged sword.. careful what you wish for.

      1. The military has its own mafia. In fact, it is only interested in the old technology, you can steal public money. It has a fusion of commercial capital and military generals.

      2. I wonder. Did Rossi’s experience with the underworld in Italy give him enough strength to know how to avoid the american military?

  20. I’m not terribly well-versed in the political protocols here, but I am wondering how responsive the Sec. of Defense will be to this directive from the House committee. Relations between the House of Representatives and the White House are not the warmest these days, and I wonder if Ash Carter could just say to the House panel “sorry, but we don’t have time to do this by Sep 22” Then there is an election, a new administration, a new Congress and nothing happens.

    1. I think the Defense department would be more inclined to play along even if the white house stepped in and squashed the idea.. the Defense Department has to play ball with both the house and senate in some form as that’s where oversight and funding comes from regardless of who’s in the white house. You very well may be right that they can respond that they don’t have enough time for a thorough report in the time given.

      1. Hi, everyone,
        Now the game is afoot, here is the dilemma, hold off, and lose advantage, to completely ignore itis fool hearty, so as we see Dr R rush to production, he who hesitates loses ground, now this congressional hearing , is like the U.S. saying ok we’ll take a look, and to their misfortune, by the time is herring is held , the E-CAT, will have been announced, approximately 2 months earlier, great timing, Dr R. you always seem to have the advantage, an old gun fighters trick, so Dr.R keep the sun that is rising, to your back, and shinning on the world’s new fire.

    2. Frank:
      Like others,I have searched the original document that you are quoting – It seems that either it has been edited to suppress the mention of LENR or it is a hoax. Please let us know if you get more information

    3. What evidence do we have that this “directive” is being taken seriously by the government to any degree at all? Does it in fact date from 2009?

  21. LENR commercialization would be harmful to Russian economic security, as the first fossil fuel to suffer most would be natural gas. So not good for Russian exports. It is also unlikely that there will be an equivalent of Rosatom for LENR – if this is validated. But it is a great pity that Russia cannot be a leader in this field – given the impressive scientific capacity in place.

  22. “applications where this technology could potentially be useful”
    For example, you can quickly create the atmosphere of Venus and Mars.

      1. It may also depend on how much power it will be, it is still not known. Of course, perhaps a million years, the only one at the moment.

    1. Forget planets, look into artificial, spinning habitats made of asteroid materials, since they could eventually provide much more living area than planets. And no need to wait for any long terraforming process to complete. Name to search: Gerard O’Neill.

      1. Concur. Once habitat construction technology is mature, most of mankind will not live on planets, but on habitats. Why live on a planet???

        1. Because we do not have a method of protection from radiation outside the Earth’s magnetosphere.

          Maybe LENR can power one, if there were a design.

          Manned missions outside the Earth’s magnetosphere are not currently possible, that is why there are none.

          1. Until we can mine enough asteroid metals in space, the two meter thick layer of metal foam needed to stop accelerated particle damage, might be a little prohibitive. Even as a foam, that still only plays well for stationary applications.

          2. For the 10m wall habitats, we indeed need to mine a lot of asteroid material. But nothing in principle prevents one from doing that. Take for example Ceres, build a space elevator there, lift the mined stuff to Ceres orbit and build and leave the habitats orbiting Ceres. The space elevator is not hard to build for a reasonably fast rotating and low gravity body such as Ceres. Or alternatively, use ordinary rockets to lift the stuff with propellant mined from Ceres – that is also possible because the gravity potential is so low. The mass of propellant needed is much less than the mass of the lifted material – the reverse situation to what we have on Earth.
            LENR is not needed to do this, but of course if it’s available, it helps and makes sense to use it.

          3. Just find a nickel-iron asteroid of appropriate size and hollow it out as needed. Walls as thick as you want.
            Might not really need to be nickel-iron, just solid enough.
            Spray foam the walls with insulation-sealant.
            Stick some engines on one side, and/or rail gun nickel-iron lumps mined from the asteroid habitat to move into a convenient spot.

          4. But you would also need to rotate it to get artificial gravity (if one wants humans to live there – not if it’s used only a greenhouse etc). It could be possible, but one would have to make sure that the natural walls have no significant cracks so that the asteroid does not disintegrate when rotated so fast that the centrifugal force overcomes its gravity by a large factor. I would prefer to live in a structure which has manmade, engineered walls.

            Still, these are just technical details and there are many ways to do it. The main point is that an artificial structure (rotating cylindrical pressure vessel) can be million times more efficient in mass consumption than a terrestrial planet. An artificial structure needs only >=10m walls (for radiation protection), whereas on Earth there’s 6000 km of heavy rock below our feet which does nothing except produces the 1g gravity field. Essentially, the mass ratio 1:1,000,000 is the ratio of the mass of Earth’s atmosphere relative to Earth’s total mass.

          5. Aside from the manned lunar missions. But I agree, deep space for extended periods presents a problem. Foam metals, as others have pointed out, might be the solution, although seems like a rather bulky solution.

          6. Without going into details, that the magnetosphere would be needed to protect us is a longstanding myth which is for some reason kept alive by science journalists. The atmosphere is what protects us and it’s equivalent to roughly 10 m layer of water or other similar material. Thus if the habitat wall is made about 10 m thick, there are essentially earthlike radiation conditions inside. (Or not quite? Then make it 11m.) If the habitat diameter is some 5-10 km, 10 m wall thickness is needed already for structural reasons, to withstand the internal 1bar pressure and the 1g centrifugal acceleration.

          7. “Manned missions outside the Earth’s magnetosphere are not currently
            possible” My understanding that there was no radiation shielding on the
            supposed Moon missions in the 1960’s. So how did the astronauts survive
            the Van Allen Belts’ radiation?

          8. Radiation damage is cumulative, not acute. The astronauts exposure time was short. It was ruled that the small possible additional lifetime dose damage was worth the other results of the mission(s). OTOH, for a Mars transit mission with today’s propellants and drives, you have far longer exposure times, and much higher cumulative dose. There are those who would be willing to voluntarily take the exposure, even on a Mars mission.

            Note that every human being on earth is constantly exposed to at least “some” radioactivity.

          9. I see Pekka has already saved me the task of responding in detail. He is correct. You are wrong.

          10. “Manned missions outside the Earth’s magnetosphere are not currently possible” My understanding that there was no radiation shielding on the supposed Moon missions in the 1960’s. So how did the astronauts survive the Van Allen Belts’ radiation?

    2. Electric military aircraft with unlimited range and time in the air, and no heat signature, with extremely reduced weight requirements. Nothing to see there.

      1. More so to carry more ordinance seeing that is the only reason aircraft would need to return to an airbase. With drones they have also removed the limitation of the pilots stamina as they can now do shift work.

  23. LENR will force a “star trek” like cooperation onto humanity for its very survival. The upside is a world of abundance.

  24. With Venus, you might be able to keep progressively nuking the excess atmosphere away from the planet and into space.

    1. After we tame global warming on earth with reflective shielding in high earth orbit we’ll have enough experience in the art to cool down Venus.
      500 years + or – 100.

  25. It is ironic that it is the military who are paying attention to LENR, presumably for the use in more destructive weapons. Our elected “leaders” have exhibited no such curiosity or even awareness, and the scientific establishment continue to be pathologically skeptical, refusing to study the many documented reports, but summarily dismissing them. Today the news reports that carbon monoxide levels have climbed above an important level of 400ppm, which is considered a point of no return, which will inevitably lead to severe disruptions in our economies, loss of habitat resulting in millions of climate refugees, and increasingly extreme weather conditions. Yet the leaders of one of our political parties refuse to accept reality, like the the legendary King Canute, who believed he could turn back the tide at this command. Republican leaders and their intellectually dishonest followers, believe they can command the weather to obey their will, by weaving a fabric of complicated lies.

    1. here’s the thing about global warming. if we sat here and done absolutely nothing and let the planet go through its standard cycles .. we would still have huge warming and cooling periods and ice ages that will absolutely wreck modern civilization.. this is inevitable the planet goes through ice ages that last for a lifetime (winter is coming!). in the end no mater whether its water flooding from the oceans or glaciers coming from the north.. you cant stop it.. change is coming and people will die.. nature cares nothing for you.. with the amount of people we have.. you simply cant save them all.. Your only hope is in technology that can feed/warm us during the harsher times.. without it.. its back to parka’s and hunting.

      1. Well I don’t know, Billy. Actually, we should be descending into a minor ice age right now, but due to AGW we are heading in the opposite direction, it appears.

        Now, if we can cut through all the cr*p about is it/is it not a real effect or a global conspiracy of [fill in your bad guys of choice], let’s look a little further ahead (say 50 years, maybe).

        Tools that we have/ or will shortly have will enable us to forecast and control the globe’s macro climate, offsetting the orbital cycles that give rise to ice ages, from mini to major.

        Tools are:

        1. LENR. When further developed, cheap and pollution free energy will enable us to drive carbon capture/vitrification technologies that currently are non-viable as the energy needed to drive them creates more carbon etc. The carbon can readily be ‘scrubbed’ from the atmosphere by investing in large biomass (eg straw) burning power stations, then capturing the smokestack CO2.

        2. Accurate long term atmospheric modelling. Teraflop computers etc. We’re moving very fast in that area and will have a pretty comprehensive view of how it works and how it needs to be tweaked with changing planetary conditions within that timescale.

        3. Ability to emit more global warming gases when needed to stave off a cooling cycle. Actually, we’re pretty good at that today – and ironically it’s what is needed right now, but we’re overshooting the target a tad at present.

        The hardest bit will probably be to get the politics right to allow these tools to be used in a co-ordinated way, say from 2060 onwards or so….

    2. It’s carbon DI oxide, but many scientists are not all that worried though a lot are. There so many things to be fearful of that I’ve decided to quit thinking about it.

      If we have global warming attractive young women will be caused to wear scanty clothes.

    3. First, we not had any global warming for 18 years.

      You can find the math here:

      The pause draws blood – A new record pause: no warming for 18 years, 7 months:

      Note that we start from today, and you START going backwards from today, you can go back year after year and you have to go back 18 years in a row before you start seeing any warming (we are NOT picking some cherry date in the past and going forward. We START today, and go back – that’s not a cherry pick).

      In fact, you cannot even show EVEN A BASIC math relation between our CO2 output and temperature. As a result, your position is faith based, and an appeals to authorities. In fact, you are appealing to the VERY same science community that you asking us to trust that
      sold us out on LENR! – Too funny! So trust them on global warming, but don’t
      trust these people on LENR? – Too funny!

      Also most interesting is in the past 18 years we output more than HALF of ALL industrial CO2. (close to 2/3). This is due to china, India and the rest of the world that is industrializing. In other
      words during the same period in which we output the vast majority of our CO2, we not seen warming DURING THAT period.

      Next, during the medieval warming period we had temperatures warmer than today, and these warm temperate caused economies to prosper. And MORE interesting is those higher temperatures existed without our industrial CO2 output.

      If you take the last several thousand warming/cooling cycles, you find that BOTH THE RATE and the amplitude of past warming cycles are what we see today – and those cycles occurred without our industrial CO2.

      To quote the government panel on

      Quote by Ottmar
      Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official:

      “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.”

      Quote by David Brower, a founder of the
      Sierra Club: “The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society,
      which is nature’s proper steward and society’s only hope.”

      Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former liberal
      Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: “The objective, clearly
      enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present
      system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with
      central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether
      real or not – is expected to lead to – compliance”

      So the leaders of the global warming flat out admit this is about socialism, and not about science.

      and the leaked climate-gate emails shows the same thing – this is political movement and those eamils shows scietiets wondering why they are not seeing the warming they predict, but such questions are NEVER asked in public, and the SAME goes for why these people have NOT told you about the 18 years of no global warming – why is this?

      Anyway, feel free to download the government data and reproduce the math outlined in the above first link – if you find something wrong with the math, please do post the math corrections here for all to see. (again: if you find something wrong with the math, please post the corrections
      here) (again: correct the math for all here to see).

      Here is another:

      No warming for 23 years (using satellite data)

      Again, the above data is public – do the math yourself and again please provide the math to correct the above.

      I also point out that EVERY SINGLE IPCC model for the last 18 years has been wrong – they are models, and not actual measurements.

      The simple matter is our effects of CO2 are minimal, and really don’t show up over that of natural variations (the effects are trivial at best). And CO2 is plant food – we been bio-seeding the
      world with that extra CO2 and plants are loving this extra food and are
      responding by gobbling up that CO2 with a great appetites.

      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  26. This is very similar to one of the arguments I usually put forward against the various conspiracy theories

    1. Probably correct.

      An unlikely possibility, though, is that they fear (maybe correctly, and responsibly) that LENR (if real) can be weaponized. I recall, but cannot find, a youtube video that appeared about four years ago in which a (female) Italian physicist discussed some apparently successful LENR experiments that Carlo Rubbia praised – but, then suddenly went silent on, and refused to communicate. The video ended with Emilio Del Guidice speculating that Rubbia, et al, worried that it could make poorly fissionable metals more reactive. Also refer to the youtube video where Bob Martinez is chastised by NASA —
      “NASA Senior Scientist, Dennis Bushnell threatens James Martinez”

  27. It is heartening to see that other countries are more open to LENR and have programs to actively study it. The first country to truly harness LENR will have a tremendous technological and economic advantage.

  28. The gubmint be frontin a façade to placate pressure from the soiled masses to look into this new thing that is all over the forums. In reality they have been experimenting and I dare say progressing the pursuit for years now. Let’s “look into” this LENR thing. That will buy time for the oil majors that fund our re-elections to unwind their assets onto the backs of the pension funds the soiled masses think are so safe.

  29. It is not as big a conflict of interest as you might think, imagine Gazprom, having much lower costs for drilling in the north, using lenr energy production and heating, They could supply gas at a much lower cost, undercutting Fracking (US), undercutting the Arabs, certainly for the decade or two that leads to LENR taking a large enough market share to make a difference, gas is possibly the best option for most forms of energy production at the moment, the Russians might do well to invest in LENR.

    Lenr could also open up farm land that is currently unavailable due to cold or lack of water light, a country like Russia could be far better off investing in Lenr now and reaping the benefits while the rest of the world slumbers.

  30. Well, finally. If we can get the Armed Services to use lenr for all it’s machinery, the military will be cheaper eventually–at least in fuel costs–won’t it?

    1. Significantly, operating costs anyway though switching technology from diesel gas and whatever will be expensive. The Navy is where most of the switching over to LENR would be most practical, probably. Jets and such will take time and lots of redesigning, probably. The potential advantages for tanks/APCs/etc should be obvious, being able to get rid of a significant amount of “supply train” related to their upkeep.

      1. Rail guns, lasers and plasma beams, in that order, coming to a weapons platform near you soon. Wake up and smell the napalm before it’s obsolete.

          1. As Gandhi said in reply to a different question (What do you think of Western civilization?) – “I think it would be a good idea.”

  31. We don’t know anything about the motivation behind this. Here is what we do know: the text in the document has been around since 2009. It is not something anybody put into print any time recently.

    Here is my take on what happened. Some LENR fans badgered a Congressman to do something about LENR. Or maybe it had something to do with the Brillo demo to Congress. Somebody said do something about it. So they did. Some low-level secretary was asked to do some preliminary research and write it up in a paragraph. This person looked online and dug up this snippet of text. Copy/Paste, and viola. “we did something about it”.

    This could also be a government CYA. In case something actually does come up we have been on it all along. So that nobody can come along and say we, the great country of the United States, did not know anything about it.

    Out of context this plagiarized text is meaningless.

    1. AR believes it arose from the 1 year trial:-

      Tom Conover
      May 11, 2016 at 12:25 AM
      Dear Andrea,
      If the results are positive and you start shipping before 9/28 that might solve a problem.
      Please read these references:

      Andrea Rossi
      May 11, 2016 at 11:33 AM
      Tom Conover:
      Clearly this has been moved from the 1 MW 1 year test. They clearly said
      we have the leadership and this is an honour for our Great Team.
      Warm Regards,

      1. Please read these references (and check the date while you’re at it):

        Sound familiar???

        AR has never replied to a DARPA request for ideas and information about a technology. First they say they are in critical need of some technology. Then they make you jump through so many hoops that one cannot help but wonder how critical this need really is. If one ever does have the endurance and patience to persevere a rejection letter will follow. Completely discouraging and futile effort. Trust me. Even if Rossi is real the US government won’t get the word. They are completely incapable and incompetent of anything except producing reams of documentation and rules and regulations that stifle and dissuade the little guys.

          1. I am more interested to know what Brillo showed Congress. AR is stuck in a Farnsworth vs Sarnoff knot. Brillo is not afraid to show what is under their kimono and has momentum and is going forward.

      2. “They clearly said we have the leadership”

        Huh? Were did they say anything allowing this interpretation?

        1. There are exactly two lines of text, properly cited, from the well known DIA 2009 paper.
          Where are the other lines copied and pasted from ? Please provide the link to the online resource of the DARPA findings mentioned in the text.

    2. Or a number of similar scenarios. Could be some Congressman actually takes the matter seriously and this is a way to keep him quiet.

    3. Was the briefing date of September 22, 2016 in the 2009 text? Were the Italians leading LENR research in 2009? Was the Japanese investment fund in place in 2009?

      The date of this document is May 4th, 2016. Would that fall into the category of “put into print any time recently” ?

      Your entire statement seems to be at right angles to reality.

      1. So the 2016 document contains material updating the 2009 document. Did you read the 2009 document? If that document were taken seriously it would have been more than enough to blow apart the suppression of LENR.
        Take the following in the spirit it is written in:
        The actual government information on LENR is stamped with the highest possible security classification, “EMBARRASSING”. The existence of this security classification itself has the highest security classification since to admit such a security classification would be ….

        1. The website has a contact form. I just submitted this question. Let’s see what the response will be…

          We are having this big discussion on e-catworld regarding mention of LENR in the Report on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services

          Problem is that parts of this text were plagiarized from documents written and presented to the DIA in 2009. It leads us to wonder if this is a wholehearted effort or was the DoD forced and coerced into looking into this issue by an overzealous Congressman?

          1. To me it doesn’t matter too much how and why LENR found itself into this report, and we don’t know where it will lead. The fact is it’s there, which shows that someone is paying attention and thought it was important to put in the report. This is evidence that there at least some level of interest being paid to the topic by someone in government in the US, and that’s what many proponents of LENR are hoping to see: the field beginning to being taken seriously by people in decision-making positions.

          2. There was a demo of the Hyperloop today. Use your influence to convince Rossi to do a demo and you won’t have to worry about whether or not LENR is taken seriously. If people see it in action it will be.

            I have worked with people like Rossi before. They are afraid of everything being perfect. Today’s hyperloop demo was far from peachy. Made noise and looked awkward. High tech R&D is not for the faint of heart.

            If this report is for real it would be thanks to the brilliant (hehe) efforts of the Brillo demo team in Congress. Maybe they will reply to my inquiry and say hey that’s it?

          3. The problem is that he already did some demos and these common flaws like the Hyperloop were only used to claim fraud.
            That is the problem, people would have a big work to find flaws and flaws to say that it is only a fake.

        2. The National Defense Reauthorization Axt has to be redone each year to some extent, although the GOP had held up everything for years.. The report is reissued with updates every year, as a result..

  32. “the US government is directing the military to find interesting ways of using the technology”
    I have yet to see any evidence that the US government is taking any such action. And yes, I have downloaded CRPT-114hrpt537.pdf
    and looked at page 87

      1. But this whole discussion seems to be based on the idea that this particular “interesting stuff” was coming to light. As for what “isn’t … for all to see”, see my earlier remarks of security classification.

  33. Well, many resources in Russia can not reach the world market because transport (energy) is to expensive. LENR give Russia a chance to branch out and diverse the economy.

    1. Warning: It’s quite a long read. I wonder how many people will be reading this (apart from Putin’s spy’s). Maybe it’s just written to keep them busy?

        1. I really hope DARPA have a secret research program on LENR and are ahead of other countries. If Mini tactical nukes could be engineered with the tech it would level the playing field between US and China considerably. Drones equipped with tactical nukes could take out anything and be churned out on production lines!

          1. This doesn’t seem to be a particularly constructive line of thought. More WMD are about the last thing the world needs, and any hint that LENR can be weaponised would absolutely ensure that the technology is quickly captured by militaries and the nuclear industry.

          2. It’s pointless ignoring it when it’s a possibility. Nuclear weapons keep the world stable in some ways. I mean the fear of what could be done with them keeps us from starting major wars.

            With LENR it either can be weaponised or it can’t. If it can be, some country somewhere is going to do it. Didn’t Martin Fleischmann say he thought it could be possible? The danger would be some country other than the western/NATO group getting a big head start on weaponising it. Could shift the balance of power! If a battleship or tank can be taken out with a stealthed infinite range LENR drone or the like, the US would lose its military hardware advantage fairly quickly.

            I don’t think the Militaries really could control LENR’s spread though. The materials required are common and if the techniques for initiating and controlling the reaction are relatively simple once understood it would require a police state to keep it from being used.

          3. “I don’t think the Militaries really could control LENR’s spread “, Dennis Bushnell NASA/DoD report agrees.

            The weaponisation of advanced technologies, such as nano bots nano swarms and LENR energetics, is a serious subject, largely due to the ease of manufacturing. Offensive weapons need to be made illegal, period.

            Quote Dennis Bushnell

            They are difficult to defend against, and often untraceable; being cheap and easy to manufacture. They will be developed commercially, and very simply; without requiring any long-term governmental development like mega-trillion dollar stealth bombers, naval carriers, and observational platform programs.

            They are soon becoming commercially available, legally. Actions which classify these dangerous technologies as illegal (weapons) are needed.

            – end quote.

            The question (solution?) posed by Bushnell, in his paper presented to the DoD, I paraphrase and put before you… perfect as a discussion topic… perhaps this question could be a forum topic at all LENR blogs.

            “What can the emergent LENR energy and advanced technology communities do to contribute to a world culture that does not feel the need to ever go to war again?”

            Read the article at Cold fusion Now, read the paper by Bushnell, think “out of the box”… help make this happen.

            “Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] NASA LENR” –


            High Energy Density Materials (HEDM) (Power, Explosives, Propellants)
            Tetrahedral N (Isp 600+ sec)
            Atomic Born, C, H (Isp 600+ sec)
            Metastable He (Isp 1500 sec) • Metallic Hz (Isp 2000 sec)
            ISOMERS ( 105 x TNT)

            Page 37 Revolutionary Power Generation/Storage Opportunities

            • Ultracapacitors • Adv. Fuel Cells (e.g. Lithium/water/air)
            • HEDM (e.g. Solid H2, Isomers, antimatter, etc.
            • Adv. PV (50%?) • Room Temperature SC/SMES
            • C-Nanotube storage of H2 (non-cryo)?
            • Offshore Methane Hydrate
            • Blacklight power?
            • LENR
            • ZPE

          4. A friend just called and asked if solid H2 is metallic hydrogen and if carbon nanotubes store solid H2, good questions, lets see.

  34. “We do not have to visit a madhouse to find disordered minds; our planet is the mental institution of the universe.”
    Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

        1. If the doctors are engaged in curing the “mentals” then we should still listen to the doctors, even if “democratic” majority of the “mentals” chooses what’s good in the short term.
          I.e. see in the light that makes you look good!!

          1. George’s intent minimally conforms to the ancient Hippocratic oath: “to uphold specific ethical standards.” And do no harm.

  35. Yes, fire bombing killed more people than the two A-bombs but that didn’t stop napalm and phosphorus (what the firebombs mostly consisted of) being used in Vietnam. Yes, total nuclear war is unthinkable to the rational mind but my point is that people like the North Korean dictator are not rational. And, that aside, there still remains the possibility of terrorists getting hold of either radioactive waste or the bombs themselves, not forgetting that, as I said previously, that the accidental order to launch from a major nuclear power is still possible. Finally, we have that Israel (which has an estimated 200 nuclear weapons) simply won’t stand by and patiently watch while Iran constructs a bomb that is quite obviously meant for them.

    Anyway, I think we’ve got too far off LENR, so let’s agree to drop this particular topic.

  36. Just to update, from AlainCo LENR Forum
    Dean Burnett wrote:
    The Guardian : British Gas: alternative, cheaper energy suggestions – Cold Fusion LENR among
    Cold fusion
    The ideal alternative energy source would be cold fusion, where atoms of
    hydrogen (or, more likely, the isotope deuterium) are fused at
    obtainable temperatures to form heavier elements like helium, releasing
    abundant energy in the process.
    There is still some debate as to whether practical cold fusion is
    feasible, given the conditions required to result in a net gain of
    energy. One restriction is the amount of pressure required to force
    atoms to fuse. This has proven to be a tricky hurdle for scientists, but
    it should be easy for British Gas. If an executive is placed in the
    middle of a reactor, given a lump of solid hydrogen to hold, then told
    it is the last thing of value owned by an impoverished pensioner, it
    should trigger a grasping reflex so powerful that the hydrogen atoms are
    forced together and a fusion reaction initiated. Once initiated, it
    should be sustainable.
    Granted, solid hydrogen is extremely cold so shouldn’t be something a
    human can hold unaided. But given their actions, it seems those in
    charge of British Gas don’t experience cold as they clearly don’t see it
    as a potential problem.

  37. This sort of thing causes me fear. Are they going to whitewash LENR again?

    Every one of the scientists that has achieved LENR needs to contact the secretary of defense and communicate their credentials and their findings. If its just Rossi holding up LENR, at this point it will crumble, especially in light of IH’s assertions.

    1. bfast, I put up a link yesterday showing that when there is disagreement between the Defense Dept. and the President then the Defense Dept. wins, but it strangely went missing. ha.

      1. post it again George – it sounds revealing – or should I say, a step toward “disclosure.” Possibly the most feared word in all of Washington DC.

        1. GreenWin great to see you back, The example I gave was
          the American Guantanamo Bay gulag, where people are imprisoned without trial for years and torture “was” common.
          Obama has been trying for years to close it but the Defense Dept. has more power than him.
          It was only an example but to sensitive a subject, I think.
          Am having a rest as well, had to sign-in to reply.
          Look forward to your comments.

          1. Obama is commander in chief. DOD loses.
            The 50 State Governors veto the Gitmo closing as they don’t want them in their states.

            Note that Obama has no need for Gitmo as he takes no prisoners. He has Drones that excludes the prisoner issue. Each drone strike requires his approval.

    2. I doubt if LENR will die, but it will be set back years. It depends upon how embarrassing Rossi turns out to be.

  38. This is TBD best news swe”ll ever get!! Too bad the Rossi report has not been released! A 50+ COP would steal the show!

    1. I see nuclear weapons as a wonderful deterrent to total war and a great zen koan about war. Nuclear weapons are an external symbol of our essential oneness.

  39. I have no doubt that this “is actually a government document”. What the military is directed to do is provide a briefing. That briefing could easily be utterly dismissive of LENR. It could merely say “the technology” is unconfirmed hence “ways of using” it are speculative.

    1. Well, of course this speculative. They’re most likely not even familiar with the technology. Regardless, I stand by my opinion that this is a very positive thing. Weather the US military decides to make a bomb out of it or not doesn’t take away from the fact that they acknowledge other countries are pushing forward with the technology and that among that number a couple of them are Farther Along then the rest.

    2. Alternatively there may be an ongoing ‘black budget’ military LENR initiative that will only emerge as fully operational weapons systems that, for obvious reasons, neither we nor the committee will be informed of.

      It is a given that the success of the SPAWAR ‘cold fusion’ experiments opened the door to this interpretation, i.e. that the initiative went dark some time ago…

  40. I looked into the committee set ups of the House:

    Energy and Power subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee of the House of Congress has the folowing statement as to its jurisdiction:

    National energy policy; fossil energy; renewable energy; nuclear energy; nuclear facilities; the Department of Energy; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; synthetic and alternative fuels; energy conservation; energy information; utility
    issues; interstate energy compacts; energy generation, marketing, reliability, transmission, siting, exploration, production, efficiency, cybersecurity, and ratemaking for all generated power; pipelines; the Clean Air Act and air emissions; all laws, programs, and government
    activities affecting energy matters, including all aspects of the
    above-referenced jurisdiction related to the Department of Homeland

    But its recent activity has overwhelming concerned actions in support of liquid natural gas, oil pipelines, atomic energy plants, and lots of back
    and forth about ozone. Not a pip about LENR or any new sources of
    energy for that matter. It looks like these reps will have to be hit
    over the head with reality before they will even acknowledge any new
    energy advent, even when it steers them in their faces.

    With the defense sub
    committee perusing reports about LENR’s viability, an onslaught of
    this as kind of butting into their jurisdiction may awaken them
    from slumber.

    If any of the readers here communicates or otherwise interacts with the subcommittees reps, just letting them know that Defense is interested in a new energy source might do wonders. Or not. Worth a try.

    The subcommittee consists of these folks:

    Republican Members

    Ed Whitfield (Kentucky – 01) – Chairman … (theres the
    Pete Olson (Texas – 22) – Vice Chairman … (there’s the
    John Shimkus (Illinois – 15)
    Joseph Pitts (Pennsylvania – 16)
    Robert Latta (Ohio – 05)
    Gregg Harper (Mississippi – 03)
    David McKinley (West Virginia – 01)
    Mike Pompeo (Kansas – 04)
    Adam Kinzinger (Illinois – 16)
    Morgan Griffith (Virginia – 09)
    Bill Johnson (Ohio – 06)
    Billy Long (Missouri – 07)
    Renee Ellmers (North Carolina – 02)
    Bill Flores (Texas – 17)
    Markwayne Mullin (Oklahoma – 02)
    Richard Hudson (North Carolina – 08)
    Joe Barton (Texas – 06)
    Fred Upton (Michigan – 06) – Ex Officio

    Democratic Members

    Bobby Rush (Illinois – 01) – Ranking Member
    Jerry McNerney (California – 09)
    Paul Tonko (New York – 20)
    Eliot Engel (New York – 16)
    Gene Green (Texas – 29)
    Lois Capps (California – 24)
    Michael Doyle (Pennsylvania – 14)
    Kathy Castor (Florida – 14)
    John Sarbanes (Maryland – 03)
    Peter Welch (Vermont – 00)
    John Yarmuth (Kentucky – 03)
    David Loebsack (Iowa – 02)
    Frank Pallone (New Jersey – 06) – Ex Officio

  41. This fits in with my prediction that Obama will announce emergent LENR energy before his end of term, claiming this as part of his legacy.

    The first U.S. African American president solves:

    – the energy problem
    – the carbon fuel pollution problem
    – a way forward for our space colonization goals
    – a new energy era for humanity

    The report, due in September, has most likely already been written.

    It will include the NASA/LENR SUGAR Volt, LENR spaceplanes, NARI/LENR presentation, (NASA)CAFE Flight, “MPD Augmentation of a Thermal Air Rocket Utilizing Low Energy Nuclear Reactions” a AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC presentation, Boeing LENR “Rotational annular airscrew with integrated acoustic arrester”, LENR flight leaders Dimitri Mavris, Rhett Jeffries, Chris Perullo, Michelle Kirby, Dr. Jimmy Tai FAA Ascent Program, US govt LENR patents and LENR technology transfer, the GEC GeNie reactor and I could list much more…

    Any presentation to the U.S. House would be amiss if it did not report on these developments, which have already been presented by the U.S. in international venues.

    Consider the following, and one figures that the U.S. would not have made these works publicly known unless the DoD has mastered and applied the technology, sufficient enough to secure superiority in the theater.

    The 2009 report states that, “LENR power sources could produce the greatest transformation of the battlefield for U.S. forces since the transition from horsepower to gasoline power”. That’s a huge statement!

    In 1990, the importance of mastering this technology, and applying its nuclear dense energetics, was realized by the U.S. Also it was decided, at that time, to closely follow developments in the field, and to quietly work on improving it in multiple advanced labs.

    The 2009 report was:

    “Prepared by: Beverly Barnhart, DIA/DI, Defense Warning Office. With contributions from: Dr. Patrick McDaniel, University of New Mexico; Dr. Pam Mosier-Boss, U.S. Navy SPAWAR/Pacific; Dr. Michael McKubre, SRI International; Mr. Lawrence Forsley, JWK International; and Dr. Louis DeChiaro, NSWC/Dahlgren.

    Coordinated with DIA/DRI, CPT, DWO, DOE/IN, US Navy SPAWAR/Pacific and U.S. NSWC/Dahlgren, VA.”

    Please note Dr. Louis DeChiaro (an author of the report)

    “… since 2009 been performing investigations in LENR physics and supporting the EMC efforts of Branch Q51 at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA. During the period 2010-2012 he was on special assignment at the Naval Research Labs, Washington, D.C. in their experimental LENR group.”

    In that capacity he coordinated LENR research and applied engineering throughout multiple DoD/DoE laboratories (Washington DC has no labs), Navy SPAWAR/Pacific and NSWC/Dahlgren being the most significant (see their patents).

    “As the largest DoD full spectrum energetics facility and leader in the Navy’s energetics enterprise, NSWC Indian Head employs a workforce of more than 1,400, of which more than 850 are scientists, engineers, and technicians dedicated to developing and sustaining explosives, propellants, pyrotechnics, high-energy chemicals and their application to warfighting systems. In addition, NSWC Indian Head has the largest concentration of PhDs working in Energetics in the WFC, including the highest number of synthesis chemists, detonation physicists, and formulation scientists dedicated to the energetics National competency.”

    1. No politician will stick his neck out until they are on the market.
      They’ve already promised 100’s of billions in Cap & Trade revenue to far to many people world wide. Their only way to save face is to look like they were blind sided.

      1. Most politicians will be blindsided by this… on a ‘need to know only basis’ till now. The Navy LENR patent was sequestered for years… No conspiracy theory here… it’s the mission of NASA DoD DoE to maintain U.S. technological advantage. Google ‘U.S. LENR Manhattan Project’, I’m continuing to add to this convincing compilation. Funny but sad, politicians are masters at ‘saving face’ and will turn this to their advantage, it was necessary to assure U.S. energetic superiority.

    1. Let’s hope the motivation was wholehearted and not forced on them or else it will be two steps back not one big giant step forward.

      Then again I thought about it and wondered what they are going to do? Is this like a spy thing? Or are they going to go after the same sources we have which means take a ticket and get in line to wait for Rossi’s big reveal?

      Back in the late 80’s I used to work for Japanese technical intelligence. We would scour help wanted ads for information about what companies are doing. I would go to plants and warehouses to visit personally. Write reports on what I saw and what is going on afterward. I would ask for front or demo copies of software, make a copy, send it to Japan, return the original and say we’re not interested. Sound familiar??? He he smacks of Rossi/IH. These guys weren’t really interested in stuff US companies were doing. More so about what other Asian manufacturers are up to. I can see them in an R role. I have difficulty seeing them in a D role. So when the report mentions Japanese R&D I wonder if it means they are really doing something or scouting around the world looking for something to grab and manufacture themselves? Not really sure they would like LENR. It is not mechanical enough. They prefer expensive difficult to accomplish components they can charge top bucks.

  42. I’m not sure what you mean. Do you mean that the probability of a nuclear detonation by any means is low? I suggest you re-read all the reasons I’ve given for it not being that low. The above film was made in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis and, as I said about that, it was only the courage and assertiveness of one man who prevented the trapped and isolated Soviet Submarine from launching all its nuclear missiles. That man’s name was Vasili Arkhipov – click on this: If you were born after the 27th of October 1962 you owe your very existence to him. You and other Americans seem to have a very dangerous blind spot about all things nuclear.

  43. I think you may need to explain how a hydrogen ion (proton) is ‘deconstructed’ and what the reaction products might be, before the rest of your theory can be followed. Otherwise the ‘wild theories’ remain as possibilities until further research can eliminate or confirm them.

  44. about Kobe firebombing, a magnificient film
    describe the context of the war.

    Note that there was more kilotons of TNT dropped on Dresden in Germany than both nuclear bombs dir…

    the 400k death are not uncommon in city bombing, and i would even say that given the impact, this was cheaper than usual.

    never forger the numbers :
    Japanese caused 24Mn death in Asia (including they)
    Russia lost 12Mn lives
    Germany lost 8Mn lives
    Extermination of resistants/opponents (political opponents, terrorists, insurgent, communist and sympathizers) killed about 3Mn, and untermenchen (handiccaped, gay, homeless, jewish, jeovah witness, tzigans) killed about the same 3Mn (number debated because some people in both camp)

  45. Of course it involves fusion but also fission. The fusion is a Proton with Lithium 7, the fission of the Be8 atom into 2 He4 atoms produces the excess energy. Without the initial fusion there is no Be8 for fission.

      1. That is quite funny when my IP was filed in 2006. Rossi by his own admission has studied it extensively taking about 100 pages of notes. I looked at Rossi’s IP and it does not teach anything. By the way I don’t use Li in my reactor cores. Only occasionally is Li used for diagnostics.

        1. Funny is you come here to defend something that apparently needs no defence, because it is crystal clear you are the number one in the field, and you did it all on your own. So don’t you worry about anyone saying anything about your work, as you know it is all nonsense, and Rossi is just copying your project. You know what, I think you should sue him.

        2. Hi Robert,
          If I’m right, this is your first visit to this forum but, either way, welcome or welcome back! I have exchanged emails with you before (about the Fourier spectrum of your E/M pulses) but I, for one will be all ears (eyes?) for whatever else you are free to talk about now. I’ve mentioned you often enough in my own blog ( basically as part of the quinella (with Rossi) in the “LENR Derby” but it would be great hear it directly from the “horses mouth” in future.

        3. Hi Robert
          What do you think the chances are that A.R. has
          been as successful as he says he has been with the Ecat.

    1. Hi, Robert, thanks for posting. I used to live nearby on Hillegass; since moved to North Side, though we can’t stay away from Elmwood for more than about ten days at a time. Great place for changing the world!

  46. I’ve had a conversion.

    I’m no longer sympathetic with Rossi’s desire to be an industrialist. As he has shown, he’s not very good at the partnerships required to make that work.

    I’m no longer sympathetic to the idea that free market rugged individualism is the best way to distribute LENR. When the technology is fully revealed (exact fuel composition, exact frequency, everything) it will be impossible to suppress on a worldwide basis, and economic competition will spread it as far as is possible.

    If paranoia about over-regulation is warranted, it’s unlikely that can’t be prevented anyway, so there’s no point in trying to finesse that.

    If the euro-quark show doesn’t open the floodgates within a few months, I’m signing up to georgehants’ moral position with respect to Rossi: it’s too important to play ego games with any longer.

    To Rossi: find someone who will give you $10M for your personal financial security, with the provisio that you open source all of it, and just do it.

    Your karma hangs in the balance.

    1. We do not really care about your conversion. Neither does Rossi. You think he should give it away for free to Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg, or better to Exxon or BP. Well mate, not gonna happen.

      1. I don’t care that you don’t care, first of all because you are not “we”.

        I didn’t say give it away for free, I said get paid well with the condition that it would be openly published.

        Watching Rossi make his convoluted control moves while the world writhes in anguish is more than I can take.

        1. See the 2 votes ? It means WE are more than one. For the rest of your dissertation I can not waste any more time replying.

        2. Utopia/erehwon, nowhere. Idealized views of the world somehow don’t work. Everyone is on their own except for what has always been mandatory and manageble like social security, taxes and police military. I’m talking about big powerful things that have evolved over time. Maybe the world will be better because of LENR but it will take time. Very few actually take part in revolutions if they can get away with it.

    2. You underestimate the lengths TPTB would go to get what they want. You will be continually surprised by the happenings of the world if you assume they will behave in any sort of morally upright way.

      1. If it’s real, and it’s fully exposed, it can’t be contained. It’s like saying “Gold in Alaska! Make sure to dodge the government agents on your way there!”

        Thinking TPTB have super powers to control the world is the product of watching too many spy movies. Civilization is held together by the thinnest threads. One big solar storm and we would be fighting in the super-market aisles. We’ve got terrorists using poison gas, there are more guns than people in the United States, and both major political parties are fractured, and half the population thinks the other half isn’t fully sentient.

        Is the EU going to send troops to Mali to stop LENR development from being used for desalination there?

        How about serious mental model of how the world works.

    1. I am beginning to wonder about how some who work the Halls of Power are concerned that Darden/IH’s decision to not pay the $89M and the consequent legal conflict will keep the USA out of the LENR market for many years (maybe 2-5 years) while Rossi moves forward in those non-IH markets.

      Mats, is it a reasonable supposition that the market pressure of pending LENR sales outside of the US is beginning to leak into the US Political/Power realm? Is this something that fits with your, Sifferkol, and Frank’s perspective?

      By the way, my understanding is that the Military as an institution is perceived by the public as having a stellar reputation.

      1. If public opinion on government/military honesty re: UFOs is a metric. 83% think military is BSing the public.

        1. GW,

          however, that statistic is polled from those who have been abducted leaving the question open about the remaining 17%. Does this prove that the neuralizer really exists? 😉

          Humor aside . . . . I didn’t say that the military is perfect. I have a strong sense of disappointment on the boondoggles and wasted money. The F35 has become a financial quagmire. And the agenda to kill-off the most effective Warthog (A10) is near criminal.

          1. “The F35 has become a financial quagmire. ” Indeed. The last time a U.S. fighter jet engaged in air combat was in 1992, in Yugoslavia. That’s a quarter of a century ago. Fighter jets are going the way of the dodo, replaced by ever more capable drones.

  47. – Well, all I can say is that I’m glad there are people in your government who are not so smug about this and whose job is to be constantly working to track down nuclear material, frustrate the efforts of would-be nuclear terrorists, constantly improve hot-line liaison with the other nuclear powers and constantly trying to lower the temperature in and around places like the Middle East and North Korea. That’s both covert and overt – all the way from real life Jack Bauers to John Kerry, even if he was too Neville Chamberlain – like altogether with Iran.

  48. At long last the markedly slow guvment braintrust is groking the idea there is a BETTER WAY to do energy. All it took was whackin’ ABCs upside the haid with real science!

  49. The fear of “words” such as fusion only confirms the fragile state of the standard model and the terror instilled in the ivory towers who have fabricated it. LENR forever shames micro-cephalic naysayers like Robert Park, Johnny Huizenga, and Jennifer Ouellette.

    1. Fission/Fusion often confusion, for a layman like me, and others who don’t even have my ‘abstract LENR education’. Non radioactive low energy nuclear reaction is a phrase that calms fears. I often use it as precursor.

  50. It would seem the US Navy knows quite a bit about LENR and had detailed operational info on the 1MW plant test in Sept 2015. Did the 3 monthly ERV reports circulate to more than IH & Leonardo? Seems the US Navy may have received the ERV reports.

    For sure what is in this Navy presentation is just scratching the surface as most of the real work will be classified.

  51. I think that the world needs to be educated on what fission truly is. Even you downplay the fact that the Li7 + p > 2 He4 + 91.84kev is a man made fission reaction. Walton and Cockcroft were awarded a Nobel Prize for discovering and achieving this reaction so referring to it as merely alpha decay seems like white washing. There has been a tremendous effort by both governments and private groups to paint fission as a deadly and dangerous effect in order to fulfill agendas, but much of this fear mongering only applies to fission caused by neutrons. Rossi has not stumbled upon a new source of generating energy but instead a method for producing energy from an old one by a new and efficient means. From nearly the beginning Rossi has stated what was going on he just hasn’t been able to explain the how and why. In short the world in general needs to get over its fear of the word “Fission” if LENR as it currently is being pursued is ever going to flourish.

    Getting back to your ending question: “can you tell me honestly that you do not ever get exasperated at the Star Wars Sci-Fi fantasy pseudo-science that you see thrown around….” Yes some of it can get tiring, but I view discussion boards like this one to be public brainstorming sessions. One of the basic rules of brainstorming is not to be too critical of suggestions and ideas as no matter how off base one might be it may trigger another one that is the answer. I often wonder what the world would be like today if greats such as Einstein and Tesla would have had access to boards like this one to help fuel their creativity.

  52. When their interests align, you’d be surprised. Wait, watch and listen in the years to come. When their interests don’t align, they pull shenanigans on each other as quickly as on us.

  53. be carefull with piketty work.
    It seems to be erroneous and just catch interest by those needing to justify preconceptions. (policy driven science )

    De soto is not tender with him, reminding his vision on capital is childish

    other economist raise more technical concerns (errors).
    some also remind that in modern economy the rich don’t stay so rich so long if they are entrepreneurs (they stay rich, but 10x less because of wind changes).
    they als raise facts that some income are just virtual like shares of your company that you cannot sell.
    as De Soto raise, most of said income is pure hot air exchanged as if it was real.

    pikety live in Marx period where capitalist were stable and exploiting a work class…
    not current total mess, nor the complex capitalist-worker income of poor people in emerging countries.

    Piketty is the ITER of economy.

    I bet on De Soto as the LEBr of economics.

    1. I wouldn’t say so. He and others have done major work with their collection of data. It would be wrong to dismiss his findings when he seems to be one of the few economists who has analysed most of the historical data on income. It may not be fully accurate but to be fair he has admitted some flaws.

      People seem to get distracted by his politics when the most important thing to take is the acceleration in inequality since the 80’s. Bound to lead to political instability (Trump/Sanders appealing to US lower classes is an example). Seeing as the last time levels were this high was before two world wars, its probably a good idea to look into his work!

      De Soto in the article talks about entrepreneurs that would be starting businesses which I don’t think Piketty is against. It’s the most important part of capitalism. You have different types of entrepreneurs too. I mean the majority will never make it big and can’t. Only so many genius new ideas and innovations to go around. Especially with the way information flows over the internet now. That also adds to the top percentiles ability to concentrate wealth. Through intelligent wealth management.

      Would agree with you on virtual wealth at the moment. Printing billions that ends up in share buybacks and property is false stimulation of the economy and trying to avoid an inevitable unwinding of rampant speculation.

  54. Thanks…

    This news got me interested, so I put together a compilation of U.S. Government LENR made public which I think will provide the elements of the report by the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Ashton Baldwin “Ash” Carter. He is known as the ‘deputy commander in chief’ and under direct command of President Obama, one could say this is the presidents’ report

    Got to wondering what the U.S. Secretary of Defense was like. I found he was head of DOD R&D during the filing of the Naval/SPAWAR LENR patents and the DIA LENR report.. He is a really bright guy, a scientist.

    He was Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics from April 2009 to October 2011, with responsibility for procurement of all technology, systems, services, and supplies, bases and infrastructure, energy, and environment, and more than $50 billion annually in R&D.

    I think he will have a very positive report. Here is the compilation…
    2016 US Congress LENR Report and the Department of Defense Commander in Chief “What Will Obama Say?”

  55. For some time I have been envisaging going into my local hardware store and buying a cigarette box that I plug into a wall socket in my house that will provide all the electricity I need for the next twenty years. If this sounds outrageous, then consider the early Star Trek episodes of 1966 where the crew of the USS Enterprise each have flip cell phones that do not seem to need re-charging.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *