Can Pons and Fleischmann be Rehabilitated? US Military Reports Could Hold Cold Fusion Keys

The recent appearance of the report by Mosier-Boss, Forsley and McDaniel, released for public access by US Defense Threat Reduction Agency report on LENR, claims that it is possible to replicate the original Pons and Fleischmann effect with a certain Palladium co-deposition technique.

The paper reports detailed experimental protocols and results which suggest that Pons and Fleischmann were not mistaken or fraudulent in their claims (as they were widely accused of being in the late ’80s and early ’90s). However that was 25 years ago, and most of the scientific world has moved on.

The authors write:

The physics community noted that Fleischmann and Pons had not published their results in any journal prior to their announcement, there had been no reports of any replications of the effect, there was no mention of the generation of any nuclear ash, and that the reported results did not match theory. Despite these perceived irregularities scientists, worldwide, went into their laboratories to replicate the Fleischmann–Pons results. A few scientists succeeded but a great many more failed. It is now known that those failures were due to the fact that the experimental conditions necessary to achieve the effect, i.e., high D loading and high D flux inside the Pd lattice, had not been achieved. Ultimately, the lack of replication by others and the fact that Fleischmann and Pons were not able to defend their original claims caused most scientists to lose interest. (emphasis added)

This report has been released without any kind of announcement or fanfare from the US DTRA. They have not confirmed or denied that it is authentic, but from what I have heard and read, I am sure it is. (Update: The Daily Caller article on the report has been updated and now states: “DTRA has confirmed the documents are authentic.”)

The questions that arises for me are, what if this document really does contain key information that would confirm the Pons and Fleischmann effect? And what if the many replicators who rushed to test the claims of P&F had had this information back in the early days — and had been able to see similar results?

And also, does anyone care enough now to try and replicate with this additional information? Or is this all to remain a footnote in history — forever a cautionary tale about pseudo or pathological science? I wonder if a US Military Agency report like this from the DTRA would be enough to stimulate new interest, given that it provides some specifics regarding how to achieve replication. Let’s also not forget that last year research notes of Louis F. DeChiaro, Ph.D, a physicist with the US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), Dahlgren Warfare Center were published in which he wrote:

As for duplicating the Pons and Fleischmann results, we now have a much better understanding of the phenomenon, and the list of prerequisite conditions is rather lengthy. Failure to meet even one of those conditions results in zero excess energy output. The data suggest that there may be more than one initiation mechanism, so I’m most qualified to comment upon what is known as the atomic vibrational LENR initiation mechanism (because my formal background is in Condensed Matter Physics).

He then goes on to list a summary of what he has found to be necessary conditions to see the P&F effect.

Over the years there have been multiple reports published showing successful replications of the P&F effect (see here for a summary of some of them), yet still we find that LENR/Cold Fusion is considered by most people who have head about it as an impossibility. I wonder if with new information from US Military sources, and an overall uptick in interest in LENR any new blood will be interested in getting into cold fusion research at this point.

There’s a lot of interest in Andrea Rossi and the E-Cat nowadays, and there have been serious efforts to replicate the Rossi Effect. I hope these efforts continue and are increasingly successful. However setting aside Rossi for the moment — if it would be possible to consistently replicate Pons and Fleischmann and rehabilitate these courageous scientists in the public’s eyes, we might be able to see a scientific reset and pick up the cold fusion trail back from the wilderness where it has been wandering over the last quarter century.

  • greggoble

    Marianas Variety – Micronesia’s Leading Newspaper Since 1972

    “Virginia Firm Offers Nuclear Energy” Jun 2012 By Emmanuel T. Erediano

    Lawrence P.G. Forsley, vice president for science and technology of Global Energy Corp. (, said their “revolutionary technology” is based on the “new science of hybrid fusion fast fission” green nuclear energy, or “Genie.”

    Forsley said he is among the GEC scientists who conducted 23 years of research and development with the U.S. Navy. He said they completed the design of a safe, clean, secure and affordable green hybrid fusion nuclear reactor for commercial uses.

    Genie reactors, he said, don’t use a uranium-235 chain reaction. Without a chain reaction, there can’t be a runaway, core meltdown, no explosions initiated by the meltdowns and no radioactive fallout, he added.

    Genie reactors, Forsley said, don’t have nuclear waste problems. It doesn’t need a spent fuel pool nor a spent fuel waste storage dump. It “burns” uranium-238 that comprises 95 percent of conventional nuclear waste. Therefore, Genie actually “cleans” nuclear waste, he added.

    Dayberry said Genie will cut consumer power costs by 50 percent.

    If the Commonwealth Utilities Corp. charges households 43 cents per kilowatt hour, Genie will bring it down to 20 cents per kilowatt hour.

    As soon as Genie facility starts operating, Dayberry said, it can provide electricity for everybody including hotels that presently generate their own power.

    Saipan will be GEC’s showcase for the new green nuclear revolution of the 21st century, he added.

    Global Energy Corp. Vice President for Science and Technology LAWRENCE P.G. FORSLEY and Vice President for Pacific Island Operations MICHAEL DAYBERRY Pose for a Photo

  • Axil Axil

    All that plutonium in the waste is a national resource for making bombs.

  • Axil Axil

    I am beginning to beleive that LENR will not be usable as a basement power source.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Nothing will change. The University of Bologna will still get a lower ranking than the universities that set LENR back a quarter of a century.!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank_label/sort_order/asc/cols/rank_only

    • Alan DeAngelis

      And the University of Bologna has genuine rather than imitation Gothic buildings. Shouldn’t that put it at the top of this sort of ranking system?

  • US_Citizen71

    We will need hybrid reactors for a limited time to get rid of the current stockpile of waste. Afterwards they still may be useful for power and could be fueled with nothing but unrefined ore.

    • Omega Z

      Are you aware that 75% of nuclear waste is medical grade. That they know how and have the technology to remediate it.

      However, there is huge profits in handling and storing it forever.

      That the same process can be used to remediate/recycle 95% of all landfill waste economically. Also blocked by monied interests.

      There is currently no economical way to recycle concrete from outdated and replaced bridges, roads etc. However, LENR may provide temperatures high enough and economical enough to recycle 100% of all waste.

      Of course, you still need to deal with the monied interests of the current system.

      • US_Citizen71

        My comment to Varmlandstok was really concerning used fuel rods that are too hot radioactively to reprocess due to being left in the pool too long and are now too full of daughter products. I was under the impression that most waste by weight was piping, wiring, etc that had been radiated to the point that portions have undergone transmutation creating such things as radioactive cobalt and strontium. It does not surprise me that making money off of the storage is higher priority than the destruction of said waste. We have several temporary landfills containing such waste here in Colorado due to our history of involvement in making nuclear weapons and other such things. One of these landfills sits next to the tracks of one of our light-rail lines. The county gets money every year to allow it to remain.

        • Omega Z

          Don’t know if the officail numbers they give included the hardware. I’m just aware that the astronomical numbers the give includes the medical waste at 75%.

          LENR remediation of nuclear fuel waste is good, but I see it as being problematic in as how the cost will be spread. For sure no one will want to pay 20 cents per kilowatt when 2 or 3 cent per kilowatt is available.

  • enduser

    There’s a mainstream media article about LENR and US government interest coming in the latest issue of New Scientist magazine.

  • georgehants

    Many thanks Andy, I agree it seems no easy cure, but many caring people in the World just waiting for the opertunity to change from this selfish existence, encouraged by most of our leaders, to something more satisfying and worthwhile.
    Rome wasn’t built in a day.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Just wondering if we as a LENR community are under estimating the importance of the DTRA report? As I understand it the report has been confirmed as being genuine. The US government has now verified the existence of LENR. The majority of US “scientists” who have basically called LENR a scam are now put in the position of proving the US government wrong. And more importantly, where is the “major media” why have we not seen a headline in USA Today, “US Government confirms Cold Fusion”. I for one am going to send the report to as many “major media” outlets as I can find.

    • Alan DeAngelis
    • georgehants

      Bernie, would it be appropriate for me to point out that until the media is removed from the control of the rich and powerful, then it will serve the people no better than any other media controlled by an elite, such as the old USSR Pravda etc.
      We are laughingly claimed to live in democracy’s, a democracy is a system that reflects the will of the people informed of the Truth, unhindered by biased propaganda and control by the few.
      It used to be known as freedom of the press.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        I agree. Free market capitalism must be well regulated, including the “free press”.

        • Warthog

          No, not “regulated”, but “policed” (i.e. the prevention of fraud, bribery, and similar). The problem is not with “free market capitalism” (in which government keeps hands off the market), but “crony capitalism” (in which capitalism controls some or all of government (laws, regulations, flow of money) to the sole benefit of parts of the market).

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            I agree.

  • Omega Z

    Protecting ones IP is less criticle once patents have already been granted such as they have obtained. Also as pointed out, this is old info and they have moved forward with their R&D. They merely maintain a higher degree of obscurity. Thus minimizing exposure to negative forces.

    With a University background, I would think you would be aware of the obsession Universities have with IP. As a whole, they file more IP applications then all others combined. They file for anything and everything regardless of how important.

    All the license fees go into a seperate trust that pays for special perks of the University Elite with little oversite. This has no impact of federal or state funding. It is not used to reduce tuition. It is their own private slush fund.

    How great is that. The tax payer funds the R&D, the IP protection costs and should the IP end up in a product, they get to pay those license fees as well.

  • georgehants

    Wonderful day, I wonder if today is the day we will get a report of the first open, repeatable conformation that Cold Fusion is a reality from anywhere in this wide World.
    Not many scientists etc. seem to be very keen to be awarded a Nobel Prize etc.
    The Prize is wide open, as up to now nobody has provably given information for such a repetition.
    Five + years since Mr. Rossi claimed his unverified success and in that time not a single, confirmable, repetition from anywhere.
    Main-line science must find, as with most things, that anything beyond a steam engine is simply beyond their understanding or capabilities.

    • Omega Z

      George, You and everyone else needs to understand 1 thing.

      There will never be an accepted verifiable replication. 10 Russian, 10 Chinese, 10 British scientists can all replicate the E-cat. The question then becomes can these replications be replicated. Probably all were outcome biased.

      Possibly you and many others missed what has been posted here at ECW by a few. Should MFMP replicate the Rossi effect, it will be meaniningless as they are considered outcome biased. Obviously, any who replicate an MFMP replication will also be accused of the same. It is an endless circle…

      Only 1 way to end this circle jerk B.S. Nonsense. We need to wait for Rossi to get a product to market.

      • georgehants

        Omega Z, many thanks, no, you as many are completely in error.
        A published report that others for example MFMP can reliably follow to replicate the effect is perfectly sufficient for all sane people.
        Rossi has been pumping the, only products on the shelf is exceptable, bullshit for years and unfortunately like many other things in this life, many slow thinkers fall for it.
        This is not a case of opinions rule, but Facts, the first to publish a report that others, skilled in the art, can follow to confirm the Cold Fusion effect is the winner and all others, excluding the much aligned P&F become just also rans.

        • Omega Z

          What you call fact, I call your opinion. Who is right is opinion.

          Instead of being negative about my post, you should question why some would question MFMP’s results before they even have them. They have set the stage just in case MFMP should obtain positive results. They done poisoned the water. Any results are already questionable.

          The Russian, Parkhomov claims to have achieved excess heat in multiple replications following Rossi’s work. Some of Parkhomov’s colleagues have claimed to have replicated Parkhomov’s work, thus replicating Rossi again. The Chinese R&D- Songsheng Jiang LENR Tests: Excess Heat for 7 days(Engineeer Zhang Hang)

          Both reference Rossi’s work and both claim replication results. Excess heat. Neither are accepted as replications. How many times do we have to witness this to know this is going nowhere without a product on the market.

          P&F’s work has been replicated many times. Papers have been published. You and I know this. However, it is just our opinion. You know how I know this. Ask the people in Charge. P&F have never been replicated. All results were due to error or incompetence . According to the people in charge, that is a fact.

          My post is less about predicting and more about what is actually taking place. Replications are not accepted by the mainstream.

          A working product with positive customer testaments are much harder to ignore. The Facts speak for themselves. But expect resistance even then.

          • georgehants

            Omega Z, there is no report in existence that can be followed by people skilled in the art, such as MFMP to replicate a Cold Fusion effect, that shows a cop above1.
            You can write as many reply’s as you wish but you are not going to change that clear indisputable Fact.

            • Omega Z

              If you are looking for a yellow and black book titled-

              “Cold Fusion for Dummies”

              Then you proclaimed Fact may in fact be a Fact.

              It does not mean the information is not out there and available. Case in point-The (Chinese engineeer) Zhang Hang and Parkhomov have both referenced and stated they obtained excess heat by following published information based on Rossi’s patent applications and the Lugano report.

              R&D is spread over years, even decades. If you want to attemp to replicate something, you need to locate the sources yourself. They do not hand it to you in pre-packaged book for dummies.

              If you’ve ever perused a patent and I doubt you have, they may indicate a process without the details. It merely provides a reference source that you can follow. Perhaps to understand a specified process you need to understand Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC).

              Regardless how much information is provided, it doesn’t mean someone skilled in the art will succeed in replication. Some information does not transfer in discription, can not be taught, but is only learned by actual experiance through repeated failures.

              “skilled in the art, such as MFMP”

              I mean No Disrepect to MFMP, but I don’t think they qualify for that title as of yet. I would call them knowledgeable in the art and advancing.

              Note: A book for Dummies would involve a step by step process. 1,2,3, – – incert tab A to tab C etc…

              I’ve yet to see anyone do this even when such process is provided. It usually goes 1,2,zxp, off world, crap why didn’t chocolate milk produce excess heat…

              So if such a book existed, what use would it be???

              • georgehants

                Omega, I do not think you are justified to call MFMP “Dummies”

                • Omega Z

                  George, I don’t think your reading comprehension is up to speed.

                  I did not state that MFMP are dummies.

                  However, this thought must have occurred to you.

                • georgehants

                  Last time I waste my time —
                  You said —–
                  “If you are looking for a yellow and black book titled-
                  “Cold Fusion for Dummies”
                  Then you proclaimed Fact may in fact be a Fact.”——-
                  If you are saying, as you are, repeatably, that there is a open, repeatable, report that gives all the information necessary for a Cold Fusion repetition available, then the Fact that MFMP have not or cannot follow that report brings them, in your opinion into your category of “Dummies”
                  There is no open, repeatable report in existence that can be followed by anybody skilled in the art, to show a Cold Fusion effect above 1.
                  Understand the words OPEN, REPEATABLE,

                • Omega Z

                  If you are looking for a yellow and black book titled-
                  “Cold Fusion for Dummies”

                  Then you proclaimed Fact
                  may in fact
                  be a Fact
                  That was a play on the word fact. Note “you” should have been “your”

                  What I was saying is if your looking for a single source or book on how to replicate Cold Fusion. You are probably right.

                  There is “NO” 1 source.

                  However, the info is out there. you just need to find it on your own.
                  Zhang Hang and Parkhomov seemed to have found it as they claim excess heat by following Rossi’s patent and the Lugano report. Possibly they found other sources as well, but never devulged that info.

                  You should be aware this research data being scattered is the norm. I would agree that this needs to change. I have posted in the past that this is a disaster taking place in real time. It’s estimated 50% or more of all the data that published research papers are based on in the 90’s is lost. Possibly forever. Those published papers can no longer be verified by data.

  • Bruce Williams

    Frank, thank you for an excellent post.

  • sam

    Scott Kevin
    August 1, 2016 at 3:29 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Are you confirming that the production of the industrial E-Cat is already started, or you had to stop it for some reason ?

    Andrea Rossi
    September 12, 2016 at 8:26 PM
    Scott Kevin:
    Not now, but I think a publication related to it is not too far from now.
    Warm Regards
    Interesting that AR replys to an August 1
    question on Sept 12

    • SD

      Sometimes Rossilivecat doesn’t link the right Q&A’s

      I think the real question might have been

      Scott Kevin
      September 12, 2016 at 3:04 PM
      Dear Andrea Rossi,
      Can you disclose exactly the max temperature you reached with the Quarkx?
      Thank you

  • Alan DeAngelis

    F&P’s work WAS replicated soon after the 1989 announcement. When John Bockris from Texas A&M replicated the F&P experiment, this was the thanks got for doing it.

  • Zephir

    /* The recent appearance of the report
    by Mosier-Boss, Forsley and McDaniel, released for public access by US
    Defense Threat Reduction Agency report on LENR, claims that it is
    possible to replicate the original Pons and Fleischmann effect with a
    certain Palladium co-deposition technique */

    This Palladium co-deposition technique had been described in NewScientist publicly and nobody did rehabilitate Fleischmann not at least…

  • Observer

    This report is 4 years old. It represents the last work done on LENR at SPAWAR.

    • Omega Z

      Yes, some of us are aware and remember discussing it here at ECW.

    • Warthog

      Actually, what it is is a “final summary” of the overall LENR SPAWAR technology effort, as the lab has been shuttered, and the effort taken up by a different group. These folks did a lot of really excellent work, and, if mainstream science were not controlled by groups antithetical to “cold fusion”, the work would have long been accepted as definitive, and LENR as real.

  • Timar



    September 12, 2016 at 5:28 PM

    Dr Andrea Rossi:

    Did some engineer of Sparwar make a test with your E-Cat?


    Andrea Rossi

    September 12, 2016 at 10:53 PM


    I cannot answer either in positive or in negative.

    Warm Regards,


    • Freethinker

      Hint of a NDA with US Navy? Otherwise it would be simple to say “no”.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        No, it’s a standard answer that AR gives to such questions.

        • Curbina

          It is also a standard answer To FOIA requests on matters that are deemed as National security interest…

        • Stephen

          I think he updated the reply a bit to try to make it clear. I also think he means he can only answer these kinds of questions this way.

      • sam
    • artefact

      Rossi changed the answer!

      “Andrea Rossi September 12, 2016 at 10:53 PM
      This kind of arguments are always covered by NDA. I cannot answer either in positive or in negative.
      Warm Regards, A.R.

  • wizkid

    It’s shouldn’t be that hard to replicate based on the drawings. It can use nickel according the patent… that says that “The second electrode is made of a material selected from the group that includes palladium, AB2 alloys, and ABS alloys, where A represents magnesium, Zirconium, and lanthanum, and B represents vanadium, chromium, manganese, or nickel.”

  • Alain Samoun

    Maybe time to put PONS on the ticket for the next Nobel in honoring him and his late associate FLEISHMANN

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Yeah, and then he can decline it the way Grigori Perelman declined to accept the Fields Medal to show how irrelevant these awards have become.

      • Alain Samoun

        Pons will do what he wants but at least it would show that they recognize that LENR Cold Fusion exists and that they made a big unpardonable mistake.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Yes. It’s unfortunate that only Nobel Laureates that stood up for F&P were the late Julian Schwinger and Brian Josephson. Brian Josephson is a hero.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            I always forget. It’s “who” instead of “that” when it’s Homo sapiens.

            • georgehants

              Ha, Alan always remember that the English language is nothing but an incompetent ever changing code of communication, that is illogical and inefficient to the extreme.
              It seems to be maintained in such a silly state purely to make it as hard as possible for our children to learn to read and write.
              People who are disturbed, with a need to point out every minor infringement of this unnecessarily complicated code suffer a form of OCD.

              • wpj

                It’s (it is) when it should be its (possessive pronoun) drives me crazy (as well as all the other possessive apostrophes out there).

                • psi2u2

                  Speaking as a writing teacher, possession is always problematic and a major source of error. When I’m in a hurry I frequently still mistake “its” for “it’s” or visa-versa.

                  Sometimes my online critics think this means I must be a terrible writer and writing teacher, when actually I’m quite good at both. What really matters is the reader’s comprehension of the writer’s ideas. Good ideas are their defense and can survive small errors.

              • Alan DeAngelis

                You might find this interesting. I’ve heard that Korean is the most phonetically unambiguous language in the world.

        • sam

          Interesting comment from
          EgoOut blog.
          Simon DerricuttSeptember 13, 2016 at 2:59 AM
          Peter – the Johnson-Mathhey Palladium alloy was developed to filter Hydrogen. It was at the time well-known that repeated absorption/desorption of Hydrogen by pure Palladium caused small cracks in the metal, and that such cracks would allow impurities to pass the Palladium barrier. The Palladium filters therefore had a limited lifetime in use, heated as they were to around 400°C. J-M produced a proprietary alloy (the recipe and process is still secret) that was resistant to such damage and thus extended the lifetime of the Hydrogen filter. This is the alloy that Martin Fleischmann used, since he knew what he wanted. People trying to replicate his experiments did not use this alloy to begin with. Those that actually talked to Martin and got samples of the alloy from him did succeed.

          Interestingly, therefore, the “nuclear quality” Pd is specifically resistant to producing nano-cracks. This snippet of information does seem to be ignored.


          Peter GluckSeptember 13, 2016 at 5:15 AM
          Thanks, dear Simon!
          I know this well it is recurrently discussed.
          In 1997 at ASTI I discussed the subject with Martin Fleischmsnn- in the frame of the IMRA France failure.
          However I think now there is no solution known. I hope Hubler will say interesting things at ICCF20


        • Alan DeAngelis

          Yeah, I get your point. I just thinking that this would be analogous to George Washington’s hatred of royalty. He was so fed up with royalty that he declined the offer to be ordained king of the United States. In Washington’s mind, being king wasn’t “ The be all and the end all”.

      • Jarea

        The interesting part is on minute 3

  • Brokeeper

    Has anyone noticed the release of governmental LENR/Cold Fussion confirmations before this month’s Congressional hearing on LENR? Is this a CYA phenomenon?

    • Ophelia Rump

      No. This is not a CYA phenomenon?

      This is a preparation for funding requests phenomenon.

    • Gerald

      Lets hope so, then the budgets and effort put into cold fussion will be huge. Like winning the race in ww2 building the bom or later getting on top of the space race. America just can’t affort not to be on top of this. For the question Frank is asking, My thoughts that no one under 40 will mind. What MFMP are doing now at the university maybe ignites an other fire getting young scientific people interrested. For me personally the Pons and Fleischmann getting the reward it deserves would be one of the best things happen in a long time.

      • SG

        And as soon as there is official public funding allocated, it will no longer be “pathological science.” Indeed, all those who lined up over the years to call it such will be lining up for the funding to conduct their own cold fusion experiments.

        • Gerald

          Yes, the first one who stick their heads out will be chopped off, if all stand up the ones just above the gras will not be seen. It is nature, don’t waste time getting sour. Try to get standing on their shoulders and lead them.

          • SG

            Not sour (at least not to where it affects me in any significant way). But at the end of the day, it is always all about the money, is it not?

            • Gerald

              Yes it will be. It’s envy what drives our society. I don’t have that but sometimes I feel quit suppid not to have it.

      • Frechette

        If it hadn’t been for Wernher von Braun and his team from Peenemunde

        the US would probably have been the loser of the space race.

        • Omega Z

          Having additional brain power does not hurt, but the U.S. was already in good shape in the space brain trust. And least we forget, Russia also enhanced their brain trust from Germany.

          The real key was funding and the national drive to succeed.
          On May 25, 1961, Kennedy 1st proposed before a special joint session of Congress to put a man on the moon within the decade. He made his speech on national television on September 12, 1962. The Eagle lunar module landed on the moon on July 20, 1969

          I personally find the short timeline(approximately 7 years) amazing.
          Here is what else I find amazing. Forty seven years later, we are stuck in Low Earth Orbit(LEO). What the hail happened. It’s called cronyism where once the task is completed, you replace those who can do with your buddies who can’t.

          Also, in the last 12 years, a tripling of NASA’s annual budget and we still haven’t completed the Heavy Lift Saturn V replacement. Oh well. Russia is also dependent on 40 year old technology. Cronyism inflicts itself on everybody.

  • Gerard McEk

    I do not understand the US military research groups. Reports like this one and the public revellations of DeChiaro,show that they seem sucessful, but further research is stopped, WHY??
    And if it is promissing, why publish it and do not take the promissing advantage in secrecy?
    It seems that the military leaders are not convinced and therefore stopped the developments. As a strategy they may have published it in the expectation that others (e.g. Russia, China) will put more effort in it (and taking their resources), convinced that it will lead to nothing. A depressing thought, considering that they bought a 1 MW plant of Rossi in 2011…

    • Brokeeper

      Or perhaps the US Navy already has it. The brand new USS Zumwalt cruiser has a new unique 85MW Integrated Power System that is highly speculative. It contains four clean gas turbine engines driving electric generators driving only electric propulsion engines, rail guns, LASER beams and ships environment. Many think the power source is natural gas, but exhaust pipes for that kind of power is not noticable? Nuclear Power reactors for that magnetude would be too large for the CG(X) cruser class hull. I could be wrong but I can think of only one possible power source that can sustain the clean electric needs of this new class of cruisers for extended lengths of time – LENR.

      • Warthog

        “Nuclear Power reactors for that magnetude would be too large for the CG(X) cruser class hull.”

        Fission reactors can actually be made quite small. The limiting factor is having a critical mass in a small package. This requires a very high enrichment of fissionable material, upwards of 90+% U-235 instead of the lesser percentage in commercial power reactors. The Russians used small fission reactors to power their deep-space probes.

      • Zephir

        USS Zumwalt cruiser uses four marine gas turbines
        that power generators that produce a total of 80 megawatts of

    • Warthog

      What you have to understand is that the high-level managers in the various defense R&D organizations are, in large majority, nuclear physicists who got into the management ladder from and during the era of nuclear weapon development.

      You also need to remember is that it is the lesser competent scientists who become managers.

      Given this background, the huge prejudice against a chemically-moderated fusion process at near-room-temperature being possible is understandable.

      • HS61AF91

        Hmm, but understandable is neither a reason or an excuse for dragging down human progress.

        • Warthog

          Oh, I absolutely agree. Unethical, unscientific, and a whole lot of other negatives.

    • colodude

      @Gerard, I’m not the first to think/write this, but when I saw the codeposition video here in ECW a couple months back, and maybe once before about 10 years ago(?), that accomplishment would be enough to turn over the project to the less documented part of the military budget and given some inocuous code name. Brokeeper, below, but earlier than me, points out there might be some smoke at least at this point, and JimR seems even more convinced than I that it would be the cornerstone of any mil spec construction of a LENR device.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      “they seem successful, but further research is stopped, WHY??” Well, they don’t really advertise it, but governments (not only U.S.) tend to be weaker nowadays than they were 25 years ago. It’s possible that they just don’t have the right combination of funding, talent and political will to proceed at the moment.

  • Jimr

    I believe all this P & F duplication is meaningless. I am convinced that government agencies are far more advanced than Rossi is, (ex: Lockeed ) however since it is government financed it is all done secretly. Also Mitsubishi, Toyota ,etc, etc are most likely advancrd.

  • NT

    I have never understood why the MFMP group did not pickup where P & F (successfully) left off. Maybe Bob can weigh in on this?

    • Ged

      One reason could be that Pd and deuterium are quite a lot more expensive. The Ni/H system also appears easier and more powerful, but that may not ultimately be the case. MFMP were planning a P&F replication with original material and all, at some point.