LENR and the Climate Debate

Since climate change is front and center in the news, after President Trump announced that the United States’ withdrawl from the Paris Climate Accord, I thought it might be appropriate to broach the topic here. Andrea Rossi has made a lengthy comment on the Journal of Nuclear Physics on the topic that I thought would make a good starting point. could

I don’t consider Rossi an expert on climate science, but I do consider him an expert in developing an energy technology which I believe could have a profound impact on the debate around energy and the environment.

I realize this is a topic that can often lead to heated debate, I hope that commenters here will be respectful of one another, even if they might disagree with another’s position, and remember the commenting guidelines of ECW.

Here is Rossi’s comment on the JONP today:

Andrea Rossi
June 2, 2017 at 6:49 AM
There is a lot of hypocrisy and superficiality on this issue.
I am sure of the fact that the more we research in new environmentally friendly and renewable energies, the better, but:
1- the solar energy is not economically profitable and is funded exclusively and by the taxpayer
2- the wind energy ( that indirectly is solar ) is not profitable as well as the solar and it too is economically sustainable only if funded by the taxpayer
3- both of them are profitable only in restricted areas, where sun and wind are particularly strong all the year around, not relevant in the global energy market: when you read that “30% of the energy is made by solar” it is a lie that takes advantage of the fact that laymen do not know the difference between power and energy: the solar represents 30% of the installed power, but for the 90% the solar plants and the wind towers produce no energy, therefore the energy actually produced is barely the 10% of the power installed
4- all the jobs created by the alternative energies are funded by the taxpayer, otherwise could not be paid for
5- the phrase ” all the scientific community is sure that the global warming is generated by human activities” is a lie: no serious statistic has been made on this issue and the phrase ” all the more vociferous guys in the scientific community are sure that the global warming is induced by human activities” would be more proper
6- the Earth has had dramatic climate changes along its eons, totally independent from humans: the Sahara desert was a gigantic forest, as big as the Amazonic area and the oil is the product of the decomposition of enormous amounts of organic residue degenerated underground during the “global warming” of a precedent era: in this case, not only it has not been oil to cause the global warming, but, on the contrary, it has been the global warming that has generated the oil…
7- nevertheless, I sustain that R&D in the alternative energies must be done, but without hypocrital opportunism and with serious scientific and economic approach and without the distruction of the patrimony of plants and jobs created by the traditional energies.
When I read that China and India are lecturing the USA about pollution, I take it seriously, but only as an epiphany of hypocrisy and opportunism.
Warm Regards,

  • malkom700

    Today’s policy takes place between two equal poles in the world, between the socialist and the conservative. Hitler and Stalin were the same extremes, otherwise Hitler was the most dangerous for race theory. One of the leading parties in today’s Germany is the Social Democratic Party. A distinction should also be made between North American and European plitic systems.

  • To go beyond the eternal debate on climate, I propose you read that artucle about predicting hurican energy in the atlantic


    Conclusion by Judith Curry, a seasoned (joke) climatologist having worked (and frauded, she admit) for the IPCC for many years is interesting :

    “Apart from the intrinsic interest in the Atlantic seasonal hurricane forecast, CFAN’s forecast is an interesting example of the sociology of private sector research and how it differs from academic research.

    If you are paying close attention, you will see that I do not provide sufficient information for this forecast to be reproduced. While reproducibility is the mantra (if not the norm) in academic research, in the private sector there are big counter incentives to giving away your ‘trade secrets’.

    Underlying this forecast model is some very significant research into climate dynamics. Will it slow down academic research progress not to make the details of this research public? Maybe, but I’m not too worried about it since academic research is focused on other things.

    Developing this forecast cost CFAN about $40K in salaries and overhead. CFAN has one client that is partially supporting this research and forecast product. In general, CFAN’s research is funded by the occasional government grant, client contracts, and overhead. More funding is needed for our hurricane climate dynamics research to continue and for regular seasonal hurricane forecasts to be sustainable. Sponsoring subscribers to the hurricane forecasts will receive full technical reports. We shall see how this funding model works.

    So this is a very different model for climate research. With President Trump’s funding priorities and cuts, not to mention the endemic group think in academic climate research, this may turn out to be a good path to follow. Time will tell.”

    Solution is in the free market, provided :
    – they are not subsidized
    – they don’t have any fashionista/state as client
    – their clients pay for the errors

  • Andreas Moraitis

    A friendly advice: By posting insults instead of arguments you will reach the opposite of what you might intend.

    I remember that cold winter, too, but I do not think that it was relevant on a longer scale. There will always be lows and highs, sometimes even extremes. What counts is the overall balance. Do you recall MFMP’s last experiment? Some readers here and elsewhere have been excited about the “instant COP”, or even its short term running average, although it was totally irrelevant (except maybe for system diagnostics). My impression is that many critics of GW are making the same mistake. This applies as well to a number of GW proponents. But I doubt that you would find any serious scientist amongst these groups.

  • Chapman

    Prey tell, what do you think “Fascist” means?

    I do not ask that with any sarcasm, but the left tends to play Orwellian Double-Speak games and tries to redefine what WORDS actually mean (and YES, words DO actually MEAN things), and as a result even learned men are often subject to confusion regarding the actual definition of some terms.

  • Omega Z

    “that supplies barely 5% of U.S. transportation”

    If you replace that 5% with oil, you would see $110 oil as demand would outstrip supply. The Saudi’s would love that..

    • If we ban biofuels, the cost of fertilizer, farmland, and food will go down all over the world, which will increase our standard of living . The cost of fossil fuels will not rise because we use so much oil and natural gas to farm, process, and transport biofuel crops they are highly energy inefficient. The biofuel scam is corporate welfare driven by farm belt greed. 99% of the human race is hurt by biofuel production and 1 % makes money on biofuels. You pay for biofuels at the pump and again at the supermarket; you increase water pollution, deforestation, and engine repair bills, and future generations may starve right here in the USA when all our topsoil is gone. Over half of our prime Midwest topsoil is already lost to erosion, and worldwide topsoil is being lost 10 times faster than it is being replaced by nature. Making cars and trucks our competitors for food caused the world food crisis during the Bush and Obama administrations, which has already killed millions worldwide through malnutrition, and is still ongoing. Malnutrition is the #1 cause of avoidable premature death and the #1 cause of mental retardation in children. Watch *The Global Biofuel Disaster* at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha7lUWlZaOY

  • cashmemorz

    It will take months to read through the GUTCP in a coherent way, to make sure I not only understand what Mills writes but where each point comes from how it is developed, if it is developed logically, historically accurate, and potentially true to nature as it is observed regarding each point. The universities giving lectures I assume have done just that before putting their logo on the line for an otherwise potential fraud. There are frauds out there that are built up by large business organizations to make their actions look legitimate. For instance malware that attacks computers via their BIOS. I have put on order a computer that has every chip scrutinized for potential flaws that can be utilized by such large hacker organizations. Purism is the builder and supplier of the computers. Very costly but I value my privacy. You get what you pay for. Until I get that I am using a $400 laptop that has twenty different antimarware apps to protect it. The chief among them is malware bytes, comodo, registry first aid, free windows registrey repair, iobit malware fighter, advanced systemcare, firmware updates from chip manufacturers and I still get hacked. Backups help a lot.

    For now here are a few sites showing university lectures re Mills’ GUTCP:



    • Chapman

      I have flagged the Mills video for my evenings viewing. Thank you for the link.

      In regards to Infinite Energy, I must confess that it is a site that I avoid. Much of the content is quality stuff, but I can not get over my own childish grudge against Jeb for his nonsense. I Know it is a matter of cutting off my nose to spite my face, but the man just irks the daylights out of me.

      BUT, as it is a resource you recommend for following the topic, and in so far as I could not hope to have logical discussions with you on the topic if I were to refuse to review the very information that you point out AT MY OWN REQUEST, than I guess I must be a man, swallow my pride, hold my nose, and follow your lead.

      Thank you for taking the time to lay out the path for me. 🙂
      Much appreciated.

      (I just hope Jeb has not spiked his site with Anti-Chapman Malware landmines!!!)

      • cashmemorz

        Just do as those who are nervous when giving a speech for the first time before a large audience of strangers. Pretend they are all naked. This gives you a one up over them. Same with the website. They don’t really know you from Adam. Those guys may be so below you in quality it doesn’t really matter. The web is anonymous. Until you give someone a postal or email address. In other words keep your own council and don’t be sensitive to unknown strangers who likewise do not really know you.

        • Chapman

          HA!!! Good advice.
          Will do.

  • Chapman

    Just a reminder that today is the 73rd anniversary of D-Day.

    It is worth remembering the Heroes who gave their lives, 73 years ago, to help free Europe from the Tyranny and Oppression of a bloodthirsty, murderous, and lunatic Germany-led Socialist Empire.

    I can only pray that our British brothers have once again come to see the folly of Chamberlain’s “go along to get along” attempts at appeasement, and that a new CHURCHILL will rise up from the ashes in London, to lead Great Britain, and the World, to an eventual victory over the Socialist Huns that are currently laying waste to Europe.

    If Europe is to BE freed, Britain, first and foremost, must STAY free! I pray the British people will reject the socialist fifth column that has infiltrated their borders, and restore Britain to all Her Glory.

    Let the world Rediscover the BRITISH Culture, Worldview, and Backbone that gave rise to western culture itself.


    • Chapman

      (There were several factions within the German socialist community, just as there was in Russia at the time of the Bolshevik revolution. The fact that ONE faction exterminates the others does not mean that the surviving faction was any less a socialist group than their conquered brethren.

      The NAZI’s were not JUST socialists, they were the archetypal MODEL of socialism itself. Socialism is, as socialism does.)

      • radvar

        For a self-professed non-believer in science, that sounds about right.

    • radvar

      You dishonor those who served.

      • Chapman

        Boy, I am really living rent free right smack dab in the middle of your frontal cortex, aint I… 🙂

        You know the first thing they teach in Forest Ranger School?
        Don’t feed the Bears, dude…

        It is time to move on. Get over it. Few people believe the AGW hype, but so what? The sun will still come up tomorrow, and If you take a deep breath, and meditate on all that is GOOD in your life, you will probably enjoy the day.

        You have your opinion, but others have a different one. It is JUST an opinion, my friend. You might as well be getting nasty with folks because they think Queen was better than The Beatles. It is irrational… FUNNY, mind you, but irrational none the less.

        Life is too short to waste on being so angry. You will pop a blood vessel if you keep it up. Walk away. Enjoy life.

    • Jas

      Quite a statement. Possibly the most right wing thing I have ever read on this forum. There is a large difference between Socialism and National Solcialism. Many of the British soldiers who fought against Fascism were Communists, Socialsts and Anarchists.

    • Stanny Demesmaker

      Please keep your fact free posts(aka propaganda) for breitbart. And yes AGW is real, there is till this day no credible criticism against it.