We are transitioning to our new platform located on our homepage at www.coldfusionnow.org.

So where do you go for the latest Cold Fusion Now words of energy freedom?

www.coldfusionnow.org

Please update your bookmarks to our homepage for continued Cold Fusion Now info on ultra-clean energy from the hydrogen in water.

If you’re catching the RSS, you can get the same service at our new digs.

If you’re a subscriber, and you subscribed by email, you’re still a subscriber.
(If you subscribed with your own blog profile, we haven’t transitioned you yet.)

Pardon the broken links at our new site while we are moving.

Cold Fusion Now has been actively campaigning for clean energy for almost two years! We’ve got a full house and there is lots to move.

Thank you for your continued support of new energy and

Cold Fusion Now!

Yours Truly,
Ruby

“Ain’t nobody got a faith like mine!”
James Joyce
(sort of, but paraphrased with that jazz feel)

US demand for oil arises from demand for the products that are made from it. When the price of petroleum products increases, consumers use more of their income to pay for oil-derived products, and their spending on other goods and services decline.

One might say that there are three types of ignorance. Ordinary ignorace which is the ignorance of not knowing something.  Ordinary ignorance can be answered with ordinary knowledge.  This knowledge is factual and except in particular circumstances, usually trivial.  By trivial, I mean that it is one thing to passively know something, it is another to turn that knowledge into action.  Ordinary knowledge gives an answer for ordinary ignorance, what it does not do is give a heuristic with which individuals can discover things by themselves.

Galileo's telescope 1609

Internal thermos- sized cold fusion cell.

Of course, the opposite can happen, people can believe in something because it is suppressed.  This usually traces a grand conspiracy back to the Templars/Illuminati/Trilateral commission etc. etc.  In a truly liberal society, there would be no suppression, and one could weigh such a topic more fairly.  With suppression, the issue can neither come to fruition, nor can it really show itself as empty.  With propaganda blocking the way one cannot realize an issue, nor can one, if it is a bad idea, let it go.  I tend to not believe in grand conspiracies.  Small ‘c’ conspiracies, yes, pettiness, arrogance and just sheer meanness explain alot.  Big ‘c’ conspiracies, not so much.

The third type of ignorance is learned or higher ignorance.  Nicolas of Cusa states that,”every inquiry proceeds by way of a comparative relation, whether an easy or a difficult one.  Hence, the infinite, qua infinite is unknown; for it escapes all comparative relation.”  Higher ignorance whether it be towards God or creation must be learned.  It has a sincerity to it, it is intellectually honest unlike willful ignorance.  As Aristotle said, philosophy begins in wonder.  Wonder is not an answer, but rather a question, the question, that uproots the self, along with everything else (aporeia).  Socrates engaged in that kind of wonder, although he focused only on the human realm, and shirked natural philosophy (physical world).

Galileo, on the other hand, engaged in the physical world with such wonder.  He formulated new questions where there previously had not been recognized topics of study.  Galilean moons, the phases of Venus and sunspots.  He saw them and asked about them before anyone else did.  He blew the lid off of the order of things and in the process the Church lost control.  He was not trying to make the Church lose control, he was just actively and openly looking at the world.  It is amusing to think that the Catholic Church lost control, precisely because the Church thought it had control, and that if the Church had not thought that it was in control (and tried to enforce it on Galileo and a whole slew of astronomers on the one hand, and Martin Luther and a whole bunch of reformers on the other), then the Church would perhaps still have control.  Like a song says, “if you hold on too tightly, you’re going to loose control.”

Pd-D cold fusion cell.

Another type, willful ignorance, blocks inquiry, trying to preserve an orthodoxy.  It is negative.  It is active, but rather than creating, it protects a rather limited vision of the status quo.  It is like a conservatism for past that never really existed.  It is reactionary and if we are honest with ourselves, we will recognize that to some degree, it is in us all.  

Last of all, ordinary ignorance is the ignorance of the individual not involved and unconcerned.  This type is neither positive nor negative in its nature because it is passive.  If it becomes interested, it becomes interested in knowing “that,” rather than doing.  Of course, there are all kinds of different degrees of involvement or openness inside these three types of ignorance, but you can figure out the different shade on your own if you desire.

“The Department’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 budget request is $29.5 billion, an 11.8 percent or $3.1 billion increase from FY 2010 current appropriation levels.”

“The central theme of this year’s budget in SC [Office of Science] is research in new technologies for a clean energy future that address competing demands on our environment,” the document states.

In FY 2012, the [SC] Department requests $5.4 billion, an increase of 9.1 percent over the FY 2010 current appropriation, to invest in basic research. The FY 2012 request supports the President’s Strategy for American Innovation, and is consistent with the goal of doubling funding at key basic research agencies, including the Office of Science. The FY 2012 Office of Science budget request supports the following objectives from the Strategy, including:
– Unleash a clean energy revolution
– Strengthen and broaden American leadership in fundamental research
– Develop an advanced information technology ecosystem
– Educate the next generation with 21st century skills and create a world-class workforce.
Program Office Highlights DoE FY2012 Budget Request page 7

The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) is one of many DoE offices that claim to be “Investing in Breakthrough Technology and a Clean Energy Future.” Their FY 2012 budget request for $3.2 billion is “aimed at accelerating innovation and change in the Nation’s energy economy.” This includes programs that with meet with the President’s goals of “investing in the next generation of clean energy technologies“, among other things.

But the bulk of these requested monies will fund traditional alternative energies that have been in development, and funded, for decades:

The FY 2012 budget request continues to work to transform the Nation’s energy infrastructure by investing over $1,164.9 million in a variety of renewable programs including solar ($457.0 million), wind ($126.9 million), water ($38.5 million), hydrogen ($100.5 million), biomass ($340.5 million), and geothermal ($101.5 million). Research, development, and deployment of these technologies will reduce the production of greenhouse gas emissions and revitalize an economy built on the next generation of domestic production.
Program Office Highlights DoE FY2012 Budget Request page 8

The DoE office “devoted exclusively to funding specific highrisk, high payoff, game-changing research and development projects to meet the nation’s long-term energy challenges” will get <more than half-a-billion dollars.

Specifically, ARPA-E‘s budget request, ‘detailed’ on page 23 of the document, totals $650 billion.

Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy: Transformational Research and Development
The FY 2012 budget request includes $550 million for the Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E), a program launched in FY 2009 that sponsors specific high-risk and high-payoff transformational research and development projects that overcome the long-term technological barriers in the development of energy technologies to meet the Nation’s energy challenges, but that industry will not support at such an early stage.

An additional $100 million in mandatory funding is also proposed from the Wireless Innovation Fund for developing cutting-edge wireless technologies. An essential component of ARPA-E’s culture is an overarching focus on accelerating science to market.

Beyond simply funding transformational research creating revolutionary technologies, ARPA-E is dedicated to the market adoption of those new technologies that will fuel the economy, create new jobs, reduce energy imports, improve energy efficiency, reduce energy-related emissions, and ensure that the U.S. maintains a technological lead in developing and deploying advanced energy technologies.

Nowhere in the budget is found the words low-energy nuclear reactions LENR, lattice-assisted nuclear reactions LANR, chemically-assisted nuclear reactions CANR, condensed matter nuclear science CMNS, nickel-hydrogen exothermic reaction Ni-H, or cold fusion, despite meeting each of the Department of Energy’s Objectives.

DoE Objective – Unleash a clean energy revolution

The revolutionary energy from cold fusion comes from the Fleischmann-Pons “Excess Heat” Effect FPE.

When hydrogen, or its isotope deuterium, is absorbed by a metal like nickel or palladium, large amounts of heat can be generated. This heat can make useful steam, hot, clean water and eventually, electricity.

Hydrogen is an element abundant in water. Access to water means access to fuel, empowering local communities with their own energy sources.

Metals like nickel are plentiful on the Earth, as well as the moon and asteroids. Costs for these and other metals will be low. And this energy is powerful enough to make ecological mining practices economically viable and standard.

Large energy returns of 25 have been published, and energy returns of 400 and higher have been demonstrated. A planned commercial steam generator is the size of a cigarette pack and expected to generate 10 kilowatts of power.

DoE Objective – Strengthen and broaden American leadership in fundamental research

Internal view of an experimental cold fusion cell.

Experiments have yielded multiple effects other than excess heat like transmutation, even in biological organisms, where current research may lead to ridding the world of the stockpile of radioactive waste.

The research possibilities are endless.

DoE Objective – Develop an advanced information technology ecosystem

Few could imagine the way personal computers developed in the 1980s would literally change the way we live as they did. New jobs and new businesses can thrive in a service environment for clean cold fusion energy.

As a decentralized power source, cold fusion energy devices do not need a grid delivery system. Units can be designed stand-alone and portable.

Scalable power sources could be built into even the smallest hand-held devices, providing power for the life of the device, with no need to recharge.

DoE Objective – Educate the next generation with 21st century skills and create a world-class workforce.

A cold fusion economy means opportunities for training in new energy. Basic research means jobs for young scientists, with the meaningful and exciting work of building a future based on clean and plentiful energy.

Cold fusion meets the objectives, and then some.
What kind of funding would make a difference?

In an earlier interview with James Martinez, longtime researcher based in Washington D.C. David J. Nagel described a 5-year program starting at $20 million a year, ramping up to $40 million annually, an average $30 million a year for five years to bring this research to the next phase, and more importantly, as Dr. Nagel describes, bring a young group of scientists into this field of research to continue to innovate and drive the next-generation energy for our planet.

$150 million for cold fusion, half-of-one percent of DoE requested budget for 2012.

The document is filled with phrases like “energy security” and “American leadership in innovation”, visual-space divisions that are relevant no more to an alliance of peoples across this planet who live in an invisible spacetime of digital-satellite-wireless electromagnetic resonance, and who realize the need for a new arrangement for living on Earth.

Creating a new economy cannot be done by the US, or any one nation, alone. There is a new world to create, one that requires participation and cooperation from people united on every continent.

How will this move forward?

Within the context of maplines, this scenario was posited by Kiva Labs cold fusion researcher Dr. Edmund Storms, way back in 2010:

“Sooner or later scientists in some country will discover how to make cold fusion work on a commercial scale. When this happens, the countries that develop this technology will rapidly become richer and more powerful. The cost of energy for manufacturing will go down and processes that are not yet practical under most conditions, such as obtaining fresh water from the sea, will become widely used.

These benefits will cause a rapid expansion in the power and influence of the countries using this inexpensive energy source. What about the countries that do not know how to make the effect work?

Their scientists will attempt to reverse engineer the power generator, but in this field, such efforts will be difficult without an understanding of how the process works, an understanding that will not be shared by the discovers.

Also, highly developed countries will have difficulty removing their present energy infrastructure and substituting this much simpler source. So, the race is on and the potential winners are not obvious.

Nevertheless, it is obvious the winner will not be a country that ignores and rejects the reality of cold fusion.”
Edmund Storms Why is cold fusion rejected?

Perusing the DoE budget request is like forensics on a phantom limb, gone but not forgotten: there will be no federal funding for this field of new energy anytime soon.

But thank you Sidney Kimmel!

News like “Billionaire helps fund MU energy research” from the Columbia Daily Tribune is welcome, and desperately needed.

Cold Fusion Now!

Related Links

Billionaire helps fund MU energy research by Janese Silvey Columbia Daily Tribune

Department of Energy Budget and Performance

ARPA-E answers questions about fulfilling mission by Ruby Carat February 9, 2012

Letters to Congressional Energy Sub-committees repeat hearings request by Ruby Carat November 13, 2011

David J. Nagel on Ca$h Flow: A Reasoned Approach to Funding with James Martinez by Ruby Carat August 24, 2010

Why is cold fusion rejected? by Edmund Storms July 20, 2010

According to the Subcommittee press release, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Department of Energy Inspector General’s (IG) office both issued reports that found ARPA-E funding practices and procedures appearing to veer from this mission.

In particular, the GAO’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy Could Benefit from Information on Applicants’ Prior Funding reported that

12 of the 18 companies it identified as having received private sector funding prior to their ARPA-E award planned to use ARPA-E funding to either advance or accelerate prior-funded work. Further, Chairman Broun noted, “Similarly, a review of GAO work papers and publicly available information indicates numerous instances of overlap and duplication between ARPA-E and both public and private sector funding.”

In addition, DOE’s Office of the Inspector General (IG) released its own audit in August 2011 that focused on “whether ARPA-E implemented safeguards necessary to achieve its goals and objectives and to effectively deploy associated Recovery Act resources.”

Two of the three awards examined in detail by the IG had questionable costs of $280,387. Included among these costs were “meetings with bankers to raise capital” and a “fee to appear on a local television show.” Despite concerns regarding these uses of taxpayer dollars, the DOE IG noted in its report that such activities were cited as an allowable cost by ARPA-E under its Technology Transfer and Outreach policy.

ARPA-E, DOE IG, and GAO each testified.

Testifying were Dr. Arun Majumdar, Director, Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy, U.S., Gregory Friedman, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Energy and Mr. Frank Rusco, Director, Energy and Science Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Roscoe Bartlett

Dana Rohrabacher

The Chairman of the Subcommittee, Paul Broun said in his statement that

“while it is clear many ARPA-E projects are pursuing high-quality, potentially transformative research that is too risky for private investment, reviews of GAO work papers and publicly available information reveal many exceptions to this practice, and raise questions regarding ARPA-E’s commitment to ‘carefully structure its projects to avoid any overlap with public and private sources of funding.’”

Specifically, the reports detail information showing that:

Numerous awardees indicated to GAO they would use ARPA-E funding to accelerate work they were already pursuing.

Numerous awardees’ proposals overlap and even duplicate efforts supported elsewhere in DOE and other Federal agencies.

The Administration touted ARPA-E awardees that received private sector funding after their ARPA-E award as proof that ARPA-E is working and successful; however, ten of these eleven recipients had also received significant private sector funding prior to receiving their award, raising questions regarding the degree to which the ARPA-E award itself was the driver of the follow-on funding.

Of the 44 identified small- and medium-size companies that received ARPA-E awards, a review of USASpending.gov shows that 26, or 59 percent, of these companies received other funding from the Federal government.

Over 60 percent of proposals funded by ARPA-E sought to advance technology to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 and beyond—the late stage technology demonstration and system commissioning and operation that is regularly supported by the private sector.

ARPA-E’s response, included in the GAO report, rationalized the actions.

The full Staff Report to Chairman Broun’s statement HERE
The GAO’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy Could Benefit from Information on Applicants’ Prior Funding report is available HERE
The DOE IG’s Audit report is available HERE

The IG report states “The goals of ARPA-E are to enhance domestic economic security through the development of energy technologies and to ensure that the United States maintains a technological lead in developing and deploying advanced energy technologies.”

The small amount of federal funding for cold fusion research has come largely from Department of Defense agencies. Civilian funding would come from the Department of Energy’s ARPA-E office, but so far they have refused to even acknowledge the two-decades long body of science, violating their stated mission.

At this point, it appears private sector funding will carry the development of this revolutionary new energy technology into the future – only after the first steps in commercial products begin appear on the market. Till then, the small, self-funded companies will continue to struggle in their effort to bring forth the answer to many of our energy problems in the form of real, usable generators.

And at that point, the DOE will realize they’ve been playing in Bonanzaland instead of the Space Age.

Cold Fusion Now!

Related Links

Members Question Oversight and Administration of ARPA-E House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight Press Release January 24, 2012

Letters to Congressional Sub-committees repeat hearings request by Ruby Carat November 13, 2011

Letter to the Secretary of Energy and others by Ruby Carat October 14, 2010

Letter to ARPA-E by Ruby Carat August 17, 2010 – one of our early efforts at contacting DOE.

“Suburbia lives imaginatively in Bonanza-land.” — Marshall McLuhan The Man, His Message CBC Archives

Contact Representative Bartlett Contact Representative Rohrabacher

System crashing, nuclear threat,
riots in streets, fiat paper debt,
mass extinctions, despot measures-
I’m changing the channel for TV pleasures.

I am not familiar with most current TV offerings – and this is old news for you hipsters – but while visiting family, I learned about The Big Bang Theory, one of the biggest shows on TV. It’s about a couple of super-smart science geeks, and the limitations they have as whole people.

One particular episode, Season 4 Episode 2 The Cruciferous Vegetable Amplification, aired on November 30, 2010 and had a guest appearance by Apple computer legend Steve Wozniak AND a mention of cold fusion.

As Sheldon, one of the characters who plays a verifiable genius with obsessive compulsive disorders, figures out when he’s going to die, he laments to his friend and room-mate Leonard about all he’s going to miss out on when he does.

Watch a short clip here (with Turkish! subtitiles).
The cold fusion reference comes in at mark 2:10. [Full transcript here]

Sheldon: But seriously, even if I disregard the Uncle Carl factor, at best I have 60 years left.

Leonard: That long, huh?

Sheldon: 60 only takes me to here. I need to get to here.

Leonard: What’s there?

Sheldon: The earliest estimate of the singularity, when man will be able to transfer his consciousness into machines and achieve immortality.

Leonard: So, you’re upset about missing out on becoming some sort of freakish self-aware robot?

Sheldon: By this much.

Leonard: Tough break. You want eggs?

Sheldon: You don’t get it, Leonard. I’m going to miss so much, the unified field theory, cold fusion, the dogapus.

…60 years?

Maybe they got confused with hot fusion…

Or…maybe I got the joke wrong! [See comments] If Sheldon can make it long enough to transfer his consciousness to a machine, then he could live forever, and then, he would experience cold fusion.

Well, luckily, we don’t believe Sheldon will miss cold fusion!

The writers are listed as: Bill Prady (Story), Lee Aronsohn (Story), Steve Holland (Story), Chuck Lorre (Teleplay), Steven Molaro (Teleplay), Jim Reynolds (Teleplay) – at least one of this crew had some ears on.

It’s an old episode, before the Rossi effect. Perhaps the writers will put Sheldon’s genius towards the cold fusion question in an upcoming episode, and Big Bang Theory will turn comedy to science fiction with a what-if plot: What if we got clean cold fusion energy in 2012?

As an aside, the very first entry searching Big Bang Theory and Cold Fusion brings up Eugene Mallove‘s The Implications of the Big Bang originally published in Infinite Energy #46 from 2002.

Related Links

Official The Big Bang Theory from CBS

The Cruciferous Vegetable Amplification Wiki

Steve Wozniak personal website

This graph is taken from Dr. Michael McKubre‘s public talk What happened to cold fusion?

As a scientist involved in this research since that very day back in 1989, Dr. McKubre described some of the main features of this graph.

“This result, by itself, with no more explanation really, is sufficient – if you believe Martin Fleischmann – to convince you that there is a real thermal heat effect in a deuterium-palladium system.”

Acknowledged as one of the greatest electro-chemists that ever lived, there was good reason to accept Dr. Fleischmann’s, and his partner Stanley Pons’, data.

In the graph, the temperature begins in the upper-50s C, and then begins to increase at a steady pace, represented by the slowly climbing line in the graph, as their electro-chemical cell is held at constant power.

“You see the little downward spikes in the rising areas”, said Dr. McKubre, “Fleischmann and Pons ran their electro-chemical cells open, that is, the products of electrolysis, in this case deuterium D2 gas and oxygen O2 gas, leave the cell, so they have to refill the cell every so often with the amount of heavy water that’s left. So these downward spikes are the times once each day when heavy water was added to the cell to make up for lost electrolytes.”

In their paper that circulated after the 1989 announcement, some of the early Fleischmann-Pons experiments that created excess heat were described.

… standard additions of 1 ml of the electrolyte were made following sampling. Losses of D2O due to electrolysis in these and all the other experiments recorded here were made up by using D2O alone. A record of the volume of D2O additions was made for all the experiments.
–Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium, J. Electroanal. Chem., 1989

The steady increase in temperature, punctuated by small, temporary drops, continues for days. Dr. McKubre relayed what happened next,

“All of a sudden, one day it goes down alot, and then it kicks up to a new level – it kicks up in temperature by 10 degrees or more. So all by itself, at constant input power, steady operating systems, the cell suddenly started to produce 15 degrees more temperature. There’s clear evidence of excess heat and it builds.

It builds up asymptoting at 100-degrees Centigrade, so it comes up very close to the boiling point, and then all by itself – and this all-by-itself is why its taken us twenty-two years to understand this thing – the cell switched off and went back to its initial trajectory.”

When the temperature “kicked-up”, the rate of change increased to about 6.4 C higher each day, and rose parabolically as it got closer to boiling. After the big drop, the rate of temperature increase returned to about 2.2 C each day.

What caused these sudden temperature increases, and temperature drops, has occupied scientists for the past 23 years.

“This is an electrode being electrolyzed in a heavy-water electrolyte”, said McKunbre, “a palladium cathode, the negative electrode. The line is rising, the temperature is going up in the cell at constant power. Now, electro-chemical cells will generally rise in voltage, so that’s not necessarily surprising or interesting.”

Continuing,

This small cell sat on a tabletop and generated fusion-sized thermal energy using a tiny bit of palladium metal and the hydrogen isotope deuterium.

“All you need to do is wrap a calorimeter around that and measure the amount of heat to determine whether this is possible by any chemical scheme or not. And the answer is it’s absolutely not possible by any chemical scheme. This amount of heat is 100 or 1000 times more than you could get from the sum of all possible chemical reactions in that particular experiment.“

In his 2007 summary of cold fusion research The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, Dr. Edmund Storms described one early FP experiment using a 1-cm cube of palladium which “melted through the beaker and bench after an explosion stopped the current.” [p 128] In their initial paper, the Fleischmann-Pons team wrote “WARNING! IGNITION?” for that particular run. Had they experienced “heat after death”, a phenomenon whereby the cell keeps on generating heat energy even after it’s been unplugged, and the current to drive electrolysis is no longer applied?

The control of this particular reaction leads directly to “self-sustain mode” in the newer nickel-hydrogen gas-loading steam generators, leading to huge thermal energy returns that are safe and clean.

“This [early data] was available for discussion and interrogation”, said Dr. McKubre. “Thoughtful people looked at it and said, ‘My god, how can that possibly happen?’”

Unfortunately, for various reasons, some of which Dr. McKubre discusses in the lecture, many bright scientists did not reproduce the results. Dr. Edmund Storms related the irrationality of the broader scientific community in accepting their negative conclusions over the positive results.

“Accepting these negative studies as evidence against anomalous power being real would be like having many groups each collect random rocks from a beach, have the sample carefully tested for diamonds, and then when only a few diamonds are found, conclude that diamonds do not exist anywhere in nature because the observations could not be reproduced when other random rocks were examined. Such an approach would be considered absurd in any other field of study, yet it was applied to claims of Fleischmann and Pons.”[p 52]

This early data “was preliminary, as Fleischmann and Pons readily acknowledged”, and they had not at the time intended to make it public. Yet, it was this early data and graph that “triggered” all the work in the newly created field of condensed matter nuclear science since.

Dr. Storms wrote,

“Nevertheless, the excessive response encouraged intense studies in many laboratories and a willingness of a few scientists to acknowledge anomalous results. Without this over-reaction, such unexpected behavior would have been completely ignored as error. Instead, people were encouraged to report behavior thought to be impossible-behavior that now has been witnessed hundreds of times in dozens of laboratories.” [p 62]

This Early Data graph was dismissed by the mainstream science minds of the day. The small group of researchers around the world who continued to investigate the anomalous heat generated by these simple electrolytic chemical cells have done so despite isolation and derision from their less-than-curious peers. Now, major advances in this field are leading to commercial products which hold the promise of changing all planetary systems, social, economic, and ecological.

As this field develops from an obscure science to a worldwide technology, this graph represents a turning point, when humanity was given a second chance for a peaceful future, with clean, abundant energy for all, even if nobody knows it yet.

Cold Fusion Now!

Related Links

SRI International: What happened to cold fusion? (See part 2 of the video for the Fleischmann and Pons Early Data) by Ruby Carat November 21, 2011

-February 5 The JET Energy Solid State NANOR ‘IAP Cold Fusion/LANR Demonstration’ Has Just Successfully Completed Its First Week Continuously Operating at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA)

“For hot fusion and particle physicists and students, the background (input) are the blue (control) and green (NANOR), and the foreground (output, read off the left) are the red curves (control and NANOR, plotted as input-power-normalized temperature deviation (delta-T). Compare these to others in the CF/LANR field, and note that these curves have a thermal (ohmic) control and also time integration to determine energy, and thus rule out energy storage, chemical sources of the induced heat, and other sources of possible false positives. Here, the tiny, active CF/LANR quantum electronic device shows significant improvement in thermal output compared to a standard ohmic control (a carbon composition resistor).”
Dr. Mitchell Swartz Jet Energy

- February 2 The NANOR used in the open MIT Demonstration is a ZrO2-PdD Cold Fusion/LANR solid state quantum electronic device – now ongoing for five days straight!

“Cambridge, MA – The IAP Short Course (7 days) on Cold Fusion and Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions [at Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT] has meticulously developed the salient point that skeptics of cold fusion were wrong, and that scientific theories do exist for understanding the difficult to achieve reactions.”

Dr. Mitchell Swartz of JET Energy, Inc and Dr. Peter Hagelstein of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science collaborated on the Short Course, held between semesters, which offered students a full one-week introduction to the discipline of condensed matter nuclear science.

“January 30-31, 2012 – Cambridge, MA. – As part of the IAP Course on COLD FUSION at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dr. Mitchell Swartz, JET Energy, and Prof. Peter Hagelstein demonstrated cold fusion openly for scientists and engineers. The demonstration was a two day part of the detailed, yet overview, seven day course run by Prof. Hagelstein and Dr. Swartz, and followed the first open demonstrations of cold fusion at MIT since 2003. This JET Energy NANOR(TM) demonstrated a significant energy gain greater than 10, much larger than the previous open demonstration. This exhibition is also remarkable because it confirmed the role of the nanoengineered lattice in enabling the CF/LANR activity. It followed Prof. Hagelstein sharing his breakthrough explanatory theory of cold fusion during the first 5 days. The NANOR technology of JET Energy may have already begun to shatter a few preconceived notions of skeptics and cold fusioneers.”

Given the potential for new discoveries in this field, skilled scientists, engineers, and inventors in condensed matter nuclear science stand to be at the forefront in creating an entire new economy based on clean, abundant energy.

New jobs from a new industry will need an educated group to carry the development forward. Which institutions of higher learning will be the first to begin programs in this area?

Bachelor of Science Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, anyone?

Read more at Cold Fusion Times.

Related Links

Starting 2012 with Cold Fusion 101 by Ruby Carat November 18, 2011

JET Energy, Inc home

There will be a test screening in Chicago, Illinois on February 11 at 12 Noon local time at the Gene Siskel Film Center.

This is the announcement from their website:

“If you’ve been waiting to see our new film, The Believers, now is your chance!

The Chicago Council on Science and Technology is presenting a work-in-progress screening of The Believers on Saturday, February 11 at noon at the Gene Siskel Film Center, and filmmakers Monica Ross and Clayton Brown will be in attendance for a Q & A session after the film.

You can attend for free by becoming a 137 Films Backer. We hope to see you on February 11!”

James Martinez, who has interviewed a dozen scientists on the topic, was filmed for the movie last year during a Ca$h Flow interview with Dr. Edmund Storms who related the then-recent news on Andrea Rossi‘s 10 kilowatt E-Cat demonstration with the quote “There will be a stampede.“

The film does not appear to be on the Gene Siskel Film Center calendar, but it is posted on the Chicago Council of Science and Technology front page.

There is an RSVP required and Registration at 11AM.
$15.00 non-members / $5.00 Students. Details here.

Related Links

In World on the Edge, Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute, writes

“The world’s ever-growing herds of cattle, sheep, and goats are converting vast stretches of grassland to desert. Forests are shrinking by 13 million acres per year as we clear land for agriculture and cut trees for lumber and paper. Four fifths of oceanic fisheries are being fished at capacity or overfished and headed for collapse. In system after system, demand is overshooting supply.”
Lester Brown Chapter 1 On the Edge

Human expansion into the environment for shelter, food, and fuel, exacerbated by the sprawl around cities, is squeezing wildlife into the last remaining islands of shrinking habitat.

What is at stake?

In 1979, 1.2 million elephants roamed the African continent. That number currently is 300,000 elephants. We have lost 75% of the elephant herds mainly due to poaching, loss of habitat and human conflict.
Wildlife Direct Elephant Slaughter is Recurring

Kenya’s Lions are on the brink of extinction.

Borneo Orangutans victims of logging and fire to clear the land for palm oil plantations, and hunted as resources become scarcer.

The total population of mountain gorillas worldwide is 786 because of shrinking habitat.

The last two hundred in Virunga National Park are victims of resource wars and poaching for food and retail. The DR Congo blocks Soco from oil search in Virunga Park for now, but how long?

North America inexplicably began losing bee colonies. Chemicals in the water supply cause small amphibians to show mutations. A giant Garbage Patch in the Pacific floats unnoticed by humans, but putting plastics into the DNA of birds.

Birds fill up on plastic, then starve to death.

But this conflict that threatens the futures of both wildlife and humans has a solution – with abundant cold fusion energy technology.

Growing food locally and sustainably is economically viable using cold fusion energy.

The first commercial device of this revolutionary technology is essentially a steam generator, which could provide affordable clean water, as well as hot water and heat, off-grid in the remotest locations to support agriculture, horticulture, aquaculture, and domestic needs.

Designed to run on hydrogen and a recyclable nickel powder, only one gram of nickel can provide 10 kilowatts of thermal energy from a small portable unit, recharging in about six-months.

Agriculture, horticulture, and aquaculture all benefit from clean water, and hot water.

With plentiful energy, it becomes economically viable to recycle all waste, reducing the need for more virgin resources, and no more plastic into the environment!

With clean and abundant cold fusion energy, we can stop the pollution from fossil fuels and the end resource wars limited supplies engender.

Carbon-burning steam power revolutionized farming in the 19th century. Nickel-Hydrogen Exothermic Reaction steam power can revolutionize world agriculture in the 21rst century.

In the ancient Mediterranean villages where philosophy and science began, problems associated with increasing population in were taken care of by shipping off a portion of the tribe to a new location, sometimes forcefully, and founding a new colony.

21rst century humans do not have that same opportunity. There is no ‘Unknown’ area on Earth to expand into. Moon base 2020? Not likely without cold fusion energy.

Where else can humans go?

Why should we care about the wildlife of this world?

One of the first philosophers in the Greek world was Empedocles. He lived around 450BC and came from the island of Sicily. In one of his surviving fragments of writing, he relates to his student Pausanias the importance of listening carefully to the words his teacher Empedocles is saying.

And why is listening to the teacher Empedocles’ words so important?

“If you press them down
underneath your dense-packed diaphragm
and oversee them with good will and with
pure attention to the work, they will all
without the slightest exception stay with you
for as long as you live. And, from them,
you will come to possess many other things.
For they grow, each according to its
own inner disposition, in whatever way their
nature dictates.
But if you reach out instead after
other kinds of things – after the ten thousand
worthless things that exist among humans,
blunting their cares – then you can be sure
they will only too gladly leave you with the
circling of time, longing to return to their
own dear kind. For you need to know that
everything has intelligence and a share
of awareness.”
Empedocles 450BC translated by Peter Kingsley in Reality

"Please listen to us!"

Cold Fusion Now!

Reality by Peter Kingsley www.peterkingsley.org

Earth Policy Institute www.earth-policy.org

You can help animals and birds in your neighborhood by providing fresh drinking water, putting bird seed in feeders, and plant indigenous to feed local wildlife. Refrain from toxic chemical use in and around your home, and recycle even the tiniest of plastic pieces.

To Learn More about Endangered Species

National Geographic

The World Wildlife Fund

Nature Conservancy

Wildlife Direct

However, he has provided a valuable service in exposing the fossil fuels lobbying efforts that help to mold policy away from conventional alternative energies, not to mentions clean cold fusion energy. Mr. Brown’s recent analysis of International Energy Agency data revealed that worldwide, “direct fossil fuel subsidies added up to roughly $500 billion in 2010.”

The IEA’s World Energy Outlook Executive Summary released last November stated “Subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption of fossil fuels jumped to over $400 billion.” And additional $100 billion is funneled to the production-side.

Why all the subsidies when demand is so high?

According to The Center for Responsive Politics‘ website Open Secrets, oil, gas and electric utilities in the US spent $2.3 billion lobbying their government legislators to support their industry since 1998.

The top US spenders on lobbying government legislators for support of industry-friendly policy actions include these companies:

And what does that lobbying get?

Legislation favorable to the industry, and subsidies.

Altogether, worldwide governments gave an average $1.5 billion US a day subsidizing fossil fuel industries. And scrapping fossil fuel subsidies would “avoid 2.56 gigatons of carbon-dioxide per year by 2035 – that “could provide almost half of the extra cuts the world needs to stay within its carbon budget” as reported by the Washington Post.

Conventional alternative energy, whose financial lobbying is puny compared to fossil fuel industry, is increasing its support for Washington DC politics. In response, the World Energy Outlook claims “The share of non-hydro renewables in power generation increases from 3% in 2009 to 15% in 2035, underpinned by annual subsidies to renewables that rise almost five-times to $180 billion.”

In an early Ca$h Flow interview with James Martinez, David J. Nagel described a 5-year program to fund cold fusion research; starting at $20 million a year, and ramping up to $40 million annually, a pittance compared to the subsidies for fossil fuels.

An average of $30 million a year for five years to bring cold fusion research to the next phase, and more importantly, as Professor Nagel describes, bring a young group of scientists into this field of research to continue to innovate and drive the next-generation energy for our planet.

The IEA has not taken into a account the new energy technology based on cold fusion, and therefore, their forecast is lacking.

What is not lacking is the scenario of dire consequences should we continue to fund dangerous energy choices, and ignore the solution of ultra-clean and abundant cold fusion energy.

Cold Fusion Now!

Related Links

World Energy Outlook 2011 International Energy Agency home

An update of the G20 Pittsburgh and Toronto Commitments: A new report Joint report by IEA, OPEC, OECD and World Bank on fossil-fuel and other energy subsidies from www.oecd.org

An old Architectural Record from December 1925, with no cover but otherwise in tact, contained eight advertisements for hot water boilers and a lone oil heater for domestic use in the US.

It’s amazing that, despite the technological advances, some things will never change. Hot water and steam are beloved by humans.

Imagine this cold fusion technology network.

This unit consumed 18 tons of coal over a heating season, compared with their neighbors 25 tons of coal. I can't wait to write my testimonial - for one gram of nickle powder every six months!

Let's leave this technology in the last century. Look at all that CO2!

Cold fusion hot water boilers don't need to be connected to a grid giving privacy, independence, and freedom

Small amounts of nickel transmute to copper in a Rossi E-Cat.

What will the next 31 years bring? Will cold fusion be the energy in the year 2043?

Multiple single cells in one unit. Now where have I seen that before?

Can Mr. Rossi rollback prices this low? Go Conchie!

Such is the Power of Word.

Dr. Michael McKubre outlined some of the names used to describe cold fusion.

In this presentation slide below, he notes the vocabulary characterizing various aspects of condensed matter nuclear science.

Names trace the slow awareness of the mechanics of cold fusion reactions.

Dr. McKubre described a few of the terms during the introduction of the lecture.

“All of these terms in red are used to describe what was announced on March 1989 as cold fusion. The term cold fusion actually came from previous work in hot fusion – muon catalyzed hot fusion.

The term stuck, it’s unfortunate, it irritated the physicists. I think the physicists would have been irritated anyway, but this didn’t help.

In attempts to soften the blow we’ve called it low energy nuclear reactions or lattice assisted nuclear reactions – LENR/LANR. Those terms are not very good. Low is subjective and pejorative – you know we don’t really want to produce low energy.

And nuclear is always a bad word. We took the nuclear out of nuclear magnetic resonance and called it magnetic resonance imaging because sociologically, nuclear is not a good term.

Chemically assisted nuclear reactions. A whole slew of things.

The Japanese rather coyly called it new hydrogen energy which really conceals a wealth under that phrase.

If we’re talking about the Fleischmann-Pons Effect, the effect that Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons announced to the world on March 23 which was the electrolytic production of excess energy from a cell containing heavy water D20 and a palladium cathode, then the Fleischmann-Pons Effect is an accurate descriptor.

But the field has expanded vastly beyond that, and we now have an overall terminology condensed matter nuclear science attempting to distinguish what we do from what physicists do with high-energy particles or high-temperature plasmas.”

Each name expresses a particular aspect of a highly elusive process that has defied explanation for more than two decades. As long as there is no definitive theory and scientists are still not sure how this special excess heat effect is initiated, or what the Nuclear Active Environment really is, there will be no definitive name.

The element Helium is correlated with excess heat from the consumption of the hydrogen isotope Deuterium.

In this slide from Dr. McKubre’s presentation, we see excess heat is positively correlated with the production of Helium. The slope of the line represents the rate of change of energy per helium measured and is close to 31 MeV, +/- the error.

Assuming two deuterium nuclei pair up to form a helium nuclei, the measure of the heat generated, or Q-value, would be 24 MeV. Dr. McKubre believes that the observed higher bias may be due to experimental design elements, and that a value closer to the expected 24 MeV Q-value is possible.

These models are based on last century's hot fusion theory of nuclear reactions and do not occur the same way in cold fusion. High-energy particles and dangerous radiation, by-products of hot fusion, are not seen in cold fusion.

That can’t be all that’s going on either, for the excess heat effect is also generated from Nickel-Hydrogen Ni-H systems, which do not use a fuel of deuterium, but the simplest form of hydrogen, protium.

And because elements not originally present in a cell can be created during the process, there is also a transmutation effect, which could be from either fusion or fission inside the atomic matrix, or, some other new nuclear process.

For these outcomes to occur in different systems, creating multiple different effects, implies nuclear reactions occurring beyond conventionally known theories from 20th century physics.

Nevertheless, the name cold fusion reflects this idea of fusion occurring in “cold” circumstances, i.e. not hot plasmas.

“The future of the future is the present.”
Marshall McLuhan

In ancient times, before science, words were magic. Uttering a name gave power and dominion over that thing. Saying a word could bring whole universes into existence.

The Key to Alchemy by Samuel Norton

It will be remembered that Thoth is called the “scribe of the gods,” the “lord of writing,” the “master of papyrus,” the maker of the palette and the ink jar,” the “lord of divine words,” i.e., the holy writings or scriptures, and as he was the lord of books and master of the power of speech, he was considered to be the possessor of all knowledge both human and divine.

Ancient Egyptian god Thoth was a master of words of power.

At the creation of the world it was he who reduced to words the will of the unseen and unknown creative Power, and who uttered them in such ways that the universe came into being, and it was he who proved himself by the exercise of his knowledge to be the protector and friend of Osiris, and of Isis, and of their son Horus. From the evidence of the texts we know that it was not by physical might that Thoth helped these three gods, but by giving them words of power and instructing them how to use them.
E. Wallis Budge Egyptian Magic 1901

What we choose to call this transformational new energy technology will continue to evolve, until the secret formula is unlocked. In an instant, the simple, clear, perfect vision of our clean energy future will be summoned by a new and powerful Name. Scientists in every basement lab and every DOE office will be able to relax for a bit, and then get down to the hard work of implementing a revolution across the globe.

But the kids won’t care. They make up their own names. Change nouns to verbs, verbs to nouns, mess up the plural, create their own magic.

For this year, we’ll stick with Cold Fusion Now, not just cause we mean it, because it fits – and the kids dig it too!

Related Links

SRI International: “What happened to cold fusion?” video lecture with Michael McKubre at Cafe Scientifique by Ruby Carat November 21, 2011

From The Spoilsman: How Congress Corrupted Patent Reform by Zach Carter published on Huffington Post back in October.

“Many people are still looking for work or looking for a job that pays more,” Obama said to a scrum of reporters. “There are more steps that we can take right now that would help businesses create jobs here in America.”

The first item on Obama’s list of immediate, job-creating congressional actions was the passage of patent reform legislation.

“Right now, Congress can send me a bill that would make it easier for entrepreneurs to patent a new product or idea, because we can’t give innovators in other countries a big leg up when it comes to opening new businesses and creating new jobs,” he said.

Besides the fact that the US Patent and Trademark Office re-routes cold fusion/LENR related applications, what else is the problem?

Trolls file hundreds of lawsuits a year over “low quality” patents — lobbyist legal jargon for the questionable or downright bizarre patents routinely granted by the understaffed Patent and Trademark Office. In recent years, patents have been approved for products including a wheeled flower pot (patent No. 7,908,942), the crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich (patent No. 6,004,596), a decorative box that can be placed in a casket (No. 7,908,942) and an accounting scheme that helps people dodge taxes by moving stock options around (No. 6,567,790). Once approved by the patent office, it’s difficult and costly to overturn the patent in courts, which grant significant deference to the office’s decisions.

What does the newly enacted patent reform mean for innovators?

Here’s one view from Paul Morgan from Patently O 2011 Recap: The Practically Important Elements of the America Invents Act of 2011.

Another view comes from Eric Savitz at Forbes US Inventors: Take Heed of the Revised US Patent Law.