book_sargDr. Stoyan Sarg kindly sent me its last and interesting book titled “Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion”. So, I could appreciate his original work and here’s my review for you.

In his long career, Dr. Stoyan Sarg paid particular attention to “fringe science”, which is sometimes mistakenly confused – by the uninformed people – with borderline science. But this certainly is not the case of Dr. Sarg, who just focused his attention on some unsolved problems in Physics.

He investigated the history of physics and scientific publications from different fields, and arrived at an original idea about the relation between matter, space, time and gravitation. As a result, he developed a treatise, called “Basic Structures of Matter – Supergravitation Unified Theory” (BSM-SG), based on a concept of the physical vacuum that had not yet been investigated.

In his book, Dr. Sarg remarks that “quantum mechanical models of the atoms, based on the planetary model of Bohr for hydrogen, are not real physical but mathematical”. Moreover, the remarkable advances achieved in Cold Fusion experiments cannot be explained from the point of view of current physical understanding of nuclear fusion.

This is an obstacle to endorsement and investment in this field. A supporting theory is needed.

The present book – which is quite technical, but it is natural – suggests a new approach for analysis of the results and offers practical recommendations based on the physical models of atomic nuclei derived in the BSM-Supergravitation Unified theory (BSM-SG).

The book, essentially, provides to the reader: (a) a method for analysis Sarg2of the LENR experiments using the BSM-SG atomic models (see the image); (b) a selection of isotopes suitable for a more efficient energy yield with a minimum of radioactive byproducts; (c) practical considerations for selection of the technical method and the reaction environment.

Then, this book is a very good read for all researchers in the field of LENR, both for experienced experimental scientists and for business-oriented newcomers in the hope of getting quick results.

Paperback, ed. 2013 – Pages: 212 – Price: 35.55$. You can buy the book on Amazon here.

About the Author

Dr. Stoyan Sarg – Sargoytchev, a Bulgarian-born Canadian, holds an Engineering diploma and a PhD in Physics. With his 35 years of interdisciplinary work at different scientific institutions, he gathered experience in different fields of physics and technology. He has over 70 scientific publications, popular papers online, four US patents and four books.


Bob_GreenyerI interviewed Bob Greenyer, eclectic entrepreneur and cosmopolitan ideas man who was part of a group that launched the “Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project” (MFMP), the world’s first Live Open Science project, made possible by the creation of a startup focused on LENR research. Here’re his answers:

1) Bob, when and how did you have the idea of a “Live Open Science” project? And what is the main goal of your efforts?

“I had always been frustrated by the way important science seemed to be done. I wanted science to be engaging for the wider public, so they could be part of the discovery process. The kernel of the idea occurred to me when I wrote my degree thesis some 21 years ago following exposure to the collaborative power of the early internet, but it wasn’t until early 2012 that I saw the opportunity for its application. The name came later, after the formation of the project to describe what we were doing. Our main goal is to show to the world there is a new, practical, primary energy source we call the New Fire”.

2) Your replication attempt of the Celani’s experiment with a surface modified constantan wire reactor began in 2013. What was the target and what results have been obtained?

“Our target was to replicate the claims of excess heat made by Francesco Celani at National Instruments Week, USA, and ICCF-17, Korea, both in 2012. It was a truly courageous thing of Francesco to release his part explored work. The target was to seek truth. We found excess heat signals of up to 12.5%, but that was below Celani’s findings which was disappointing. We later discovered oversight and other aspects of Celani’s original experiment that retrospectively adjusted his output to be in line with our own, which was satisfying”.

3) Can you tell us something about the other types of experiments going on right now? Can you say in a few lines what results they aim to achieve?

“Other than the on-going Celani experiments in Switzerland and France, in the US, Ryan Hunt’s team has completed the first phase of testing of our new generation of powder cells using Nickel powders with Hydrogen, so far we only saw low single digit excess percent, which is of little interest. Second phase is to include Iron Oxide based catalyst and Lithium Hydrides. The Tesla technology based electrical discharge cell inspired by Stoyan Sarg will first test Ahern powder + Hydrogen before adding Lithium Hydrides. In France, Mathieu Valat continues to collaborate with Jean-Paul Biberian on Mizuno style cells”.

4) What can you tell us of your most recent project of E-Cat replication just started, “Project Dog Bone”, and of the setup of such experiment?

“Well, firstly, it cannot be a replication as we are not party to all of the facts. Initially, the so-called []=Project Dog Bone=[] will test the thermal characteristics of a reactor made from similar materials to that tested in Lugano, this study will add valuable data for others to consider. We will then take a best guess at what is in the reactor and how it is controlled and attempt to re-create the effect. Even if we do see something similar, it may still not be considered a replication, it may be another approach that produces a similar effect”.

5) Nobody is the owner of the IP of what you’ll find, right? But this could delay a LENR product to the market. What’s your opinion about it?

“The old fire serves all of humanity, directly or indirectly, every day, regOpen_Science2ardless of IP, so it will be with the New Fire. Since the New Fire promises to be better in nearly every way, once clearly demonstrated, I see no problem with delivery other than by deliberate obstruction by vested interests. Good companies make billions on cars and smart devices and the basics of the internal combustion engine and Linux are open. Furthermore, the extreme importance of the New Fire would make international bodies force IP holders to provide affordable licensing of the technology to all”.

6) Your target is to raise 500.000$ to pay for equipment, the materials and anything else. In which forms and ways can a person contribute?

“Firstly, people can contribute by openly collaborating with us or by following what we do, spreading the word and scouring the literature for useful insights. Also, donation of time and equipment is very helpful. In fact we have 3 research groups wishing to join our effort and we need resources to help support them. Our work is primarily made possible by donations and individual donations of up to $1000 can be made via quantumheat.org, or if people are able to contribute more they can contact us via the same website. We really want to accelerate our work, support new teams, improve our website, build rich media for better LENR communication and take on more permanent lab hands, so today we are announcing our new initiative called the ‘Fusion Fund‘”.

7) Already the name “Fusion Fund” sounds nice… What is it, exactly?

“It is a match fund and has 3 components:

1. Quantum Heat Inc – a 501.c.3 US charity registered in California;
2. Big ticket donation pledges that provide matching funds;
3. Donations by the crowd, either directly on the website, or to the US charity.

We are looking for philanthropic individuals or organizations to pledge $10,000 or more to the 501.c.3 that will be called upon as matching funds. When any other donations are received, they catalyze a reaction causing fusion with a matching fund, the smaller donor sees their contribution doubled and a match fund provider, depending on their tax rate, could see up to a quadrupling of their effective donation – this is a COP of 4!”.

8) Definitely an original idea, but I know that there is another little scoop for the readers…

“Yes, we hope to secure a number of match fund pledges, but the great news is, that for next year, we have already received two pledges of $20,000 or more which, when triggered by crowd donations, will yield $80,000. Of course, we need the small donations to make this happen, so the crowd is the key! All donations under $1000 since October 8th 2014 will be matched in this way. Thank you to every contributor – we’re lighting the New Fire together.”

BOB GREENYER holds a bachelor of Engineering and a Manufacturing Engineering degree from Brunel University, London. He co-founded Quantum Heat C.I.C., a not-for-profit Community Interest Company registered in United Kingdom.


I received from Eng. Ventola the following article specifically focused on the E-Cat technology: in this case, on a “Type I” design of the Hot-Cat reactor tested by third parties:

The picture here below, published in a skinny version in the patent application filed by Industrial Heat on April 26, 2014, shows a layered tubular reactor device (Fig. 1), also represented in cross-sectional view (Fig. 2). It can be described as Energy Catalyzer HT, where HT stands for “high temperature” and it is the first of three different embodiments described in such patent application, so for sake of simplicity hereinafter I’ll indicate it as “E-Cat HT – I’“.

Fig1-2_Patent_2Diagram of a reactor device E-Cat HT “Type I design”  (from IH’s patent, slightly modified).
You can use this image provided that you leave its attribution and a proper link.

This reactor, with the charge non evenly distributed but concentrated in two distinct locations along the central axis of the reactor, was used in the first of the three tests described in the first Third Party Report (TPR-1), performed in November 2012 (see the table below about the TPR tests on Hot-Cat reactors). Such test failed, due to the overheating and melting of the steel cylinder containing the active charge and the surrounding ceramic layers.

Tests_TPRAll the tests described in the Third Party Reports released from the scientists Levi et al.

According to the description given in the cited patent and integrating the info contained on this issue in the TPR-1, a sealed steel inner tube (110) included a cylindrical wall (112) that extended between two end caps (114). The inner tube contained reaction charges (116) in two distinct longitudinal locations. A first cylindrical ceramic shell layer (118) surrounded the inner tube.

Each of 16 resistor coils (120) extended the length of the interior of the reactor device between the inner cylindrical ceramic shell layer and a more outer cylindrical ceramic shell layer. The resistor coils were circumferentially distributed around the inner cylindrical ceramic shell layer to produce uniformly distributed heating when electrical current was passed through the coils.

According to the patent application, the resistor coils were operated continuously at about 1 kW to perform experimental investigations of heat production. Once operating temperature is reached, it is possible to control the reaction by regulating the power to the coils.

IR_ImageAn IR thermal image of the November 2012 test device. Area 1 is at 793 °C. The temperature dips visible in the diagram on the right are shadows of the resistor coils, projected on the IR thermal camera lens by a source of energy of higher intensity located inside the device.

The reactor device was charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel powder. However the fuel was, more precisely, a mixture of nickel, hydrogen and a catalyst consisting, according to the TPR-1, of some “additives” pressurized with the hydrogen gas and not disclosed being an industrial trade secret (I hope to discuss this topic in a future article).

The E-Cat HT-I is a further high-temperature development of the original apparatus described in detail in the old patent application WO 2009125444, which has also undergone many changes in the last years. As in the original E-Cat, the powder charge activated by heat produced by the resistor coils produces excess heat from some type of reaction.

As said before, the reactor was destroyed in the course of the experimental run.

Before melting, it looked just like in the picture below, where you can see the shining charges distributed laterally in the reactor and the horizontal darker lines, corresponding to the shadows of the resistor coils, projected outward by a source of thermal energy located further inside the device, and of higher intensity as compared to the energy emitted by the coils themselves.

E-Cat_HT_I_2The E-Cat HT “Type I design” during the Third Party test performed on November 20, 2012.

This is evidence of an exothermic reaction that occurred within the inner tube.

The test was fruitful also because it demonstrated in a more direct way, i.e. completely destroying the entire reactor, a huge production of excess heat, which however could not be quantified. The device had similar, but not identical, features to those of the reactors used in the December 2012 and March 2013 TPR-1’s runs, which I’ll illustrate in detail in my future contributes.

R. Ventola – Electrical engineer


bill-gates2Bill Gates, co-founder and main shareholder of Microsoft, but also the richest and perhaps the most influential person in the world, has been interested for a long time in the activities in the field of frontier research.

Indeed, Gates has come a long way from when he was a teenager prodigy obsessed with writing computer codes, at the beginning of a four decades career leading to a digital revolution. Now, the “Bill Gates 2.0”, left Microsoft some years ago, can work full-time together with his wife Melinda giving his money away – he has a 67 billion dollar fortune – to make the world a better place, and he thinks that inventions are the key to success, a way to accomplish this goal.

In the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in Seattle, there are over 1100 employees to help them decide which programs to fund, but Gates still visits sites around the world to see what works and what does not. And now one of Gates’ boldest and – as he says – most important adventures is to build a new kind of nuclear reactor. It would burn depleted uranium making it cleaner, safer and cheaper than today’s reactors. He hopes to have a prototype around 2022.

Gates_reactorBill Gates illustrating to a US journalist the great advantages of “his” nuclear reactor.

But he’s an optimist and still looking for new ideas and challenges.

So, it is not a surprise that Wednesday, after a meeting with the Italian Foreign Minister Paolo Gentiloni, Gates visited the ENEA, i.e. the former Italian National Agency for Alternative Energies, which in 2009 organized the 15th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-15) in Rome, last year sponsored ICCF-18 held in the USA, and was engaged in the field of LENR also with an agreement signed in 2010 with the US Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) and with many collaborations involving American Institutions and Universities.

Accompanied by the new head of ENEA Federico Testa, Gates toured the labs located near Rome, in Frascati, for a few hours, giving to its researchers – as prof. Vittorio Violante, who is the LENR Research Coordinator at the ENEA headquarters and responsible for the ENEA Task Force for Energy from Metal Hydrogen Systems since 2011 – the opportunity to describe in detail the research carried out by the Institute, which now is close to an economic agreement about funding by Bill Gates or by his Foundation for some research projects.

According to the present journalists, Gates first heard a presentation of the ENEA’s activities and then focused on cold fusion, frontier research in the field of nuclear fusion, sector in which these laboratories represent a center of excellence. Indeed, this is one of the world’s leading centers in nuclear fusion research, laser sources and particle accelerators since the ’50s, among the first to build a sophisticated machinery for fusion studies: the Tokamak Upgrade.

It’s quite funny that “Mr. Microsoft” was interested especially in LENR, a small research field also for the ENEA, whose activity is now directed mainly towards the development of technologies for magnetic and inertial confinement fusion, being involved in the project ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor), so giving contributions in the fields of superconductivity, new materials, neutronics, security, remote handling and plasma physics.

Leonardo_Da_Vinci_CodeBill Gates seems very attracted by the Italian genius… here is showing his Da Vinci Codex.

Surely, Bill Gates 2.0 could better satisfy his deep curiosity towards inventions and Cold Fusion with a trip in Raleigh, USA. In 1994, he bought for $30 Millions the Da Vinci Codex – one of about 30 scientific paper left by the Italian genius Leonardo Da Vinci – which now is in his private office and is shown proudly to the guests. I wonder if Bill Gates’ recent and strong interest for LENR was just inspired by another Italian genius, but this is another story… 😉


Cover_Panorama2I was very pleased to see that my book E-Cat – The New Fire, not more than a few days after its publication, is on the main Italian magazine!

Indeed, a detailed newspaper article on the E-Cat, fruit of a long interview with Andrea Rossi and including a wide review of my book, has just been published on the latest issue of “Panorama” (November 12, n°47).

The title of the article is simply: “An ingenious physicist?” (the Italian original title is “Un fisico geniale?”). The author is the journalist and writer Raffaele Panizza.

With a circulation of 303.422 copies (in June 2013), Panorama is an Italian weekly magazine of current events and politics published by the most important publisher of books and magazines existing in Italy: Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA, better known as Mondadori.

This magazine addresses world and national news, political analysis, society, economy, health, science and technology reviews, and can be considered the Italian equivalent of the weekly Time in USA, of Der Spiegel in Germany or of L’Express in France.

The interview with Andrea was a real scoop for the skilled journalist author of the article, because now Rossi only very rarely (to say the least) gives interviews to Italian newspapers.

Page1-2_small

The beginning of the long article on Andrea Rossi, the E-Cat and my book.

Here’s a translation of the article summary published in the highlights of the last issue that you can find in the Panorama’s website: “Andrea Rossi is a much discussed entrepreneur: he was able to prPage3_small2oduce nuclear energy at low temperature. His project, the E-Cat, that for the first time realizes the cold fusion, has received the imprimatur of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. And the license was sold to a start-up in North Carolina, which in one year should put on the market the first megawatt plant: the price is $ 1 million“.

Finally, only a couple of brief excerpts from the positive and well-documented article:

“Andrea Rossi from Caponago saw rewarded his Faustian perseverance. A Prometheus which, for stealing the fire from the gods, accepted that the eagle gnawed his liver for two decades”, and “Also the Relativity of Einstein was considered a joke for a long time. Here it is no longer science. It is frontier”.


My photo that showed Rossi’s lab seems to have caught the attention of many people, hundreds of whom have visited this website. The image was literally passed to the “X-ray”.

Rays_X

I read the comments appeared on various Italian and international blogs and forums, so I would like to summarize here the most interesting observations. I think that makes sense, given that many of the measurement instruments seem identical to those used in the 2nd independent test.

According to andrea.s, an engineer who writes also on Cobraf: “A 3-phase supply is applied in a star configuration (3 phase 4 wire) to the 3 Hot-Cats”, but “each Hot-Cat is powered by one phase line and connected to a common neutral daisy-chained from one Hot-Cat to another. Wiring is so long, and neutral wiring length so uneven, that there can be no “electromagnetic pulses” other than the 50 Hz sinusoid fractioned by the AC regulator thyristors”.

The electrical engineer Bob Higgins, on Vortex, is substantially of the same opinion: “Each Hot-Cat is connected with 2-wires only: each is connected single-phase! This probably means that the Hot-Cat only relies on heat-up, not magnetic field interaction – certainly not rotating field interaction. So replication does not need to use a 3-phase heater coil inside the Hot-Cat because there is no need to simulate an industrial environment”.

Cables

A reader on E-Cat World points out: “The use of 3-phase power during testing inadvertently sidetracked many independent observers when in reality it was just a convenience for management or equipment reasons”. And AlainCo writes on LENR Forum: “It is designed for industrial application where phase balance is important. As soon as you consume few dozen kW, the electric company asks you to use 3-phase and to balance your consumption”.

On Vortex Bob Higgins adds, about the gray box in the photo: “The gray box controller is controlling the energy to all 3 Hot-Cats via the red 3-phase SCR controller in such a way as to control the temperature of each Hot-Cat independently. This gray box controller is designed to control each Hot-Cat solely based on 1 temperature measurement per Hot-Cat”.

Higgins also clarifies its function: “The temperature controllers mounted on the gray box are probably each controlling the set-point of each Hot-Cat (i.e. they are not being used just as temperature meters). A microcontroller in the gray box may read each meter (RS232) and then sets the SCR angle for that phase to control the power to each Hot-Cat”.

Socket_LabWave

The engineer Gerard McEk on E-Cat World instead focuses his attention on the little yellow paper on the bottom left corner of the table (see the image above): “It shows the shape of the currents due to the triac control. It seems that Andrea Rossi is also interested in that shape. If the triac controller was just installed to control the heat input, you would not be very interested in the shape of the currents”.

Finally, ThomasM observes, like many other readers elsewhere: “When I look at the electrical installation on the walls it’s an American type installation, not Italian sockets”. And Andre Blum adds: “Also the extension cord / splitter on the ground is one found typically in the US”.

Better than Sherlock Holmes! 😉


I intervieweAndreuccettid Piero Andreuccetti, an experienced Italian nuclear engineer who has always worked in the energy sector and follows the LENR for many years. Here he exposes us his interesting personal view and position on the subject.

1) Dr. Andreuccetti, do you remember when and how did you get interested in LENR for the first time?

“In mid Nineties, by chance, I heard of Randell Mills researches on ‘Hydrino’. His activity seemed to be connected with the 1989 Fleischmann & Pons’ announcement about Cold Nuclear Fusion obtained at (almost) room temperature by means of electrolysis experiments. But while in 1989 I had not been so excited by F&P discovery, because I had not seen a possibility to turn it into a readily available new energy source, when I heard of Mills discoveries I get more interested, also because of some contacts I had in Westinghouse at those times, confirming that some excess heat had been provisionally measured on Mills’ device”.

2) You followed the recent developments in the LENR sector. Do you think that we’re on the edge of an energy revolution?

“Not yet on the edge, but something is going to happen in a few years. Because too many signs are starting to find their way to emerge from the realm of the so called ‘junk science’ and acquire a new dignity among mainstream researchers. Just for instance: Brian Ahern is obtaining results with his LENR experiments at MIT, the same Institute that dismissed as ‘heretical’ F&P results 25 years ago… But one thing is sure: if an energy revolution will take place, it won’t be by a Government decree or Academia move: market battlefield will decide, if and when some LENR devices will have proved their economic convenience, their safety and dependability”.

3) Today would you recommend to a small company with no experience in this field to invest in research on LENR?

“Right now LENR is still a slippery field, because of several reasons: LENR phenomena are difficult to replicate, powers generated by these experiments – Rossi’s E-Cat excluded – are still too small to be of industrial interest, and poor understanding of the physics underlying LENR on the one hand prevents from an effective assessment of risks associated with a massive research activity in this field, while on the other does not allow a R&D effort that ‘makes sense’ in order to scale lab devices up to marketable apparatus… Public support would be strongly needed to absorb risks, but it is largely impeded by the adverse Academia lobbying”.

4) What do you think are the main advantages of a technology such as that underlying an E-Cat compared to the renewables?

“Renewables, I mean photovoltaic and wind energy, are quite dispersed and basically not-depenEnergydable. Up to date, feeding an extended and highly demanding energy system by only means of renewables is simply impossible: as a matter of fact, fossil energy sources are unavoidable. Well, a marketable E-Cat – and I make the point that Renewables and LENR are to be regarded as integrable rather than as alternative – would enable a credible exit strategy from traditional energy sources… such a scenario that presently is difficult also to simply figure out”.

5) Do you think that there are now enough available information to have a good chance of independently replicating an E-Cat?

“The last Independent Third Party Report (ITPR) about an E-Cat long lasting test has shed more light on how this device is made and actually works. Evidence of Nickel and Lithium isotopic changes throughout the test allows for a deeper analysis of the physical processes taking places in the E-Cat and, consequently, paves the way for a possible independent replication. In this respect, let’s consider that the first public tests performed on the E-Cat had been done on Andrea Rossi’s made devices, while the last ITPR has been conducted on an Industrial Heat’s made apparatus. This is already a replication, though not completely independent”.

6) If you owned the IP of the E-Cat, would you risk to lose it allowing to third parties an isotopic analysis of fuel and ash?

“As far as IP protection is concerned, my opinion is that allowing a completely open and independent third party isotopic analysis of fuel and ash is risky enough… I understand scientific method needs, but real industrial world need adequate self-defence measures. And I repeat: E-Cat success, if any, will not happen by a general consensus decided in a number of Academia congresses… market will decide, and going on the market imply IP protection, engineering, marketing, etc. Epistemology, though important, will come after”.

PIERO ANDREUCCETTI, Nuclear Engineer, is the Property and Technical Services Manager at CESI SpA, in Milan, Italy. He has a Ph.D. in Safety of Nuclear Power Plants obtained at the University of Pisa, and a Maitrise en Management at the Université libre de Bruxelles.


Pat_IH_coverIt has just been published, in the database of the US Patent Office (USPTO), a patent application (doc here) filed on April 26, 2014 by Industrial Heat, regarding some types of high-temperature E-Cats, or “Hot-Cats”.

Title: Devices and Methods for Heat Generation.

I immediately asked for an opinion about this doc to some my friends engineers and here’s the interesting information and material that I’ve collected so far:

“It seems a very important document. The most relevant part probably regards the COP reached by a Hot-Cat.

Already in the ‘summary’ of the patent application (page 1) we read that the best Hot-Cat has a minimum COP of 5.0: “In at least one example, a ratio defined by dividing the output amount of thermal energy by the input amount of energy exceeds 5.0”. And it is precisely the definition of Coefficient of Performance (COP).

In the ‘experimental results’ of the patent application, describing instead a test on a multiple reactor device, we read that a COP of 11.07 was measured using water calorimetry.

In particular, we read (page 15): “A total number of 18 reactors devices including a reaction chamber in which nickel powder and hydrogen react in the presence of a catalyst were used. Each of the reactors may absorb a power of about 1.1 kW”.

In such test, according to the patent application presented by Industrial Heat:

1) A 300 kW power generation provided the input electrical energy to trigger reaction initiation.

2) In order to be conservative, ALL the energy produced by the generator was assumed to be absorbed by the 18 reactors. In reality, a part of this energy fed the pumps which convey the water in the calorimeter and so would not have gone to feed the reactors.

3) The temperature of the outlet steam was always significantly higher than 100 degree Celsius.

4) In order to be conservative, was not taken into account the heating energy of steam. Moreover, for the same reason the temperature of the inlet water was always considered equal to the maximum value of the same measured during the whole test.

5) The COP was considered only during the period in which the reactor devices were operating: it was not considered during the phases of activation and de-activation.

Minimum_COP3

Figure 9 of the IH’s Patent Application (the colored text was added for sake of clarity).

In other words, now we know for the first time that the COP of many Hot-Cats were measured using not only the infrared thermographic calorimetry, but also with a different and more accurate method, the water calorimetry. The results appear to be consistent and surprising”.

Well, this should put the word “end” to the majority of speculations and doubts on the COP!


Cover2It was published this week, in the latest issue of the bi-annual magazine Elforsk Perspektiv, an article on the 2nd Third Party Report (TPR-2) and on the Hot-Cat. The title: “Isotopic changes indicate ‘Cold’ nuclear reaction: Elforsk following developments“.

Elforsk Perspektiv is a trade magazine published by Swedish energy R&D organization Elforsk AB, which since a couple of years takes a very serious look at LENR and partly financed the two tests on the Hot-Cat performed in 2013 and in early 2014.

The article covers the results obtained in the last independent test, including the isotopic analysis of fuel and ash. So, the contents are not new, but it is significant that an important national industry organization is taking the LENR, and especially Industrial Heat‘s E-Cat, more and more seriously.Art_Eng

Indeed, the involvement of Elforsk began in 2012, when it was asked by a group of Swedish scientists to support the evaluation of an invention: the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. After the first positive evaluation conducted by Swedish and Italian researchers, they budgeted 230,000 Euros per year in 2013 and 2014 for further investigation on the E-Cat.

Soon after the release of the 2nd Third Party Report, Elforsk published in its website an article in which the CEO Magnus Oloffsson said about such report the following words:

“Clear isotope changes in the analyzed fuel indicate nuclear reactions at low temperatures. It suggests that we may be facing a new way to extract nuclear energy, probably without ionizing radiation and radioactive waste. The discovery could eventually become very important for the world’s energy supply”.

You can read the article clicking on the pictures in this post to obtain a hi-res image. Below is the original version in Swedish (page on the left), above you’ll find the English translation.

Elforsk_mag_2


Had you ever seen an high-res photo of Rossi with three Hot-Cats all together? Now you have… 😉

Laboratory

As promised, this is the whole picture of a part of the large Rossi’s laboratory in Ferrara, Italy.

It shows Andrea Rossi and three Hot-Cats. The photo was taken on September 26, 2013, with a good quality camera of an Apple smartphone using a flash, even if no reflections are visible because the shot was taken from a quite great distance and from above a loft.

You are free to publish this picture in your blog or article, provided that you put a link to the source.

If you click on the image I’ve posted, you can see the original photo, where you can distinguish many details, such as the title of the book that Rossi was reading: “The particle at the end of the Universe“, by Sean Carroll, winner of the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books.

On the table we can also see some notes, whereas for the technical part I refer to my sources:

“On the left, there is a Neutron Dose Analog Ratemeter produced by Ludlum Measurements Inc. (see photo below), that can detect fast and slow neutrons eventually emitted from the reactors. The instrument to the right of the near notebook is, probably, a Geiger Counter.

SquareD

Detector

The second gray box on the main table is a Safety Switch, model Square D, produced by Schneider Electric (see photo above on the right). It provides an effective way to interrupt power in an emergency. You’ll find other photos and the specs here.

It seems that only one of the thermocouples used to measure the temperatures of the single reactors is now connected to the other gray box, which could then be used to stabilize the reactor or for producing, if and when necessary, the ‘electro-magnetic stimulation‘ cited in the 2nd TPR”.


Japan-CF-SocietyThe event of these days, for those who follow the LENR, is the 15-th Meeting of Japan Cold Fusion Research Society (JCF-15, November 1-2), which hold in Sapporo.

Japan is a country that, despite still using the energy from nuclear fission, is also strongly investing in cold fusion research, having focused on this sector well before the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.

In the past, Japan scientists showed that cold fusion is a real physical phenomenon. Yoshiaki Arata (Physics professor at University of Osaka, now retired), a former hot-fusionist, was a highly respected cold fusion pioneer in this country, opening the way to others.

So, it is not a surprise to find today, in the program of JCF-15, scientific contributes coming from big companies focusing on high technology, like Mitsubishi (Iwamura et al.) and Technova Inc. (Takahashi, Kitamura et al.), but also from smaller realities such as Hydrogen Eng A&D Co. (Mizuno et al.), as well as researches from Universities and other institutions.Japan_Cold_Fusion

Looking at the abstracts, who is interested in trying to replicate an E-Cat could find intriguing the study presented by Kitamura: “Comparison of some Ni-based Nano-composite Samples with respect to Excess Heat Evolution under Exposure to Hydrogen Isotope Gas” (see below).

Also the contribute by Takahashi, “Is Gamma-Less Transmutation Possible?”, sounds interesting.

My sensation, however, is that in Japan the CF research is still very far from practical applications. 

You can find the program and all the abstracts of the Japan Cold Fusion meeting here.

KitmUPDATE! – A summary of the interesting presentation by Kitamura et al. (click for enlarge). If you are interested, you can download the full document directly from here.