We published Issue 34 of New Energy Times on Jan. 31. In it,
we reveal how scientists at
SRI International and MIT, claiming
evidence for the theory of "cold fusion," have misled the
their peers, the Department of Energy and the reviewers of the
2004 DoE LENR review.
Although the LENR phenomenon may not be D-D "cold fusion,"
it is nuclear and provides hope for a new source of clean energy.
Since NET34 published, we have received no response, let alone
corrections, from any of the
principal subjects of the story,
Michael McKubre (SRI International), Peter Hagelstein (MIT
and Naval Postgraduate School) and Vittorio Violante (ENEA
Frascati). The three are members
of an informal consortium
collaborated on research, publications, intellectual
and shared in federally funded LENR research.
We have received a few interesting comments on our blog, and we
For your convenience, here is a summary of the meaning and
implications of NET34:
1. "24 MeV/4He" Does Not Exist
Contrary to what the public has heard and believed, the
purported best evidence for the theory of low-energy nuclear
reactions as a "cold fusion" reaction, specifically
the highly promoted claim of ~24 MeV/4He, does not exist.
2. Helium-4 Is Not Expected*
Helium-4 is a rare product of D-D thermonuclear fusion. Its
finding in LENR in significant quantities is inconsistent with
thermonuclear fusion. Its promotion by the subgroup as
evidence of D-D "cold fusion" is misleading.
3. Only a Subgroup Is Responsible
A subgroup of the LENR field comprising some of the most
prominent leaders of the field (mostly Americans) is primarily
responsible for causing this misperception.
4. Other Potential Energetic Processes Discarded
The subgroup misled the public into believing that excess
heat and non-energetic helium-4 were the only confirmed
evidence for LENR. This distracted the public from more
closely analyzing why the D-D "cold fusion" hypothesis fell
so short in explaining the many other observed phenomena
5. Experimental Evidence of LENR Is Strong
The consequences of attempting to sell people and the U.S.
government on the speculative, unsupported theory of
"cold fusion" caused them to have less confidence in the
very real and strong experimental evidence of LENR.
6. LENR Progress Delayed
The subgroup's efforts to promote its "cold fusion" theory
have come at the expense of the acceptance and recognition
of the entire LENR field.
NET34 contains these six articles:
1. Editorial: An Incoherent Explanation of LENR
(An expanded version of the four points listed above)
2. The Emergence of an Incoherent Explanation for D-D "Cold Fusion"
(The feature story, 3,971 words, excluding the abstract)
3. Inexplicable D-D "Cold Fusion" Claims From Italy
(How Italian researchers played a role)
4. U.S. Department of Energy 2004 LENR Review: The Inside Story
(How American and Italian researchers attempted to spin the DoE)
5. Revisions to Previously Reported MeV/4He Values
6. A Tragic Event in LENR History
(About a murder)
To view NET34 on the Web:
NET34 Slideshow: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/34/4HeRetention-Slide1-100.shtml
Both documents are also available as printable PDF files:
NET34 Slideshow: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/34/NET34Slides-IncoherentExplanation.pdf
Again, let this be crystal clear: Although the LENR phenomenon may
not be D-D "cold fusion," it is nuclear and provides hope for
a new source of clean energy.
Steven B. Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
* See blog comment by William Collis