Andrea Rossi with Sergio Focardi consulting made news in January with a demonstration of the Rossi design of a nickel hydrogen fueled low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) reactor. The past month has been pretty quiet in much of the world where the noose of established science has no temperament for things not already successfully through its own peer review.

Rossi and Focardi at the Italy Demonstration January 2011

But outside of the science establishment lacking curiosity and vision the press has caught on  – which leaves most of the news in foreign languages.  Most notable is Italy, Rossi’s and Focardi’s native land is proudly reporting as well the Greek and Swedish press as well as across Europe, and there is a factory in Greece due to run a commercial demonstration later this year.

But for those of us where the science chooses to be blind and offers a nasty treatment for those willing to proceed, the progress comes as welcome news.  That brings us to America’s most noteworthy scientist on cold fusion – Edmund Storms.

Dr. Edmund Storms was just back from Chennai, India where the International Conference on Cold Fusion 16 (ICCF-16) took place when James Martinez arranged an interview that played for his Cash-Flow listeners on March 1. The ICCF-16 is a conference where researchers in low-energy nuclear reactions share their most recent results.  Mr. Martinez taped the interview in conjunction with 137 Films crew filming their documentary on cold fusion. To be released in late summer, it is expected to make the independent film festival rounds.

Now Dr. Storms is a long-time private researcher in cold fusion and author of “The Science of Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions“. Storms obtained a Ph.D. in radiochemistry from Washington University (St. Louis) and is retired from the Los Alamos National Laboratory after thirty-four years of service. His work at Los Alamos involved basic research in the field of high temperature chemistry as applied to materials used in nuclear power and propulsion reactors, including studies of the “cold fusion” effect.  Seventy reviewed publications and monographs resulted from Storm’s work at Los Alamos as well as several books, all describing an assortment of material properties.

Storms own cold fusion work has resulted in fifteen presentations to various conferences including the American Chemical Society and American Physics Society. In addition, twenty-one papers have been published including four complete scientific reviews of the field, one published in 1991, another in 1996 and 1998, and the latest in 2000. A critical evaluation of the Pons-Fleischmann Effect was published in 2000. In May 1993, he was invited to testify before a congressional committee about the “cold fusion” effect. In 1998, Wired magazine honored him as one of the 25 people who is making a significant contribution to new ideas.

Dr. Storms is no lightweight, and hasn’t risen to the bait of the cold fusion deniers.  Retired and happy to be curious, he must drive the establishment a bit nuts.

Martinez’ interview with Storms has been condensed in text at ColdFusionNow.  The full audio podcast is this link running a bit under 24 minutes with a couple of minutes up front of music and introduction.  For those interested in the highlights they are as follows:

Storms on the situation of the Rossi and Focardi reactor: “They [Rossi and Focardi] found a way of amplifying the effect to a level that makes it attractive as an industrial source of energy and people in the cold fusion field have been working towards that, but they had not achieved that level of heat production, and so this was both a bit of a surprise and a bit shock, but a bit of a kick to get people moving a little more rapidly now. And it looks like the phenomenon will actually have an application.”

His thoughts on the science status: “We’ve arrived. It’s interesting we’ve arrived in a different car than we thought we were. Cold fusion started out using deuterium and palladium, and then Rossi found that it worked quite well in nickel and light hydrogen.”

On Rossi’s path to discovery: “Rossi hit upon this somewhat by accident. He was using a nickel catalyst to explore ways of making a fuel by combining hydrogen and carbon monoxide and apparently, observed quite by accident, that his [apparatus] was making extra energy. So then he explored it from that point of view and, apparently, over a year or two, amplified the effect.”

“He’s exploring the gas loading area of the field. This is also a region, a method used in the heavy water, or the heavy hydrogen, system. But in this case, it was light hydrogen, ordinary hydrogen and nickel and what happens is quite amazing.”

“You create the right conditions in the nickel, and he has a secret method for doing that, and all you do is add hydrogen to it and it makes huge amounts of energy based upon a nuclear reaction.”

Storm’s thoughts on the secrecy: “Well, you really need a patent, you need to protect your intellectual property. You want to be able to gain some economic benefit from the discovery. So far, they have not gotten a patent, and that’s always been difficult in the cold fusion field because the patent examiners simply don’t believe that it’s real.”

“So, until they get a patent, they’re not revealing how they do it. Now, they’ve been upfront about what they can do and what they promise to do, and so far, they’ve fulfilled these promises. Once they get their patent, then they promise to reveal how they go about doing this.”

Storm’s thoughts about the coverage both where its well covered and not: On the covered side, “The Swedish newspapers, the Italian newspapers, the Greek newspapers, they showed an interest. The American newspapers showed none at all. It’s been on a number of blogs and talked about in a number of chat rooms, but no, it hasn’t reached a level of any serious importance to the American press.”

Not covered, “Mainly because, it is institutionally the belief that cold fusion is not real, or if it is real, it’s so trivial, it’d make no difference to anybody. That’s institutional. It’s the myth that’s in, we’ll call it, the intellectual structure of the United States, and a number of other countries.”

And Storm’s knowledge of national support, “There are a few countries where that’s not true, and Italy is one of them. The government there believes that it’s real, and they’re doing everything they can to develop it. The government in China believes it’s real and they’re doing everything they can to develop it.”

And lastly, Dr. Storms offers this bit of news: “Rossi . . . (has)  . . .  promised a demonstration in Florida that’s coming up in October. And there will be some people from the U.S. government there watching, and hopefully they will be convinced that it’s real and that will change the attitudes.”

Storms confirms what others have suggested, Rossi has business interests in the U.S. and will try to build at the Florida factory he owns a full one megawatt unit made up of one hundred cells similar to the single cell seen at the Italy demonstration.

For now the news has come in a bit distant and subjective form.  While little is known about the technology, Rossi has built up a lot of street type credibility – and there is no motive in sight for some sort of financial or business misbehaving.

This writer isn’t doing a lot of thinking or imagining about the Rossi effort.  But there is certainly a discernable feeling of satisfaction that the science so long denigrated has a foothold in the real world of business and industry.

When the orders fill and business reduces the grid demand some in established science are going to be much more busy with the “why weren’t we” while others will be looking for what other cold fusion ideas might go commercial.  Not putting your pants down on purpose is lesson well worth repeating  – again.


334 Comments so far

  1. Albert Kong on March 9, 2011 8:49 AM

    I have read about the close mindedness of the middle ages where we presume that religious influences were the dominant factor. Never thought I would be living through it myself in our present modern age. The factors appear to be more dogmatic egocentricism and economic now rather than religious. I am wondering whether that was the case too in the past age.

    Kudos to Dr. Storms (in essence a chemist) for acknowledging the breakthrough of competitors Engs. Rossi and Focardi (engineers) for the sake of the science. Very admirable.

  2. BFast on March 9, 2011 12:23 PM

    I am excited to see another report on the Rossi machine on new energy. Back in February published a report on an 18 hour test done by a semi-independent scientist ( 18 hours provides a lot of proof! However, the scientist that did the study is a colleague of Rossi, so the challenge of true independence hasn’t been reached.

    This small machine put out about 20 horsepower for 18 hours using a 1 liter fuel container(nickel and hydrogen). There is no evidence that it ran out of fuel. If this thing isn’t a fraud, if the nickel used is not some specific hard to refine isotope (hard to believe as Rossi doesn’t seem to have that advanced of equipment) then the world is about to change.

    Despite the rise in oil prices I’m holding off investing as I think when this thing breaks through the glass ceiling the price of oil will be rocked.

  3. Andrea Rossi’s and Sergio Focardi’s Cold Fusion Reactor Status update « sourceofrealnews on March 9, 2011 1:30 PM

    […] Source: New Energy and Fuel. […]

  4. Mikaela on March 10, 2011 4:57 AM

    Chat with Andrea Rossi tomorrow about his invention!!!
    mvh MN

  5. marco on March 12, 2011 10:52 AM

    @Albert Kong, agree with you, please notice that Dr. Focardi is not an engineer but rather a theoretical physicist involved since more than 2 decades in the research field of LENR at University of Bologna, Italy.

  6. JP Straley on March 13, 2011 9:31 AM

    In light of the Japanese earthquake and the nuclear power plant problems, the Rossi technology could not have come at a better time.

    If it is unequivocally demonstrated, who can doubt that Japan will be first in line!

    JP Straley

  7. John Jan on March 14, 2011 1:52 AM

    Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi Ni-H generator works indeed. But it has nothing to do with nuclear reactions or fusion. It is rediscovered ancient technology. IT IS ALCHEMY.

  8. Wtf John Jan on March 17, 2011 10:14 AM

    WTF John Jan? Are you an idiot? You suck at life.

  9. BFast on March 17, 2011 10:55 AM

    WTF, John Jan’s opinions are unusual at minimum but you are being vicious. It is not called for.

  10. John Jan on March 17, 2011 11:27 AM

    I know what I claim, and some people are getting very nervous and violent, it is not my problem.
    It is just beginning.
    I do not want to create flame, but I have been contacted and I know it has nothing to do with any sort of fusion, although reaction is producing copper and 20x energy excess.

    I can just end with this quote:

    All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed.
    Second, it is violently opposed.
    Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

    Arthur Schopenhauer

    PS. We are now at the second stage.

  11. b-bob on March 18, 2011 1:28 AM

    @ John Jan

    obvious troll is obvious…

  12. Ash on March 18, 2011 7:21 AM

    If this experiment is genuine, explain then Rossi and Focardi, if it uses very little Hydrogen you could could extract the H2 from water to run the machine, using the power that the machine produces or generates for electrolysis, so why do they need an external bottle of H2? in theory, the consumables will be only Nickel powder and water


  13. Albert Kong on March 18, 2011 8:52 PM

    @marco thanks for the correction. Very impressive qualifications of Dr. Focardi. Now that is what I don’t understand. As someone with a little academic training myself just the suggestion that these gentlemen are committing fraud is obviously disingenuous. Detractors there will be, and can understand the confusion with established theory, but experimental results are experimental results unless there is some mass delusion going on.

  14. bindlepete on March 19, 2011 9:09 AM

    I have been facinated by the technology since I learned that MIT massaged the helium 4 and tritium out of their data when they duplicated the F&P work back in 1990.

    I am delighted that it is now going mainstreal and there is a a lot of crow to be eaten by the silverbacks of physics who have denied the data. I just wish the crows were having a feat on them.

    Remember MIT had it’s own megga program to protect at Princeton with the Tokomac. So much for the impartiality of science. Now, Los Alamos has been busy but apparently throttled by the politicos of science. Where is our Government and Chief Science Advisor?

  15. john s. gordon on March 19, 2011 2:43 PM

    let’s hope it is real, it would be a boon to humanity.
    i am familiar with a patent examiner or a journal editor denying issuance or publication because “it does not agree with published data”. well sometimes the published data are wrong, and sometimes the second applicant on a particular invention gets the patent protection because the first examiner didn’t do his job, or was prejudiced.

  16. BFast on March 19, 2011 4:04 PM

    bindlepete, “I am delighted that it is now going mainstream”

    Oh I wish. It will go snake after deniability is gone, but it won’t go anywhere until it breaks through that barrier. I am not yet ready to share this news with my brother, for instance, because I don’t trust it yet.

  17. John Jan on March 21, 2011 6:35 AM

    We are entering in the second stage .. violent opposition and fact denial .. it is just an established routine in the revelation of epochal discoveries.

  18. Neil Taylor on March 22, 2011 7:06 PM

    The facts are in and the establishment will eat much crow one day soon. A new and better world is close at hand thanks to these scientists who stuck with and pursued their beliefs…

  19. Galen Haugh on March 23, 2011 10:02 AM

    I’m glad the E-Cat will first be implemented on a commercial scale in Athens. Both Greece and Italy are working together through a consortium of energy companies from both countries to adopt this form of energy. Implementing it first in Greece and Italy also bypasses any energy interests tied to Big Oil or Hot Fusion that would thwart successful implementation. After that, you can bet countries like Japan and South Korea, who currently import the vast majority of their energy, will implement this as soon as possible. I forsee a replacement of the older nuclear plants in Japan with this newest technology, especially in light of their current state of disrepair and destruction. I envision that the US and England will be the very last to get it–both in terms of psychological acceptance and in actually generating energy for these countries. You thwart and fight progress and you pay the price. Both China and Russia will accept and implement cold fusion before the US and UK. How sad, for it will put the US and UK further in the hole of economic meltdown.

  20. Fred on March 23, 2011 6:45 PM

    Elsewhere I’ve seen claims that there was a problem with the demo in Italy – something about the steam having to escape very fast if their claims regarding the rate of water boiled were correct. Perhaps someone should check that.

  21. thomas on March 24, 2011 5:30 PM

    Simple Question: Why doesn’t Dr. Rossi put one of his devices on a secured display showing no outside power source and running a simple motor or widget of his choice for three months? Put it on a website where anyone could view it at any time to verify its continued motion. I guarantee that in a few weeks he would have a multitude of offers rolling in.

    Why doesn’t he do something like this to put all doubts to rest? He claims that a group of his devices have been running a factory for two years.

    Why doesn’t he just run a simple example of his discovery for everyone to see?

    Simple Answer: Because he can’t.

    Simple Question to you: If you had invented a device that would cure mankind’s need for energy, that would literally save millions of lives all over the world by just providing unending power to let’s say a water pump to provide fresh clean water to children in 3rd world countries, would you not be brimming with joy hardly able to contain it? Would you not want to prove right away that it was true?

    This has all the ear markings of a false claim such as the now infamous STEORN over-unity device.

    They as others like them claimed “over-unity” and stated that they were coming out with a manufactured product soon. That “soon” turned into a year because they had to have verification of their device. That year turned into another year and another and so on…. You get the picture.

    Rossi stated that they were going to go public with a manufactured device made commercially available in 3 months. That was in January. That was cool and promising. Now they are saying that they have to study it for a year. That was a very big red flag!!!!

    Simple Question: I thought they have been running several of them in series to power a factory for two years. Are you telling me that two scientists haven’t been conducting studies of their world changing device all that time?

    This is just the beginning of the never ending delays.

    Simply put, If Rossi has what he says he has, then he could just simply prove it.

  22. John Jan on March 24, 2011 5:35 PM

    The Factory will start in October this year! He is not asking for money up front! Not a dime! He will sell electrical energy for 1 cent of US$ per kWh.

  23. BFast on March 24, 2011 7:51 PM

    Thomas, “Why doesn’t Dr. Rossi put one of his devices on a secured display…”

    And if he did, I would suspect that he doctored the display. He would prove nothing.

    Thomas, “If you had invented a device that would cure mankind’s need for energy, that would literally save millions of lives…”

    Rossi claims an invention that the scientific world views as impossible. He is going headlong into developing an undeniable 1 megawatt plant. Then mass manufacturing facilities will have to be geared up, the transition from heat to usable energy will have to be made, etc. You can’t get from point a (a working prototype) to point b (the thing implemented around the world) overnight.

  24. thomas on March 24, 2011 7:56 PM

    John Jan,
    Just watch for the release date. That date will be extended and extended and… you get the point. Also, where is the factory? Where is its location so that the manufacture can be verified?

    The fact that no money is being asked for is not really proof because a lot of scammers don’t ask for money but fool you into offering money to invest. Wouldn’t you invest in a device that would solve the world’s energy problems? I know I would. If I believed it I would beg to give my money away.

    No, it’s all too easy to verify what you have in today’s high tech age.
    JJ, if I am proved wrong and a working unit is produced and verified, I will eat crow for the whole next year once a week. I hear they are high in protein.

    I have also invented a perpetual crow catcher just in case. I haven’t put it out in the yard to catch any crows yet and no one except my friends have verified that it really works, but I know it does, but I don’t know how. You can’t count on them falling out of the sky, but that is happening more and more lately.

  25. thomas on March 24, 2011 8:15 PM

    I hear you, but you are preaching to the choir. I would love for this device to be real and solve today’s problems. My wishing for it to be true does not make it so.

    The very simple fact is, this device can be proven “real” very easily. However, it has not. There is no basis my believing in it. I cannot see the wind yet I know it exists and believe in it as I see it move leaves, trees, and sometimes houses where I live. I see nothing here.

    These are scientists. They live by pursuit, discovery and verification and know how important it is, which makes this whole deal all the more questionable.

  26. John Jan on March 24, 2011 8:55 PM

    Dear Thomas,
    Wait .. only till October 2011, perhaps even before, but not longer than that.

  27. thomas on March 25, 2011 5:20 AM

    Ok JJ, I’m not unreasonable, waiting cost me nothing and time will go by no matter the outcome.

  28. mstrom88 on March 29, 2011 6:46 PM

    I believe it is prudent and justified to have a study of the technology and participation of CERN and others scientists in the community prior to unleashing what is likely to surpass even the most impressive personal electronic devices iPhone,etc. in terms is demand.

  29. BFast on March 29, 2011 7:06 PM

    mstrom88, “what is likely to surpass even the most impressive personal electronic devices iPhone,etc.”

    You understate. This technology, if real, will be at least as revolutionary as the internet, at least as revolutionary as the telephone, or the cellphone system. Actually, as each of these technology leaps did not significantly leave whole industries in the dust, one could realistically say it will be much bigger than any of these major industries. (Oil will be obsolete, solar, wind, geothermal, natural gas, coal — all obsolete.) New technologies will bloom. A few obvious ones are greenhouses and water desalination. This technology, if real, will be radically transformative.

  30. mstrom88 on March 29, 2011 8:52 PM

    Agreed,an understatment to be sure. My rather limited understanding of the history of the idea of inputing a smaller amount of energy to gain a sustainable harnessable amount of energy without creating a ” big mess” (ie spent fuel rods and the like) hasn’t been a reproducable phenomenon…. until now. I’d like to have your thoughts-

  31. Stanley J Dunne on April 1, 2011 11:33 AM

    It appears very amateurish that Rossi & Focardi cannot demonstrate to the world an output result of electrical potential from the input. There are many ways to convert heat into electrical output and drive motors or lights.
    I would love to see this a success,but like many others I am very sceptical. There are plenty of fraudsters out there.

  32. John Jan on April 1, 2011 3:21 PM

    Within this year they will build 1MW power plant! They are NOT asking money, they will sell energy for 1 cent per kWh. As simple as that.

  33. Bryan Elliott on April 2, 2011 2:47 PM

    Which isotope of Nickel is used?

  34. BFast on April 2, 2011 6:29 PM

    Based on one of the releases, it is clear that Mr. Rossi has not selected a particular isotope of nickel. It seems that the naturally occurring mix of nickel isotopes works just fine. Also, however, it seems that only some of the nickel produces a reaction, so it might be found that selecting for a specific isotope will produce huge efficiency gains. As it is the thing, as presented, is so vastly more efficient than anything seen before, so if such improvements aren’t available, its still mega-revolutionary.

  35. Bryan Elliott on April 2, 2011 11:48 PM

    Well, just doing the mass->energy calculations, the only feasible isotope for a fusion reaction is:
    58Ni + 1H -> 59Cu

    That said, it’s endothermic. What’s exothermic is that 59Cu has a short half-life and decays via positron emission with more energy than it takes to do the original fusion.

    That sequence of events is consistent with the construction; a fuel cell is a suitable medium for utilizing the production of positrons as an electricity source. The result is an energy excess of about 600 kWh/g, which if his energy collection is only 16% efficient, gets the claimed number of about 100 MeV (and a lot of gammas (o_o) )

    I’d be interested in what magic is used to get the hydrogen and nickel close enough to fuse. I could see maybe something between a PEMFC and a farnsworth fusor.

  36. Bryan Elliott on April 2, 2011 11:49 PM

    Edit: 100 kWh/g

  37. BFast on April 3, 2011 12:11 AM

    Bryan Elliot, thanks for the nuclear physics/chemistry lesson. This is certainly outside of my expertise. However, what we do know is that this reaction seems to take place without significant gamma ray radiation. (If I recall one report correctly, it seems to emit a burst of gammas during shutdown.)

    I appreciate what Dr. Levi said, “If so, we have a new physics”. At some point, if the Rossi engine isn’t a hoax, the world of nuclear physics is going to have to climb into a cave and figure out why reality is differing from established knowledge; and we know that in such battles, reality always wins over established knowledge. Such are the most exciting moments in science.

  38. John Jan on April 3, 2011 4:17 AM

    – very mild or zero radioactivity copper ash
    – neutrons are absent, so it is NOT a nuclear reaction, not even LENR
    – gammas are absent
    – Gentlemen, IT WORKS and it is not expensive!

    Columbus has discovered West Indes, according to theory. Well no, it was a new continent, not expected, not predicted by the theory of the old world.

    Andrea Rossi has re-discovered, serendipitously a new science. It is alChemy. Alchemy is two elements used to make a third, and so this reaction fulfills this definition.

  39. BFast on April 3, 2011 11:30 AM

    John Jan, “Gentlemen, IT WORKS”. I would caution against counting the chickens before they hatch. This technology has hardly been validated yet. I don’t believe any formal examination of the resultant materials has been done. Dr. Levi says that this is the next test he wants to run — to analyze the nickel before a reaction, to run the machine, then to study the product. I vote that the jury is out as to the specific nature of this reaction.

  40. Peter Roe on April 3, 2011 1:50 PM

    Bryan Elliot’s comments and suggested mechanism are extremely interesting. I think this is the first speculation I have seen that appears to be fully consistent with the reported facts.

    “What’s exothermic is that 59Cu has a short half-life and decays via positron emission with more energy than it takes to do the original fusion.”

    Actually, if one reads all reports carefully, it does seem that some gamma is produced while the R-F fusor is operating (there is apparently a 12mm lead shield around the reaction canister). Also, there is mention that all traces of radioactivity subside ‘a few minutes’ after the process is ended – implying that there is indeed a short half-life nuclear decay process involved.

    I think Bryan may be on the right track but sadly do not have the knowledge to join the speculation concerning the ‘catalysation’ of the fusion phenomenon.

  41. Peter Roe on April 3, 2011 2:09 PM

    Of course, the concept of a ‘secret ingredient’ chemical catalyser might be a red herring. If heat alone is required to maintain the reaction, then it should be self sustaining at the levels of energy concerned. A thermal runaway could even be a possibility, but there is no indication that this ever happens.

    But if some of the electrical input is required for some other purpose such as for example generation of some type of magnetic field or radio frequency input etc., then this would explain the need for a constant electrical supply.

    Just some idle speculation…

  42. BFast on April 3, 2011 3:12 PM

    Peter Roe, “If heat alone is required to maintain the reaction, then it should be self sustaining at the levels of energy concerned.”

    Reading the analysis if the 18 hour run, the input power is approximately equal to that required for the instrumentation, in other words it is self sustaining. Further, the reaction seems to be started purely by heating it up, it is not electrolytic.

    “A thermal runaway could even be a possibility, but there is no indication that this ever happens.” I see otherwise. Rossi shows off some nickel that he claims was melted in some of his reaction experiments. If the reaction requires fine dust of nickel, the reaction will naturally shut down as soon as the nickel goes molten and becomes a blob. Pretty cool safety system.

  43. Peter Roe on April 4, 2011 3:25 AM

    BFast – I stand corrected, and can see that the process is probably intrinsically safe due to its ‘failsafe’ nature. However I don’t think this significantly affects my ‘idle speculation’.

    As I have understood the process, a relatively high input of about 1kW is required to heat the nickel to the point where the fusion process is initiated, and thereafter a maintenance input of 400W is required.

    This seems to me to be superfluous in view of the amount of heat generated by the exothermic reaction, so I am just wondering if there may be some other internal electrical apparatus involved in the process. It occurs to me that some means of ionising the hydrogen to produce a soup of free protons and electrons might materially affect the threshold for fusion that Bryan Elliot wondered about.

    Probably not – just trying to promote further speculation by those far more knowledgeable about this field than myself!

  44. wade on April 4, 2011 1:10 PM

    The reaction described in the original paper and the patent application is a multi-stage fusion reaction, followed by a matter – anti-matter annihilation reaction.

    Nickel and Hydrogen fuse to make an unstable copper isotope.

    The copper isotope quickly decays and ultimately ends up emitting an anti-particle, positron I think, which gets annihilated.

    The energy released from the exothermic positron-electron annihilation is far greater than the binding energy of the nucleus of the atoms, resulting in each cycle have a net exothermic output.

    If the equations they presented are correct, the net energy released is truly spectacular.

    If one mole of Nickel reacted to Completion with one mole of hydrogen, the annihilation of the resulting positrons with the electrons will release a total of 98.7 gigajoules of energy per MOLE of nickel and hydrogen.

    This means that one MOLE of nickel plus one MOLE of hydrogen theoretically gives 3.13 Kilowatts of heat for a full year, or about 10 kilowatts for 4 months.

    Also, if you actually do the math for yourself, the Nickel + hydrogen = copper reactions are not actually endothermic. Nickel + Hydrogen is always more massive than the resulting Copper. The missing mass is a net exothermic reaction.

  45. Roseland67 on April 4, 2011 4:53 PM

    Peter Roe,

    Possible the 400w of continual utility based input is for “power quality” to run the control circuit.
    IF the reaction is in fact self sustaining, the reactor power output may be of such an unpredictable “quality” that the control circuit cannot consistently/reliably
    perform it’s functions.

  46. Peter Roe on April 5, 2011 3:33 AM

    Hi Roseland67.

    “Possible the 400w of continual utility based input is for “power quality” to run the control circuit.”

    That’s how I understand the system to work. However the device does not produce any electrical output, so all control/monitoring circuits must be powered externally.

    A ‘control system’ would normally comprise sensors and trim systems, not requiring significant power to operate. Demand from any contactors, motorised valves or similar items in the control cct would presumably be intermittent, not continuous.

    If the circulating water pump’s power supply is included in the 400W figure then I suppose that it is conceivable that powerful pressure pump might use this kind of power, but I don’t think this is the case. The ‘clacking’ sound in the video demonstration would indicate that a low-power diaphragm type pump is used.

    So I’m still a bit mystified by exactly what 400W of power might be needed for, hence my (uninformed) speculation about a possible ioniser power unit or some other currently secret continuous power-consuming electrical kit either within the control box, or the fusor unit itself.

    In one interview, Rossi is asked directly why the unit can’t be made to be self sustaining, and he replies something along the lines that the unit ‘works better’ with an externally powered heater. This seems a tad vague.

    There are apparently 5 cables (twin core or coax assumed) connecting the reactor unit and its control box. One (or 2 if single core) will be the power supply to the internal heater and one must be a temperature sensor cable. It would be very interesting to know exactly what the others do!

  47. Peter Roe on April 5, 2011 4:22 AM

    I have now learned that an electrically operated pressure control valve is used to modulate hydrogen pressure in the reactor to control the reaction temperature.

    So that’s up to 2 more cables explained (power/control?) but still not the requirement for a ‘maintenance’ power input, variously reported as 400/700W. As the rate of fusion can apparently be precisely controlled through regulation of hydrogen pressure in the reaction vessel, any additional electrical heating still seems to be rather redundant.

  48. BFast on April 5, 2011 10:13 AM

    You will notice that in the 18 hour run the input power was only 80w, rather than 400. I puzzled for a long time about the difference. It turns out that when they ran the first test, there was a crack or something in the reaction chamber. The 80 watts is attributed to control system power.

  49. Peter Roe on April 5, 2011 2:15 PM

    OK. I can see my case fading rapidly!

  50. Bryan Elliott on April 5, 2011 4:03 PM

    “if you actually do the math for yourself, the Nickel + hydrogen = copper reactions are not actually endothermic.”

    I did the math. That’s what led me to the opinion I hold above – that the reaction, if it works at all, must be:
    58Ni + 1H -> 59Cu
    59Cu -> 59Ni + B+ + y

    This is because no stable isotope of Ni plus H is heavier than the resultant Cu isotope. There are non-stable variants that work, but we’re working with bog-standard nickel (or we’re working with a non-feasible fuel).

    I have a hypothesis for the “Then Magic Happens” step of fusion, based on Rossi’s original work towards fuel cell catalysis using finely powdered nickel.

    The bond length of hydrogen is about 106-112 pm at room temperature. The crystal structure of nickel places its atoms about 220 pm apart at room temperature. It may be that at nicely high pressures/temperatures, these numbers meet up, and the physical structure of the nickel and hydrogen become such that the electron shells overwhelm each other in places, resulting in fusion.

    I could see a little EM jiggering helping the process along

  51. Brian Westenhaus on April 5, 2011 9:56 PM

    That looks good, Bryan. Maybe you’re in reach of figuring out the additive or catalysts.


Name (required)

Email (required)


Speak your mind