Publication of a further, 3rd, International Patent Application by Francisco Piantelli – Part I

The following is a further posting in a series of articles by David French, a patent attorney with 35 years experience, which will review patents of interest touching on the field of Cold Fusion.

This will be a two-part outline of a recently published patent application originating from Francesco Piantelli. The first part will address the content of the disclosure of the application. The second part to follow shortly will address the scope of patent coverage apparently being sought.

The two prior Piantelli PCT applications

A third International Patent Application has been published naming Francisco Piantelli as an inventor. The first occurred in 1995 as International Application PCT/IT95/00008 entitled: Energy Generation and Generator by Means of Anharmonic Stimulated Fusion, filed August 3, 1995. This application was assigned to Francesco Piantelli, Sergio Focardi and Roberto Habel. The application addressed the fusion of hydrogen and deuterium absorbed on a metallic core that has been heated to above the Debye temperature for the core. The reaction in this disclosure is initiated by vibration and maintained by “a coherent multimodal system of stationary oscillations.” The 1995 International Application was eventually abandoned without issuing to a patent.

Notwithstanding the abandonment of this filing, these three individuals, or at least Piantelli and Focardi, should probably be credited with having pioneered research into nickel-hydrogen systems as a source of LENR effects.

A second application appeared in the Patent Cooperation Treaty system – PCT in 2010. This second application was addressed in an earlier posting of ColdFusionNow. The corresponding Canadian national entry filing to this PCT filing is available here.

The present, third, Piantelli PCT application

This present ColdFusionNow posting addresses the third International Application PCT/IB2012/052100 naming Piantelli as the sole inventor and published under the PCT on November 1, 2012 PCT. Key data on this filing obtained from the World Intellectual Property Organization – WIPO PCT website is as follows:

International Application No.: PCT/IB2012/052100
Inventor: Francesco PIANTELLI
Assignees: Silvia PIANTELLI, Alessandro MEIARINI, Leonardo CIAMPOLI, and Fabio CHELLINI, all of Italy.
Title: Method and apparatus for generating energy by nuclear reactions of hydrogen adsorbed by orbital capture on a nanocrystalline structure of a metal
PCT filing date: April 26, 2012
Original Italian priority filing date: April 26, 2011
International classification : G21B3 – physics, nuclear physics/nuclear engineering, fusion reactors, low-temperature nuclear fusion reactors, e.g. alleged cold fusion reactors

Summary of the disclosure: Power is generated by contacting hydrogen with the surface of cluster-nanostructures, e.g. crystals, of a transition metal, at a determined process temperature, by which the following process occurs. An orbital capture reaction of negative hydrogen ions, H- ions, is effected by the clusters followed by a nuclear capture reaction by the atoms of the cluster which is triggered by impulsively acting on the primary material to generate heat (Q1). A secondary material such as Lithium and/or Boron and/or a transition metal such as 232Th, 236U, 239U, 239Pu is positioned within a predetermined distance from the clusters of the primary material facing the primary material. This secondary material interacts with energetic protons that are emitted by/from the primary material and release secondary reaction heat (Q2). This secondary heat is in addition to the primary reaction heat. The heat produced is regulated by adjusting the separation of secondary material from the primary material. (This summary is a paraphrasing of the Abstract accompanying the application.)

The drawings as published in association with this application may be found at the PCT website . While the text of the words of the patent disclosure are available through a hyperlink on the top of the primary PCT page through the link labeled “Description”, in order to see the drawings it is necessary to first link to “Documents” and then link to “Initial Publication with ISR” in order to view all of the Figures. It may be necessary to choose the “download” version in order to view the PDF document.

The actual process occurring by which heat is generated is described more fully in the disclosure accompanying the application and referenced as “Description”. It involves:

– on average there must be at least 109 clusters/crystals per square centimeter of surface
– hydrogen, interstitially adsorbed at the grain boundaries and microfractures of the clusters, are of no importance for the purposes of orbital capture of negative hydrogen ions
– in the course of hydrogen capture, the negative hydrogen ions are transformed into protons
– nucleus capture of a proton causes transmutation, e.g. nickel transmutes into copper
– protons which fail to be captured are expelled with an energy of 6.7 million electron volts, verified by cloud chamber experiments
– subsequent atomically re-emitted protons can react with the adjacent secondary material, e.g. lithium, to produce nuclear transformations, e.g. converting lithium into beryllium and/or releasing helium as alpha particles having energies on the order of 4 – 17 million electron volts
– re-emitted protons can also react with boron to produce beryllium, carbon and/or helium, releasing energy on the order of 1-16 million electron volts
– alpha particles may react with boron to produce nitrogen and 19 million electron volts of energy
– alpha particles may react with nickel to be transmuted into the zinc, releasing 3-5 million electron volts of energy
– the secondary nuclear reactions arising from re-emitted protons can generally double the amount of heat being produced over that arising from the initial proton capture
– the amount of energy arising from the secondary nuclear reaction can be varied/controlled by adjusting the separation gap between the primary and secondary materials

This Description is well worth reading.

It is to be appreciated that these are assertions that have been made by the applicants in this application and do not necessarily reflect what is actually able to occur in the host material. If the assertions of utility are untrue or the procedures for generating energy are insufficiently described, then no valid patent can issue from this application.

For example, the setup as described does not appear to be critically dependent on the degree of hydrogen loading in the primary transition metal. The closest reference appears to be: “The primary reactions, both internal and external, globally occur generating a primary reaction heat, which is the heat that can be obtained according to the method described in WO2010058288,” This is a reference to the second PCT application published in 2010. The procedures of that application are adopted by reference, which is permitted. That application addresses the hydrogen loading ratio in the following terms: “Advantageously, the concentration of H- ions with respect to the transition metal atoms of said clusters is larger than 0,01 , to improve the efficiency of the energy production process. In particular, this concentration is larger than 0,08.” Accordingly, neither of these two references teach the use of a metal substrate which has a substantial hydrogen loading ratio, e.g. on the order of 0.7:1 or higher, as an essential condition for an LENR event to occur.

Additionally, there is no discussion of the effect of the conduction band within the transition metal which forms the clusters. There are a number of clear questions of physics to consider when reviewing this disclosure.

This concludes Part I. Part II will address the scope of patent coverage that this application aspires to achieve.

David French is a retired patent attorney and the principal and CEO of Second Counsel Services. Second Counsel provides guidance for companies that wish to improve their management of Intellectual Property. For more information visit:

David French is prepared to address questions included as commentaries to any of his postings or by direct email. In particular, he would like to learn what people need to know in order to better understand patents.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather

16 thoughts on “Publication of a further, 3rd, International Patent Application by Francisco Piantelli – Part I”

  1. The time for secrets is over, that the truth must come.

    I am more optimistic about the LENR technology and even I’m sure its conclusion.
    We are entering a new field of physics and the understanding of our world through LENR.

    But Andrea Rossi as Piantelli or Celani must now win the media battle. It shall publish a report by credible third parties (scientists known and recognized in the media). It must also be published in a newspaper recognized by fathers.
    It is now urgent to get out of his secret, and give evidence
    His new client must be aware of this, because today the commentators and even scientists may turn away from him and LENR technology.
    Skeptics and interests contrary to await a new energy this error. The enemies of the cold fusion can repeat the scenario discredit P & F and cold fusion.
    He must give evidence of his work, or it is a second time that cold fusion will be buried. AR client must understand that it is not his interest to make a secret of the new fire, for himself will lose all credibility with potential buyers.
    If AR and his client has official press conference with the media known, they are credible.
    If AR and client continuously remain in secret he become impostors.

    In french
    Le temps des secrets est terminé, celui de la vérité doit venir.

    Je suis de plus en plus optimiste pour la technologie Lenr et même je suis certain de son aboutissement.
    Nous sommes entrée dans un nouveau domaine de la physique et de la compréhension de notre monde grâce au LENR.
    Mais Andréa Rossi comme Piantelli ou Célani doit maintenant gagner la bataille médiatique. Il doit faire publier un rapport par des tiers crédibles, (des scientifiques connus et reconnu dans les medias). Il doit se faire publier également par un journal reconnu par les pères.
    Il est urgent maintenant de sortir de son secret, et de donner les preuves
    Son nouveau client doit prendre conscience de cela, car aujourd’hui les commentateurs et mêmes les scientifiques risquent de se détourner de lui et de la technologie LENR.
    Les sceptiques et les intérêts contraires a une nouvelle énergie attendent cette erreur. Les ennemis e la fusion froide peuvent répéter le scénario qui a discrédité P&F et la fusion froide.
    Il doit donner les preuves de son travail, ou c’est bien une deuxième fois que la fusion froide sera enterré. le client de AR doit comprendre que cela n’est pas son intérêt de faire un secret du nouveau feu, car lui-même perdra tout crédit auprès de futurs acheteurs.
    Si AR et son client se présente officiellement en conférence de presse avec les medias connu, ils sont crédibles.
    Si AR et son client continu restent dans le secret il deviennent des imposteurs.

  2. Thank you for this informative update on Prof. Piantelli. This is the first we have heard of his work in 6 months. The man is certainly meticulous in his approach.

  3. Dear Sir,

    I like to be informed whether or not a “catalyst” is used, e.g. potassium (see e-Cat Site “cold fusion catalyst” and DEFKALION news about the use of potassium. THANKS.


    Such information is not readily available.

    Astute observation not withstanding.

    1. David French replies:

      Here is how to find the answer to this question. Go to the link for this new patent application that has been published under the PCT system. That link is highlighted in red, above, under the number for the PCT application, PCT/IB2012/052100. Here is the actual link:

      This will bring you to the homepage for this application. It is entitled: “Latest bibliographic data on file”. Above this title is a link labeled “Description”. Activating this link will allow you to review an HTML version of the text of the disclosure accompanying this application.

      You have asked whether a catalyst is involved in making the described invention operate. You can find the answer by reading this description. As a quick check I used the “find” function on my browser to see if the word “catalyst” appeared in the HTML text. I got a “nil” return. But possibly some other word may have been used that describes a catalyst. Only reading the text carefully will provide a definitive answer to your question.

      1. I think you are probably right, Bertil. If sonemoe of their ages had such a device, would they be trying to build a simple start-up business with it, working night and day? How could anyone possibly hope to hold onto something like that? Consider that the great and supremely powerful IBM could not hold onto the PC, which they initiated and which seriously threatened them when it was pirated by everybody else. Most people would buy from a Chinese factory instead of a Italian factory. International patent protection would be worthless in the face of such massive economic pressure. What kind of trade secrets could be kept from the world’s best scientists who would place such a discovery as one of the most important things to understand that ever was?I would like to believe, like you, that these two would be treated as liberating geniuses, pampered and wanting for nothing. However, the history of how the world treats its greatest benefactors is sobering and often grim.The excess heat effect is real, even with light water and nickel. This demonstration, however, is showmanship.

  4. To Dr. David French,

    I thank you very much for your reply concerning the catalyst and hope sincerely that Piantelli
    considers the possibility to use potassium as a catalyst for producing negatively charged
    hydrogen ions (H-). Truly yours,


    1. According to professor Giuseppe Levi’s rorept on his investigation of the Rossi apparatus the temperature at the water/steam exit end was measured with a PT100 thermometer. During steady state the temperature was mesured to be 101,6C and this is taken as a proof that only dry steam was exiting. This is not a good proof. The boiling point of water at standad pressure is 100C, but it takes only about 0,05 bar overpressure to increase the boiling point to 101,6C.If I told you that I have a hen that is laying golden eggs, but if I just showed you then hen and not her laying the eggs would you believe me? Probably not. But in the present case it is very easy to collect the golden eggs to demonstrate their metal. Just take the steam/water exit hose that is connected to the top of the apparatus and stick it into a suitable volume of cold water (=calorimeter). By measuring the temperature increase during the experiment it is a child’s play to calculate the power generated.

    1. Let me state for the record that, as I far as I know, Dr. George Miley has had abltoulesy no part in the mud-slinging and the rock throwing at Rossi. He has been the consummate professional and tended to his work diligently for many years. He may ultimately benefit from the negative publicity about Rossi but he has not been directly involved in it. I think in his presentation at the World Green Symposium in October he attempted to respectively acknowledge Rossi’s work, not disparage it or cast doubt on it.But you are correct Peter, some ugliness in the race to bring this technology to market is to be expected, unpleasant as it may be.

  5. Some commentors are sugsegting that the Rossi-Focardi catalyser is a scam. Maybe it is and maybe it is not. What may have been a scam, a very big scam, was the devastating attack on the Fleischmann-Pons proposal of cold-fusion, or what is now being referred to as Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, to distance the science from the original and but very descriptive title. It is now known that cold-fusion is possible, has been measured and that this Rossi-Focardi effect, ready-to-market, could very well be the result of cold fusion. If this is the case, then, the killing of the Pons-Fleischman theory would prove to be the greatest scam ever perpetrated by who ever had the finanial-political-anti scientific interest to kill the new cold fusion science. Time is slowly but surely proving Pons and Fleischmann right.What would those scientists and the mainstream media that supported them have to say in few months time?

Comments are closed.