The Evidence for LENR

“Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical…” —Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) using nickel and hydrogen is a clean, very very cheap, and super abundant new energy technology. It would be fair to say that it is the silver bullet for our current continual energy crisis – and as a consequence sounds too good to be true.

In November of 2009 the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) published Defense Analysis Report DIA 8-0911-003 titled “Technological Forecast: Worldwide Research on Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions Increasing and Gaining Acceptance” ( ).

The paper gives a rundown of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction work being done around the world. Among other things it notes: “DIA assesses with high confidence that if LENR can produce nuclear-origin energy at room temperatures, this disruptive technology could revolutionize energy production and storage, since nuclear reactions release millions of times more energy per unit mass than do any known chemical fuel.”

“Energy density many orders of magnitude over chemical.” —Michael A. Nelson, NASA

Here is a detailed description of a LENR generator and formula that was producing energy over unity. In the March of 1994 US government contract F33615-93-C-2326 titled “NASCENT HYDROGEN: AN ENERGY SOURCE” ( ), “Anomalous heat was measured from a reaction of atomic hydrogen in contact with potassium carbonate on a nickel surface.”

This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers as is shown by this document titled “Tally of Cold Fusion Papers” ( ). It gives readers a sense of the scale, variety, and sources of the material available about this subject. It also gives some indication of how much has been published on cold fusion, and where they were published.

Of special note is a PowerPoint presentation by George Miley of the University of Illinois ( ), who has successfully replicated the LENR “cold fusion” reaction.

In the ebook “Secrets of E-Cat,” (Consulente Energia Publisher, 145 pages, 68 illustrations, Pdf format, 7 €, ) author Mario Menichella says:

“The modern history of cold fusion begins with the premature announcement made in the United States by the two electrochemical Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, who in 1989 convened a press conference…there were numerous attempts to replicate (their) result, but for some years had little success, so that soon the question of cold fusion was labeled by the media and mainstream science as a “hoax.”

Menichella continues, “The probably better experimental work…carried out in Siena since the early Nineties, by a group of physicists composed by Sergio Focardi (University of Bologna), Francesco Piantelli (University of Siena), Roberto Habel (University of Cagliari), but it did not lead to a system capable of generating useful amount of excess energy for normal industrial or domestic applications. In Siena, in fact, the three scientists – using hydrogen and nickel as the two only “ingredients” of the reaction, plus an appropriate amount of heat supplied to the system – managed to get out a double thermal energy than the electrical energy provided in input.”

You may be wondering why the ebook is called “Secrets of E-Cat.” As you can see, LENR (otherwise loosely known as “cold fusion”) is a proven scientific phenomena, but the excess energy from this exothermic reaction was not large enough for normal industrial or domestic applications. In comes Andrea Rossi, the e-cat fusion developer, an Italian inventor who has a Masters Degree in Engineering from Milan University.

To quote the article “ANDREA ROSSI BIOGRAPHY – STORY”
( ):

“In 2007, Andrea Rossi arrived at the very critical point in his research and concentrated his time on his invention. He also hired Sergio Focardi, a physicist from the University of Bologna who is an acknowledged expert in field. The physicist’s work on nickel hydrogen reactions proved to be invaluable…In 2009, Mr. Rossi introduced to the public a process and a device called the E-Catalyst. This is a revolutionary process in energy production and is also called low energy nuclear reactions. It could be a breakthrough invention since it can solve some of the energy problems of our planet.”

I recommend watching the video contained in this article titled “Nobel laureate touts E-Cat cold fusion” ( ). Dr. Brian Josephson, winner of the 1973 Nobel Prize in Physics, stars in the video whose stated purpose is to wake up the media to the E-Cat story, which has not been widely reported on in the mainstream media of the English-speaking world.

By the way, here is a article titled “The New Breed of Energy Catalyzers: Ready for Commercialization?” ( ), which contains a relatively current survey of all the companies that are trying to bring LENR to commercialization.

The subject of LENR, a clean, very very cheap, and super abundant energy technology, is too deep to comprehensively cover in this limited space. Using only nickel and hydrogen, both very abundant and cheap, in a LENR exothermic reaction, could be a source of almost unlimited energy for humanity, with a cost close to nothing, and no environmental pollution. Hopefully the limited evidence for LENR cited above will go part of the way toward convincing an open minded reader of the validity of this too good to be true energy technology.

“Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry.” —Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

15 thoughts on “The Evidence for LENR”

  1. Excellent article.

    I agree LENR is accepted mainstream.

    It is the Ni-H version of LENR that is somewhat questionable, and the ability to control any LENR reaction is highly questionable.

    We have 4 sources claiming they can control it, but none have proven control as of yet.

  2. LENR is a subtle approach that uses chemistry to bring nuclei close enough together to fuse in a nuclear reaction. On the other hand, hot fusion is such a heavy-handed brute force approach. I don’t know why they stubbornly persist in using this unimaginative route to fusion.

    1. “to bring nuclei close enough together to fuse ”
      your sentence is already an assumption and a theory.

      the widom larsen says that it is not coulombian force that you oppose, but weak-interaction that you allow with some energy. (see widom-larsen theory). then with the prduced neutron, classic things happens.

      anyway as you say it is subtile… and probably use chemical parameters to allow the forbidden wedding…

    1. @ Kruger,
      I’d like to see it proven, but so far none of the 4 claiming control has been “proven”. I’m as hopeful as anybody and believe in them. It would be nice if they prove it to us through third party testing. They described their experiments in immense detail so I assume they are willing to try.

  3. In these systems using the nickel is that metal used up or can it be reused/recycled? In other words will this new energy source now require massive use of the world’s nickel resources?

    1. Hey Greg, the majority of the nickel will be recyclable, and use only a fraction of the worlds annual nickel production.

      All cold fusion systems differ at this time, but Rossi’s device, the first commercial product on the market, has a tiny portion of the nickel transmute to copper, which is not such a bad thing as that will be recyclable and copper is quite useful as well.

    2. @ Greg,

      Nickel is the fifth most common element on our planet, and the power we are talking about is nuclear which means even if this energy was used worldwide for a hundred years it probably would not even rise in price.
      1kg nickel = 200 000 barrels of oil.

      The Nickel is not reused, but would buy us a few thousand years of very cheap and smog free energy with no nuclear waste.

    3. Never forget that the asteroid between Mars and Jupiter contains a vast number of Nickel Iron asteroids that could be harvested. This reserve is probably hundreds if not thousands of times the total accessible reserves on Earth. Additionally, ion propulsion driven by cold fusion power would be an excellent way to get the treasure here.

      1. TPB, George Miley proposes a LENR-based General Purpose Heating Source to replace the plutonium on radioisotope thermoelectric generators that provide power to spacecraft. We could be scootin around those asteroids with cold fusion power.

  4. Wow, thanks Brad for putting that summary together. It’s so helpful to have a spot where several authoritative references are compiled in an easy-to-read form, and you hit some very authoritative ones indeed. We can post this page on other sites as a reference for newbies, and they’ll get a good taste of the reality of this science.

    By the way, I am on my way back to California and currently in New Mexico right now visiting Dr. Edmund Storms, longtime researcher into cold fusion and author of The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. He gave me a serious download yesterday, and I’m scheduled for more today. No video yet, just conversation and science lessons for my tiny brain.

    I did attend the NETS and had a great conversation with George Miley, which I will write up at the first opportunity. Lots of driving ahead, stopping to camp along the way.


  5. The Science Fiction writer Peter F Hamilton Forsees a future where mankind has the technology to capture asteroids and put them in an Earth orbit. These asteroids would contain vast amounts of minerals including Nickel which would be mined. Its realistic to imagine then that we would never run out of Nickel.

  6. A national Research program to optimize LENR ahead of CERN would be brilliant economically, militarily, politically, and environmentally.
    Energy that is many orders of magnitude cheaper does not have to have ideal “Control”. Use it or vent it.
    It’s not all hat and no cattle, incorrect oil cowboy analogy. Closer would be where there’s smoke there’s fire!
    LENR is significant breakthrough science. The huge breakthrough is the move from wet chemistry to dry nano-particle high heat yield per gm results. The yield improvements with surface area cannot be ignored.
    Promising financial payback–research results out maybe 2 years vs hot fusion out maybe 20 years. This is because the optimization process and consumer product is DRAMATICALLY simpler.

Comments are closed.