Letters mailed to Senate Energy subcommittee members

It’ll take a couple of weeks to get through security, but 15 senators will have a nice surprise waiting for them when they get back from recess. Each member on the Energy sub-committee got a unique letter requesting funding for low-energy nuclear reactions research accompanied by two complimentary Cold Fusion Now stickers.

Here’s a sample letter sent to Senator Debbie Stabenow from Michigan:

Senator Debbie Stabenow
133 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510

Dear Senator Stabenow,

Please lend your support for the only viable alternative energy beyond the renewables – low-energy nuclear reactions, also know as cold fusion.

We want solar and wind developed, but these are not enough to supply all our energy wants. Nuclear energy is a million times more powerful than chemical energy, and only cold fusion promises, clean, green, safe, nuclear energy from the deuterium in sea-water with no radio-active waste.

The research has gone on for the last 21 years in virtual isolation with $0 from the Department of Energy. That’s right; $0 from the DOE. Yet low-energy nuclear reaction scientists are now getting output energy 25 times the input energy!

The Naval Research Lab and the Army Research Lab both support this research, but the funds are limited. This science needs DOE funding to take the current research to a new level, where the private sector can then begin to develop new energy products. There is just no good reason why the Department of Energy withholds funding for this important research.

You’ve worked hard on issues of water, the environment, and jobs in your state of Michigan. And you also know the danger that petroleum poses. Please take a look at the current state of cold fusion research and I think you will see another opportunity to provide clean energy jobs.

Please direct the DOE to apportion funding for cold fusion research.

Thanks very much,
My name, etc…

The names of the senators who received this particular mailing are:

Sen. John Barrasso WY
Sen. Evan Bayh IN
Sen. Robert Bennett UT
Sen. Sam Brownback KS
Sen. Jim Bunning KY
Sen. Richard Burr NC
Sen. Maria Cantwell WA
Sen. Bob Corker TN
Sen. Byron Dorgon ND
Sen. Menendez NJ
Sen. Bernie Sanders VT
Sen. Jeff Sessions AL
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen NH
Sen. Debbie Stabenow MI
Sen. Mark Udall CO
Sen. Ron Wyden OR

Yes, there’s going to be changeover soon, but that’s OK. I’ll be doing a follow-up letter in October: shorter, and with more specific info relating to each member, and….I dunno……Cold Fusion Now matchbooks? Would they even make it through security???

I will ask those of you living in any of these states to call your senators in September and ask for their support on CF funding for a follow-up.

Find your senator’s info here.

Next up: it’s the House Energy subcommittee.

Not the most fun assignment, but better than some. For instance, reading the Slate article Palladium: The Cold Fusion Fanatics Can’t Get Enough of the Stuff By Sam Kean reveals the level of ignorance of commonly available scientific data by the author, and sadly, the commentators too.

The die-hard will cling to an obsolete belief with such tenacity, staying true to their name. It blows my mind that high-caliber scientists have had to endure such ignorance for two decades. I hope I won’t even have to try…

Fusion funding in the news

1) From the Tehran Times: Iran begins nuclear fusion studies. They are talking about hot fusion, but cold fusion is mentioned in the last lines of the release…

2)Funding for nuclear fusion: Expensive Iteration looks at the cost overruns and funding difficulties the latest big hot fusion project is facing. Geez, the dollar numbers are humongous.

3) Finally, this article to be published in Canadian Business, Wanted: More cash in nuclear fusion, appears to blur the lines between hot and cold fusion, unaware of the huge scientific and funding differences between them. The article does give some dollar numbers for recent start-up projects.

Shout out to the Private Sector: Could we please get $10 million to the cold fusion scientists? Comparing the funding to the hot fusion folks, there is little to lose, and everything to gain.

Pizza run leads to God

I went out to get a pizza last nite. I almost never leave the house without a book, and this time it was “The Rebirth of Cold Fusion” by Steven Krivit of New Energy Times. While waiting for the pizza, I’d catch up on some history.

When my pizza was done, the older gentleman who called my name asked “What are you reading there?” I said “Oh, it’s about an energy source whose fuel is derived from sea-water.”

He thought a second, and then replied “Well that makes sense. Just look around…why else would God put all this water here?”

Keep talking. Keep typing.

It is pretty overwhelming watching humanity destroy itself; allowing whole systems to collapse, rather than change course.  Cultures rise, and they fall.  At the limit of global expansion, we now confront ourselves, squarely. Do humans have a limit of irrationality

Giant methane lakes a half mile under the ocean?  Water samples blowing up?  Calls for MORE deep ocean drilling?  If this wasn’t reality, I’d think I was losing my mind in a Twilight Zone episode.  If we humans have a future, the immediate one looks rocky, and the anxiety in the chip body is palpable.

Time to unplug and get outside!

So I’m walking around my little town and I decide to stop in the Shoe Repair and check in with Mark, with whom I had had a wonderful conversation a while ago when I had dropped off a pair of shoes for maintenance.  In the course of our transaction, I discovered that he was born in Greece, and, he collected ancient coins.  When he was a kid growing up in the Mediterranean, they could find ancient coins on their beaches regularly just as they played around!?

Early 5th century.
Early 5th century.

Late 5th century.

Mid- 4th century.
Mid- 4th century.

Well, I am an ancient coin lover, and as a student of media, I’ve learned the relationship of the phonetic alphabet and the beginning of science and math in ancient Greece.  This alphabet effect is also reflected in their coinage.  (Indeed, coinage itself is an effect of the alphabet.)  Earlier pieces are classified as Archaic, and are raw, wild, abstract symbols juxtaposed, while later coins from the Classical period show a refined character, with increasing perspective and realism throughout the design. 

The coins pictured above are the ancient coins of Athens, called owls. The obverse shows Athena, the patron goddess of Athens. The reverse, not shown, has an owl, which Athena often appeared as. Of course Pallas Athena, goddess of wisdom and war, is the origin of the word palladium, by way of the asteroid, that is!

Well, I don’t know about you, but the thought of having something from 400BC in my pocket when I’m walking around just puts an extra spring in my step and I just happen to have my Athena with me on this jaunt, my original destination being our local Antique and Coin Shop.  I’d go show my pal Mark the piece first, knowing he’d totally dig it.

Now before you start crying that this is a Cold Fusion Now blog, and not a personal diary for an ancient coin lover, let me beg your patience, as all will be revealed.

I roll in the Shoe Repair and show him my Athena (mine’s the one in the middle of the pictures above). Mark isn’t busy, and he loves the Owl, so we start in on a little conversation, in the course of which, I lay a Cold Fusion Now sticker on him, and show him the copy of Fire from Ice I’m draggin around with me. Yes, I start ministering the CF.

He reacts astounded and says, “My son and daughter both worked at the fusion center!” And he runs to the back of the shop, and when he comes back, he shows me his jacket with the National Ignition Facility stitched logo on the front! One of his kids had been at Lawrence Livermore at some point as well. I am just like “Whaaaatt?”, aghast to find someone who even knows what I’m talking about, let alone whose kids have fusion research experience, albeit the other kind!

Well, I began to describe some of the differences between laser fusion, and cold fusion.. Turns out he had heard about it in 1989, but then heard it turned out to be a “fraud”. Thus the conversation continued.

He was interested in hearing about the story of CF and I ended up giving him my hardback copy of Fire from Ice, the very copy I’d gotten in 2004 after learning about CF myself (again, from Bob). He didn’t want to take it, and we went back and forth until he relented. He had to have it, and I know he’ll read it.

That’s it, that’s the story. It just goes to show, you never know who’ll you’ll meet. And everywhere you go, you got to keep talking about cold fusion. Sometimes the conversation slides your way, and a light is turned on. It really brought my spirits up.

Arthur C. Clarke said “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Before the alphabet, words had magic. Just saying something evoked power. Isn’t it funny when the most important thing we can do for our future is to keep talking?

Keep talking cold fusion. Keep typing cold fusion. The words are cloned over and over the more say it, the more we add to the critical mass, and then, at some point, awareness will bifurcate, and instantly, our world is changed.

Proposed changes to the Green Party platform regarding Energy policy

The Green Party is in the process of updating their party platform. You can read and comment on the proposed changes here: http://www.gp.org/committees/platform/comments/?page_id=823

The deadline is NOW! So here’s what I’m submitting. Anybody have suggestions on how to write these words? Please respond with your comments.

You can comment directly to the Green Party California contact coordinating one set of party platform changes ( the document I am commenting on below) here: Marnie Glickman.

What follows are proposed changes to the Green Party platform Chapter 3 on Ecological Wisdom.

I am suggesting the edit below regarding Energy policy. My proposed changes are in large green font.

The idea is to distinguish between conventional fission nuclear power, and, clean fusion power, more specifically, fusion power from heavy hydrogen derived from sea-water, that occurs at room temperatures, and creates no radio-active waste.
Safe fusion power from hydrogen needs to be supported along with all of the renewables.

Whenever we say “nuclear power”, we must make the distinction. One way to do this would be to use the words “conventional nuclear power” when referring to dirty fission nuclear power plants, and use “clean fusion power” when referring to safe, green, power from hydrogen, called LENR low-energy nuclear reactions, CANR chemically assisted nuclear reactions, or simply cold fusion.

We suggest the Green Party say NO to FISSION, and YES to FUSION.

Whatever your political leaning, it makes sense to have everybody clear on the different kinds of nuclear power. I want EVERY POLITICAL PARTY to understand this difference, and support clean, green, cold fusion power. I just happen to be starting with the Greens as they are my registered party.

Now, let’s be clear: party politics are not my thing. It just goes to show how important this particular issue is that I am getting up off my *** to get involved this way.

Help the Greens. Help your third party. If words are magnets, then let’s get the right words attracting clean fusion power, no matter what the political stride.

Section: Introduction to Chapter 3 Ecological Wisdom

The sad truth is that our planet is dying. Human-induced climate change is searing a major ecological crisis across the planet.

Glaciers and polar ice shelves are crumbling. Species are being eradicated at record numbers. The biology of our planet is growing simpler — and poorer. Air pollution kills about two million people prematurely each year. Water supplies are drying up, while water systems are being sold off to big corporations concerned only with their profits. Our weather is growing more violent. Meanwhile, our nation keeps building new coal plants, even though they are the most destructive way to meet our energy needs. And the Obama administration and some Democrats are pushing dangerous new nuclear power plants.
Greens propose a decisive break from this madness. We must save our planet — before it is too late.

Here is our Green vision:
To forestall disaster, we call for an immediate halt in greenhouse gas emissions increases, and reducing these emissions 95% by 2050, compared to 1990 levels.
As a nation with less than 5% of the world’s population, we cannot continue to consume 25% of the world’s energy resources.

Greens support a decisive shift away from coal, oil, and [conventional] nuclear power, towards clean and renewable energy such as wind, solar, ocean power, geothermal and small-scale hydropower, and [clean fusion from hydrogen].
We call for extensive energy conservation efforts, to reduce energy consumption by 50% in 20 years.
We call for a massive financial commitment to developing clean renewable energy technologies [and safe, low-temperature fusion derived from seawater].
We call for major federal, state and local government purchases of solar cells on government buildings, to jumpstart the solar market.
Greens are opposed to [conventional] nuclear power. The prospect of a radioactive catastrophe is ever-present, there is no safe way to dispose of the radioactive waste, and it is financially risky and more expensive than other types of energy production.

We call for early retirement of nuclear reactors in less than five years, no new [conventional fission] nuclear plants, and an end to all corporate welfare for the nuclear industry.

We support a ban on new coal-fired power plants, and phasing out of electrical production by the burning of coal.

Much of the solution to climate change is at the local level. We support massive subsidies for expanding mass transit, as well as more bike lanes, bike paths and auto-free zones.

We support major changes in agriculture. We call for a dramatic expansion of organic farming. We want to shift price supports and subsidies away from animal agriculture to plant-based agriculture, small family farms and cooperatives. We also oppose the construction of all new factory farms.

We Greens want environmental justice. That means no new siting of toxic chemical or waste facilities in areas already contaminated.

We must stop polluting so much. Greens support a shift away from the use of toxic chemicals, and towards an industrial system based on clean production.

We want to protect our nation’s beautiful public lands. We call for an end to all commercial timber cutting and clear-cutting on federal and state public lands.

We must make the economy work to save our environment, by establishing true cost pricing for all goods and services.

We must stop trade agreements from crushing our environmental standards and accelerating the destruction of natural resources.

We encourage everyone to spend more time outdoors. When we cultivate our connections with nature, we strengthen our convictions and abilities to defend our skies, oceans, land, and biodiversity.

Chapter 3 Ecological Wisdom
Section: Energy
Section Subtitle: Energy for a safe climate and a cleaner world.

U.S. dependence on and overuse of dirty and dangerous energy sources has generated an unparalleled assault on the global environment and human rights in many nations. In the U.S., low income communities and communities of color bear the greatest burden of health impacts due to exposure to emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants. Native American communities have been devastated by uranium mining, and the poor of Appalachia witness helplessly as their ancient mountains are destroyed for a few years’ worth of coal-fired electricity.

The regional and global peaks in supply of oil, gas, coal and uranium production are driving up costs of conventional fuels, threatening continued wars and social chaos. To avert this we must move beyond the dirty and dangerous energy sources immediately and invest in only the cleanest, most sustainable energy strategies. We can and must strengthen our conservation and energy efficiency standards. Of highest importance is to use less, then to use wisely, and to have clean production of what is used.


1. Support public subsidies for clean renewable energy technologies – technologies that do not create pollution in the course of generating electricity. These can include wind, solar (including solar thermal and concentrating solar), ocean power, geothermal, and small-scale hydro, [and low-energy fusion from hydrogen]. Since even clean renewable energy can have negative environmental impacts, care must be taken to minimize such impacts. Clean renewable energy does not include [conventional] nuclear [fission] power, any sort of combustion or process in which by-products are ultimately combusted, or hydroelectric dams that block entire rivers.

2. Federal commitment to the mass-production of cheap, non-toxic solar photovoltaic technology to enable widespread deployment of solar power. To make solar more cost-competitive, we support large-scale government purchases of solar cells for installation on government facilities.

3. We support efforts of individuals and institutions to voluntarily purchase wind and solar power products through tradable renewable energy certificates. However, there are limits to the volunteer, market-based approach to promoting clean energy. Just as we cannot expect that individual purchases of organic food will cause all food production to become organic, we cannot expect that voluntary approaches will be sufficient to fully replace current energy supplies with clean energy. We support net-metering to make decentralized energy production economically viable.

4. We support further research to identify more safe, clean renewables, [cold fusion] and safe energy storage strategies.

END THE USE OF DIRTY AND DANGEROUS ENERGY SOURCES1. Oppose further coal, oil and gas drilling or exploration.

2. Ban the construction of hydroelectric dams.

3. Ban mountaintop removal mining.

4. Stop the development of fuels produced with polluting, energy-intensive processes or from unsustainable or toxic feedstocks, such as genetically-engineered crops, coal and waste streams contaminated with persistent toxics.

5. Support small and community-scale renewable and biofuels fuel production operations or programs that recover otherwise wasted biomass or utilize clean primary energy sources such as wind and solar.

NO [Conventional] NUCLEAR POWER
1. Ban any new construction of nuclear fission power plants.

2. Decommission all existing U.S. nuclear power plants expeditiously

3. Phase out technologies that use or produce nuclear waste, including non-commercial nuclear reactors, reprocessing facilities, nuclear waste incinerators, food irradiators, and all commercial and military uses of depleted uranium.

4. Ban plutonium (MOX) fuel, nuclear fuel reprocessing, uranium enrichment, and the manufacturing of new plutonium pits for a new generation of nuclear weapons.

5. No public subsidies or bailouts for the nuclear [fission] power industry.

1. Create extensive energy conservation efforts, with a goal of reducing energy consumption by 50% by 2030. (Review amount and time goal)

2. Decentralize electric grids.

3. Authorize tax-exempt bonds to finance public ownership of utilities and to allow publicly owned utilities to finance conservation, energy efficiency, and renewable energy projects.

4. Enact smart energy utility regulation for generation, transmission and distribution, not deregulation.

5. Support building codes for new construction that incorporate the best available energy conservation designs. For existing homes and buildings, we support programs to aid in their weatherization and increased energy efficiency.

6. Support research into advanced fuels when the purpose of the research is to develop a fuel that in its full cycle does not create more problems than it solves.

1. Support municipal, county-level, and state efforts to regain control over electricity by establishing democratic, public utility systems, to locally coordinate supply and demand and to eliminate energy trading.

2. Provide ratepayers deserve full disclosure of the specific electric generating facilities used to produce their electricity.