US Senate candidate Randy Hekman puts LENR first

December 29, 2010 Energy: America’s Next Space Race READ NOW.

The Michigan US Senate race includes over half-a-dozen Republicans vying for Democrat incumbent Debbie Stabenow’s long-held seat, but only one has LENR on their platform.

Randy HekmanFormer Juvenile Court Judge Randy Hekman states his energy policy on the campaign website www.RandyHekman2012.com:

8. Energy: The simple reality is that our economy depends on energy derived from coal, oil and natural gas to function. Energy exploration – mining and drilling – provide needed jobs and the energy these industries produce keep our economy moving. We need to end the policies that subsidize inefficient sources of energy such as ethanol, wind and geothermal. The best alternative energy program is Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). We must work to develop this energy program.
Randy Hekman, candidate for US Senate from Michigan

Randy Hekman has a long history of association with LENR science. He formed his own company in 1996 to provide energy research and consultation for LENR.

In 2004, along with Dr. Peter Hagelstein, Dr. Michael McKubre, Dr. Talbot Chubb, and Professor David J. Nagel, Mr. Hekman helped to prepare the report presented at the Department of Energy Review of the field that sought funding for research. The results of that Review, and a critique of the issues related to the Department of Energy and LENR, are compiled by Jed Rothwell here.

Mr. Hekman prefers the term LENR to ‘cold fusion’ saying that though the process is nuclear, it “involves neither fusion nor fission.” In addition, he says,
“Because of its nature, LENR does not require heavy shielding nor does it produce radioactive waste. It offers incredible potential to provide inexpensive and safe energy for our nation, and a boost to our economy.”

We sent Mr. Hekman a few questions about his experiences with LENR and here are his responses.

Randy Hekman
Senate candidate Randy Hekman supports LENR.

Q&A with Candidate Randy Hekman

CFN You are running for the US Senate seat from Michigan and have publicly stated support for LENR science and technology. What is the response when you discuss new energy?

RH I have spoken to many people in our state and elsewhere about LENR over the past 14 years that I have been working full or part time in this field. When I am given a full opportunity to explain how LENR works, I find people are supportive. The ultimate proof, however, will be when people become willing to invest major dollars in the technology. So far, this has eluded us.

CFN You believe that coal, oil and natural gas are still important. What do you see as the role of fossil fuels in the economy?

RH More than 1.7 trillion barrels of crude oil (these are proven reserves) can be found in the 50 states of our nation, plus enormous amounts of natural gas and coal. Until we get LENR on stream, we will need to use these resources to allow our economy to recover from the malaise it is in. But I firmly believe that LENR technology is the means of meeting the world’s energy needs into the future. It is safe, inexpensive, virtually inexhaustible, and causes no environmental damage. In fact, it can be used to convert spent fission fuel into benign elements.

CFN The BP/Horizon oil catastrophe caused damage to both the economy and environment, and the federal response was weak. As a member of Senate, how would you have responded differently?

RH The damage to the environment was significant at the time and costly to remediate, but not for long term. Human beings will at times make mistakes. We must do all in our power to minimize the likelihood and severity of mistakes, but deal with life when mistakes occur and go on. I am not overly put out by the federal government’s response except their reluctance to open up exploration more quickly.

CFN You state that “We need to end the policies that subsidize inefficient sources of energy such as ethanol, wind and geothermal.” Why do you call these sources of energy ‘inefficient’?

RH Without government subsidies, these approaches to alternate energy could not work. Government has a very poor record of picking winners and losers. Let market forces do their thing to bring the winners to the top and losers off the scale. LENR can become a powerhouse because it is good, not because government feeds it with resources.

CFN Why do you call Low Energy Nuclear Reactions LENR the ‘best alternative energy program’?

RH I am totally convinced that LENR is an energy source that is virtually limitless and can be used in small and very large applications safely and durably. I have studied it long enough to become totally convinced it is real and the wave of the future.

CFN In 2004, you were part of a group that presented a survey of the field of condensed matter nuclear science to the Department of Energy in a bid to include LENR science in their energy research funding mix. How would you characterize the outcome?

RH I was a part of that group. I was there when our group made its presentations to the panel of experts. The panel was impressed, as they should have been, with a description of the data supporting LENR experiments. But they were rolling their eyes when our team tried to describe the theories behind the data. We tried to say it was “cold fusion.” I am totally convinced it is neither fusion nor fission, but neutron-catalyzed nuclear reactions utilizing the weak force rather than the strong force.

CFN Recent demonstrations of Andrea A. Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer and announcements of other products planned for release next year by researchers in Greece and Italy have generated alot of excitement from the public, as well as some mainstream press. What changes, if any, have you noticed in the public awareness as these technologies are being developed.

RH I agree there has been growing news on the subject, but I am VERY skeptical of Mr. Rossi’s work, based on his excessive secrecy and his sketchy background. On the other hand, however, more and more legitimate scientists are following with great interest the work of Lewis Larsen and his partner, Allan Widom. I feel they accurately explain this phenomenon.

CFN Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney recently mentioned cold fusion in an interview with the Washington Examiner. What do think brought cold fusion to his attention? Are you aware of any other political candidate who supports condensed matter nuclear science?

RH I’m sorry, but I can’t answer your question about Mitt. And no, I don’t know of others who support it.

CFN What do you see on the new energy front moving forward into 2012?

RH I’m optimistic that we will see great breakthroughs in people’s acceptance and, frankly, we need it!

 

See also…

US Senator Hopeful – A LENR Enthusiast! by Eli Elliott May 16, 2011

Republican Candidate Mitt Romney speaks out for Cold Fusion
by Ruby Carat December 9, 2011

Republican candidate Mitt Romney speaks out for Cold Fusion

The Washington Examiner’s Transcript of our interview with Mitt Romney published here has this mention of cold fusion from the Republican Presidential candidate:

CARNEY: What role should government have in promoting certain industries or economic activities such as homeownership, or manufacturing, renewable energy or fossil fuel energy, exports, or just advanced technology? What sort of subsidies and incentives do you favor? You had some of these in Massachusetts, I know.

ROMNEY: Very limited — my answer to your first question. I’m not an advocate of industrial policy being formed by a government. I do believe in the power of free markets, and when the government removes the extraordinary burdens that it puts on markets, why I think markets are more effective at guiding a prosperous economy than is the government.

So for instance, I would not be investing massive dollars in electric car companies in California. I think Tesla and Fisker are delightful-looking vehicles, but I somehow imagine that Toyota, Nissan, and even General Motors will produce a more cost-effective electric car than either Tesla or Fisker. I think it is bad policy for us to be investing hundreds of millions of dollars in specific companies and specific technologies, and developing those technologies.

I do believe in basic science. I believe in participating in space. I believe in analysis of new sources of energy. I believe in laboratories, looking at ways to conduct electricity with — with cold fusion, if we can come up with it. It was the University of Utah that solved that. We somehow can’t figure out how to duplicate it.

But basic science, in my view, is a way that research can encourage our entire economy. And so, for instance, in Michigan, some years ago — I think it was in 2007 — I spoke there and said, you know, I think we ought to embark upon an effort to do analysis on energy research, transportation research, materials research. But again, basic research which could then be either purchased by or licensed by companies foreign and domestic.

CARNEY: For instance, nuclear power right now is getting loan guarantees under both Bush and Obama policies to help develop nuclear power more rapidly. Is that the sort of thing that you would support?

ROMNEY: My inclination would be to do this: It would be to say that – if we went to the nuclear people and they say that, you know, if you could give us our permits in three years, then we wouldn’t need any help. And so what I might be willing to do is say we will either give you your permits in three years or refund the money to you we’ve invested to build the facility or to reach this point. We will, in effect, give a guarantee that you will not be prevented from developing nuclear power by virtue of government’s malfeasance and ineffectiveness. And so rather than saying, here, we’ll give you a bunch of money to build a nuclear facility, we would instead guarantee certain government action.

In an area, sometimes it’s hard to find the line between research and development. In the area of nuclear research, for instance, there is discussion of an entirely different technology for building very small nuclear plants that use a pebble-type technology, as opposed to the rods that – you’re familiar with this – there’s a discussion about building a model facility to see if that technology actually works. I actually consider that research. It would be owned by the government; perhaps we’d hire companies to build it; and we’d see if it works. And if so, then that technology could be licensed to any number of companies, again, foreign or domestic, to build facilities here and around the world.

That, again, is if we don’t think that there is going to be sufficient interest in that part of industry to carry out research which has a very high-risk of failure and requires a great deal of resources.

It’s election season in the US, and time to demand better from our representatives. Now is the time to be planning your 2012 Campaign for Clean Energy.

How will you contact your political party and inform them of the one solution that’s been missing?

Access audio of this statement at the 3:30 mark.
Cold fusion is mentioned at 5:06 mark.

Uncle Sam says:

Citizen’s Petition calls for open support of cold fusion technology

Kelley T of Sierra Vista, AZ is the creator of the Whitehouse.gov petition asking President Obama to “investigate the usefulness of the Energy Catalyzer, a creation of the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi and he needs your help in gathering signatures to move the request forward to the President.

white-house-logo

Can you take a moment and sign the petition to publicly put this issue in front of President Obama? You must register with Whitehouse.gov using an email address to sign the petition, and the effort needs over 24,000 signatures to make it through.

Having just sent a batch of letters to the Congressional House and Senate Sub-committees on Energy, this effort towards the Whitehouse completes the triptych.

Sign the petition to the Whitehouse here.

Thanks Kelley, and thanks to all who took the time to lend their name to this Action for a clean energy future.

*******Kelley T has subsequently joined with Cold Fusion Now as zed short.

The Believer by zed short

Waiting for the E-Cat: A Comedy in Two Acts by zed short

Cold Fusion Now!

Letters to Congressional Energy Sub-committees repeat hearings request

Why does the Department of Energy refuse to acknowledge LENR science and technology as part of its energy portfolio?

Why does the US Patent Office siphon cold fusion patent applications outside of the review channel?

A recent mailing sent two dozen letters to the Senate Sub-Committee on Energy and other Senators requesting hearings into these questions.

This past few days Cold Fusion Now put together letters addressed to US Congressional Representatives on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce‘s Sub-committee on Energy and Power, as well as the House Committee on Space, Science and Technology’s Sub-committee on Energy and the Environment asking these very same questions.

This massive stack of snail mail is the whole 39 letters to Congressional energy policy makers requesting hearings to find the answers.

Stack of 39 letters
Snail mail retrieves the classic art of letters for sleepy TV-body Legislative Branch.

Hand-signed and flying with the wind to the attention of US Representatives such as Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland who since at least 2004 (when I started paying attention) spent more than his share of time educating his peers on Peak Oil, to no avail.

Also included on the Sub-committee on Energy and Environment is California Representative Dana Rohrabacher, who way back in 1989 spoke out in support of Drs. Fleischmann and Pons as they endured a torrent of vitriol from a physics arena that couldn’t reproduce the results.

In an editorial for the Los Angeles Times on June 18, 1989, Representative Dana Rohrabacher chastised physicists for their vehemence, beginning with a quote:

Every great idea has three stages of reaction:
1) It won’t work.
2) Even if it works, it’s not useful.
3) I said it was a great idea all along.
Arthur C. Clarke

It has been almost three months since two obscure chemists at the University of Utah held a press conference to announce that they had found something truly incredible in their test tube. Their reported discovery of cold fusion, if accurate, would usher not only science but all aspects of modern life into an era of growth and improvement that mankind has not experienced since the Industrial Revolution.

Not everybody was happy with this news.

The vehemence with which B. Stanley Pons and Martoin Fleischmann were denounced in the scientific community, the ferocity of attack on their work, as well as on their personal styles and motivations, surprised everyone. Well, that is, everyone who hasn’t taken a look at the history of science.

Representative Rohrabacher goes on to review the experience of great scientists such as Copernicus, Galileo, Antony van Leeuwenhoek and Joseph Lister. Continuing, he wrote:

And in Europe, the powers of the day heaped scorn on the idea that a steam engine could have a practical use in transportation, which sent Robert Fulton to America with his plans for a steam-powered boat.

As recently as 1956, the Astronomer Royal of England scoffed at space travel as “utter bilge.” The very next year, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik.

So, some of us were not surprised at the recriminations, both petty and sweeping, that deluged the two poor chemists in Utah upon their claims of discovering cold fusion.

The high priests of physics were annoyed with the scientists’ method of public announcement; several universities touted their inability to reproduce in a matter of weeks results arrived at over a period of years, and physicists the world over continue to express pique at the presumption of two chemists entering their realm.

Rep. Rohrabacher was not a believer, giving Drs. Fleischmann and Pons “around a 50% chance of being vindicated someday.”

He was a voice of tolerance, of integrity, of decency.
He wanted to give this discovery “a chance.”

Our world needs such people who are willing to look where others refuse, to reject commonly held premises in the quest for new truths and to step before us with brave new ideas knowing that vilification will follow, even if history ultimately vindicates them. If cold fusion does fly, Pons and Fleischmann will be remembered as men who changed the course of human history; if cold fusion turns out to be a worktable mistake, well, let’s remember Pons and Fleischmann as two men who excited our imaginations for a while and who reminded us that we should not discourage pursuit of scientific knowledge, even if it flouts conventional wisdom–even if it is done without the benefit of a federal grant.

And for these words of reason, disdain poured upon him too.

Perhaps our message will prompt him to think back to those moments when he had the courage and fire to speak for what was right, and this time, feel the strong and worthy support behind him to do it again.

In politics, we don’t have to agree on everything.

We just need folks to do their jobs.

Join us in asking Congress to do theirs.

Why doesn’t the DOE consider LENR science and technology, and why isn’t the Patent Office prioritizing LENR patents?

Patent Office Memo

Cold Fusion Now!

Related Links

Turkey Today, Genius Tomorrow: Cold Fusion Attempt Has a Noble Lineage in Science by Representative Dana Rohrabacher for the Los Angeles Times June 17, 1989

Representative Dana Rohrabacher Congressional webpage.

Representative Roscoe Bartlett Congressional webpage.

House Sub-committee on Energy and Power from Contacting the Congress

House Sub-committee on Energy and Environment from Contacting the Congress

Patent Office Memo scanned by Jed Rothwell from LENR Library.

Letters to the Senate request hearings on DOE and USPTO.

This past week Cold Fusion Now sent letters to all the US Senators on the Energy Sub-Committee requesting hearings on the Department of Energy’s refusal to acknowledge LENR science as a part of its research funding AND the US Patent Office’s lack of action on LENR technology.

Join us!

These folks here are the designated energy policy makers who need to be educated on the emerging technology that promises clean energy and a 21rst century economy.

2011 US Senate Energy Natural Resources Committee
ENERGY SUBCOMMITTEE
http://energy.senate.gov/public/

Chairman Jeff Bingaman NM
703 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
TDD: (202) 224-1792
Tollfree (in NM): 1-800-443-8658

Ron Wyden OR
221 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-3703
Phone: (202) 224-5244
Fax: (202) 228-2717

Tim Johnson SD
136 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
p. (202) 224-5842
f. (202) 228-5765

Mary Landrieu LA
431 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Telephone: (202) 224-5824
Fax: (202) 224-9735

Chairman Maria Cantwell WA
311 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-3441
202-228-0514 – FAX

Bernard Sanders VT
332 Dirksen Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Phone (202) 224-5141
Fax (202) 228-0776

Debbie Stabenow MI
133 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4822

Mark Udall CO
Hart Office Building Suite SH-328
Washington, D.C. 20510
P: 202-224-5941
F: 202-224-6471

Mark Udall CO
Pikes Peak Region
2880 International Circle
Suite 107
Colorado Springs, CO 80910
P: 719-471-3993

Jeanne Shaheen NH
520 Hart SOB
Washington, DC
20510 Ph: (202) 224-2841
Fax: (202) 228-3194

Al Franken MN
309 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-5641

Joe Manchin WV
303 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC, 20510
Phone: 202-224-3954
Fax: 202-228-0002

Christopher Coons DE
127A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC, 20510
(202) 224-5042

Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski AK
709 Hart Senate Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Main: 202-224-6665
Fax: 202-224-5301

John Barasso WY
307 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-6441
Fax: 202-224-1724
Tollfree: 866-235-9553

James E. Risch ID
SR-483 Russell Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
tel: 202-224-2752
fax: 202-224-2573

Mike Lee UT
316 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Phone: 202-224-5444
Fax: 202-228-1168

Rand Paul KY
208 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC, 20510
Phone: 202-224-4343

Daniel Coats IN
493 Russell Office Bldg
Washington, DC, 20510
P: (202) 224-5623
F: (202) 228-1820

Rob Portman OH
338 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-3353

John Hoeven ND
120 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington DC, 20510
Phone: 202-224-2551
Fax: 202-224-7999

Dean Heller NV
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-6244
Fax: 202-228-6753

Dean Heller
Lloyd George Federal Building
333 South Las Vegas Blvd., Suite 8203
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Phone: 702-388-6605
Fax: 702-388-6501

Bob Corker TN
SD-185 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-3344
Fax: 202-228-0566

Letters are also en route to constituents of Florida, California, Utah, Nevada, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Massachusetts to be postmarked and sent to their Senators’ local offices.

Don’t let this science be ignored while billions are wasted on obsolete non-solutions.

Don’t let this technology be derailed or delayed by excessive regulation.

The possibility of a peaceful future on this planet demands no less than all our effort, no matter how small.

As Infinite Energy magazine approaches its 100th issue, I was flipping through an old issue from 1995 (Volume 1 Number 3), I found this letter to editor Eugene Mallove from then Senator Bob Dole.

Notice “the anonymous contributor” that prompted Senator Dole to write. Perhaps a letter, a book, a conversation, a video, might yet turn on a light today in DC, or your hometown.

Senator Bob Dole

The loss of wildlife and marine species, a generation of young people with few opportunities, the elderly living on flyspecks in a world they don’t understand; in a vast universe of potential, is this the best humans can do?

Demand access to clean energy.

Demand jobs with integrity and purpose.

Demand the tools to empower your local community.

And make your demands clear to the people who serve at our pleasure.

We have the power; we have only to use it.

Congressional committee’s are next….http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Cold Fusion Now!

DJ spins with Cold Fusion Now on NBC6 Miami

Bologna, Italy may be the center of the universe for cold fusion action, but Miami, Florida is gearing up as a contender for 2012.

DJ LeSpam of the Spam Allstars, a ensemble that mixes multiple genres into a futuristic, Cubano funk, slapped a sticker on his tables, and everywhere he spins, the floor gets more than just a beat; they glimpse the future of energy too.

The band includes Tomaz Diaz on timbales, AJ Hill on sax, Mercedes Abal on flute, Chad Bernstein on trombone, and Jose Elias on tres and guitar.

And they made history as the first to show-off Cold Fusion Now on national TV.

The crew assembled last Monday October 24 at the NBC6 Miami television studio for a promotional spot to support the Kiwanis Club of Little Havanna and their Spooktacular Halloween event. During the performance the camera panned across the the tables and revealed to the TV landscape the message of cold fusion.

OK, it was a tiny message, but visible nonetheless.

spamallstars on nbc6 miami
DJ Le Spam sports Cold Fusion Now on every jam.

Watch the video of the spot here at NBC6 Miami.

Yes, yours truly was an early member of Spam, when back in the day, an official Spam recipe was cooked onstage at every gig, with plenty of MSG on the side.
Here’s a recently unearthed photo from 1995.

Spam Allstars circa 1995
Spam Allstars circa 1995

Miami is a musical town, where a musician can actually make a spare living playing in the myriad of nightspots that cater to the tourists who come for the beaches and shopping.

In 2012, Miami could be hosting another type of visitor, shopping for clean cold fusion reactors, soon to be the energy bargain for a world in need.

Cold Fusion Now!

See where Spam Allstars are playing and download music for free on their website HERE.

And if you are in Miami, catch them every Thursday night at Hoy Como Ayer en La Pequeña Habana. You will not have a better night on the town.

Top