Patent is only valid in Italy. A significant tipping point nonetheless.
A recent post up from the Cold Fusion “Andrea Rossi” Method Facebook page – “Does E-Cat need a “validation”? – Rossi responds to the everyday requests which he receives for independent validation and fears of industrial espionage:
“Here is the inventor Andrea Rossi answering to Mr Frank on the Journal of Nuclear phisics about a request of “validation” of the E-Cat:
Dear Mr Frank:
I receive every day requests from all the world of Universities, Associations, Laboratories from any Country, of any kind which want to make an “independent” test to offer us the only possible real validation of the technology. Should I accept, 24 hours per day, 365days per year would not be enough to be so much validated. I respect all the wannavalidate of the Planet, but I want to remember that:
1- In October we will start deliver to our Customers our plants, so that the validation will be made by the Customers: they will use our plants 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. That is the sole real validation that counts for us, also because if the plants work, Customers will pay us, if not, they will not pay us. The plants have to respect precise guarantees we gave about their efficiency and their safety. We are not searching any validation. We never did. We just wanted to make a good product.We have already made our public presentations, no more of them will be made. With the University of Bologna we will continue the R&D program, but not to “validate”: the validation must arrive from the market. The aim of the R&D program with the University of Bologna, financed by us, and therefore made with our money, is to develop our future, not to “validate”. Not to mention the fact that the real target of the wannabe validators, in 99 cases out of 100, is to get information and make industrial espionage, as already occurred to me with another “validator” with whom we severed any collaboration after getting evidence of the fact that data obtained from us have been utilized for a competition.
2- I thank anyway Prof. Peter Hagelstein for his attention. If the MIT is interested to our product, they can buy a plant, and make all the validations they want, for themselves, and get from it good heating too, during the hard Bostonian winters ( I lived there for some year, mamma mia, che freddo!)
The Cold Fusion Andrea Rossi Method Facebook page can be found at http://www.facebook.com/EnergyCatalyzer
James Martinez produced another hour of far-out radio in his recent Ca$h Flow interview with Ron Miller of www.technocracy.org.
Download full .mp3 April 7 interview with Ron Miller from the Cold Fusion Radio Audio page.
Defined by Wikipedia:
“Technocracy is a form of government in which engineers, scientists, health professionals and other technical experts are in control of decision making in their respective fields. The term technocracy derives from the Greek words tekhne meaning skill and kratos meaning power, as in government, or rule. Thus the term technocracy denotes a system of government where those who have knowledge, expertise or skills compose the governing body. In a technocracy decision makers would be selected based upon how highly knowledgeable they are, rather than how much political capital they hold.”
Ron Miller is a retired engineer who now educates about technocracy conducting workshops for kids at schools and colleges. One of his students described technocracy as “a cross between Star Trek and Nova”, which may be as accurate as Wikipedia.
James, whose show looks at issues of money and society, asked about the support shown for a “no money society” from technocracy.org poll participants. Mr. Miller responded:
“What the organization proposed was that the amount of energy that is required to produce every single thing that society needs should be accounted for, and everyone would be given their share, simply by dividing between the population, of the amount of energy over a given budgeting period.
An then when you go into a store, that amount of energy would be deducted so that we could keep track of what’s going where, and so on and so forth. You still have to have a feedback mechanism, for instance, so that the warehouses know that their beginning to run out of a particular product and the warehouse can tell the manufacturer they need more and the reason we chose energy is because energy is the most fundamental constituent of anything physical.
In the universe, there is really only two things, matter and energy, and without energy there is no motion and no movement. It requires energy to dig materials out of the ground, it requires energy to turn them into products, and so forth. Most of the time we don’t measure it, but we certainly could.
One of the real problems, too, that you have when we talk about money, and this is one of the things that I make sure to explain to kids in the classroom, is that money is not wealth. Money is not wealth at all.
Wealth is the chairs they’re sitting in, the buildings they’re sitting in, the houses they go home to, the cars they drive in. That’s wealth. Money is just a pile of paper.”
James asked Mr. Miller what would life look like with this different type of living arrangement, and how would a country operate under this system?
“There would be numbers of things that simply wouldn’t change much,” Mr. Miller said. “People still have to have homes, some place to live, they still have to eat, and so on and so forth, and go about their business.”
“But when you no longer have a price system, there’s a whole bunch of things that you don’t need anymore. You don’t need Wall Street. In fact it becomes worthless, pointless, it can’t exist. Neither can corporations exist. The banking systems becomes obviously non-existent, just an empty building. Most of the financial structure that we have now essentially would disappear.
We certainly wouldn’t need the advertising that we have anymore. There’s going to be huge numbers of things connected with the financial system that we are not going need.
A great deal of what is left can and should be automated, very quickly in some cases. Immediately, what the organization proposed was that a person should start work about the age of 25 and retire by the age of 45. I think that even with a framework of only 20 years of working, I think you’d have trouble finding work for alot of people.
Now, that having been said, we’re going to have to completely rebuild our infra-structure. It’s at a minimum inadequate, if not downright dangerous. It needs to be drastically converted into something that uses far less energy.”
Mr. Miller offers solutions like transportation systems like high-speed magnetically levitated trains, which would replace polluting airplanes. People would work only 4 hours a day, 4 days a week, leaving more time for them to engage in creative pursuits. He describes “an explosion” in the arts and sciences “because people will want something to do with their time and lives of value.”
He believes the transformed society would have personal transports that are diesel-driven, which means there is a huge hole in this model, but he does say overpopulation is the biggest issue that must be dealt with whether or not a technocracy was established.
M. King Hubbert was an original Technocrat. We recently wrote about Mr. King’s interest in nuclear power and his time at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, then the Atomic Energy Commission. Those who claim Carbon Currency is an outgrowth of the Technocracy, Inc are missing the point by limiting credit to carbon, though perhaps it is not surprising that this is so in a world where governments are indistinguishable from fossil fuel corporations.
A free-energy society operating on energy credits may sound radical, but low-energy nuclear reactions LENR technology is poised to drop on world culture within the next couple of years, and questions such as how our economy can and should be shaped will be important to stabilizing the effects.
It was Marshall McLuhan whose theories of communication expressed the importance of understanding our technology so that we do not become slaves to it. Laws of Media, written with his son Eric McLuhan, models a system that allows an inventory of effects when new technologies are introduced in society, in order to better mitigate the inevitable disservices.
In the discussion of how to create a new living arrangement on a planet-wide scale using cold fusion technology, one model is proposed by Technocracy, but you decide. In a no-money society, how would we operate with free-energy credits?
Planet Forward is a consortium including PBS, National Geographic and George Washington University, set-up seemingly to create dialogue on innovative energy solutions.
They are planning a special PBS broadcast on innovative energy for this year’s Earth Day, and they want you to decide what innovative ideas should be featured..
From their website http://planetforward.org/vote-pbs/:
On April 8, 2011 PBS will air a Planet Forward special…made by you. Our members have submitted their ideas about how we generate or use energy more efficiently, and YOU decide if they get on the show. Learn more about the special….
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
On October 26, Cold Fusion Now posted the CBS 60mins video clip on Cold Fusion: More than Junk Science as an innovative energy idea.
If you vote for this idea, cold fusion could be featured on the special broadcast to be aired for Earth Day 2011.
Follow this link and scroll down to October 26, 2010. (Fifth row of submissions down. You will see the greenish cold fusion cell bubbling.)
Click the thumbs up to add to the “Viability” of cold fusion energy. The more votes, the better.
Very few ideas even have votes – and it ain’t hard to beat zero.
Cold fusion is creeping from ground to figure, and nothing will stop that. But a little push, and low-energy nuclear reactions could be a feature of Earth Day 2011.
From Planet Forward:
The days are counting down. Nominations close on February 4 and voting closes a week later on February 11.
Cold Fusion Now!
Gerald Celente, lauded prognosticator of Trends Research Institute, recently put new energy and cold fusion as #6 on his Top Trends for 2011 in the Trends Research Journal.
As a regular guest on cable news and contrarian financial radio shows, we can expect lots more cold fusion talk on the virtual landscape.
And, it’s started.
He also mentions the trouble with getting patents with anything related to cold fusion.
For the full interview, go to http://radio.goldseek.com/ for this Saturday’s January 29 broadcast. Listen to this exert here.
Download the report from Prof. Giuseppe Levi, Dr. David Bianchini and Prof. Mauro Villa (Bologna University) about the experiment.
This past weekend, a cold fusion reactor was demonstrated in Italy by scientists Sergio Focardi and Andrea A. Rossi. In this demonstration, about 18 liters of water went into the device, and turned into steam.
Speak Italian? Watch their video release on their Youtube channel:
Of course creating steam means creating heat to turn a turbine, and that means creating electrical power. The device apparently ran for an hour giving off an estimated 23,000 Kilojoules of thermal energy!
See Jed Rothwell’s report and preliminary analysis on the News page at his LENR News site http://www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm.
This demonstration is still being confirmed, but many respected researchers are lining up in support of the results, in spite of rumors of inventor and engineer Mr. Andrea Rossi’s background.
The demonstration would be a difficult one to fake with members of the University of Bologna physics department measuring power inputs and outputs, and, with one of the scientists measuring the heat generated being the former president of the Italian Chemical Society. See the Advisors for this project here.
This demonstration, when fully confirmed, will be remarkable as the reaction is not from a deuterium and palladium system, but a reaction involving hydrogen and nickel. The theory of this reaction is outlined in this article “Hydrogen/Nickel cold fusion probable mechanism” from the scientists’ group blog.
Using nickel, as well as other less expensive metals and alloys, will bring the cost of cold fusion power devices much lower than if they had to use palladium, a precious metal that is more costly to mine and produce.
Also, using hydrogen, instead of its isotope deuterium, means that the fuel for this type of reaction consists of the most abundant material in the universe, and on planet earth in the form of water!
From Mr. Allan’s article, he quotes an estimated cost for electricity generated from a device using this technology:
“Rossi estimates that the cost of energy made with this system will be below 1 cent/kWh, in case of electric power made by means of a Carnot cycle, and below 1 cent/4,000 M J in case of thermal power production for heating purposes. That is several times cheaper than energy from fossil fuel sources such as coal or natural gas.
According to Rossi, the demonstrated device shown last Friday is their industrial product that is claimed to be reliable and safe. In normal operation it would produce 8 units of output for every unit of input. Higher levels of output are possible, but can be dangerous. They will soon start serial production of their modules. Combining the modules in series and parallel arrays it is possible to reach every limit of power. The modules are designed to be connected in series and parallels.”
As we learn more about new energy technologies, we find that there are many ways to tap the power of the atom, and even the vacuum of space. Imagine a power device that gives a nuclear-sized power and runs on water? Ultra-clean nuclear power will take humanity to a new level of evolution. There is no reason to continue to subsidize oil, gas, and coal when these new technologies are about to blow! It’s time to get educated and get on board.
If you are in the US, call President Obama on the Whitehouse Comment Line 1-202-456-1111. Call your Congressperson.
If you are elsewhere, call your government officials.
Tell them “there is a clean energy solution: fund LENR research now. We want ultra-clean nuclear power from water. It’s been demonstrated many times over. You said that alternative energy was a high priority. Please demonstrate your commitment to new energy technologies by publicly stating your support and putting dollars into researching this science and engineering the technology of the future.”