Category: Patents

Posted on

US Examiner Addresses Andrea Rossi US Patent Application

The US Examiner at the United States Patent Office has finally reached the patent application of Andrea Rossi. That application was first filed as an Italian filing on April 9, 2008. It was translated into English and up-graded into an application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty – PCT on August 4, 2009. And it finally arrived at the US Patent Office as of September 16, 2010.

The text of the disclosure in this application became frozen as of the date of the PCT filing, August 4, 2009. It is not permissible to amend the story after the “final” filing of a regular patent application, which is how a PCT application is treated. Therefore this application represents Rossi’s understanding of his invention as of August 4, 2009.

As is usual with a first initiative by a US Patent Office Examiner, this Office Action rejects the application. Rossi now has three months from March 26, 2014, extendable upon fee payments up to six months, to file a Response. That Response must overcome the Examiner’s objections or the application will go abandoned, unless Rossi pays fees for Continued Examination or files an appeal.

The key claim that Rossi was endeavoring to obtain reads as follows:

“1. A method for carrying out an hexothermal reaction of nickel and hydrogen, characterized in that said method comprises the steps of providing a metal tube, introducing into said metal tube a nanometric particle nickel powder and injecting into said metal tube a hydrogen gas having a temperature much greater than 150.degree. C. and a pressure much greater than 2 bars.”

“Hexothermal” is spelling error for “exothermal” which can easily be corrected. This claim is supposed to identify a new method which will produce excess heat.

While the application explicitly states, in para [0065]: “the invention actually provides a true nuclear cold fusion”, the Examiner’s Office Action does not use the expression “Cold Fusion” to criticize the filing. Instead, the Examiner expressed doubt that the described invention would be able to provide the heat as alleged and claimed. He therefore concluded that, unless shown to the contrary, he was going to rule that the invention does not work, i.e. it is “inoperable”. An invention must be useful to qualify for a patent. Therefore, unless Rossi can prove the contrary, this application will be rejected for failing to meet the utility requirement of Section 101 of the US Patent Act.

While Rossi cannot add any further text to the disclosure in this application by way of amendment, if he can show that, following the recipes set-out in his original disclosure, the results as promised can actually be achieved, then the Examiner may withdraw this objection. Rossi would have to provide authoritative evidence to this effect, probably from an independent source such as a Research Institute or an established Engineering firm in order to be sure of satisfying the Examiner. That may cost a substantial amount of money.

Unfortunately, any outside evaluator would be required to follow the procedures described in the application based on knowledge as it existed as of the date of the PCT filing on August 4, 2009. This may prove a barrier to demonstrating utility.

As an additional ground of rejection, the Examiner has also alleged that the disclosure is inadequate as failing to meet the requirements of Section 112 of the US Patent Act which reads as follows:

“The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.”

Rossi faces the challenge that he must not only prove that the invention as described in the application actually works in the manner as promised, but also that the disclosure is sufficient to enable others to achieve such useful results.

The Examiner did not refer to this specific passage in the disclosure of the Rossi patent application:

“[0025] In applicant exothermal reaction the hydrogen nuclei, due to a high absorbing capability of nickel therefor, are compressed about the metal atom nuclei, while said high temperature generates internuclear percussions which are made stronger by the catalytic action of optional elements, thereby triggering a capture of a proton by the nickel powder, with a consequent transformation of nickel to copper and a beta+ decay of the latter to a nickel nucleus having a mass which is by an unit larger than that of the starting nickel.”

The feature of using catalyzing material is addressed in one of the dependent claims as follows:

“8. A method according to claim 1, characterized in that in said method catalyze materials are used.”

Claim 8 could never go forward. There is no description in the disclosure identifying what constitutes the specific catalyzing materials. Nothing can be claimed that it is not supported by an enabling disclosure in the body of the patent specification.

Furthermore, applicants are expected to describe the: “best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention”. If the applicant knows of special catalytic materials that make the invention work better, then he is required to disclose them in the application. Having acknowledged that such materials exist and having failed to identify them, this application violates the requirements of Section 112 and could be rejected on that basis. The Examiner may raise this point in a future Office Action if prosecution continues.

This is a serious deficiency in this application.

Another example of inadequate patent drafting is the following statement in the disclosure:

“[0062] The above mentioned apparatus, which has not been yet publicly disclosed, has demonstrated that, for a proper operation, the hydrogen injection must be carried out under a variable pressure.”

If it is known that a mandatory procedure must be employed in order to make a claimed process operate properly, then that procedure has to be included in the principal claim, Claim 1. In this case, such a limitation has not been incorporated into Claim 1. This claim could have been rejected on that basis alone.

One of the depending dependent claims does provide as follows:

“4. A method according to claim 1, characterized in that said hydrogen is injected into said tube under a pulsating pressure.”

Being a dependent claim, Claim 4 overcomes this deficiency of Claim 1 in that it does incorporate a feature asserted to be essential in the disclosure. The limitations of Claim 4 are therefore directly available to be added to Claim 1 in an attempt to repair its deficiency.

However, claims must also be definite and an Examiner would typically ask for limitations to be included in the claim that characterize the types of pulsations suitable to ensure that the claim covers a fully functional procedure. If a Response were to be filed, it would be appropriate to search through the disclosure for ranges and other limitations on pressure pulses to be incorporated into Claim 1 in order to ensure that Claim 1 describes a method that actually works.

There are no references in the disclosure as to the nature of the pulsations: their strength, frequency, duration, waveform or other parameters. If the Examiner were to raise this type of objection the consequences would be fatal to the application

There are therefore many grounds for the Examiner to have rejected this application. Not all were applied in this first Office Action. Instead, the Examiner relied upon lack of operability as the primary objection. In addition, he also made a novelty objection based on the assertion that Claim 1 describes something that had been done before, referring to published experiments wherein nickel was converted to copper by ionic bombardment using a linear accelerator. This is a pretty lame objection. A reading of Claim 1 will show that there is no stipulation in the claim that a nuclear transmutation will occur. Rather, it is in the discussion of theory in the disclosure that such allegations are made. The Examiner is wrong in criticizing Claim 1 on this basis. The Examiner was simply confused or inattentive in making this objection.

The disclosure contains an extended discussion of theory which, rather than helping an applicant will usually only get an applicant in difficulty. It’s not necessary to describe a theory why something should work. It’s essential to describe a procedure by which an actual operating version of the invention can be implemented. Any description of a theory is superfluous. Indeed, it is dangerous to suggest a theory; the theory might be wrong. As has occurred here the Examiner has seized upon flaws in the theories recited to justify his skepticism that the invention actually works as promised. It would have been much better, for patenting purposes, not to have included any discussion of theory.

One can only speculate how a patent application such as this was originally drafted and managed to go forward. It must have cost the applicant tens of thousands of dollars, including translations from the Italian, to get to this stage. Was this done intentionally, knowingly that the application was deficient? This is not logical. It’s more likely that the original patent attorney simply wrote down the material as reported to him by the inventor without giving feedback and guidance on the inadequacy of the disclosure. This happens all too often.

Inventors should be more aware of what is really expected to produce a patent application that will support a valid patent grant. This is quite apart from the separate issue of producing a valuable patent which is meaningful and effective. To minimize the risks of spending money futilely, in the case of important inventions, it would be appropriate to get a second opinion from a second attorney. This should be done well before the end of the initial priority year in time to make adjustments and corrections before the one-year deadline arrives.

This application by Andrea Rossi has been available for public examination for several years. If it describes a working invention one would presume that others would have followed the instructions in the disclosure and achieved the promise of excess energy. Though not proof of the inadequacy of the disclosure, such validating demonstrations have not been publicly disclosed. One can only speculate why this has not occurred.

Andrea Rossi is entitled to file further applications containing an improved disclosure so long as his claims focus on material that is new, i.e., are limited covering only things not previously available to the public. Such applications are not published until they have been pending for 18 months from the earliest, original filing date. It is possible that Mr. Rossi has a follow-on application that has already been filed but is not yet published. We can only wait in order to see if this is true.

Posted on

Seldon Technologies, NASA, and LENR

“The present disclosure combines the unique properties of nanotubes and in one embodiment carbon nanotubes, in a novel manifestation designed to meet current and future energy needs in an environmentally friendly way. Devices powered with nanotube based nuclear power systems may substantially change the current state of power distribution.” 
–Retired U.S. Rear Admiral Craig E. Steidle of Seldon Technologies on cold fusion nanotube-based nuclear power systems.

Rear Admiral Craig E. Steidle – USN, NASA, DoD
Admiral Craig E. Steidle served as the first Associate Administrator of the Office of Exploration Systems at NASA (now known as the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate), an organization formed to implement NASA’s human exploration of the solar system as announced in the Vision for Space Exploration.

Adm. Steidle served as the Director of the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Advanced Strike Technology Office and was the Director of the Joint Strike Fighter Program, DoD’s largest program.

Admiral Steidle officially resigned from the position of associate administrator for exploration systems in June 2005. He served as a Visiting Professor in Aerospace Engineering at the U.S. Naval Academy for five years and then briefly as the President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation before fully retiring in 2011.

Craig Steidle NASA’s Future Is Rising From ‘the Swamp’
by Guy Gugliotta, Washington Post, Dec.15, 2004
At NASA headquarters, they call it “the swamp,” a broad expanse of the fifth floor where experts gather to figure out how to accomplish the most ambitious space feat ever: a multi-decade plan to send humans from Earth to the moon and ultimately to Mars.

The master of this domain is Associate Administrator Craig E. Steidle, the retired Navy rear admiral who runs NASA’s not-so-new-anymore Office of Exploration Systems and who went to work for NASA after the top brass lured him in as a consultant….

Craig Seidle and Dennis Bushnell were each highlighted in 2008 American Society for Engineering Education Conference. I imagine each know of each others works, Admiral Steidle as board-member of cold fusion company Seldon Technologies and Dennis Bushnell as a leader in NASA cold fusion.

Distinguished Lectures Presentation Title: “The Future(s) of Energetics” by Dennis Bushnell was sponsored by the Mechanical Engineering Division. This talk summarizes the increasingly dire and ever nearer term implications of Global Warming and Peak Oil and then considers the spectrum of “Green” and the “Ways Forward” to replace Fossil Carbon Energy Sources. There are four approaches possible in the nearer term. These include approaches with the capacity to replace petroleum for transportation and coal/natural gas for base load. While they require research, they are both feasible and affordable.

The lecture also considers the “frontiers of the responsibly imaginable” in energetics going forward, and “Wild Card” approaches which proffer revolutionary possibilities. Energetics issues considered include Generation, Storage, Conservation and Transmission. Lecture concludes with a brief discussion of “Second Law Warming”, which will follow Atmospheric Warming and constrains the solution options for Atmospheric Warming.

Best Paper Award – NSEE 2008 “The Loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia: Portaging the Leadership” by Robert Nieweoehner, Craig Steidle, and Eric Johnson, sponsored by the Engineering Management Division.

December 2008 “The Energetics Futures Brief” with NASA Chief Scientist Dennis M. Bushnell” for the University of Alberta Energy Club.
This presentation will focus on the advanced and futuristic technologies already at the laboratory stages or on the horizon that have the potential to shape how we will live and conduct our activities. The urgency for humanity to change energy consumption, and the types of energy that is used will form part of this presentation leading to a discussion on the following topics:

  • Nano-plastics for the conversion of solar energy into electricity
  • Thermo-electrics (i.e., the direct conversion of temperature differences), tidal-current turbines and geothermal sources for electricity production
  • Production of food biomass and biofuels by means of genetically modified halophytes (salt tolerant plants) and algae growing in saline or brackish waters
  • Robotics replacing higher-level human labour, machine intelligence and human life extension
  • Carbon dioxide (CO2) to carbon monoxide (CO) conversion and hydrogen production by artificial photosynthesis
  • Photo-catalytic electrolysis of water for hydrogen production
  • Low-radiation nuclear fusion, such as proton – Boron 11 aneutronic fusion
  • Low energy nuclear reactions

Seldon Technologies
Now, Craig Steidle is on the board of directors of Seldon Technologies, Inc. The two following Seldon patents are noteworthy.

Methods of Generating Energy and/or he-4 Using Graphene Based Materials
Publication date: Oct 30, 2013

Inventors Christopher H. Cooper, William K. Cooper, James F. Loan
From the Patent:

Deuteron-Based Reactions

[0050] Fusion of two deuterons that are confined in a solid can theoretically result in three different outcomes as shown in the following equations (V. E. Kim, Purdue Univ., The 15th International Conf. on Condensed Matter Nuclear Sci. (ICCF-15) Oct 5 -9, 2009)

[0052] For each 4He produced by two deuterons 23.8 MeV energy is released because of the well-known relationship between change in mass during a fusion process and energy release (E=mc2). It is speculated that the energy released is in the form or electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths ranging from Gigahertz to extreme UV, sometimes referred to as “soft x-rays”

[0053] It has been discovered that graphene materials have an unusual electronic structure making it an ideal candidate for a variety of applications, primarily in the field of electronics. In particular, it has been discovered that the single atomic layer of carbon, characteristic of graphene materials, effectively screens Coulomb interactions, causing graphene to act like an independent electron semimetal. Furthermore, one particular graphene material, carbon nanotubes, can be grown with remarkable uniform diameters, number of walls, and atomic structure. See, “The Effective Fine-Structure Constant of Freestanding Graphene Measured in Graphite,” Science, Vol. 330 no. 6005 pp. 805-808 5 November 2010, which is herein incorporated by reference

[0058] The results presented herein are, in general, consistent with other reported low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) experimental results, most notably the work of McKubre at Stanford Research Inst, who reported a peak 4He concentration of 1 ppm after 20 days of aging palladium powder in D2 gas (APS meeting, Denver CO, March 5, 2007)

Methods of Generating Energetic Particles Using Nanotubes and Articles Thereof
US 20130266106 A1 – Publication date Oct 10, 2013

Inventors: Christopher H. Cooper, James F. Loan, William K. Cooper, Alan G. Cummings Original Assignee: Seldon Technologies, Llc

From the patent:
ABSTRACT

There is disclosed a method of generating energetic particles, which comprises contacting nanotubes with a source of hydrogen isotopes, such as D2O, and applying activation energy to the nanotubes. In one embodiment, the hydrogen isotopes comprise protium, deuterium, tritium, and combinations thereof.

There is also disclosed a method of transmuting matter that is based on the increased likelihood of nuclei interaction for atoms confined in the limited dimensions of a nanotube structure, which generates energetic particles sufficient to transmute matter and exposing matter to be transmuted to these particles.

DESCRIPTION

This application claims the benefit of domestic priority under 35 USC §119(e) to U.S. application Ser. No. 60/741,874, filed Dec. 5, 2005, and Ser. No. 60/777,577, filed Mar. 1, 2006, both of which are incorporated by reference herein.

Disclosed herein are methods of generating energetic particles, by contacting nanotubes with hydrogen isotopes in the presence of activation energy, such as thermal, electromagnetic, or the kinetic energy of particles. Also disclosed are methods of transmuting matter by exposing such matter to the energetic particles produced according to the disclosed method.

A need exists for alternative energy sources to alleviate our society’s current dependence on hydrocarbon fuels without further impact to the environment.

The inventors have developed multiple uses for nanotubes and devices that use such nanotubes. The present disclosure combines the unique properties of nanotubes and in one embodiment carbon nanotubes, in a novel manifestation designed to meet current and future energy needs in an environmentally friendly way.

Devices powered with nanotube based nuclear power systems may substantially change the current state of power distribution. For example, nanotube based nuclear power systems may reduce, if not eliminate, the need for power distribution networks; chemical batteries; energy scavenger devices such as solar cells, windmills, hydroelectric power stations; internal combustion, chemical rocket, or turbine engines; as well as all other forms of chemical combustion for the production of power.

Posted on

Mitsubishi Cold Fusion LENR Patent Granted Transmutes Nuclear Waste

Amazingly enough LENR patents are now being granted, after passing the muster of the patent examiner. They must perform, as described, in order to do so. Each time I rejoice, and after studying it deeply, appreciate the brilliant and applied efforts undertaken to achieve such a patent granted.

Initial Patent Application – Filed 2001

Nuclide Transmutation Device and Nuclide Transmutation Method

Iwamura, Y., T. Itoh, and M. Sakano Iwamura, Y., T. Itoh, and M. Sakano, 2002, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.: U.S.A.

Abstract

The present invention produces nuclide transmutation using a relatively small-scale device. The device that produces nuclide transmutation comprises a structure body that is substantially plate shaped and made of palladium (Pd) or palladium alloy, or another metal that absorbs hydrogen (for example, Ti) or an alloy thereof, and a material that undergoes nuclide transmutation laminated on one surface among the two surfaces of this structure body.

The one surface side of the structure body, for example, is a region in which the pressure of the deuterium is high due to pressure or electrolysis and the like, and the other surface side, for example, is a region in which the pressure of the deuterium is low due to vacuum exhausting and the like, and thereby, a flow of deuterium in the structure body is produced, and nuclide transmutation is carried out by a reaction between the deuterium and the material that undergoes nuclide transmutation.

Cold Fusion

Now this LENR patent has been granted, Dec. 4th, 2013

Years of consolidated efforts between multiple branches of advanced arts of science has led to improvements, another successful LENR patent is granted. This important LENR technology transmutes nuclear waste to benign elements, with simpler processes than used today, much less expensive machinery, and can even handle those hard to transmute actinides, such as Cs-137.

A Key to How

[0032] According to the nuclide transmutation method described above, the material that undergoes nuclide transmutation is transmuted to a nuclide having a similar isotopic ratio composition, and thereby the nuclide transmutation reaction can be promoted.

Nuclide Transmutation Device and Nuclide Transmutation Method

Google Patents Link  –  Espacenet Link

INPADOC legal status: EP1202290  (B1) ― 2013-12-04

Legal status of EP1202290 (A2) 2002-05-02; EP1202290 (A3) 2003-06-04; EP1202290 (B1) 2013-12-04: EP F 01402812  A (Patent of invention)

Publication number: EP1202290B1

Publication type: Grant
Application number: EP20010402812
Publication date: Dec 4, 2013
Inventors: Yasuhiro Iwamura, Takehiko Itoh, Mitsuru Sakano

Applicant: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

Description of Arts Related to Actinides Remediation

[0004] Three types of disposal processing methods are known:
  • i) disposal processing for actinides and the like by neutron irradiation in a nuclear reactor such as a fast breeder reactor or an actinide burn reactor;
  • ii) nuclear spallation processing for actinides and the like by neutron irradiation in an accelerator,
  • iii) and disposal processing of cesium, strontium, and the like by gamma ray irradiation in an accelerator.

Known Processing Methods are Problematic

Hence the growing stockpiles of nuclear waste. Presently utilized nuclear waste disposal processes are clearly inadequate, difficult, and extremely expensive as described here.

[0010] However, in the case of carrying out nuclide transmutation using a nuclear reactor or an accelerator, as in the disposal processes in the above-described examples of conventional technology, there are the problems in that large-scale and high cost apparatuses must be used,

[0011] Furthermore, in the case of processing, for example, Cs-137, which is a long-lived radioactive nuclide fission product, when transmutating Cs-137 radiated from an electron power generator of about one million KW to another nuclide using an accelerator, there are problems in that the necessary power reaches one million KW and a high strength and large current accelerator become necessary, and thus efficiency is low.

[0012] In addition, in contrast to a thermal neutron flux of about 1×1014/cm2/sec in a nuclear reactor such as a light water reactor, the neutron flux necessary for nuclide transmutation of Cs-137, which has a small neutron interaction cross section, is about 1×1017 – 1×1018/cm2/sec, and there is the problem in that the necessary neutron flux cannot be attained.

Mitsubishi Patented LENR Nuclear Waste Remediation 

Claims

A nuclide transmutation device for achieving a nuclide transmutation, comprising:
  • i) a multilayer structure body; that is made of palladium or a palladium alloy, or a hydrogen absorbing metal other than palladium, or a hydrogen absorbing alloy other than a palladium alloy,
  • ii) an absorption part and a desorption part that are disposed so as to surround said multilayer structure body on the sides and form a closed space that can be sealed by said multilayer structure body,
  • iii) a high pressurization device that produces a relatively high pressure of deuterium at said absorption part on the side of the surface of said multilayer structure body,
  • iv) and a low pressurization device that produces a relatively low pressure of deuterium at said desorption part on the other side of the surface of said multilayer structure body,
Characterized in that said multilayer structure body includes:
  • i) a base material  including a hydrogen absorbing metal or a hydrogen absorbing alloy;
  • ii) a mixed layer formed on said base material and comprising a hydrogen absorbing metal or a hydrogen absorbing alloy,
  • iii) and a material having a low work function that allows emission of electrons equal to or less than 3 eV;
  • iv) a surface layer formed on said mixed layer and comprising a hydrogen absorbing metal or a hydrogen absorbing alloy;
  • v) and an additional layer bound on the surface of said surface layer and that undergoes nuclide transmutation,
  • vi) said high pressurization device includes a deuterium gas supply device configured to supply the deuterium gas into said absorption part so that said additional layer that undergoes nuclide transmutation is exposed to the deuterium gas and a flow of the deuterium that penetrates through the multilayer structure body is provided.

A nuclide transmutation device according to claim 1, wherein said additional layer that undergoesnuclide transmutation includes at least one of Cs, C, Sr and Na.

A nuclide transmutation device according to claim 1 or 2, wherein said low pressurization device comprises an exhaust device which evacuates said desorption part.

A nuclide transmutation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein said base material is formed by Pd, said mixed layer is formed by Pd and a material having a work function equal to or less than 3 eV, and said surface layer is formed by Pd.

A nuclide transmutation device according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein said mixed layer comprises layers of Pd and layers of CaO that are laminated alternately.

A nuclide transmutation device according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein a heating device for controlling the temperature of the multilayer structure body is provided.

A nuclide transmutation method using the nuclide transmutation device according to any one of claims 1 to 6, comprising the step of:

  • i) a low pressurizing process that brings about a state in which the pressure of the deuterium is relatively low on the other surface side of said multilayer structure body,
  • ii) characterized in that the method further comprises a high pressurizing process of supplying a deuterium gas from said deuterium gas supply device into said absorption part so that the surface of said additional layer that undergoes nuclide  transmutation is exposed to the deuterium gas,
  • iii) and providing a flow of the deuterium that penetrates through the multilayer structure body.

KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK

Ain’t just show biz…
When you know your biz…

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

Anticipatin’

A generation…

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

Now we’re provin’ …
That we’re groovin’…

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

Now we’re growin’
We keep on flowin’

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

Sweet romancin’…
In all our dancin’…

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

Ain’t just show biz…
When you know your biz…

Everyone’s sayin’… Keep Up The Good Work!

gbgobleapgoble2012

Posted on

Liviu Popa Simil – LENR – Nuclear Battery Roadmap

This fellow proves to be quite bright…  Just study his patents granted.

One example is:

“Nano-structured Nuclear Radiation Shielding”

In July, 2012 he presented the following paper and slide show at the LENR International Conference:

“Roadmap to Fusion Battery – A Novel Type of Nuclear Battery and Potential Outcomes and Applications”

ABSTRACT

“The Fusion battery was the object of many science fiction novels and movies; the most recent one being “Star Trek,” but now it is poised to come to life. These batteries rely on a process that converts the fusion energy into electricity. They are more compact and state-of-the-art and resemble an aluminum air battery, but up to about 10 million times more powerful.

In my developments I have learned that is possible that in a specific particle arrangement, sometimes met by nano-structures, with a specific excitation creating what now is considered exceptional conditions it is possible to generate nuclear reactions, like transmutation, fusion or fission.”

This LENR patent Is related to his work, I expect it to be granted soon.

“Method and Device for Direct Nuclear Energy Conversion in Electricity in Fusion and Transmutation Processes”

ABSTRACT

“A method and device to generate electric energy on demand by fusion or transmutation nuclear reactions produced inside a super-capacitor that uses inter-atomic field’s particularities obtained inside nano-structures, by using temperature, density and electric fields in order to modify nuclear entanglement and quantum non-localities particularities in order to control nuclear reaction rate of an inserted material, called nuclear fuel, facilitated by the nano-structure nuclear composition, called burner, that controls the non-local nuclear reaction.

Fusion or transmutation generated nuclear particles’ energy is converted using a super-capacitor made of a micro-nano-hetero structure meta-material that loads from the nuclear energy and discharges by electric current.

The device contains the nuclear burner module that produces the nuclear particles surrounded by the direct nuclear energy conversion into electricity super-capacitor modules comprising several functional sub-modules, and the utilities that provide the nuclear fuel and byproducts management and process control systems.”

He has also authored the following:

“Advanced Nano-Nuclear Program Proposal” – LAVM LLC, Los Alamos

BRILLIANT

The art of appreciation resonates…

Like a low energy nuclear reaction. Thank You!

I am just beginning to appreciate the true depth of Liviu Popa Simil, I checked out his books at the library and am on the fourth of five. When finished, I will enthusiastically contact him to say, “Keep up the good work… and always remember… we love you!”.

My prevailing thought, while reading his books was:

“This gentleman will enjoy working together with us on Open Source LENR projects.”

Read his books, and if you concur, then go ahead and reach out to him.

“The Fusion Battery, A Novel Type of Nuclear Battery and Potential Outcomes and Applications”, (Nuclear Power – Fusion… by Liviu Popa-Simil (Jun 28, 2012)

“Applied Nano-technologies Improves Nuclear Power Safety and Performances”, (Nano-technologies in Nuclear Power) by Liviu Popa-Simil (Feb 21, 2012)

“The Challenges of the Future Individual Transportation”, by Liviu Popa Simil (Feb 27, 2011)

“The Challenges of the Future – How the Climate Change Might Affect US!”, by Liviu Popa Simil (Mar 8, 2011)

“Who Doomed US? We the People! New IP Initiative Might Save US!”, by Liviu Popa-Simil (Jan 19, 2012)

And as an addendum there is also…

This is a story I wrote a few months ago.

You might enjoy the re-telling of it.

If so, please do tell as often as you like.

Insight into the workings of cold fusion LENR science and engineering…

LENR science, is best served to, as a multi-disciplinary art.

“LENR: The Debutante at the Ball”

Posted on

Message from ICCF-18: Sunday Basic Course

Some 25 enthusiastic participants signed up for David Nagel’s Basic Course, scheduled to run from 8 AM to 4:30 PM on Sunday, July 21, Registration Day for ICCF-18.

David Nagel arranged for presentations to be made by: Michael Melich; Mahadeva Srinivasan; Vittorio Violante; Michael McKubre; Peter Hagelstein ; David Nagel himself, and myself, David French. Also in the room as interested participating observers were Ed Storms and Dr. Celani from Italy. The sessions were intended to conclude at 4:30 PM but ran on to 6:30 PM partly because of the enthusiastic participation of the audience in asking questions.

This basic course, led by individuals with lots of gray hair, provided an intense but informative presentation of the fundamentals of the LENR phenomenon from its roots in 1989. It provided a great grounding for those not familiar with basic principles and a very useful refresher for those who think they’ve heard it all before.

David Nagel in his opening remarks made it clear that active Cold Fusion debunkers still exist. These are generally persons who ignore the data. He expressed a wish that he could present such individuals with a definitive collection of all of the excess heat reports that have been generated over the last 20 years. Somewhere out there, somebody has probably prepared or, hopefully, is preparing such a document.

Mike Melich shared his 2009-2010 personal experiences with Andrea Rossi that led to the rebirth, under Rossi’s initiatives, of the hydrogen gas-nickel system for generating heat energy. Discovered in the early 1990s, this gas phase type of experiment went into partial eclipse. Following Rossi’s famous public demonstration in January, 2011, this technology is now in the forefront of the field. Defkalion is planning to make two demonstration experiments based on hydrogen-nickel at ICCF-18 using the Internet. A most interesting observation by Mike Melich was that Rossi in 2009 was demonstrating Cold Fusion experiments based on hydrogen-nickel to generate heat almost as a whimsy. Since then, however, Rossi has clearly become market oriented.

Dr Srinivasan emphasized the developing importance of transmutation as an alternate phenomenon to nuclear fusion in the field. The evidence is there for some degree of transmutation, but not at profound levels or rates. It’s still unclear whether this is arising from neutron or proton capture. But recent experiments such as those of Dr Iwamera based upon deuterium permeation of metallic foils definitely shows a decline in the presence of carbon and sulfur at the same time as a rise in the level of content of manganese and silicon. Theoretical equations have been proposed to support these transmutations. Even the manganese appears to have a theoretical pathway for conversion to silicon. Accordingly, the LENR phenomenon may actually be a multiple or combination of phenomena: fusion and transmutation.

The remaining speakers provided their wisdom in their respective fields and I had the fortunate/unfortunate opportunity to be the second last speaker before David Nagel was to provide his concluding remarks. I spoke on patenting Cold Fusion inventions before the US Patent Office. Unfortunately, the audience had many many questions about patenting in general. I got drawn-in to the seductive experience of answering questions until I realized how quickly time was flying. I even had to plead with some of the speakers to stop asking their questions, and even then some persisted. In the end, David Nagel to his great credit, gave up his time to make concluding remarks in order to allow my presentation on the theme of patenting to reach its conclusion. My message was simple: think of something useful, describe how others can make it happen and stipulate a feature that is new. Not complicated when summarized in a few words, but pregnant with meaning and concepts that are hard to absorb.

I tried hard to stay away from my favorite theme, “patenting sensibly”, and focus on meeting US PTO requirements to patent Cold Fusion. I circulated an email received from the US Patent Office confirming that they will issue patents for Cold Fusion inventions if they meet the requirements of four sections in the Patent At. These are the sections that deal with the usefulness, novelty, inventive step, and the obligation of an applicant to provide a description that will enable others to reproduce the invention.

The point of my presentation was: you can get a patent for something in the field of Cold Fusion, even at the US Patent Office. I provided one example of a success, and one example of a failure.

Tomorrow the Conference begins in serious. You can tell it’s going to be serious because opening remarks are scheduled for 7:45 AM with two keynote speakers following directly thereafter.

Until the next time.

Posted on

Transmutes Radioactive Wastes Now – U.S. Navy and LENR Energy

The United States of America Navy LENR energy patent is noteworthy. The transmutation of radioactive waste to benign elements through LENR low energy nuclear reactions is of global importance. With the continuing Fukushima disaster, inadequate storage of spent fuel rods, and the plutonium sludge leaks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation site; each which threaten planetary health, our government should be fast-tracking the LENR remediation of nuclear waste. This technology should be brought forward with broad disclosure and international involvement. The U.S. has not made broad disclosure and is thereby stalling international collaboration in development of this important nuclear waste and pollution remediation, a cold fusion technology.

Can we trust the DoE to do it right this time?

NAVY LENR Patent Granted – Transmutes Radioactive Waste

genie_fast_facts

Ruby read the previous article and had this to say

Ruby Carat July 9, 2013 at 11:32 AM

“Who will license this???”

“Somebody – please!” see GEC Fast Facts

The Global Energy Corporation Has Use of Patent

Companies working with U.S. governmental agencies developing technology have first consideration as patent licensing takes place.

Global Energy Corporation is utilizing the LENR nuclear waste remediation technology developed at SPAWAR. Lawrence Parker Galloway Forsley of Global Energy Corporation along with JWK International have worked with SPAWAR developing this technology for decades. Following many years of research and development the Navy patent was filed in 2007. Department of Energy funded SPAWAR LENR research has most likely been continuous since the 1989 announcement of cold fusion.

The DoE has controlled the release of information pertaining to this technology since before 2007, keeping it from the eyes of the public. It is well known that the DoE discredited Pons and Fleischmann in 1989 and has continued to marginalize LENR through search engine censorship and misinformation.

Quote Global Energy Corporation, “This manuscript has been co-authored by National Security Technologies, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 with the US Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.”

We have been lied to about cold fusion research at SPAWAR. (see Navy Commander Halts SPAWAR LENR Research Posted on March 1, 2012 New Energy Times). We have been misled about the value of pursuing LENR Energy. Historians will investigate those responsible for this. We will eventually understand why the Department of Energy of the United States of America has secretly coveted while publicly denouncing the science of cold fusion.

We the People, as the Government of the United States of America, would certainly like to see our State and Federal representatives, fellow citizens, scientific institutions, as well as the nuclear regulatory agencies and political leaders of all nations to be informed of this nuclear remediation technology now.

Furthermore

We the Peoples of the United States of America, as owners of this important technology, certainly do not want it to be hidden or marginalized any more. Contrary to the DoE and their method, the truth should be told about LENR. International development should be sought and licensing agreements offered widely to utilize this technology. A Congressional sub-committee should be formed seeking international cooperation in making this technology available, worldwide, as quickly as possible. 

The Lawrence Parker Galloway Forsley LENR Patent

A HYBRID FUSION FAST FISSION REACTOR (View it here)

A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor is disclosed. The hybrid reactor may include an electrolyte solution comprised of PdCI2 a conductive salt and D2O, an anode of a noble metal, a cathode consisting of a conductive high Z (atomic number greater than 46) material wound around a deuteride-forming actinide nuclear fuel element, a power source providing constant current to the + anode and the – cathode, an applied power profile for fabricating the PdD nanoalloy, and a co-deposition of a PdD nanoalloy on to the high Z cathode winding as well as the nuclear fuel element. A preferred embodiment stablizes the actinide deuteride nuclear fuel element from hydrogen isotope de-loading. A preferred embodiment initiates deuterium-deuterium fusion in the deuterized fuel element and fissioning deuterized fuel element actinides. A preferred embodiment includes surrounding spent nuclear fuel elements with deuteride nuclear fuel elements that will fast fission the spent fuel elements. Another preferred embodiment includes surrounding the deuteride nuclear fuel elements with spent fuel elements as fast neutron reflectors that will also fission.

WOUS2009001213@@@true@@@en.gif

Claims

What’s Claimed Is

1. A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor in a vessel comprising:
an electrolyte solution comprised of PdCb a conductive salt and D2O;

  • an anode of a conductive noble metal provided within said electrolyte solution;

  • a cathode comprising a conductive high Z (atomic number greater than 46) material wound around a metallic actinide nuclear fuel element;

  • a power source providing constant current to the + anode and the -cathode;

  • an applied power profile for fabricating the PdD nano-alloy; and

  • an electrolytically co-deposited PdD nano-alloy on to the high Z cathode winding and on said fuel element.

2. A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor as claimed in claim 1 wherein said cathode wound around said fuel element acts as a neutron generator and said cathode is comprised of a composition of the non-deuteriding series selected from the group consisting of platinum, gold, mercury, lead and bismuth.

3. A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor as claimed in claim 1 wherein the nuclear fuel element is electrolytically deuterided beyond the actinide-deuterium beta phase.

4. A deuterided nuclear fuel element adapted by the electrolytic loading of deuterium to provide lattice fluctuations which initiate primary and secondary deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions at sites in the actinide metal lattice producing fast neutrons.

5. A deuterided fuel element as claimed in claim 4 where said fast neutrons fission the actinides comprising said nuclear fuel element.

6. A deuterided fuel element as claimed in claim 5 then sealed with an amalgam of compounds to prevent isotopic hydrogen deloading through desorption.

7. The deuterided fuel element of claim 6 further comprising an apparatus for pulsed control that produces acoustic, thermal, radiofrequency or other emanations attached to the deuterided fuel element and periodically enhancing local actinide-deuterium loading resulting in deuteron fluctuations producing primary and secondary deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions and neutrons.

8. A deuterided fuel element as claimed in claim 7 where said neutrons fission the actinides comprising said fuel element.

9. A plurality of said deuterided fuel elements as claimed in claim 8 arranged to irradiate and fission a spent nuclear fuel element, or a plurality of nuclear spent fuel elements, with fast primary and secondary deuterium-deuterium fusion reaction neutrons.

10. A plurality of said spent nuclear fuel elements arranged around said deuterided fuel elements claimed in claim 9 to act as fast neutron reflectors while also fissioning said spent fuel elements.

11. A nuclear spent fuel pool comprised of a plurality of said spent fuel elements and deuterided fuel elements as claimed in claim 10.

12. A method for removing heat generated by the primary and secondary deuterium-deuterium fusion reactions in said deuterided fuel elements and from fast neutron fission of said spent fuel elements.

 

Abstract Highlight Terms
Chemicals (link)
A hybrid nuclear fusion fast fission reactor is disclosed. The hybrid reactor may include an electrolyte solution comprised of PdCI2 a conductive salt and D2O, an anode of a noble metal, a cathode consisting of a conductive high Z (atomic number greater than 46) material wound around a deuteride-forming actinide nuclear fuel element, a power source providing constant current to the + anode and the – cathode, an applied power profile for fabricating the PdD nanoalloy, and a co-deposition of a PdD nanoalloy on to the high Z cathode winding as well as the nuclear fuel element. A preferred embodiment stablizes the actinide deuteride nuclear fuel element from hydrogen isotope de-loading. A preferred embodiment initiates deuterium-deuterium fusion in the deuterized fuel element and fissioning deuterized fuel element actinides.; A preferred embodiment includes surrounding spent nuclear fuel elements with deuteride nuclear fuel elements that will fast fission the spent fuel elements. Another preferred embodiment includes surrounding the deuteride nuclear fuel elements with spent fuel elements as fast neutron reflectors that will also fission.

Global Energy Corporation

Publications

Publications by Global Energy Corporation and collaborators at SPAWAR Systems Center, Pacific and JWK International

Although it has sometimes been difficult to publish in a controversial field, by conducting careful experiments and reporting the results, Global Energy Corporation collaborators at the U.S. Navy SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific and its predecessors and JWK International have published 24 peer-reviewed papers in seven technical journals and two book chapters. Our publication record documents steady progress in conducting experiments to demonstrate ever-increasing evidence that nuclear reactions can be stimulated using low energies in an electrochemical cell. Our most recent paper uses CR-39 to record and compare the impacts of high-energy particles produced in our pilot GeNiE reactor with neutrons from a known D-T fusion source.

P.A. Mosier-Boss, J.Y. Dea, L.P.G. Forsley, M.S. Morey, J.R. Tinsley, J.P. Hurley, and F.E. Gordon, “Comparison of Pd/D Co-Deposition and DT Neutron Generated Triple Tracks Observed in CR-39 Detectors,” Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 51 (2010) 20901.

Abstract

Solid state nuclear track detectors (SSNTDs), such as CR-39, have been used to detect energetic charged particles and neutrons. Of the neutron and charged particle interactions that can occurin CR-39, the one that is the most easily identifiable is the carbon breakup reaction. The observation of a triple track, which appears as three alpha particle tracks breaking away from a center point, is diagnostic of the 12C(n,n’) 3α carbon breakup reaction. Such triple tracks have been observed in CR-39 detectors that have been used in Pd/D co-deposition experiments. In this communication, triple tracks in CR-39 detector sobserved in Pd/D co-deposition experiments are compared with those generated upon exposure to a DT neutron source. It was found that both sets of tracks were indistinguishable. Both symmetric and asymmetric tracks were observed. Using linear energy transfer (LET) curves and track modeling, the energy of the neutron that created the triple track can be estimated.

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific ILIR and S&T Initiatives Programs, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and JWK Corporation. The authors would also like to thank Dr. G. Phillips, nuclear physicist, retired from the Naval Research Laboratory, US Navy, Radiation Effects Branch, and P. Carbonnelle fromUniversité catholique de Louvain for valuable discussions in interpreting the optical data. It was G. Phillips who first pointed out the existence of triple tracks in our CR-39 photomicrographs. The authors acknowledge the contributions of Dr. S. Szpak, retired from SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific, who pioneered the Pd/D co-deposition process. This manuscript has been co-authored by National Security Technologies, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 with the US Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.

Technology

GeNiE Reactor technology is based on 20 years of experimental research by Global Energy Corporation, JWK International, and SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego scientists and engineers. The results have been published in over 20 peer-reviewed technical journal articles. Our most recent publications document the ability to efficiently produce high-energy neutrons that are capable of fissioning uranium. We have answered the critical scientific questions:

  • Our experiments are repeatable.

  • Our experiments have been replicated by others.

  • Our experiments provide direct evidence that nuclear reactions are involved including the production of high-energy neutrons. Although our experimental results are not predicted by current nuclear physics theories, the results are real.

The GeNiE Reactor takes advantage of the efficiently produced high-energy neutrons in a proprietary hybrid fusion, fast-fission reactor design to produce power from un-enriched uranium. The GeNiE Reactor is not prone to melt down since it doesn’t rely on a chain-reaction to produce high-energy neutrons. The GeNiE Reactor will extract more energy from the fuel than conventional nuclear Reactors. The GeNiE Reactor is lower cost since it doesn’t required enriched uranium and it doesn’t produce hazardous nuclear waste that is costly to handle. By fissioning existing hazardous waste, the GeNiE Reactor can generate power and mitigate existing hazardous waste at the same time. And by eliminating the need for enrichment, the GeNiE Reactor removes all requirements for uranium enrichment except for weapons production, thereby removing the uncertainty in the purpose of enrichment programs such as the current program in Iran.

Global Energy Corporation and their collaborators are currently experimenting with small pilot GeNiE Reactors and are designing prototype GeNiE Reactors for commercial applications. While there are numerous products possible, GEC is currently focusing on the GeNiE Hybrid Fusion, Fast-Fission Reactor that will use either natural uranium or existing hazardous waste as fuel.

FAQ

(The facts according to the Global Energy Corporation)

  • Q. This sounds like Cold Fusion. Wasn’t “Cold Fusion” disproven?

  • A. While most people think that the Department of Energy concluded that the claims were wrong, this is not the case. In fact, after two reviews in 1989 and 2004, the DOE ENERGY RESEARCH ADVISORY BOARD found that there wasn’t enough evidence to either prove or disprove the claims and that more research was needed. Furthermore, several other countries are awaking to the fact that the phenomena may be real as documented in a recent DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY TECHNOLOGY ALERT paper. GEC scientists and collaborators developed a different experimental protocol that allowed them to go beyond the initial claims of Fleischmann and Pons. Our experiments are repeatable, they have been replicated by others and our results have been published in peer-reviewed papers. Additionally, our experiments produce direct evidence of nuclear activity including emission of high-energy neutrons.

  • Q. How can this be real since it doesn’t match theory?

  •  A. History is full of examples where the accepted theory had to be adapted to match new experimental results. At one time, theory held that the earth was flat. Galileo was put under house arrest by the church for observing that the earth was not the center of the universe. Cassini and other scientists held that the speed of light was infinite long after Romer had provided solid experimental evidence that it was 186,000 miles per second. There’s a statement in science that, “Theory guides, experiment decides.” A theory is only as good as its ability to predict or describe experimental results. If the experimental results don’t confirm the theory, it’s the theory that must change since the experimental results are controlled by nature. This is not to say that all current nuclear physics theories are wrong but that they are incomplete when it comes to explaining our experimental results. Each year, hundreds of PhD’s are awarded to students who have improved or evolved a theory so that it more accurately explains experimental results. These and many other examples show how theory must evolve to match observation. Several theories have been proposed but to date, none match all of our observed experimental results.

  • Q. How do you overcome the coulomb barrier?

  • A. Several possibilities such as a stripping reaction or the equivalent to “tunneling” in solid state electronics have been suggested as a way to overcome the coulomb barrier. More research is needed to determine the answer to this question.

  • Q. What technical challenges need to be overcome before this technology can be commercialized?

  • A. Our GeNiE pilot reactors have demonstrated the ability to produce neutrons with enough energy to fission either natural uranium, enriched uranium, or existing hazardous waste. We are currently working to optimize the reactions and increase the flux of high-energy neutrons. Once this is achieved, many commercial applications are possible.

  • Q. If this is real, you should all be dead because of the neutrons that would have been produced. How do you answer that since you’re obviously still alive?

  • A. One of the properties of our experiments is that the neutron flux is several orders of magnitude less than that predicted by conventional theory. The current flux levels are not hazardous however we are currently working to optimize the experiments to increase the flux. We recognize the dangers of high-energy neutrons and take appropriate precautions.

 

National Security Technologies

National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) was formed in 2006 as a joint venture between Northrop Grumman Corporation, and three other corporate partners. These partners are AECOM, CH2M Hill, and Babcock & Wilcox (B&W). With some 2,450 employees, NSTec manages operations at the 1,360-square-mile Nevada National Security Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and at its related facilities and laboratories for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Site Office. The company has satellite offices in Los Alamos and Albuquerque, New Mexico; Santa Barbara and Livermore, California; and Washington, D.C., along with a small number of employees located in nine other states and two foreign countries.

Our mission includes homeland security and defense applications, defense experimentation and nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship, as well as environmental management. We specialize in training our nations experts and testing new technologies to detect weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and to mitigate and manage the consequences posed by WMDs once they are detected. We are also equipped to conduct arms control verification testing as well as training of arms control inspectors. NSTec frequently teams on projects with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories. In addition, the company works on projects for other federal agencies such as the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, NASA, Department of Defense, Department of State, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Air Force, Army, and Navy.

We are also committed to fulfilling our role as a responsible corporate citizen through support of charitable organizations, primarily in the areas where we live and work. At NSTec, we focus on three key areas to achieve more effective results: education, civic and community relations, and diversity.

The Naval, Joint and National knowledge superiority through quality research, development, acquisition, test and evaluation (RDAT&E) and full life cycle support of effective Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR), Information Operations (IO), Enterprise Information Services (EIS) and Space capabilities.

SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific

Our Mission: Enable Information Dominance for our Naval, Joint, National and Coalition warfighters through research, development, delivery and support of integrated capabilities.

Our Vision: SSC Pacific will be the Nation’s pre-eminent Technical Leader for Integrated C4ISR Solutions for Warfighters.

Defense Threat Reduction Agency

DTRA is the U.S. Department of Defense’s official Combat Support Agency for countering weapons of mass destruction. Our people are Subject Matter Experts on WMD, and we address the entire spectrum of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high yield explosive threats. DTRA’s programs include basic science research and development, operational support to U.S. warfighters on the front line, and an in-house WMD think tank that aims to anticipate and mitigate future threats long before they have a chance to harm the United States and our allies. SCC-WMD, the U.S. Strategic Command Center for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction, synchronizes Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction efforts across our military’s geographic commands and leverages the people, programs and interagency relationships of DTRA at a strategic level. We work with the military services, other elements of the United States government, and countries across the planet on counterproliferation, nonproliferation and WMD reduction issues with one goal in mind: Making the World Safer.

Since DTRA stood up in October 1998 and SCC-WMD in August 2005, the Department of Defense and other federal agencies have increasingly looked to both for support and advice. Both organizations’ responsibilities span the full range of activities necessary to combat and respond to WMD proliferation and use. At home and abroad, DTRA and SCC-WMD deliver mission success against a very real and growing threat.

JWK Corporation

(JWK) has provided reliable, high quality professional services to our customers for over 30 years. Our customers, which include the Department of Defense, numerous U.S. government agencies, and various commercial and foreign enterprises, have come to realize that JWK stands for high quality, affordable technical expertise.

JWK has earned a reputation for technical excellence and cost effective operations by ensuring our customers receive the benefits of a highly qualified, affordable technical workforce, high quality products, and on time delivery. After many years of successful service contract work we are now pleased to be able to offer the full range and depth of our experience and our cost effective labor schedules to the General Services Administration.

Our emphasis on efficient, responsive management helps to ensure our client’s satisfaction. JWK honors our commitments.

JWK has traditionally provided and will continue to provide professional and technical services related to engineering, computing, telecommunications and information technology, health care and education, transportation and energy, environmental protection, intelligence, logistics, and operations and maintenance. These diverse disciplines have provided the background for JWK to focus on innovative, “high end” technology solutions that will provide a paradigm shift in strategies and solutions for our clients. Some of our technologies are uniquely our own, proprietary innovation. In some cases, we integrate other available technologies to develop “technology packages” for specific solutions.

Follow Navy LENR part III

“Energy Shortage – LENR Cold Fusion – Navy Guam”

  • MONDAY, 13  FEB  2012

  • THE Consolidated Commission on Utilities and the Guam Power Authority are investigating a new type of “generation five” nuclear power generator – one that could potentially reduce power costs for Guam ratepayers by half or more.

  • The Variety has learned Dr. Jay W. Khim, CEO of Global Energy Corp. (GEC) based in Annandale, Va., made a presentation to the utilities commission, GPA officials and Navy engineers last month and will make another tomorrow afternoon.

  • CCU member Eloy Hara, who says he is “spearheading” the project on behalf of GEC, told Variety: “After the presentation that Dr. Khim gave to the CCU and the Guam power management team, and almost an hour-long discussion afterward … we were all awed by the technology.

The Navy LENR – A Four Part Series

Navy LENR Part I

You are viewing Navy LENR Part II

Navy LENR Part III

Navy LENR Part IV 

Top