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!

Edmund Storms on “Federal Support and the ‘Rossi Effect’

The testing of Andrea A. Rossi’s 1 Megawatt proto-type nickel-hydrogen reactor is underway in Bologna, Italy. Reportedly conducted for a customer from the US, there is limited access to the private event, although Sterling D. Allan from Pure Energy Systems is attending and will be posting his impressions here on E-Day: Tracking the 1MW Test.

What is 1 Megawatt? This article from Hank Mills and Mr. Allan describes it in easy to understand language. Given an average electrical usage of between 1 and 1.5 kiloWatts per home, a 1 MegaWatt unit producing electricity could power between 750 and 1000 homes.

It should be noted that Mr. Rossi’s reactor is a thermal energy device that produces steam heat and not electricity. However, as a first step in a revolutionary new energy technology, this is the beginning of an era for the development of ultra-clean power from hydrogen.

While negative press continue to prejudice this science, the effect of Mr. Rossi’s demonstrations technology has increased the level of awareness in the public about cold fusion research.

Here Edmund Storms talks about how a commercially available device will affect the attitudes in the political class.

Mitchell Swartz of Jet Energy, a cold fusion research company that has developed the Phusor and Nanor reactor, has put together some quotes made by accomplished individuals that reveal bias towards the new, the unfamiliar, the revolutionary, for even the smartest people can’t always imagine what’s possible.

Consider this statement:

“There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.”
Ken Olson Chairman and founder Digital Equipment Corporation from 1977


Cold Fusion Now!

*************************************************************************

Related Links

How much is One (1) Megawatt? by Hank Mills and Sterling D. Allan from PESN

Skeptic Quotes Through History collected by Dr. Mitchell Swartz Cold Fusion Times

Department of Energy policy continues to ignore revolutionary new energy


Keith Owens of Cold Fusion Energy, Inc. asked the Department of Energy DoE what their “stand” on cold fusion was.

The response was a clear statement of their policy: cold fusion does not merit any attention:

From: Afzal, Shahida [mailto:Shahida.Af…@science.doe.gov] On Behalf Of Opdenaker, Albert
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 4:05 PM
To: ‘Ke…@cfeis.com’
Subject: Cold Fusion

Dear Mr. Owens:

This is in response to your e-mail message to Secretary Chu dated September 13, 2011 in which you asked to know where the Department of Energy stands on “cold fusion.”

In 1989, a review panel that had been charged by the Department concluded that reports of the experimental results of excess heat from calorimetric cells did not present convincing evidence that useful sources of energy will result from the phenomena attributed to “cold fusion.” To quote the panel, “Hence, we recommend against the establishment of special programs or research centers to develop cold fusion.”

In 2004, the Department organized a second review of the field and that review reached essentially the same conclusion as the 1989 review. The Department’s Office of Sciences does not provide any funding support for “cold fusion” research.

Al Opdenaker

Fusion Energy Sciences
Office of Science
US Department of Energy
301-903-4941
albert.opdena…@science.doe.gov

Cold Fusion Now sent a letter to the Secretary of Energy last October that got no response.

Recently, a second letter from Cold Fusion Now to the Department of Energy response saying “it is clear the topic of low energy nuclear reactions remains highly speculative and that the purported mechanism has not yet been validated by the physics community as a reality.”

Sigh.

It seems hopeless to solicit funding from this crew at the DOE with Under-secretary Koonin, a known cold fusion opponent.

“We are suffering from the incompetence or delusions of Fleischmann and Pons.”
Current Under-secretary Steve Koonin quote from 1989

And it is interesting to note that the respondent here writes from the department’s Fusion Energy Science office, the hot fusion wing.

But these letters are not in vain. Writing a letter is a lesson in expressing a complicated issue in a one-page petition; collecting signatures is a fun time talking with the people on the streets; we learn more science, and made new pals along the way. Every action adds to the momentum of cold fusion as a clean energy reality. And we are on the verge of new technology that will change the world!

The Department of Energy will be the last in line for their device – and it’s going to be a long line.

Next up: the Energy committees in the House and Senate….

Supporting Links

Documentation of Department of Energy Review of Cold Fusion from LENR Library at www.lenr-canr.org.

Cold Fusion Energy, Inc. homepage Under Construction

Keith Owens from About me.

United States Department of Energy http://www.doe.gov/

DOE Fusion Energy Sciences http://science.energy.gov/fes/

Advanced Research Projects Agency -Energy http://arpa-e.energy.gov/

Top