US Senate candidate Randy Hekman puts LENR first

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

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

Randy HekmanFormer Juvenile Court Judge Randy Hekman states his energy policy on the campaign website

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

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

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

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

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

Randy Hekman
Senate candidate Randy Hekman supports LENR.

Q&A with Candidate Randy Hekman

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


See also…

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

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

23 Replies to “US Senate candidate Randy Hekman puts LENR first”

  1. I am pessimistic that the Republican party will be a friend to LENR. There are too many large fossil fuel corporations cutting large checks to Republican office holders for them to embrace LENR. On the other hand, congratulations to Mr Hekman – although I doubt he will be very effective bucking his party if he ever wins that US Senate seat.

    BTW, congratulations to Ruby for finding a political candidate (seeking a seat to the US Senate for a major political party besides!) to speak openly about LENR. Frankly, I find the Romney quote on cold fusion to be rather spacious, but it certainly can be used as leverage to get other candidates for politcal office to talk about LENR. My experience is that politicians say what they think people want to hear (when running for office), so if the subject isn’t in consensus reality, then they are VERY reluctant to talk about it on the record.

    1. Brad Arnold, I think that your assessment of the Republican Party and Republican candidates is wrong. Lots of people contribute to the RP, not just oil companies. And Shell is working to support LENR with research with their Game Changer program. It is foolish to think that oil companies are so stupid as to think that they can stop this. They will jump on it first, knowing that that is how to survive. They may try to use government to block all of the competition, like getting the EPA to declare it dangerous for the environment. But that can only be a holding tactic. Oil per se can’t win. Big Oil companies are just as smart as we are and can surely see that.

      1. Hope you’re correct about the Republican party – I am very politically sophisticated and have very good reason for being skeptical. King Coal and Big Oil isn’t going to go down without a fight – even if they are “as smart as we are.” If they can delay the inevitable then they profit greatly. Different tactics could be employeed along the lines of global warming or tobacco, and it is indisputable that those gigantic industries own politicians (particularly Republicans).

        1. Brad, the DNC had 33% more money in 2008 than did the RNC. And given that George Soros is a strong Democratic supporter, the Koch brothers are sort of balanced out. Here is the deal. Large corporations and others with lots of money contribute to both parties. I mean to say, an individual corporation or person contributes to both parties. They want influence when one of the parties wins. They may contribute more to a party that they think will win. It looked like the Dems were going to win in 2008, so they got the most money. The idea that the Dems is the party of the people is simply not true. We have crony-capitalism here. And the corporations and certain people are rich enough to buy themselves into the hearts of both parties. The Koch brothers and George Soros are simply weirdos who actually have principles rather than playing the game of greed and influence.

          1. False equivalence based upon superficial understanding of the parties. Each party appeals to certain constituencies, and Republicans appeal to large corporations and wealthy individuals. On the other hand, Democrats appeal (generally – their are obviously always exceptions) to unions, environmental groups, and civil rights organizations.

            I suggest you look the legislation each party pushes when it controls Congress – they aren’t by any measure equivalent. In fact, the Republican party can’t reveal their true agenda because it would be supported by only a minority of the voting public, so they must hide it behind focus group tested rationals. If you think Republicans are like Democrats then I strongly state that you are badly mistaken, and are possibly an apologist of the Republican party.

            If voters were well informed, Republicans would not now be the majority in the House of Representatives.

    2. Hi Brad, I don’t think any political party is aware enough to put LENR on the platform, but there will be individuals who are willing to step up and be the first. So far, they happen to be Republican. A Republican was on top of peak oil, and a republican is down with LENR.

      Whatever their party, I’m glad there’s somebody…

      1. I credit you Ruby with finding those rare politicians who are on top of LENR, and broadcasting their words. Hopefully soon, using tactics like that, we can start the ball rolling – you know how much like lemmings those politicians are, once a few are talking about it then the topic becomes consensus reality and then (hopefully) the talk of the town. One thing you can depend upon: those running for political office won’t get much money from the pro-LENR crowd, but can always depend upon big campaign donations from the fossil fuel industry (and supporting industries that will feel threatened by LENR emerging).

  2. If LENR really works, it cannot be stopped in these times of Internet and global access to technologies and materials (e.g. nickel nano powder for few dollars available ex stock). If it does not work, there is no need to be afraid that politicians and oil businessmen will suppress it. 😉

    Does it work or not? I wish I know it… Rossi and Defkalion make a very bad service for LENR – their behavior is very untrustworthy. As a potential customer (with placed pre-order of the 10 kW E-Cat and ready for similar pre-order for small Hyperion) I do not feel almost anything which can convince me that they are not trying to fool me.

    1. Hey No, Yes!

      LENR won’t be stopped. Too many people know about it. The kids don’t have the old prejudices either.
      The science is real, the technology just emerging. Have I seen an E-Cat in action? No.
      But I’m confident in the scientists who evaluated and reported success. I believe them.
      Their behavior doesn’t rub me wrong. Look at any big corporation and you can find alot worse.

      1. As far as I know, the science around LENR is very fuzzy. Technology demonstrations did not convince me to this moment. However, it seems to be so interesting phenomena that I think about moderate investment to some independent research. To pay several hundreds of working hours of a young enthusiastic scientist and several thousands dollars for the material and equipment is not a big problem. The experiments showing excessive heat do not seem to require more. Unfortunately, I will not have time enough to arrange this for at least several weeks to come while Mr. Rossi and Defkalion will be on the market very soon. 🙂

  3. I am glad that Randy Hekman is supporting LENR, but doing so will mean that he won’t win during this election cycle. However, he may look like a hero in 2014.

    1. Mr. Hekman indicated that when he talks to the public, they are totally supportive of LENR. So that’s a good sign, and shows that he *could* win. Of course, there’s alot of other issues right now too. When energy gets more critical in the US, and it will, then a candidate might win on the issue of LENR.

      1. Ruby, that is because those crowds have not been “informed” by the science community that cold fusion is “pathological” science. The misplaced certainty of misinformed science and skeptical-science and hot fusion types will get communicated to the electorate, and I doubt if reality will have sunk in by early November 2012 to save Mr. Hekman. But perhaps it will; I hope so. If we have to wait for November 2014, then reality will have set in and there will be jillions of candidates who will be claiming that they supported cold fusion since 1989, and no one will remember that Hekman was the lone hero.

  4. Brad, it would also be a mistake to think that corporations and certain people were the friend of the Democratic party. These entities contribute to both parties. They have no principles other than to gain influence. It might be a good idea to make it a law to make it illegal for a corporation to contribute to both political parties rather than just one. They want free speech. That is just wonderful. But to contribute to both parties is not free speech; it is bribery. I think that this is a GREAT idea, even if I say so myself. Let them put their money where there is some semblance of principle rather than just naked bribery.

  5. – “What is happening right now with LENR technology? Engineer Andrea Rossi claims to be in talks with a well known giant American retail chain store to sell his 10 kilowatt home heating LENR reactors, which he calls E-Cats, short for Energy Catalyzer. The retail price is expected to be about $1,500 each, with mass production beginning in the fall of 2012. …A Greek company called Defkalion Green Technologies states they will start selling their similar Hyperion reactors in a matter of months, and their improved design outputs 25 to 32 times energy input and has longer lasting fuel that is easier to refill. Defkalion claims they have scalable reactor systems up to 5 megawatts (heat) in size, with the largest power plants built into ordinary 20 foot long shipping containers. Both Rossi and Defkalion use low cost nickel dust and ordinary hydrogen gas as nuclear fuel.

  6. It comes to me that the proof will be in the pudding when it comes to LENR. The thing is that one mans pudding will also most certainly be another mans bitter pill. How do you sign up to support Hekman if you live in California?


Comments are closed.