PDA

View Full Version : Cold Fusion Approaches



resolve
7th July 11, 10:15 AM
Original Article here: http://www.naturalnews.com/032898_cold_fusion_renewable_energy.html


(NaturalNews) Cold fusion is real, but mass American news sources are not covering it. Experiments are currently being duplicated across the world, to add further verification to the body of scientific proof. It is now possible to create energy with commonplace resources at no cost to the environment. Power plants using cold fusion will be constructed before 2012.

Natural News has been covering the developments of cold fusion for quite some time, as controlled experiments in Russia, California, Italy, and Japan have consistently proven that cold fusion is real. (Read one of the original articles here (http://www.naturalnews.com/013281.html).)

One of these successful experiments was conducted by Professor emeritus of Osaka University, Japan - Yoshiaki Arata. Dr. Arata performed a demonstration of cold fusion at Osaka. A colleague of his wrote, afterward: "Arata's demonstration was successfully done it demonstrated live data looked just similar to the data they reported in [the] papers. This showed the method highly reproducible." Read the original article for more details at (http://www.sott.net/articles/show/157573-Cold-fusion-demonstration-a-success-).

In addition, Andrea Rossi's Fusion Energy Catalyzer was tested in a number of different scenarios this year, resulting in a stronger belief that cold fusion may be ready for public use by the end of 2011. On January 14, Focardi and Rossi held a press conference, discussing their 10-kW generator. Another experiment, which took place roughly a month later at the University of Bologna, reported the model generated 15 kW for 18 hours. There are currently plans to hook up roughly 200 of these smaller units, in order to construct two 1 megawatt-producing power plants before the end of the year. If these plants perform up to their potential, then we can hope for the construction of industrial-sized power plants within another year or two.

But how does it work?

Cold fusion is not really magical, even though it could very well have a miraculous effect on our future. It is a relatively simple chemical reaction that produces excess heat, meaning that if the reaction occurs in water, it will increase the temperature of the water. Powdered nickel fuels the reaction. You put in nickel (one of the most plentiful metals on the planet), and you get heated water.

After that point, almost every mechanic in the world would be able to take it from there. Steam engines heat water with coal, then using the expansive properties of the steam to power turbines. A cold fusion device would use the same basic mechanical devices, but it would heat the water through the consumption of nickel rather than combustion.

But why has news of cold fusion not yet reached mass media in the United States? Why is there no story in the New York Times that showcases all of this excitement and buzz?

The media has been burnt by the dream of cold fusion before. In 1989, Fleishman and Pons first conducted a series of experiments on cold fusion and produced some truly exciting results. In their excitement, they let their findings slip a little too early, before they had been able to thoroughly study the discovery, or realize consistently positive results. They released their miraculous findings, with claims of having discovered the dream machine of the millennium, and they caused a lot of excitement in the scientific community, at least at first.

But they had fallen prey to their own unbridled enthusiasm. Confronted with the potential of what they had discovered - a future resplendent with clean, free energy - they jumped the gun a little prematurely. Their method was reproduced across the globe, but many experiments fell flat. In fact, their method was shown to be effective only 30% of the time. And in the world of empirical fact, 30% is an error, not a discovery. It was supposed that the 30% of experiments that did corroborate Fleishman and Pons' findings were more likely the result of bribes or 'friendships,' not cold fusion.

Consequently, it was presumed that Fleishman and Pons were frauds, just a couple of jingoists desperately attempting to gain fame and attention. Cold fusion was thought to have been revealed as a hoax, and the scientists became notorious. All but excommunicated, Fleishman and Pons went underground, where they continued to hone their method and make the process easily replicable and consistent. They checked and double-checked their findings, and they spread their idea to other scientists willing to conduct more thorough investigations, such as Andrea Rossi, whose device has, so far, produced the consistency that Fleishman and Pons' lacked.

This discovery could not come at a better time for the world, when oil resources are quickly becoming scarce, and greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to spike, despite the damage they are causing.

So, given the reason for optimism in this period in which energy is particularly expensive, why is the mass media refraining from mentioning cold fusion. Why is it not on the front pages of every newspaper?

There are a number of possible explanations. First, the scientific community's pause could very well be a consequence of the unbridled enthusiasm given by the initial experiments conducted in 1989. After such a humiliation, it is easy to see why scientists would remain skeptical, at least on the surface. Meanwhile, Rossi's Energy Catalyzer is being slated for reproduction in large-scale, cold fusion reactors later this year. If you compare the pace of Rossi's tests to the scientific norm, then it is clear that scientists are, indeed, excited.

As for the press, there are more insidious explanations to be considered. For one, it is a distinct possibility that a number of enormous businesses, such as oil and coal companies are leaning on mass media sources to keep quiet. Cold fusion power plants would drop the price of energy, thereby putting energy companies out of commission. It is in their best interest to slow down the process of integrating cold fusion.

But whatever the reason for mass media silence, you can expect to start hearing about cold fusion by the end of the year. By then, it will be impossible to keep quiet a discovery of this magnitude.

Sources:
(http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/...)

(http://pesn.com/2011/02/22/9501770_Rossi_cold_fusion_reactor_achieves_15_kW_f or_18_hours/)
(http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/)


Ok, so I don't remember much about the first cold fusion media frenzy. I do remember something about some guys who were claimed to be frauds (Fleishman and Pons above I guess) and I remember a few movies that came out about it at the same time (Saint and Chain Reaction) which made the idea seem like this dangerous thing that could change the world for better or worse depending on who had it, bla bla bla....

But this is really exciting to hear this news! This energy source could very well make electric cars viable as I can see it.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
7th July 11, 10:48 AM
I remember the first fiasco. it was quite embarassing for the scientists invloved. So far things are looking good but its early days yet.

Ny Teknik (http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3166552.ece) have done a nice review of it.

BTW Rossi doesnt call it cold fusion (http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/3626-energycatalyzer.shtml)

SoulMechanic
7th July 11, 12:39 PM
Fuck cold fusion, its all about stevia infused cold fission doggy.
PblXhbZNa3s

Cullion
7th July 11, 01:32 PM
If something as efficient as a fusion reaction can be sustained in tabletop lab equipment, this is going to be about a lot more than electric cars.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
7th July 11, 01:37 PM
They reckon they're getting 2.3-2.6kW from an input of 300W.

Cullion
7th July 11, 01:43 PM
There were claims like that with Pons and Fleischman.

Whichever idiot claimed in that article that 'cold fusion' was a 'simple chemical reaction' ought to be fired.

What interests me about Pons and Fleischman's work was that whilst prestigious labs dismissed the idea that there was a nuclear reaction occurring, lots of anomalous heat which was never explained was reported all around the world. The big labs seemed to just says 'well it's not fusion, so.. that's the job done.' and kind of fold their arms and ignore it from that point.

I'd like to read a good, thorough explanation for the anomalous heat, even if this turns out not to be fusion either.

Feryk
7th July 11, 01:50 PM
If something as efficient as a fusion reaction can be sustained in tabletop lab equipment, this is going to be about a lot more than electric cars.

I read the interview with Rossi. Break out your tinfoil hat.

I hope I'm wrong thinking he's a crackpot. But I don't think I am.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
7th July 11, 01:52 PM
If something as efficient as a fusion reaction can be sustained in tabletop lab equipment, this is going to be about a lot more than electric cars.

Shit, if fusion power plants can be that small then the electric car is already obsolete.

I'm not holding my breath, even though I really want to.

jvjim
7th July 11, 03:43 PM
Hey guys, did I tell you about the cold fusion experiment I did this summer? I fell into a lake while on my cellphone and the hydrogen in the water and the palladium in the phone caused a "nuclear" reaction that produced over $100 in energy being spent buying a new phone!

Cullion
8th July 11, 07:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8eIhth8Iw8

The Professor, Brian Josephson, in this video is a professor of physics at Cambridge University. He won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973 for his work on superconductivity, so his opinion is relevant. There are also stories that sceptical scientists from Sweden have investigated this device and given it the thumbs up.

However, Prof. Josephson may have gone a bit insane since he won that Nobel, because his current work at Cambridge seems to be on parapsychology and 'mind matter unification'.

http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/

The story about Rossi not allowing other scientists to examine the 'secret reactor vessel' is a huge red flag to me too.

Toby Christensen
8th July 11, 08:43 PM
I'm waiting to see the evidence.

Worryingly, cold fusion powered nukes are supposed to be UNBELIEVEABLY powerful.

Cullion
9th July 11, 04:15 AM
Worryingly, cold fusion powered nukes are supposed to be UNBELIEVEABLY powerful.

No, that's nonsense.

Robot Jesus
9th July 11, 10:50 AM
I'm waiting to see the evidence.

Worryingly, cold fusion powered nukes are supposed to be UNBELIEVEABLY powerful.

We have fusion bombs, the point of cold fusion is to have a LESS powerful reaction.

At this point fusion is something we can do, it's just too hot to build a reactor around. we want something hotter then fission, but cooler then an H bomb; also using common elements rather then rare.

Cullion
9th July 11, 11:02 AM
We've been generating brief controlled fusion reactions using isotopes commonly found in seawater for over a decade at a lab near Oxford and the next stage of the programme is a pilot reactor being built in France which will operate for extended periods and, hopefully, after some fine-tuning be capable of actually generating a profit selling the electricity it produces, without anything like the radioactive waste or meltdown risks of present-day fission reactors. The reactor is called ITER if you want to google it.

This is a decades long multi-country research programme involving billions of dollars worth of hardware to contain a super-heated plasma bubble inside a donut-shaped reaction vessel with extremely powerful and finely controlled magnetic fields.

'Tabletop' or 'cold' fusion would allow the same seawater-derived fuel to generate power from a few thousand dollars worth of equipment in your own home. Or on a small spacecraft.

resolve
9th July 11, 11:51 AM
Yeah but I think it's important for human knowledge as a whole to understand how to do both.

Robot Jesus
9th July 11, 01:45 PM
but that will cause the price of seawater to skyrocket, throwing the world economy into disarray!!!!!

Cullion
9th July 11, 01:55 PM
no.

elipson
9th July 11, 06:08 PM
Wecan set up a cap-and-trade system for seawater.

Everything will work out fine.

Feryk
11th July 11, 10:44 AM
This is more and more starting to look like a fraud to me. Wow, I hope I'm wrong though.

Maybe we should all start stockpiling nickel and shorting copper? :)