Cold Fusion Energy: What to Expect and How Close We Are

What are the expected major advantages of the new energy of cold fusion? One, obtaining cheaper and small nuclear energy reactors; and, two, avoiding the hazardous radioactive waste. Achieving the first one without solving the second will be a problem. Presently, management of the radioactive waste from nuclear power plants is quite expensive, but it is part of the maintenance and the problem is considered solved. At least, it appears to be solved because the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe is a result of bad waste management. The new energy reactors based on cold fusion may not be available for wider distribution if they produce any radioactive waste.

The tests of E-cat HT reactors of Andrea Rossi provided in Uppsala University, Sweden, (2012-2013),    and the live test of Defkalion (DGT) Hyperion reactor broadcast on July 22-23, 2013, are reliable demonstrations that cold fusion energy is real. The fuel elements in both types of reactors are nickel and hydrogen, while the technical methods and reaction environments are different. The E-cat HT (high temperature) rector is distinguished from the previous E-cat device that a high temperature metal hydride is used instead of a hydrogen gas. The hydrogen from the metal hydride is released when heated, so it can be controlled by temperature. In the first tests in Uppsala University (December, 2012), the E-cat HT delivered an average power of 2034 watts during a 96 hour test at an input power of 360 watts, so the coefficient of performance was COP = 5.6. In the second test (March, 2013) the temperature regulated E-cat HT2 operated at lower temperature with COP = 2.6 for 116 hours.

According to the published results, the energy comes from the fuel that is, incredibly, less than one gram, and the estimated energy density is well beyond all known conventional chemical sources. Despite of this success, Rossi has a problem with the certification of the small heating reactor, probably because he does not allow any radiation measurement of the fuel substance before and after the test. While the DGT method is more openly discussed, the E-cat method of Andrea Rossi includes a trade secret about the catalyst that he is not willing to disclose. The question is: Could a trade secret be an obstacle for the further scientific advancement in cold fusion? One cannot deny the contribution of Andrea Rossi, but his success would not be possible without the inherited knowledge from the prior 30 years of research in that field. In this sense, the decision of the European patent office to grant a patent  about cold fusion, (EP 2,368, 252 B1) to the retired professor Francesco Piantelli is reasonable. Piantelli was the founder of Cold Fusion research in Italy just after the publication of Pons-Fleischmann experiment in 1989. His contribution is significant because he shifted the focus of the research from palladium to nickel, which subsequently led to the big success in cold fusion today.

The analysis published in General Science Journal with more details in the book Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion with BSM-SG Atomic Models leads to the conclusion that the nuclear fusion reaction Ni + H -> Cu is feasible. It falls under the category of cold fusion, and it is the major source of the released heat. At the same time, this reaction cannot provide radioactive waste if the right nickel isotopes are used. That is the reason for my recommendation to use Ni(62) and Ni(64) isotopes. This is in full agreement with some experimental results published by Focardi and Rossi and the radiation measurements of operated E-cat reactors. My additional suggestions are to try also the reactions Cr(54) + H -> Mn(55) + 7.56 MeV and Cr(52) + H -> Mn(53), where the second one is a traceable reaction that will serve as a proof if the reaction is feasible.

The commercialization of cold fusion energy will require an extensive study on the safety of the newly discovered nuclear process. In the case of E-cat, this means an open test checking for traces of radioactive isotopes before and after the test. Even without such a test, the scientific analysis accompanied with properly designed experiments may lead to discovering the type of the catalyst that will jeopardize the trade secret embedded in E-cat. From the analysis of some LENR experiments, the Rossi method in E-cat and the DGT method in Hyperion, we concluded that the secret catalyst of Rossi could be an isotope (or set of isotopes) emitting beta particles. Why beta particles? Many beta emitting isotopes are not sources of hazardous radioactive waste because they do not decay into elements emitting hard radiation and their decay time is known. They must only trigger the suggested nuclear reactions by specific physical mechanism described in the above mentioned book. Our analysis also reveals and explains another important issue. Beta particles become self-generated by the nuclear process after the E-cat works in a nominal operational mode for some time. It is known that the E-cat reactor produces a small quantity of zinc(64). This isotope is unstable and decays into Cu(63) with emission of a beta particle. That helps the nuclear process to become self-sustainable. The beta radiation from the working reactor can be easily shielded in order not to appear outside of the reactor enclosure.

Where could these beta emitters be placed? In the E-cat HT reactors that Rossi provided for the tests at Uppsala University, the fuel substance (nickel powder, HT metal hydride and catalyst) was placed in a steel cylinder with a diameter of 3.3 cm, a wall thickness of 3 mm and a length of 33 cm. It was inside of an external cylinder with a diameter of 10 cm and length of 33 cm, with an outer shell of silicon nitride. In such arrangement, the beta particles from the catalyst and the process could not be measured outside of the E-cat HT device. After the tests, the cylinders with the fuel were cut and the fuel substance was taken by Rossi. He never allowed radiation spectral measurement of this substance. He also claimed that the fuel maintenance of the small distributed devices will be done only by his company and can be put in a small replaceable cartridge.

In the Hyperion reactor of Defkalion, the triggering of the nuclear reactions is produced by the high voltage discharge. In this case, there is no need for beta emitters, and the output energy can be controlled by adjusting the voltage. Another problem not solved yet is the minimization of the nuclear transmutation reactions providing a variety of nuclear isotopes, as some of them may have a longer radioactive decay. The Defkalion project is more openly discussed than the e-cat reactor of Andrea Rossi and the problem of unwanted radioactive waste might be solved.

In conclusion: Our expectations for cheaper and safer nuclear energy are realistic. However, more funded research is needed until the new energy source is matured for the market.

Join Liberty Classroom today and get 3 FREE books!

Stoyan Sarg

Dr. Stoyan Sarg is Director of the Physics Research Department at the World Institute for Scientific Exploration. 

Comments are encouraged, but please respect the rules. Click here for terms of use.

  • AlainCo

    If you see all the big corps, funds, small startup, industrialist who prepare for the LENR revolution, and the media coverage, you are shocked.

    see all what have hapened since few years

    If LENr was a scam as the opponent claims, a conspiracy of thousands of fringe researchers, having infiltrated top organisation across the planet, from corp to military labs , having manipulated big entities, the journalist should have published many critical article against National Instruments boss, Swedish utilities, NASA, US navy, Japanese corps, Chinese academy of science,…

    There are some shameful article in some science journals (Ouelette, casandra curse, futura science), which are all based on outdated data from 1989 (like wikipedia is), but beside few maverick journalist, who have been movedre or fired (Gibbs, Lewans), there is no article accounting recent events, else some anecdotical critics missing as much detail as needed not to see the facts.

    It is typical of groupthink situation, whe actors are so sure they are the best in the room, that they desperately refuse to update any data, and treat any dissenters with disdain and insults

  • Len Rosen

    The E-Cat and Defkalion demonstrations didn’t provide the kind of validation needed to believe cold fusion is a real, reliable, commercial energy generating alternative to existing technologies. I, for one, was disappointed.

    • invient

      Real – I have a confidence of 99.99%
      reliable – depends on the team, rossi (<50%), Brillouin Energy and SRI (95%)

      Commercial is asking a little much considering they are still in the research phase, we still do not know the exact mechanism (although Brillouin and SRI probably do)…

  • James Makepeace

    There is no such thing as a “free lunch” in physics.
    “Cold Fusion” is just a nice way for a few people to maintain a public profile… and maybe earn a little money.
    A waste of our time and an unnecessary diversion from the real challenge of harnessing fusion for energy.

    • “Burning” a fuel is not a “free lunch”. The rest of your post is a faith-based pronouncement. There’s no faith in real science.

  • Buss

    Are the experts sure the heat effect in cold fusion experiments is not caused by the (little?) known non-nuclear interaction between hydrogen and metals?

    • AlainCo

      yes, the energy is many order of magnitude higher than chemical. proven many times, and by Elforsk testers.

      • maryyugo

        Elforsk did not test anything– another deliberate deception. If you don’t believe me, please tell us which Elforsk people did what testing and what results they got.

        Elforsk simply paid to transport a handful of independent (and grossly incompetent and negligent) Swedish scientists to test a device made by Rossi. The tests were done in Rossi’s lab, using Rossi’s power source and identical methods and instruments Rossi had used some months before. It was supervised by Levi, Rossi’s friend. There was nothing independent about it and it has nothing to do with Elforsk except for travel money.

        The tests were badly done, and do not prove in any way that Rossi’s claims are true.

        Furthermore, there was no reason to do long (several month!) tests, and no reason to use high temperature– all of those confuse things. A simple, correct test, using single phase flow calorimetry or steam sparging with the ORIGINAL ecat would have been more than sufficient if done without interaction by Rossi. Of course, that has never happened and will never happen. Maybe you can tell us why.

        • please stop wiuth your conspiracy theories and longitudial hair cutting.

          Elforsk paid 7 competent people from 4 universities and 2 countries. One of them knows Rossi (which probably help the diplomacvy).

          the market value of cold fusion is 7 trillion dollar (energy value it 10%GDP) , and there are 3 case of spying of LENR in my network, so Rossi is not paranoid, just experienced.

          youd cray claim that there is no need of high temp or long test shows you are absolutely dishonest.
          you are the first to critics when temperature are too low, COP too low, duration too short…

          long duration is to prove that it is non chemical (you will be the first to claim it is chemical is done on short duration)

          hot temperature is to reduce calims of uncertainties on the temperature, on the power…
          with 850C temperature and COP 6 you have to prove that the testers made a 300C error in their mesurement, and 500% of heat estimation.

          you are right is is since 1992 that calorimetry have proven LENr is real, with good sigma… it was proven by F&P, conformed latter by good calorimetricians who took time and asked for the details.
          of course most physicist are not good calorimetricians and did not aks to the cookers.

          but to manage crazily pathoskeptical people like you it have to be hot, and long…

          you are exactly like what I say:

          when it is short and cool you say it is bad

          when it is hot and long you say it is bad

          when it is flow calorimetry you say it is bad

          phase change calorimetry it is bad

          thermometry it is bad

          mixing is bad
          any thirs party is bad
          any place is bad
          black box should be white, and white box should be black.

          it is always bad, because you don’t want to swallow the crow.

          You will never.

          • maryyugo

            Alain, what you write is so silly. I don’t have to prove they cheated or made a mistake at the output end! That actually is probably close enough to correct.

            But *all* the measurements at the power INPUT end were goofy! The meters did not read correctly. One phase appeared to be dead but nobody tested any of the wiring using an oscilloscope! The meters that were used were inappropriate for the task! That is gross incompetence. Rossi supplied the input power. How do we know he did not cheat there? Good con men don’t cheat the same way all the time.

            If you want me to believe in cold fusion/LENR, show me one study done officially on a Rossi or Defkalion “reactor” by a university or national laboratory. Show me one independent customer who bought a Rossi “megawatt plant” (LOL!) and is willing to be interviewed about it.

            The rest of your rant makes no sense and isn’t legible English. As usual.

            If you want to argue effectively, please try to understand and respond to the specific scientific and procedural issues and to the obvious errors by the Swedish scientists which I and others have raised! You never seem to do that! I wonder why.

            Yes, short and cool is bad. Thermometry is bad and so is so-called phase change calorimetry. The way Rossi did those, they are obvious places to cheat!

            What I said and you never acknowledged is that all Rossi needs to do is to repeat Levi’s original February 2011 test except done by people independent of him and Levi and of course, properly performed and documented, which Levi did not do.

            That constitutes low temperature, fluid flow calorimetry. It’s simple, it involves no phase change and it needs to run just long enough to rule out chemical energy. Input power must be supplied by the experimenters, not Rossi. Thermocouple placement needs to be checked by blank runs and calibrations.

            Rossi has never done that. Are you not the least bit curious why not? ROTFWL!

          • tale a degree in electricity.
            e-cat is a single phase 380V component in a triphase industrial heater, which should be mounted as Triangle.
            a triphase powermeter can manage monophase load , and as you say the other phase was dead, but pluged…
            that is the job of a powermeter to measure unbalanced loads…

            for ther ersat I’m tired of you hyperskeptical moving target.

            you bashed rossi and defkalion whatever was their method, including when it was the one you asked previously…

          • “If you want me to believe in cold fusion/LENR, show me one study done officially on a Rossi or Defkalion “reactor” by a university or national laboratory.”

            If it is enough to make you admit LENR just ask SRI, US navy NRL, US navy SPAWAR, BARC, NASA GRC, ENEA, …

            so thanks you Mary Cold fusion IS REAL.

            now since it is real, nothing extraordinary… call a plumber, and electrician, and ask a measurement… Oops Elforsk just send 7 physicist of various domains…
            what is enough for you ?
            You want plumbers ?
            or you want your own fraudsters? the one of MIT?(proven fact, even admitted despite minimized). You want the bad calorimetry of MIT or caltech?
            The lack of honesty of Nature, Science ? the illiteracy of SciAm?

            and by the way, show me the academic who acknowledged the Wright Brothers plane ?

            how many years after French Army bought the technology ?

            Academic lose the game, they are the CAUSE of LENR DENIAL !

            there is no other conspiracy than few loudspeaking lords of science who organized a denial, just to hide their incompetence in lattice physics, and their unjustified insults.
            and many parrots.

            Read nassim nicholas Taleb, “Lecturing Birds How To Fly” and “history being written by the losers”.

            the end is near

  • maryyugo

    There are too many errors in this article to enumerate.

    For openers:

    – nothing belonging to Rossi was ever tested at Uppsala University or ANY university. Rossi has the habit of citing groups and companies he “works with” but none has EVER admitted it. What Rossi did was to enlist a few Swedish scientists to participate in a totally insufficient and horribly badly botched test of his high temperature device. The instruments and methods were supplied by Rossi’s personal close friend Levi. Nothing about that is credible. In the past, Rossi claimed to be working with National Instruments, Philips, Home Depot, various governments and military customers and the University of Bologna. NONE OF THAT WAS TRUE. It was all lies.

    – Rossi claims he sold megawatt thermal power plants. But he has never revealed a single customer, or a single independent test properly done. He claims he has robotic factories. Who has seen them? Have you, Dr. Sarg? Of course not. Rossi claims he can make nickel isotopes cheaply. Really? How?

    The so-called live test by Defkalion was also botched. The calorimetry, using wildly unneeded two phase flow was unreliably. As I am sure you know, Defkalion should have sparged the steam or used single phase flow (liquid) to measure enthalpy. The calibration run they did was not the same setup as the experimental run. The 1.6 Tesla magnetic field they reported is completely unbelievable.

    Defkalion claimed they worked with world famous companies. Really? Which ones? Defkalion said the Greek government tested their device but the Greek Parliament denied it! Is anything they say true? Does anything they do make any sense?

    Dr. Sarg, you (and others) are modelling processes that most likely don’t work and are not real. They are, in my opinion, the product of deliberate attempts to defraud investors and supposed distributors.

    If you doubt it, show me ONE ironclad independent measurement done properly on ANYTHING made by Defkalion or Rossi.

    The above does not speak to LENR generally — I have no idea about the honesty and veracity of experiments reporting small amounts of excess energy. It’s Rossi and Defkalion that I doubt (and Brillouin and Nanospire are not more credible for other reasons).

    • maryyugo

      I might add that Rossi has a horrible past record. Look up Petroldragon. Then look up a DOD project in which Rossi deceived them into spending upwards of two million dollars for thermoelectric devices which supposedly were tested by the University of New Hampshire– but no positive test results could ever be located, the DOD paper was removed from their web site, and the whole thing seems to have been just another Rossi fraud and deception.

      Now, Rossi appears to be investing in Florida real estate. See for details. If he has the world’s most important invention, why is he screwing around with investing in depressed housing?

      • kidicarus

        How is it this maryyugo person pops up on any and every single site across the internet that so much as hints at the name Rossi or E-Cat?

        You must have quite the agenda to constantly be posting across countless websites as soon as the term “LENR” is uttered as a voice of dissent.

        • maryyugo

          I just wrote some 30 or so FACTS about Rossi. Which ones do you disagree with and why?

          My “agenda” is to discredit LENR/cold fusion frauds. They HURT honest researchers in that field.

          • AlainCo

            so you admit at last that Cold Fusion is real !

            Nice day!

            if so why doubt on Rossi, given Elforsk confirmed it, with a team of 7 various physicists from 4 universities and 2 countries, with only one having participated to previous tests.

            given the content of the only critic paper (pomp&eriksson), you can safely know there is nothing serious agains what they measured… just total panic by a few closed mind nuclear physicist who are as much incompetent in calorimetry than in human questions.

          • JamesJJ

            I would like to see someone address maryugo’s comments point by point instead of attacking their character.

          • maryyugo

            Lots of luck with that. Rossi is so absurd that there are no arguments for his claims being real. Defkalion is essentially the same. Either could prove their case easily in a few weeks, safely and cheaply. In almost three years of ridiculous claims, they have not done so. Only a few believers still think these claims to cold fusion are real.

          • you have no argument.

            Rossi is simply following the usual engineering line after 20 years of positive research in cold fusion/lenr…

            the only unusual facts are that in 1989 the APS publicly said it was pathological… afterward it was confirmed by bad experiments.

            when experiments get better made, and fully replicated in 1991-1992, all the coward who parroted that insult and the ban could not admit they wer wrong… so they continued… and you parrot what they say…

            for the rest, science did the job. scientific method was followed, and worked. just have to forget the opinion of those who never attended an experiment, or read an experimental report, or are incompetent…

            in 1991 Heinz Gersicher, an opponent, admited it was real.


            afterward denial is a pathology, not a consensus.

          • maryyugo

            Hilarious. Why don’t you ask Rossi why he doesn’t allow a single truly independent test? Why he can’t name a single customer? Why he can’t just redo the Levi experiment with liquid flow calorimetry?

            You won’t ask because you don’t want to know the answers and anyway, Rossi wouldn’t answer you any more than he answers Brian Josephson or gives straight responses to Frank Ackland.

        • JamesJJ

          If you know that maryugo is on all those sites… doesn’t that indicate that you are on those sites as well? Should I view your questioning of maryugo with the same credibility you’re trying to convey on them?

    • koko

      “What Rossi did was to enlist a few Swedish scientists to participate in
      a totally insufficient and horribly badly botched test of his high
      temperature device.”

      So seven university professors stake their reputation and sign the conclusions from that report (meaning that they’ve read it and agree with it), and we are supposed to somehow believe some anonymous internet person going by the name maryyugo that they know nothing about what they were doing.

  • James Andrew Rovnak
  • Psykick

    Heh heh… You KNOW the ivory towers are shaking when MYugo rails on and on and on… Failed psyops are so bitter!!

  • maryyugo

    The Swedish professors do not include any specialists in the appropriate field (heat transfer and fluid flow). They did not properly characterize the input power. They used Rossi’s power supply, his wires, and Levi’s instruments. Levi’s main papers are about making coffee (check it). NONE of these people have established reputations. None are equipped to detect deception. The issue isn’t what I know. It’s what they don’t know.

    What they should have done is asked Rossi for one of those nice, old forgotten ecats that make lots of steam at 120 degrees C. They are much easier to test. They should have demanded to have one brought to THEIR LAB to test by THEIR METHODS with THEIR EQUIPMENT. Of course, Rossi would have refused.