Brillioun Energy Interview on Smart Scarecrow Show [Updated — Video Available]

We haven’t heard much at all from Brillouin for a quite a while, and now they have decided to come out of hiding and do an interview on Gary Hendershot’s Smart Scarecrow Show. They have mentioned on their web site that they have entered into a licensing agreement for their LENR technology covering three countries, and so it could be interesting to find out how the company has been doing.

UPDATE:

The video of the interview is below — it starts at around the 30:00 minute mark. The audio at the beginning of the video is messed up, but it gets fixed!

  • They say that they can get 30 kW of thermal energy from approximately 300 W of electrical input.

    • Buck

      with and expected 10kW of electrical energy after conversion.

      They are looking at the stranded cost market of coal fired plants which are no longer compliant with EPA regulations.

      • fortyniner

        In other words, ‘retro-fitting’ older coal power stations using the 600C version. Potential head-on competition for Rossi’s ‘hot cat’ tech.

        • Buck

          Yes.

          Apparently one of their board of advisers at Sunrise Securities is an ex-director of the California Public Utilities Commission. Sunrise is making their $20M conditional upon obtaining a preliminary agreement to acquire at least one small scale (5-10MW) power plant together with the renewal of an operating power purchase or steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility.

          This seems to put them further down the path compared to Rossi.

          • fortyniner

            Interesting – I hope they are able to comply. Regarding relative progress, with Rossi apparently restricted to trivial comments and generalisations, we really don’t have much idea of what he and his corporate partner have been up to over the last year or so.

            Clearly industrial development of CF is under way, probably covertly in many quarters, but whether it will at some time emerge from the military/industrial incubator it obviously reqires for finance, expertise and engineering resources is another matter entirely.

      • I just posted a question at JONP:

        Dear Mr. Rossi

        are you able to tell us some figures about how many Low-Temp 1MW plants were already built by your partner completely independent from you, and without your help?
        I ask because if this number is greater than “1″, this will be another giant leap in mankind 🙂
        Just some numbers, no details 😉

        Greetings
        barty

        I’m curious what Rossi will reply 🙂

        • georgehants

          barty, we are in a crazy World, The Truth is almost unobtainable, but we keep trying. 🙂

    • Buck

      They are targeting a hand-off to OEMs for industrial design and manufacturing by end of 2014. They don’t know which will come first, the 120C or 600C temp system; they are joking that they may both show up at the same time.

      They are very pleased with the acceptance by SRI and their IP attorneys, Kirkpatrick & Townsend, of the essential functioning of the technology. Their happiness is based upon the credibility of the scientists there as well as the 3rd party physicists and engineers who came in to provide addition rigor and validation. K&T is a top-flight IP firm out of SF.

      They are now approaching the money market for a second round of financing to take them to the milestone of handing off to the OEMs. They state they have already been approached by manufacturers from the Far East willing to put up money at this point of development.

      They will be organized around a licensing model, so the actual amount of capital will be reduced. In addition, this model takes them out of the Marketing, Distribution and Maintenance function. They did not discuss this point directly, but they did point to the positive consequences for managing the evolution of the knowledge underlying the LENR phenomena.

      I did not hear and information confirming which countries have a licensee on line. They did point to some notable Brands such as Carrier and Rheem for the home market.

      • Buck

        Correction: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton

        Their internal expert: David Sloan JD and PhD in High Energy Physics. Both degrees from Stanford. David is the one who gathered together the outside experts in Physics for validation of concept & execution

        • Roger Bird

          PhD in High Energy Physics! That is very impressive. Sort of mind blowing, actually.

          • Buck

            I have the growing impression after reading what is available about BEC and then last night’s interview that BEC has done its homework and is being managed pragmatically with an eye to capitalizing on the opportunity of LENR/CECR; they are playing it smart.

          • winebuff

            U the man buck!!!!

          • Buck

            Like a nice glass of zinfandel out of Dry Creek Valley

  • They say that patent attorneys brought in physicists to test the system and were impressed enough to accept the technology as equity (somehow — didn’t quite understand how that worked)

    • Buck

      They receive equity in lieu of their fees. In effect, they become the attorneys on retainer, looking to protect the evolving value of the IP as more markets are opened.

      • AlainCo

        is it like stock-option payment ?

        • Buck

          No. They did not describe it as a stock option, where the person/entity holding the option, has the option to buy the equity but not the obligation.

          • Anthony

            So it’s probably stock per se, Alain, not options as Buck says.

    • CHARLES(SWVA)

      Equity is ownership. That would almost certainly appear to say they will be issued stock as their equity. When a company incorporates, it is Brillouin Inc, is it not, they must state what type of each kind of stock they will issue and how many shares of each. e.g., common stock, preferred stock (preferred as to what), voting, non-voting, blah blah. The company founders, if they have a brain in their heads, always make sure they have the majority of the “voting” stock, whatever kind it is (it is usually common). The laryers (that’s Bostonese for lawyers) will get whatever number of shares and types of shares that the laryers and company directors agree to.

  • Kim

    Talked about 3.1 COP and viability in the Japanese Market
    because of the high cost of Natural Gas.

    Respect
    Kim

    • Bruce Fast

      Below I read, “They say that they can get 30 kW of thermal energy from approximately 300 W of electrical input.”

      That’s a COP of 100.

      • Buck

        My understanding is that the 30kW unit is the 600C product. This the is targeted for the industrial market.

        The 3.1 COP unit was for the 120C product which is more suited to the consumer/residential market.

      • Roger Bird

        You can have no idea how I am craving to see the faces of skeptics and skeptopaths and others when it becomes obvious that LENR is for real.

      • AlainCo

        PESN say LENR-Cars/LENR-Invest visited Brillouin?
        any details?

        http://pesn.com/2013/09/16/9602373_Billouin-Interview_on_SmartScarecrow-Show/

        “They also recently met with a group from LENR-Cars and LENR-Invests, primarily of Switzerland, including my friend Nicolas Chauvin, who were impressed with the technology.”

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Probably the most convincing part of their presentation was the announcement their patent attorneys are accepting equity in lieu of their fees

    • AlainCo

      +1

  • AlainCo

    Very good news.
    The market crowded with competitors, with 3 different technologies.
    3 third party test.
    3 funded companies.

    nothing can stop LENR. however there will be death.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      AlainCo……Yes, there is nothing like competition, what do you mean “death”?

      • AlainCo

        just dead companies. 😉
        Pr1me computer, DEC, Orborne, , Dragon, Atari, Commodore Business Machines, Sinclair, … there are deads in gold rushes.

    • Roger Bird

      For me, this was a very encouraging interview.

      • artefact

        1:27:47 “We just had top scientists from Europe at SRI Wednesday this week and they were just absolutely astounded at the progress that we have made and at the advancement of the field overall”

        • Boris Ivanoff

          I would like to believe that but if they named the top scientists and allowed them to be interviewed, it would be much more impressive.

          • Roger Bird

            You’re still having doubts. I think doubting the details is wise. Bob George is a businessman. It makes perfect sense to not believe everything that he says, especially considering that this entire interview was an exercise in fund raising.

  • artefact

    The interview on youtube:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXAg_424_2o

    Starts at about 30:00

  • Maks

    I think it is bad sign they looking for funding after visit of Google representatives. Google looking for X – moonshot projects. Lenr -it is more that that – TM “marsshot”;)

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Maks…..good point, Google should be all over this, but maybe they are already in.

  • Herb Gillis

    Does anyone know if it is possible to INVEST directly in Brilloin?? If so; how?

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      I am afraid the entry fee will start at a million or more.

      • JeffC

        Herb, Fill out the ‘contact us’ page on the Brillouin website and the company CFO will contact you.
        Bernie is correct there is a minimum investment but I believe his million dollar guess is much higher then the actual number…

  • Julian Becker

    Any chance someone could upload the video to youku.com, the Chinese youtube? I don’t have access here in China. 🙁

    • Julian Becker

      There are also 1.3 billion potential buyers here and with apparent interest from the “Far East” I am pretty sure which country they mean…

      So can someone please load it up (maybe command of Chinese language needed) I would do it myself, but I cant get the youtube version, Thanks 🙂

      • Buck

        They are way ahead . . . they have their patent in China already.

        LINK>> http://coldfusionnow.org/brillouin-energy-patent-granted-in-china/

        • Roger Bird

          How proud I am that an American company is leading the race! How proud I am that Rossi has adopted the USA as his country, unofficially so far! How ashamed I am that the US Patent Office and the DOE and other governmental entities are such a huge embarrassment. I want certain people to be hurt; I want them to be fired in disgrace.

          • Buck

            I hear you Roger. But, I think it fair to say that Oil & Gas has done a very good job of buying influence at our national level of gov’t.

            With this in mind, I think it smart for BEC to be focused on places like Europe and Asia where the cost of energy can be very high in specific countries and the local Government is willing to ‘ignore’ Big Oil/Gas.

            Of course, time will tell how this all actually rolls out.

  • Felix Fervens

    Excellent positive developments

    side note, Gary Hendershot is talented, informed and innovative: a good choice for this kind of interview-good broadcasting voice too. reminds me of an upstart Art Bell, working on a shoestring

    (no, i have no connection to the fellow 🙂

    • I agree, Felix — I was very impressed with Gary’s interviewing skills and his background knowledge in a number of areas.

    • Lukedc

      Gary is an absolute legend. He is thoughtful, sincere and has that inate talent of the best hosts. The ability to captivate. As an Aussie we appreciate these qualities and I can see why Mark.D returns to speak with him.

      Cheers!

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Yes, he is good, but needs an intern to run his tech.

      • Roger Bird

        I never like to engage in activities for which there is no purpose, although I do it far more than I would like. I have sworn off AGW debating because it serves NO purpose.

  • Roger Bird

    We’ve had a lot of rain here in the Colorado Springs area. Fort Carson got more than 12 inches in 12 hours. Our house got 2.375 inches in 12 hours. And this does not include the massive amount of rain before that, when Boulder got 6 inches. Colorado Springs averages about 14 inches per year. So I guess we have a little climate change going on. (:->) People like more rain in semi-desert regions until they realize that more rain means more insects means more mosquito bites means more disease, etc.

    One day in late June my measuring “device” (my dog’s food bowl) over flowed in about an hour. Yes, indeed, climate change is here to stay.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer
      • Roger Bird

        OMG, Bernie, you quoted the New York Slimes with such authority, as though that was going to convince me.

        What I don’t get is why we are arguing about this. I can understand other people continuing to argue about AGW. But for us LENR believers, this argument is moot. And the fact that we keep arguing about it shows how invested our egos are in it, which is ill. Which part of M O O T didn’t you and I understand. LENR is here, and we should have a beer, and be of good cheer, and get clear, and know that environmental salvation is near, and have no fear. Argumentation for the sake of argumentation is a spiritual illness. AGW is dead. Either it never existed, or only existed a little bit (my contention), or else LENR is certain to kill it. In any case, arguing about it is foolish.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          Roger…..oh, no, you are not going to get off the hook that easy, you have been one of the many conservative individuals who have delayed serious discussion about man made climate change for over twenty years, if you think LENR is going to solve all our man made climate problems you are dreaming. Read the science.

          • Roger Bird

            LENR will solve the non-problem of CO2 emissions.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          By the way Colorado Springs has had “Biblical” flooding in the last two days.

          • Roger Bird

            They said that they had 100 year flooding in Boulder (a neighboring town). So, I guess their flooding was also “Biblical”. This begs the question, it verily gets down on it’s knees and begs, what caused similar storms 100 years ago?

            Oh, here we go again. I won’t get drawn into OUR neurotic need to argue. AGW is dead. Long live LENR.

      • BroKeeper

        That, whether true or not, plus this latest news release from China along with LENR devices on the horizon will be the beginning of fossil fuel’s demise. It’s usefullness is over. May it R.I.P. where it was found: ░░░░░
        ▓▓▓▓▓

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/world/asia/china-releases-plan-to-reduce-air-pollution.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fscience%2Fearth%2Findex.jsonp

      • Omega Z

        Bernie

        I don’t buy into it because of to many past present & continuing lies & twisting of fact.

        One Scientist has stated that whether the Earth is cooling or warming, There is nothing we can do but try to adapt. The effect man has on climate is minimal compared to what naturally occurs. If it’s warming, we may speed it up a fraction & if cooling we may be able to slow it down a fraction. But either way, what nature is doing is inevitable.

        Some examples of twisted facts.

        Great Lakes water level is dropping. Probably due to climate change. They even use selected data from another research project that says the Water Depth of the Great Lakes is becoming shallower.

        Fact: The other research actually stated ((Cherry Picked)the Great lakes are becoming shallower) because the Lake bottoms are decompressing. They were compressed by the Glaciers 15K years ago & gradually decompressing every since they melted. Or as “Their” example Pressing a sponge then watch it spring back. 10,000’s of years from now, they may become unnavigable.
        Unless of course, the natural erosion of Niagara Falls eats it’s way back to the lakes & just drains them into the ocean. About 4K years at present rate.

        The calving of 2 large sections of Antarctica the size of Manhattan is probably linked to Global warming.
        Fact: Another research project to study Tsunami effects specifically & ready just before it happened- Even published by NASA found a direct link to the Fukushima Tsunami. 18 hours after the Tsunami, the shock waves hit Antarctica causing the calving.

        Calving of course is a natural always occurring part of nature. The Ice sheets on Antarctica are constantly sliding towards the coast & breaking off & melting. If it didn’t, you’d probably have an ice bridge connecting it South America & Australia.

        Another: Sea Level Rising. Not according to Actual water markers. It hasn’t changed in 50 years to a measurable level.(Insignificant)

        Their claims are based on Satellites & Computer modeling. Satellites that can’t measure mountain tops within a few feet of accuracy, yet they claim can measure sea level within tenths of an inch. Something in constant motion. And computer models that never match up with reality even tho they can pick & choose at will what perimeters they want to use.
        They also make statements of Sat data extending to the 50’s. Read about the 1st Sat’s in late 58 or 59. They were doing good to get a beacon signal. The technology didn’t exist for their claims.

        Something we’re all familiar with here at ECW. Temperature measurements on LENR projects.
        Done in totally controlled Environments. Trying to cover all the variables. And always you’ll find disagreement on the accuracy. What was the airflow around them Etc, Etc.
        Yet they can measure within 100ths of a degree at a Global scale with Billions of constantly changing variables. Few if any we can truly account for.

        Truth is we haven’t the Intelligence nor the technology to make any determination about where the Climate is headed.
        I Just assume we are in a gradual warming as it has been for the last 15K years. I could be wrong.

        AGW is promoted for the same reason they try to suppress LENR. It’s all about the money, but more important- CONTROL.

        Myself, I Only hope we are smart enough to adapt regardless. Because Nature isn’t within our Control. It will do as it wills.

    • Invy

      Arvada, basement carpet is wet… All the wet vacs at Home Depot were moved to stores up north where it was really bad.

      The creek is overflowe, covering the bike paths, at least 4′ high.

      Still way better than what boulder got, so Ill stop complaining.

    • Felix Fervens

      There have been flash floods and unusual weather events since before man on the planet. Suddenly, a measly .8C warming over 150 years, and that disproportionally in the Arctic, is responsible for every dog bowl overflowing in Colorado.

      Are the 200 recent consecutive months of RSS cooling also caused Global Warming? link:http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/25/rss-flat-for-200-months-now-includes-july-data/

      • Roger Bird

        Are we still arguing about a completely moot issue? LENR kills AGW, whether AGW was alive or dead to begin with.

        • AlainCo

          this is also linked to protected forest that burns not enough often.
          Forest ecosystems were designed to endure regular fires.
          With human protecting them from fire, the size of the pile of bush grows… and as you says if it is not cleaned…

          We have that problem in the south of france, and cleaning the bushes is mandatory… not working so well…

          See Taleb’s conce^ts of fragilistan against mediocristan for comparing protected forest against unprotected forest.
          Protection just make system more fragile, too big to fail.

          same as putting dykes, so people pile under the level of water waiting for katrina or xynthia.

  • Boris Ivanoff

    I find one aspect of this presentation confusing. Robert and Bob are clearly alleging that neither Rossi nor Defkalion can get sustained output power from their LENR reactors. But I have never heard either Rossi or Defkalion admit to this or complain about it. And it was not mentioned as a problem, either in Levi and the Swedish professor tests or in Defkalion’s ICCF demo. In fact, both Rossi and Defkalion claim that they can sustain kilowatt levels of power at respectable COP’s for months! That doesn’t sound like they have stability problems.

    So how do these folks know it’s a problem and is it really?

    Second, I didn’t hear anything about independent testing. If Google’s scientists were there to measure radiation, did they also measure heat in and out? Did they approve and confirm Brillouin’s measurements of that heat? And if the COP and power output claims are true, why did not Google immediately grab the device and pay the development costs like they did with the Bloom box? A few million dollars is nothing to Google, if Brillouin’s claims can be validated.

    • Roger Bird

      Boris, perhaps I am mistaken, but I believe that they said that Rossi and Defkalion did not have controllable heat output, not sustainable. I think that the famous May 2013 3rd party test put the sustainable aspect to bed for Rossi.

      • Boris Ivanoff

        You may be right and I was confusing the two. But again, neither Rossi nor Defkalion ever said that they had control issues either. In fact, both said quite the opposite, IIRC.

        I wonder where Robert and Bob got their information about Rossi and Defkalion. Control issues are certainly not admitted by either, as far as I know and have read.

        • Preston

          Rossi never really admitted the issue publicly that I can remember, but control and repeatability has been an issue mentioned by people close to Rossi. The 1MW plant included a couple of redundant cells, I think, so if one doesn’t work, they could still get the 1MW output. That strategy might be okay for a few demo units, but it could be a problem with mass production. Celani, Defkaliion, and now Brillioun have all pretty much said the same thing about the ECAT; when it works it works great, but on occasion nothing happens.

          However, with the Hot Cat anyway, Rossi has been saying those issues have been solved.

          Looks like next year should be pretty exciting, at least 3 independent companies hoping to have something to ship.

        • Buck

          IMHO, Control as an issue can be inferred first by Rossi’s 3rd party testing . . . what people may not recollect is that there were three separate tests, one of which blew up. That is an example of a control issue.

          Second, a knowledgeable person like Godes could have reviewed the live video of the Defkalion demonstration and looked closely at the graphs. Information was clearly presented; an experienced person could easily draw their own conclusions about control issues.

          • Roger Bird

            Don’t say “blew up”. It may have blown up in the sense that things did not go well and they lost control. But “blew up” usually means “explosion”, and that didn’t happen and we definitely don’t want to give people the impression that it did. The cylinder melted, something that they should have been proud of. (:->)

          • Buck

            Fair enough >> They had an uncontrolled meltdown.

            However, it is regrettably reasonable to presume the vested interests will choose to say far worse things about LENR before this is all over, no matter what we say.

          • Roger Bird

            For certain.

  • Buck

    A final piece on the positive developments at BEC.

    They shared that they have been approached by European and Asian companies. These companies are all willing to put up licensing $$$ up front and agree to a royalty/unit arrangement even at this early stage of development (successful completion of Stage 2 and beginning of Stage 3) and prior to their own respective internal testing for proof of technical and operational capabilities.

    BEC shared a limited description of the different phases for the 120C system as well as images of the respective prototypes. It was made clear that the phases have at least two important components: the COP achieved and the degree of process control. For example, successful completion of Phase 2, where the amount of reaction core increased by a factor of 10 relative to Phase 1, brought the COP to a tightly controlled level of 2.1. Phase 3 will be similar: the BEC boiler will maintain tight control over a reaction core 10x larger than Phase 2 and will achieve at least a COP of 3. (Note, COP>3 is required in the Asian/Japanese market due to the very high cost of natural gas. A COP>6 would be needed in the US due to our low cost of natural gas.)

    It is with the successful completion of Phase 3 that BEC then begins the conversation with the Licensee Manufacturers and idled Coal Plants owners/operators in earnest as they have an operational technology ready for commercial design and engineering, the last step prior to market release.

    IMHO, the most important difference between BEC and Rossi/Defkalion is the degree of process control and BEC is the leader. For example, they indicated their 120C system should go for years without major maintenance as hydrogen is the only consumable and not nickle. The publication of solid 3rd party analysis of the level of process control from the likes of SRI will confirm the real extent of BEC’s capabilities.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Human Nature amazes me sometimes. Rossi has demonstrated his E-Cat 9 or 10 times and is criticized for being a “showman”, even “lying” or a “scammer”. Brillouin comes on one talk show, shows some pictures, and everyone is amazed and believes they have a “new” technology, ready for production in one year. The competition is great for LENR, but, trust and verify.

      • Roger Bird

        Bernie Koppenhofer, please, those who are criticizing Rossi are ill people, thus the label skeptopaths, sort of like zombies. Plus, Rossi’s demos and 3rd party tests support Brillouin. Personally, I have no doubts whatsoever that LENR+ is real. Rossi has repeatedly made promises that he has not kept. Brillouin has NEVER said promise one, so they can’t break their promise. This is why you see that we are thrilled about what Brillouin has said.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          Roger…they have made a promise now. Product ready for market in year

          • Omega Z

            Bernie

            Not Promised. Implied.

            Rossi has done the same many times.

            Many times we hear what we want to hear. Not what is actually said. What we hears depends on whether 1 is optimistic or pessimistic.

          • Roger Bird

            What we hear depends upon a lot of things, not just our optimism or pessimism. Our craving for the success of LENR may cause someone to hear a promise vs. an implication. Most of us here are lusting at LENR. This forum and other’s like it are the pornography of the “oh-gee-whiz-wow” crowd. So naturally we are going to hear a promise when what was said was an implication.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            What do you mean? They were asked when we could go to Walmart and buy one. They said they will be ready in one year for a boiler maker to license and start production.

          • Omega Z

            Sorry Bernie

            I heard no one promise anything.

            I heard intent. I heard possibilities. I also heard R&D throughout the interview & Optimism.

            Come time & they are not at Home Depot or Wal-mart, I will not be disappointed & bad mouthing them. I feel all those involved in LENR have a tendency to be overly optimistic when it comes to timelines.

            Note an Acceptable COP hasn’t been met yet.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Omega Z: I respect and agree with many of your posts here but the inconsistencies you site above are really minor when compared to all the facts, please consider:

      The US National Academies of Science, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and many others, say that greenhouse gas levels are rising due to human activities such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation which are causing significant climate changes including global warming, loss of sea ice, glacier retreat, more intense heat waves, stronger hurricanes, and more droughts. They contend that climate change requires immediate international action to prevent dire consequences.

      Human activities release greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (NO2), into the atmosphere. As of Apr. 2010, CO2 levels were 389 parts per million (ppm) – reportedly higher than at any time in the last 650,000 years when levels fluctuated between 180 and 300 ppm. [3] This rise took place alongside a 20th century global temperature increase of between 1°F and 1.4°F

      In March 1958, US climate scientist Charles Keeling began measuring atmospheric CO2 at the Mauna Loa observatory in Hawaii for use in climate modeling. [27] Using these measurements, Keeling became the first scientist to confirm that atmospheric CO2 levels were rising rather than being fully absorbed by forests and oceans (carbon sinks)

      In 1977, the US National Academy of Sciences issued the report “Energy and Climate” [65] concluding that the burning of fossil fuels was increasing atmospheric CO2, and that increased CO2 was associated with a rise in global temperatures.

      in 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to review research on global climate change (as of June 2010, there were 184 IPCC member countries). The IPCC issued its first assessment report in 1990 stating that “emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases,” resulting in “an additional warming of the Earth’s surface.”

      On Dec. 7, 2009, the US EPA announced their findings on greenhouse gases determining that they “threaten public health” and are “the primary driver of climate change.” This statement was in response to the US Supreme Court ruling (5-4) in Massachusetts v. EPA [47] that greenhouse gases met the criteria to be considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

      Some believe we will not see an effective response to this problem until we experience more extreme climate events which cause death and destruction. I sincerely hope this is not the case, but I live in Colorado, last summer I saw the “Front Range” mountains on FIRE, causing death and destruction, this summer we experienced 7 degrees (average) over normal temps, TODAY we are experiencing, devastating “Biblical” flooding, causing loss of life and probably destruction in the Billions of dollars. Get ready for a huge shift in public awareness and agreement with man made climate change.

  • PaulZ

    Gary Hendershot got the interview, very nice – interesting to see Google was out to see this unit.

    • Gerrit

      Yes, I think it is very interesting that Google send people over to look at it.

  • Doubting Thomas

    I think the language about the “hot” system was that they “expect to get 36kw out for a 300 watt input” I don’t think they said that they have demonstrated such a COP in this presentation, just claimed that they know how to do it.

    • Buck

      This is the system being developed and tested at SRI. And where European scientists visiting last week where astounded at the progress and current state of development.

      With this context in mind, I feel fairly firm on the 600C system being able to deliver about 30kW – 36kW with a COP of about 100-120, where the maximum input is definitely no more than 300W.

      • Roger Bird

        Buck, you seem to be summarizing what we all watched. Believe it or not, I appreciate it. Your summary is excellent and well-written and helps us remember the important points. I think that this Brillioun interview important and even pivotal.

        • Buck

          Your welcome. Everyone benefits.

  • Brian

    It seems a little weird that they spent so much time talking about the 3 COP product and just mentioned offhandedly that they had a product that could produce 100 times input. Why the massive difference in COP?

    • Sanjeev

      They are not products, just experimental setups. The talk of a COP of 100 is only an expectation (If I hear it correctly).
      Anyway, they have something it seems, and trying for funding, so they may come up with a product of 30KW, why not. Lets hope and with half a dozen competitors, the lenr market will be a hot place soon.

  • Sanjeev

    Great. Good news everywhere.
    Its good to know that BEC has plans for Ni-H system, the wet method is not so useful. From the pictures, it looks like they cracked the Ni-H puzzle independently and are now in race with Rossi and DGT. Selling a product next year seems like a marketing talk but who knows… we will see.

  • Sanjeev

    The mention of Google going to BEC is a news for me, but not so surprising. Google grabbed up bloombox, dwave and now lab grown meat, things that scare traditional cos away (because of its simply not possible), so why not lenr.

    They must have checked it and may have found that the BEC wet system is not meeting their needs (With precious Pd and COP of 2, its rather unattractive), so they left. Its possible that BEC was not the only one in their list, so whom they joined, I wonder. The claim of DGT partnering with top 10 cos comes to my mind.

    • Roger Bird

      Lab grown meat sounds exceedingly sick to me. Reductionistic, materialistic thinking is just fine for energy sources, advanced computers, striped toothpaste, and atomic bombs. But applying it to human beings is a big mistake. Human beings are holistic intersections of mind, body, and spirit, and reductionistic, materialistic thinking is the cause of ALL of our modern, degenerative, chronic diseases.

      • Hope4dbest

        Maybe you should stop cooking your food, Roger. Animals never cooks anything before eating it.

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          Quite a few scientists think that eating cooked food is the cause of humans’ large advanced brain.

          • Roger Bird

            I believe that that would be cooked meat. As with most things, balance and moderation is necessary.

        • Roger Bird

          I juice and try to be as raw as possible. And I ferment, even better than cooked or raw. (:->)

          • Hope4dbest

            Fermenting is wonderful, but animals don’t either ferment or cook anything. And don’t eat raw mushrooms, even the edible ones have nasty stuff (believe it or not, rocket fuel i.e. hydrazine) that is eliminated by cooking.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Sounds like eernie was right on the money with his “electron capture” theory.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    It takes a lot of energy to make a neutron from a proton and an electron
    Energy equivalences of rest masses of:
    Proton: 938.272046 MeV
    Electron: 0.5109906 MeV
    Neutron: 939.56563 MeV
    p + e > n would require 0.78 MeV
    The proton is covalently bonded to the nickel as a hydride. Would this set it up to undergo the following exothermic nuclear reaction that would form helium (He) and cobalt (61).

    Ni(64) + p > Co(61) + He(4) 0.66 MeV

    And Co(61) would beta decay to Ni(61) which would give off a 64 KeV gamma ray.

    Co(61) > Ni(61) + e + 64 KeV gamma ray.

    Are any 64 KeV gamma rays seen? Is there an isotopic shift of nickel-64 to nickel-61?

  • Morgan

    I have confirmed the Google bit. Google is aware of Brillioun and tests are currently ongoing.

    • Jimr

      You have confirmed with whom, and what tests are ongoing?

  • Dr. Mike

    It is certainly exciting to see yet another commercial entity reporting very positive results on their LENR experimental work. However, I believe the most exciting news from this interview is that Robert Godes explained Brillioun’s theory of the operation of their system. As many people have been bugging Rossi to divulge his theory of the operation of the E-cat, I am quite surprised that there has not been an extensive discussion of Godes’s theory in these comments. I encourage everyone interested in the theory of LENR to listen carefully to the section of the interview from about 35:00 to about 42:00. From what I understand from Godes’s explanation, lattice energy is used to create a neutron from a proton and electron (at a loss of energy to the system). Most of the published theories suggest that this is the first step of the reaction. Godes claims the excess energy is produced when a proton captures a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and finally a 4th neutron, then a final creation of He.
    Godes’s theory seems to be readily verifiable with proper experimentation, looking for the existence of the proposed reaction products, including He. It should also be noted that this theory also doesn’t really require any new physics. (Rossi has recently claimed that no new physics was required to explain LENR.) Also, it seems quite plausible that some of the neutrons would be captured by the Ni nucleus, leading to a transmutation to Cu. From some of the comments made by Godes and George, it seems that LENR works best when neutrons are captured by protons, rather than the Ni nucleus. The key to controlling LENR would be to create neutrons that are favorably captured by protons. Brillioun may have found a way to do this. It will be interesting to see how the Brillioun theory compares to Rossi’s theory when he discloses his theory.

    • Roger Bird

      Is not a data point for Godes theory that they don’t have to recharge their machine as often as Rossi with nickel?

      • Dr. Mike

        Roger,
        Yes, it seems that they are avoiding or limiting the transmutation of Ni to Cu.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      +1

  • Steve R

    I believe Brillioun has something real — and I’ve met and like Godes — but from what little we’ve been told of the business side it’s hard to feel altogether confident.
    Take, for example, their $20 million “conditional” investment. It says if they successfully can replace the boiler in an existing coal plant, they get an infusion of $20 million for 15% of the company — giving the company an implied value of $133 million at that point.
    Now ask yourself what you think the value of a company that has openly demonstrated and working technology that could save 10s of B-billions of dollars in coal plants investment in this country alone, never mind China and furthermore provide huge reductions in future operating costs. Doesn’t $133 million sound pitifully low? Why, if you had convincing technology, would you make such a deal?
    They also point proudly to the fact their patent lawyer is working for stock. But note their patent application has been denied in the U.S. despite several revisions and resubmissions, while other LENR patents have made it through (despite the USPTO aversion to such registrations). I don’t even play a patent attorney on TV and I’m no expert, but I’ve read quite a few technology patents — and I don’t think the application is up to snuff and neither do patent experts who have written about it (I know the patent was granted in China, but I know absolutely nothing about the patent process there).
    We’ve been told they already have licensees from Asia — which may well be true. But if it is, it’s odd they are having to go public to search for investment. Generally, in my experience VCs are primarily convinced by showing certain and growing income streams. That would lead me to guess than any licenses are either small change, conditional or deferred-payment, and not something a VC thinks you can take to the bank.
    Lastly, I’m not convinced BEC did themselves any favors with that interview. As someone who has pitched serious VCs, I’d say appearing on a show like that would lessen, not add, to your credibility with most of the VCs I’ve met.
    Of course, it may be a case of looking for someone already more than half convinced where you’re most likely to find them — when a business is running out of cash, it’s like a person running out of oxygen, you have to go for the quick fix rather than worrying about the long run.
    But if that’s the case, and you really, really need an investment quick, I’d think you’d at least prepare a better, more coherent, succinct case of what you have and where you’re going.
    Ask yourself would you like to go into a meeting with PG&E or Consolidate Edison or General Electric — or even to Google, and roll out that interview as your media presence?
    Of course, if BEC can hold on and deliver their claimed 100:1 hot boiler as a commercial product before anyone else with a similar product, they’ll well be able to afford a lot of mistakes. But it would be a shame if the technology lived and the patient died.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      +1

    • Buck

      Steve,

      it seems your analysis stopped too early; you leave me with the impression that you are working from a perspective which is short on additional background information.

      First, your critique of their $20M conditional financing overlooks at least two factors. This financing was negotiated more than 12-18 months ago . . . a time before BEC had even moved out of Phase 1 of their development; they therefore had less experimental proof from which to build confidence. Also, in the interview, BEC implicitly indicated that they had not triggered the $20M . . . they stated they only had $3M to this point.

      Second, your critique of their patent application comes from someone who admits his own ignorance, then overlooks the openly compromised nature of the USPTO regarding LENR, and finally ignores that LENR patents had to come through the “back door” by filing/categorizing them under other disciplines than LENR.

      Third, you criticize them for going public in their effort to market their investment. And, this you do after pointing out their shortcomings for having already agreed to a $20M conditional financing which completely undervalues their technology, a condition which they apparently have not triggered. They are refusing to use your suggested method of ESP to get out the word . . . they are out looking for the best terms they can now that they have a significantly different amount of experimental evidence behind their two prototypes.

      Fourth, you present the argument that VC’s only evaluate based upon an existing and growing revenue stream. A presumptuous misrepresentation. No VC worth their salt will look at the LENR market so naively as to overlook the ~25 years of history since Pons & Fleischmann where roasted by the likes of MIT. Or overlook the global power of the multi-trillion Oil/Gas industry which has shown a willingness to have laws passed that compromise the health and lives of people standing in the way of profit. Their analysis will show an attention span that expands beyond seconds.

      Fifth, you criticize the informal unpolished feel of the interview. Again, a ballsy misdirection. Are you buying the look, demeanor, and grace of an experimental physicist coughing into the camera, or are you buying the experimental results of the two prototypes, one of which, having a COP of about 100, is out of their direct control and being developed and tested at SRI? Did you not hear that David Sloan Phd grilled Godes for more than 1.5 years about his level of knowledge and understanding of LENR/CECR?

      Aside from my concerns expressed above, I agree with you: I believe BEC has something real.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    I wonder what the “lung condition” was that Godes alluded to….and whether his “coughing” was a sample of it?

  • Buck

    Very nice and very sad at the same time.

    IMHO, the ultimately self-destructive conflict over an obvious conclusion about CO2 and Global Warming shows that we have not really evolved far beyond the caveman stage of our evolution.

    Good job of keeping your eye on the ball.

  • Warthog

    The COP 3 is important not for the size of the COP, but because with it they demonstrated that they had full control: stopping, starting, and throttling the reaction rate at command. Something that both Rossi and Defkalion have had problems with (and IMO, “still” have problems with). And apparently the same ability of precise control translates fully from their “wet” system to the “gas-loaded” devices that are demonstrating so much promise for others (not just Rossi and Defkalion).

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Omega Z: I respect and agree with many of your posts here but the inconsistencies you site above are really minor when compared to all the facts, please consider:

    The US National Academies of Science, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and many others, say that greenhouse gas levels are rising due to human activities such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation which are causing significant climate changes including global warming, loss of sea ice, glacier retreat, more intense heat waves, stronger hurricanes, and more droughts. They contend that climate change requires immediate international action to prevent dire consequences.

    Human activities release greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (NO2), into the atmosphere. As of Apr. 2010, CO2 levels were 389 parts per million (ppm) – reportedly higher than at any time in the last 650,000 years when levels fluctuated between 180 and 300 ppm. [3] This rise took place alongside a 20th century global temperature increase of between 1°F and 1.4°F

    In March 1958, US climate scientist Charles Keeling began measuring atmospheric CO2 at the Mauna Loa observatory in Hawaii for use in climate modeling. [27] Using these measurements, Keeling became the first scientist to confirm that atmospheric CO2 levels were rising rather than being fully absorbed by forests and oceans (carbon sinks)

    In 1977, the US National Academy of Sciences issued the report “Energy and Climate” [65] concluding that the burning of fossil fuels was increasing atmospheric CO2, and that increased CO2 was associated with a rise in global temperatures.

    in 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to review research on global climate change (as of June 2010, there were 184 IPCC member countries). The IPCC issued its first assessment report in 1990 stating that “emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases,” resulting in “an additional warming of the Earth’s surface.”

    On Dec. 7, 2009, the US EPA announced their findings on greenhouse gases determining that they “threaten public health” and are “the primary driver of climate change.” This statement was in response to the US Supreme Court ruling (5-4) in Massachusetts v. EPA [47] that greenhouse gases met the criteria to be considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

    Some believe we will not see an effective response to this problem until we experience more extreme climate events which cause death and destruction. I sincerely hope this is not the case, but I live in Colorado, last summer I saw the “Front Range” mountains on FIRE, causing death and destruction, this summer we experienced 7 degrees (average) over normal temps, TODAY we are experiencing, devastating “Biblical” flooding, causing loss of life and probably destruction in the Billions of dollars. Get ready for a huge shift in public awareness and agreement with man made climate change.

  • Warthog

    Your mountains were on FIRE, not because of “global warming”, but because of eco-stupidity and mismanagment of forests, which have allowed the accumulation of decades of undergrowth detritus, which, once ignited (and once again, the ignition has nothing to do with “global warming”, but simple lightning strikes) burn uncontrollably.

    These things are happening in every state that has federally-managed (actually mismanaged) forests.

  • Sanjeev