Solar Hydrogen Trends Claim Hydrogen Production Process is LENR/Transmutation

Menlo Park, California based company Solar Hydrogen Trends have issued a press release which provides comments from its Chief Scientist, Konstantin Balakiryan about the process involved in their claimed process of converting 1 liter of water into 1kg of hydrogen.

The title of the press release is ‘Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. Chief Scientist Konstantin Balakiryan Reveals the Secrets of the Hydrogen Reactor “Symphony 7A”‘, and consists of Balakiryan responding to statements that have been posted on various web forums over the last few months. One of the statements that he responds to is that the process is LENR. He writes:

‘We have been avoiding using this term for some time because we are seriously investigating, and treat the scientific work and the description of physical phenomena, with the utmost of respect. We never display our wishful thinking as if it were reality We can confidently state that in Symphony 7A there is a transmutation process of atoms of oxygen into hydrogen.

‘Judge for Yourself: The composition of the gas mass on the exit of the hydrogen reactor in one hour makes more than 7 kg of pure hydrogen. Since the working substance in the Symphony 7A is water, then its decomposition product can only be oxygen and hydrogen. There is no oxygen on exit. However, there is hydrogen which is eight times more than it should be. And where is the oxygen? There should be 6.2 kg. But there is not. Leakage of oxygen is excluded, because we know how volatile hydrogen is, and we made sure that our hydrogen reactor is hermetically sealed.

‘The answer is clear – “This is transmutation!”
However transmutation of oxygen atoms to hydrogen atoms (reaction) at temperatures below 80F, and with energy input of 0.5 kWh can be called “low energy nuclear reactions” (cold fusion). There are no other options.
Therefore, this is classical LENR!!!’

The press release concludes by saying that it will take hundreds of scientists and experimentalists and theoretical physicists to understand the science involved in the Symphony 7A reactor, and the company reaches out to the scientific community to partner with them in this effort. It’s not clear from the press release, however, how they want to interface with the scientific community, and what kinds of help they are looking for.

  • the problem with their claim is not the transmutations, but that transforming O into H would be endothermic…
    anyway we don’t have enough detail, maybe the energy comes from another LENR mechanism… but I don’t see which one

    • Pekka Janhunen

      yes, Alain is right, it would be endothermic. A massive amount of energy would be needed to accomplish such transmutation. Oxygen is produced from hydrogen in certain stars (via intermediate steps involving helium etc) and the process frees a lot of energy making the star shine. Reversing the process would need an equal amount of energy as input.

  • the problem with their claim is not the transmutations, but that transforming O into H would be endothermic…
    anyway we don’t have enough detail, maybe the energy comes from another LENR mechanism… but I don’t see which one

    • kabel

      ” transforming O into H would be endothermic…”

      why?
      It looks for me like some fission reaction. Why it have to be endothermic?

      a little bit more details:
      http://pesn.com/2014/05/07/9602487_Chief-Scientist-Shares_SHT-Symphony-7A-Secrets/

      • Ivone

        Fusion reactions below the Fe binding energy are exothermic, whilst fission reactions above are exothermic. Ditto reversed. Which is why these claims are so out there it has to be indicative of an energetically open universe.

        • kabel

          oh. Thanks.
          So Oxygen is too light to make exothermic fission reaction? Did I get it right?

          • Iggy Dalrymple

            I usually feel endothermic until around 10:00 am.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Medical Chocolate helps with that.

          • RKTect

            Does it matter if its dark chocolate – – –
            No wait its chocolate from dark matter — — – —
            SHOOT, I’ll just eat the chocolate and leave the dark matter to the scientists who just know that 94% of the universe is made from it!
            If they say it is, it must be so. Oh dear all this chocolate has given me gas.
            But I can’t possibly have the energy to make it
            The scientific community tells me so——-

          • Ivone

            Yes. It creates exothermic fusion reactions in Betelguese and other red giants entering instability(death).

    • Pekka Janhunen

      yes, Alain is right, it would be endothermic. A massive amount of energy would be needed to accomplish such transmutation. Oxygen is produced from hydrogen in certain stars (via intermediate steps involving helium etc) and the process frees a lot of energy making the star shine. Reversing the process would need an equal amount of energy as input.

  • Guga

    This claim is crazy. That is so extremely unlikely. And foremost that has nothing to do with LENR, that would instead be massive nuclear fission.

  • Gerard McEk

    They would need an enormous energy source for this. I have calculated that you would need 193 MWh per kg water (because of the difference in atomic mass of hydrogen and Oxygen and if I did the calculation right). If Solar Hydrogen do not need that, than something strange is happening because I still believe in E=M*C*C! Until now, LENR only releases energy ( and makes bigger atoms) and it still follows the accepted laws of Physics, but this?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Here is my calculation for 1 kg oxygen:

      Atomic mass of 16O = 2.656018×10^-26 kg
      16*atomic mass of 1H = 2.677652×10^-26 kg
      Difference = -2.163×10^-28 kg, equals -121.3 MeV

      Number of atoms in 1 kg oxygen (mostly 16O): about 3.76×10^25
      3.76×10^25 * -121.3 MeV = -4.56 × 10^27 MeV

      = approx. -203 GWh

      • Gerard McEk

        Thanks Andreas, I clearly made a mistake. I found it but even then I could not match your calculation with mine. Never the less, Where does that energy come from? If SHT has in their process LENR taking place, which at the end produces H2, it should also produce somewhere a lot of heavier atoms to generate that energy. If that is the case then Rossi can stop because the COP of this process is so enormous that it will defeat all others easily.

      • builditnow

        Correct, the Solar Hydrogen claim violates E=MC^2 where as LENR does not. So this claim is much more “magical” by a trillion times than LENR. Perhaps the magic exists, however, I think it’s trillions of times more unlikely than LENR.

    • BroKeeper

      I wonder if they have tasted the resultant water (yuk). If it is non-distilled water perhaps CO2 or other carbon molecules mixed/dissolved within the water would produce a form of dissolvable sugar or even a new type exotic hydrogen oxygen bonded molecule. Is there any hydrogen peroxide molecules present afterwards? Did they analyze the water before and after? I agree, it would be a massive endothermic process to transform oxygen into hydrogen. Again, where is the oxygen? This is not possible under present in current understanding of chemical or nuclear reactions.

  • Gerard McEk

    They would need an enormous energy source for this. I have calculated that you would need 193 MWh per kg water (because of the difference in atomic mass of hydrogen and Oxygen and if I did the calculation right). If Solar Hydrogen do not need that, than something strange is happening because I still believe in E=M*C*C! Until now, LENR only releases energy ( and makes bigger atoms) and it still follows the accepted laws of Physics, but this?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Here is my calculation for 1 kg oxygen:

      Atomic mass of 16O = 2.656018×10^-26 kg
      16*atomic mass of 1H = 2.677652×10^-26 kg
      Difference = -2.163×10^-28 kg, equals -121.3 MeV

      Number of atoms in 1 kg oxygen (mostly 16O): about 3.76×10^25
      3.76×10^25 * -121.3 MeV = -4.56 × 10^27 MeV

      = approx. -203 GWh

      • Gerard McEk

        Thanks Andreas, I clearly made a mistake. I found it but even then I could not match your calculation with mine. Never the less, Where does that energy come from? If SHT has in their process LENR taking place, which at the end produces H2, it should also produce somewhere a lot of heavier atoms to generate that energy. If that is the case then Rossi can stop because the COP of this process is so enormous that it will defeat all others easily.

      • builditnow

        Correct, the Solar Hydrogen claim violates E=MC^2 where as LENR does not. So this claim is much more “magical” by a trillion times than LENR. Perhaps the magic exists, however, I think it’s trillions of times more unlikely than LENR.

    • Brokeeper

      I wonder if they have tasted the resultant water (yuk). If it is non-distilled water perhaps CO2 or other carbon molecules mixed/dissolved within the water would produce a form of dissolvable sugar or even a new type exotic hydrogen oxygen bonded molecule. Is there any hydrogen peroxide molecules present afterwards? Did they analyze the water before and after? I agree, it would be a massive endothermic process to transform oxygen into hydrogen. It would be reverse nuclear binding energy. Again, where is the oxygen? This is not possible under current understanding of chemical or nuclear reactions.
      http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html

  • Ivone

    Just maybe the universe is energetically open…but QEG is still ummm until proven otherwise.

    But – hey if E= mc^2 is superseded by infinity isn’t that even better?

  • Ivone

    Just maybe the universe is energetically open…but QEG is still ummm until proven otherwise.

    But – hey if E= mc^2 is superseded by infinity isn’t that even better?

  • Sanjeev

    How is splitting O2 into H atoms a fusion process rather than fission ? On that a cold fusion… something raised a red flag there. Can you believe someone who got the basics wrong ?
    The claim is too wild, for me at least. It’d be better to let other independent teams confirm it.

  • vampwire

    If it is true, then this technology must be banned from start, right now! Oxygen is too important for life to use as fuel in an irreversible way. Even with enormous gain… we must learn something about human history in thinking a resource “inexhaustible”.

    • David14433

      I don’t think it uses up atmospheric oxygen since the oxygen I think is coming form the water fuel. But even if it did use atmospheric oxygen you still can’t ban them. Besides I am sure we would eventually find ways to deal with it considering the underlying implications.

  • JDM

    Sounds like a box full of dragon tails!

  • JDM

    Sounds like a box full of dragon tails!

  • Gerard McEk

    If you look around on their website you will find:
    “On input of 500 Watts, the mini reactor produces an output of 2797 cubic feed of hydrogen per hour (electricity equivalent of 221,5 kWh) at cost $ 1,80”. this means a COP of 443! I wonder how big this reactor is.
    I asked them if they could produce evidence that an independent body has verified their claims. If they react, I’ll let you know.

  • mcloki

    Well if this works there’s your electric car of the future. Big tank of water, this 7A reactor and a Ballard Fuel Cell. Home units to follow. So just build one demo unit.

  • Christopher Calder

    The claim is too fantastic for me to take seriously at the present moment. They need a major independent test before I am going to burn any mental calories thinking about it.

    • Allan Shura

      I was more skeptical but the test was done by a company that is a big name in the energy industry and only one page of the 28 pages was publicly released.

      • Mr. Moho

        I’m extremely skeptical about this. Last time I checked there was no mention at all of LENR processes being involved in their website, which besides being completely devoid of real information, appears to be using far too many buzzwords currently popular in the “green energy” sector (down to the internet domain name). To me it looks as if they didn’t receive the amount of attention they expected and are now trying to hop aboard the CF/LENR bandwagon and raise interest in its currently active blogosphere, apparently with some success, unfortunately.

        I would advise ECW followers and admin to closely read this thread on Vortex:

        http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93203.html

        (you can safely skip Axil’s emails entirely)

        A few selected messages:
        http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93205.html
        http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93210.html
        http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93208.html

        • Allan Shura

          I was skeptical but the positive they have is the reputation and size of the testing company.

          • Konstantin Balakiryan

            Excusez-moi, mais not one, but
            two companies with very high credibility.

          • E_man

            From http://pesn.com/2014/05/07/9602487_Chief-Scientist-Shares_SHT-Symphony-7A-Secrets/

            Trip to LA

            Jack said I’d be welcome to come for a visit, so I
            can videotape the unit in operation, enabling others to see what I’m seeing, and
            how the testing is done.

            The flight is about $350, and we’re probably looking at one or two nights hotel
            costs.

            Your help in enabling me to go would be greatly appreciated.

            And, as usual,
            we’re still getting by on donations, so your chipping in is what is keeping us
            going as a news organization. (Leaving for Brazil tomorrow [covered by FISL]
            but only have a few dollars in my account.)

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          It seems to me, if for real, it would be fission.

          • Konstantin Balakiryan

            Yes, it is fission, fusion and not only LENR but rather Managed Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (MLENR), unachievable until yesterday.

      • US_Citizen71

        The only thing they appeared to have tested is what came out of the machine (ie just hydrogen). They didn’t truly test the machine or look for hidden hoses, tanks etc… from what has been published. I treat purported unreleased information the same way I treat the claim that the check is in the mail.

    • steve high

      Nice to hear from you Dr Balakiryan! Are you prepared to Close the Loop? Or perhaps tell us why you cannot do it?

  • The claim is too fantastic for me to take seriously at the present moment. They need a major independent test before I am going to burn any mental calories thinking about it.

    • Allan Shura

      I was more skeptical but the test was done by a company that is a big name in the energy industry and only one page of the 28 pages was publicly released.

      • US_Citizen71

        The only thing they appeared to have tested is what came out of the machine (ie just hydrogen). They didn’t truly test the machine or look for hidden hoses, tanks etc… from what has been published. I treat purported unreleased information the same way I treat the claim that the check is in the mail.

      • Konstantin Balakiryan

        Both laboratories have banned us full publication results of the test, but was allowed to present full report during business negotiations. Moreover any company before signing the agreement has opportunity to make its own
        testing. (sorry,this is google translator)

  • Asterix

    If you love this bit of news, then you’ll really love the good Professor’s 2009 scheme that was being peddled on Russian forums on how to win at roulette.

    No kidding.

  • Gordon Docherty

    According to:

    http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topics/stars/FusionCarbonOxygen.html

    the principal oxygen fusion reactions are as follows:

    O16 + O16 → S32 + γ
    O16 + O16 → P31 + p
    O16 + O16 → S31 + n
    O16 + O16 → Si28 + He4
    O16 + O16 → Mg24 + 2 He4

    The first-four reactions are exothermic, releasing 16.54 MeV, 7.68 MeV, 1.46 MeV,
    and 9.59 MeV respectively. The last reaction is endothermic, absorbing 0.39 MeV of energy.

    So, we have:

    O16 + O16 → P31 + p + 7.68 MeV,

    as a possibility, although these reactions normally only occur in a collapsing star. Still, matter in a star is mainly confined by pressure and gravity, not condensed matter (crystalline) structures, so maybe this is yet another artifact of condensed matter confinement and resonance.

    Perhaps an examination of the reaction ash would reveal the presence of heavier elements…?

    Or, alternatively, an extreme form of reverse entropy is being seen, with the Oxygen literally reverting back to its formative elements?

    Anyway, this claim may well open up another useful research avenue in the world of CMNS – and it is fairly easy to verify that Hydrogen and Oxygen are going in and lots of Hydrogen and energy – but no Oxygen – is coming out…

    • Ophelia Rump

      Presuming this Solar Hydrogen claim is true, where does all that energy go?

      16.54 MeV, 7.68 MeV, 1.46 MeV, and 9.59 MeV respectively, minus 0.39 MeV.

      • Obvious

        In the interview with Sterling, there was an indication that the reaction somehow utilizes neutrinos from the sun.

        • Fortyniner

          If that’s the case then my previously open mind just slammed shut.

          • Obvious

            If I was less generous with my interpretations, I would almost suspect that they ask more questions than they answer, then later use the answers scavenged from many blog posts as their answers later on.

      • Konstantin Balakiryan

        Dear Ophellia, Do not forget about the leptons (electrons and antineutrinos) that in spontaneous beta decay (neutron-proton transition) carry off the energy decay.
        K.B.

  • Gordon Docherty

    According to:

    http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topics/stars/FusionCarbonOxygen.html

    the principal oxygen fusion reactions are as follows:

    O16 + O16 → S32 + γ
    O16 + O16 → P31 + p
    O16 + O16 → S31 + n
    O16 + O16 → Si28 + He4
    O16 + O16 → Mg24 + 2 He4

    The first-four reactions are exothermic, releasing 16.54 MeV, 7.68 MeV, 1.46 MeV,
    and 9.59 MeV respectively. The last reaction is endothermic, absorbing 0.39 MeV of energy.

    So, we have:

    O16 + O16 → P31 + p + 7.68 MeV,

    as a possibility, although these reactions normally only occur in a collapsing star. Still, matter in a star is mainly confined by pressure and gravity, not condensed matter (crystalline) structures, so maybe this is yet another artifact of condensed matter confinement and resonance.

    Perhaps an examination of the reaction ash would reveal the presence of heavier elements…?

    Or, alternatively, an extreme form of reverse entropy is being seen, with the Oxygen literally reverting back to its formative elements?

    Anyway, this claim may well open up another useful research avenue in the world of CMNS – and it is fairly easy to verify that Hydrogen and Oxygen are going in and lots of Hydrogen and energy – but no Oxygen – is coming out…

    • Ophelia Rump

      Presuming this Solar Hydrogen claim is true, where does all that energy go?

      16.54 MeV, 7.68 MeV, 1.46 MeV, and 9.59 MeV respectively, minus 0.39 MeV.

      If there is not this quantity of excess energy released or reabsorbed, then the claim cannot be true.

      • Konstantin Balakiryan

        Dear Ophellia, Do not forget about the leptons (electrons and antineutrinos) that in spontaneous beta decay (neutron-proton transition) carry off the energy decay.
        K.B.

  • Alain Samoun

    I have a similar machine but, I think a better one, with 1 liter of water I get 2 liters of 100 proof alcohol and, yes, I can demonstrate it any time (for a fee) and the COPS my friends! the COPS, they are so numerous and big that I can’t count them especially when I’m driving.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Bravo!
      Thank you, I needed a laugh.

  • Alain Samoun

    I have a similar machine but, I think a better one, with 1 liter of water I get 2 liters of 100 proof alcohol and, yes, I can demonstrate it and you can even test it (for a fee) and the COPS my friends! the COPS, they are so numerous and big that I can’t count them especially when I’m driving.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Bravo!
      Thank you, I needed a laugh.

  • Ivone

    Yes. It creates exothermic fusion reactions in Betelguese and other red giants entering instability(death).

  • Obvious

    I wonder how this process would “know” to make only hydrogen, and not a mess of radioactive and non-radioactive atoms between O and H. Preventing a halt in the reaction at He would also be a problem.

    • It would seem to require the nuclear binding forces to suddenly cease (miracle 1), allowing the oxygen nuclei to fall apart without either massive energy release or a shower of neutrons (miracle 2a). Perhaps the neutrons fall apart, too, again without melting the general area (miracle 2b). The resulting proton-electron plasma could then condense to form the hydrogen.

      There – problem solved! I don’t think that my ‘explanation’ breaks many more rules than traditional transmutation using smelly chemicals and various organic remains.

      • Obvious

        They were talking about breaking hydrogen bonds at one point. Fissioning oxygen into H, even into N+H is a long way from breaking hydrogen bonds…
        I sure hope they use pure water. A little extra “dirt” in there might be more exciting than they want.

  • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

    Remember to have an open mind until there is evidence pro or con. In a sense the data presented shows what’s might going on e.g. some strange multi nuclear reaction, where some matter must transform to energy completely in order to balance the energy, unheard of. In a sense we don’t know as much about the nuclear reaction that is supposed to happen in Rossi’s ECAT reaction and hence doesn’t get the same critique by simply hiding / don’t knowing mass balances. Of cause the Ecat has been tested to a much higher degree when it comes to showing _a_ nuclear reaction. But until we know more, we might one day stand there, with a similar result for the ECAT. well tested and with mass balances that are unbelievable from our current knowledge. And then, reality trump theory. So don’t put effort, don’t put money and don’t ridicule until there is something more concrete to point at.

    • georgehants

      stefan, a very wise comment I think, but if nobody puts in any “effort” or “money” then how will we find out if it is negative or positive.
      We would just be left with the same mess that most of science has made of Cold Fusion and many other important subjects.

      • David14433

        I think there are always people that are willing to test somewhat credible claims for free. Like the guy that offered to test Rossi’s E-cat. Though some companies may not want to do that for some reason, IDK.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        That’s true, someone need to spend effort in verifying the technology. Someone need to invest. So to a degree I’m wrong. But the onus is on the inventor to suggest acceptable tests that a critical expert can agree on and also provide data for what such a test will produce, e.g. enough background information for any investor or academic professor to say, hey if they can make that test then we might invest, study or whatever. On the other hand what I wrote is mainly for the bulk of us here on the forum. Really we need more concrete things to base any sane judgement. Cause right now any extra LENR that can explain what is happening seams to be hidden in the inaccuracy of the (little) presented data.

    • Konstantin Balakiryan

      We have never asked to ” put any effort” or ‘ put any money’ We just follow with tremendous interest on your efforts to understand the scientific and practical value of our discovery.
      A miracle, we have created just for you.
      Believe me, today we have a huge list of investors willing to invest in our project. And it’s not only large companies and corporations but also large countries. However, we are not so much concerned about the economic side, but rather in what hands will this fantastic technology end.

    • Konstantin Balakiryan

      We have never asked for any financial support on any of these forums. We just follow with tremendous interest on your efforts to understand the scientific and practical value of our discovery. A miracle, we have created just for you. Believe me, today we have a huge list of investors willing to invest in our project. And it’s not only large companies and corporations but also large countries. However, we are not so much concerned about the economic side, but rather in what hands will this fantastic technology end.

  • Obvious

    In the interview with Sterling, there was an indication that the reaction somehow utilizes neutrinos from the sun.

    • If that’s the case then my previously open mind just slammed shut.

      • Obvious

        If I was less generous with my interpretations, I would almost suspect that they ask more questions than they answer, then later use the answers scavenged from many blog posts as their answers later on.

  • steve high

    The SHT device is different from other new energy technology we have been following in one important attribute: the output is an enormous quantity of hydrogen gas, not heat. They have a certificate from a gas analyzing company that affirms a hydrogen gas output that represents a COP of 500 over the 700 watts of input electric power. In the sense of elegance, the best way to validate a purported overunity device would be to demonstrate it running itself, with no external energy source. This is technically more difficult with the reactors that produce heat because you have to be able to convert the heat back to electricity to run the reactor. With hydrogen gas, all you would need to do would be to convert a genset running on natural gas to hydrogen. With the stupendous volume of hydrogen reported by SHT, It would be a walk in the park to produce enough hydrogen from the reactor to run the reactor, with plenty of energy left over to run a bunch of electrical equipment. This company could easily mount such a “close the loop” demonstration. With all the hoopla over new energy technology we have yet to witness a verified closed-loop demonstration, a simple, elegant way to show that something new and paradigm-changing is really happening. With such a demonstration this company would be jumping out ahead of all the new energy schemes that are still plugged into the electric mains, and I would anticipate an avalanche of investor interest. I can think of no good reason not to do this, other than the possibility that SHT has nothing and is running a scam.

  • David14433

    So how does this one stack up against let’s say the e-cat and BLP (Black Light Power)? Besides that I think Steve High made a good point that making heat from LENR is not as good as hydrogen. Since hydrogen is a more direct source of energy. Thoughts?

  • bachcole

    I am skeptical.

  • Giuliano Bettini

    I’m momentarily confused, or permanently confused. 🙂

    Someone calculates, for pleasure, the overall mass defect that has, from 1 kg of water >>> to 1 kg of hydrogen?

    I’m sorry, but if the mass defect is negative, from where the hell you get the energy gain?

    And I would be led to add:

    if so, how the hell can you publish something so obviously stupid? I do not understand.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I‘ve tried to calculate it for 1 kg oxygen (see below). The mass difference would equal ~203 GWh, provided that my calculation is correct. Since water contains 88.9 mass % oxygen, converting all the oxygen in 1 kg water would require ~180.6 GWh. That equals ~7.2 g mass.

      The only idea I have is that you could add the 7.2 grams of mass directly, instead of adding its equivalent of 180.6 GWh. That would be at least a (very) theoretical possibility.

  • Rossi’s E-cat –> Excess Heat

    Blacklight Power –> Excess Light

    Solar Hydrogen Trends –> Excess Hydrogen

    If what they say is true we have a powerful array of new energy available to exploit in the future.

    • Konstantin Balakiryan

      That’s why Solar Hydrogen Trends ahead of all for 20-30 years

      • bachcole

        If Solar Hydrogen Trends gives a great demonstration, then I will jump on your band wagon and dance in the street. If not, then you get no respect from me. Talk is incredibly inexpensive.

        • MasterBlaster7

          I know, right. No F’ing way this could be done without major heat input or output. I mean, breaking a fundamental element into 8 smaller primary elements without any notable energy exchange? I don’t know. I don’t buy it. If it really does work….make a working plant and start selling hydrogen on the cheap. It should be cheaper to produce hydrogen, this way, than any other known process? right?

          Oh, and I don’t like this being tagged as LENR…LENR is fragile enough in these early stages. Hitching this wagon to LENR could give critics ammunition…and never, ever, give the monkeys chit to fling.

          • US_Citizen71

            It is creating 16 smaller primary elements not 8. They also need to convert 8 neutrons into protons to have the correct subatomic particle count.

        • Konstantin Balakiryan

          Be sure that very soon you will be a witness to this holiday for our civilization.
          I am not upset by your skeptiisim because skepsis in science is a form of motivation knowledge.
          In this regard, I personally invite you to control
          testing in Los Angeles May 16, 2014 .
          Time and place will tell you Hagop Aghanian .
          Testing guests are respected scientist who are working on hydrogen development.
          (sorry, I can not tell you the name of the organization and ask you not to make assumptions on the forum but if you come you will see who they are)

          • steve high

            Well I sent Sterling Allen a donation to help enable him to check out your device. Have you invited Sterling to your LA control testing?

          • Konstantin Balakiryan

            Yes.

        • k

          Be sure that very soon you will be a witness to this holiday for our civilization.
          I am not upset by your skeptiisim because skepsis in science is a form of motivation knowledge.
          In this regard, I personally invite you to control
          testing in Los Angeles May 16, 2014 .
          Time and place will tell you Hagop Aghanian .
          Testing guests are respected scientist who are working on hydrogen development.
          (sorry, I can not tell you the name of the organization and ask you not to make assumptions on the forum but if you come you will see who they are)

          • bachcole

            I wait with held breath. If you want to send me the money necessary for the airplane ticket and a cheap hotel room, I will be there. Otherwise I will have to read about it. (:->)

      • steve high

        Nice to hear from you Dr Balakiryan! Are you prepared to Close the Loop? Or perhaps tell us why you cannot do it?

      • bachcole

        We here at e-catworld are very skeptical. We require evidence. We are not skeptopaths because evidence will sway us. But we are also not unicorn thinkers. Grand theories and talk just doesn’t cut it. If requiring evidence means that we are a cult, then so be it.

  • Valeriy Tarasov

    I am
    not skeptical at all. In my theory (h-space theory) LENR is a fission reaction. In
    the case of Rossi’s e-cat, it is fission of hydrogen up to positrons and electron. In this
    case, it is oxygen
    nuclei decaying into protons. Potentially we should be able
    to find fission conditions for any nuclei.

  • bachcole

    If Solar Hydrogen Trends gives a great demonstration, then I will jump on your band wagon and dance in the street. If not, then you get no respect from me. Talk is incredibly inexpensive.

    • MasterBlaster7

      I know, right. No F’ing way this could be done without major heat input or output. I mean, breaking a fundamental element into 8 smaller primary elements without any notable energy exchange? I don’t know. I don’t buy it. If it really does work….make a working plant and start selling hydrogen on the cheap. It should be cheaper to produce hydrogen, this way, than any other known process? right?

      Oh, and I don’t like this being tagged as LENR…LENR is fragile enough in these early stages. Hitching this wagon to LENR could give critics ammunition…and never, ever, give the monkeys chit to fling.

      • US_Citizen71

        They also need to convert 4 neutrons into protons to have the correct subatomic particle count.

      • bachcole

        We here at e-catworld are very skeptical. We require evidence. We are not skeptopaths because evidence will sway us. But we are also not unicorn thinkers. Grand theories and talk just doesn’t cut it. If requiring evidence means that we are a cult, then so be it.

  • Freethinker

    O.T. in relation to this story, but I have found from a webpage managed by Mr Wright, som indications that HydroFusion is seeking capital by offering 1 million shares (out of a total of 5 millions). The price per share would be one pound stirling, or $1.687. The registration period is said to be May 1st to July 1st.

    The raised capital would be used to “…. 1) pay the legal costs incurred when setting up all the necessary contracts/agreements with our partners 2) General business development costs such as the aquisition of further licenses and strengthening of our web strategy”

    I do not care much for Mr Wright, and I have no idea if this is real or a load of b***SHT. I find no information on this on their webpage. But Maybe some bizzwiz here could dig deeper and scoop.

  • Freethinker

    O.T. in relation to this story, but I have found from a webpage managed by Mr Wright, som indications that HydroFusion is seeking capital by offering 1 million shares (out of a total of 5 millions). The price per share would be one pound stirling, or $1.687. The registration period is said to be May 1st to July 1st.

    The raised capital would be used to “…. 1) pay the legal costs incurred when setting up all the necessary contracts/agreements with our partners 2) General business development costs such as the aquisition of further licenses and strengthening of our web strategy”

    I do not care much for Mr Wright, and I have no idea if this is real or a load of b***SHT. I find no information on this on their webpage. But Maybe some bizzwiz here could dig deeper and scoop.

    • Allan Shura

      If you are serious they said they would reply to direct inquiries. Though the claims are incredible they have working prototypes. Really they can’t expect to be all things to every
      persons expectation unless they are fully capitalized and established. That should not be used as an excuse. We have seen unconventional management before so it takes real organization to have the whole ball of wax. I see a lot of corporate websites where the price and product information is withheld or missing in detail with well established companies though I am adverse that strategy. As far as the public is concerned they will go for the first
      readily available alternative from conventional energy that is a cost savings and lowers
      dependence on the domestic scale.

      • Allan Shura

        HydroFusion offered to supply a 1 MW e-cat for free for public display a year ago
        not to be confused with Solar Hydrogen Trends.

        • Konstantin Balakiryan

          Thank you!

  • US_Citizen71

    Closing the loop would be the ideal test, but I can think of an easy low cost method to test this device’s validity as well. All that is needed is one charged deep cycle battery, one dc to ac converter, one natural gas fired swimming pool heater, one water pump that meets the required flow of the heater and an outdoor swimming pool. Power the device with the battery and converter, feed the hydrogen output to the heater, pump the pool water through the heater and monitor the pool’s temperature. If the claim is real the pool will get heated if not it won’t.

  • US_Citizen71

    Closing the loop would be the ideal test, but I can think of an easy low cost method to test this device’s validity as well. All that is needed is one charged deep cycle battery, one dc to ac converter, one natural gas fired swimming pool heater, one water pump that meets the required flow of the heater and an outdoor swimming pool. Power the device with the battery and converter, feed the hydrogen output to the heater, pump the pool water through the heater and monitor the pool’s temperature. If the claim is real the pool will get heated, if not it won’t.

  • Fibber McGourlick

    It doesn’t smell right. If they really have a method of transforming the world with nearly free hydrogen, the discovery is beyond price. All they have to do is let it be tested by SRI, or some agency trusted by the science community, and when the claim is proven they will have an almost infinite amouint of money at their disposal. The same thing applies to all such advanced energy soultions that will save humanity and foster a advance in civilization for all people.

    • Owen Geiger

      Will IH test their reactor at SRI?

  • LENR G

    The chances this is a ridiculous scam are much higher than the chances it is a ham-fisted psyops attack on LENR or Internet practical joke.

    Which in turn are infinitely higher than the chance this is real, which is zero.

    The picture of their magical “reactor” is apparently lifted from some bottling web site for crying out loud (vortex).

    Nothing to see here.

  • The chances this is a ridiculous scam are much higher than the chances it is a ham-fisted psyops attack on LENR or Internet practical joke.

    Which in turn are infinitely higher than the chance this is real, which is zero.

    The picture of their magical “reactor” is apparently lifted from some bottling web site for crying out loud (vortex).

    Nothing to see here.

  • Owen Geiger

    Will IH test their reactor at SRI?

  • Andreas Moraitis

    I‘ve tried to calculate it for 1 kg oxygen (see below). The mass difference would equal ~203 GWh, provided that my calculation is correct. Since water contains 88.9 mass % oxygen, converting all the oxygen in 1 kg water would require ~180.6 GWh. That equals ~7.2 g mass.

    The only idea I have is that you could add the 7.2 grams of mass directly, instead of adding its equivalent of 180.6 GWh. That would be at least a (very) theoretical possibility.

    • Christopher Calder

      Well, I just listened to the interview and my built-in intuitive lie detector didn’t go off. Either this guy is a very talented actor, or it is real. If it is real, then Rossi and Defkalion have competition. If they are using nickel powder, water, and frequency stimulation they are using the same basic tools and ingredients as Rossi, Defkalion, and others in a different configuration to produce a different product. They should invite DARPA to test their reactor. The military would love this device.

      • Christopher Calder

        If you combined a cigarette pack sized Solar Hydrogen Trends hydrogen generator, a Bloom Energy solid state fuel cell ( http://www.bloomenergy.com/ ), a five gallon tank of water fuel, and a compact electric motor, you have a light car with plenty of power and a reasonable cost of production. If you can generate lots of hydrogen gas you can take existing 747s and turn them into hydrogen powered jetliners. You would need to engineer the water tanks so that the water does not freeze at altitude. Other than that turning existing aircraft into hydrogen powered aircraft is straightforward. Manufacturing synthetic jet fuel and synthetic gasoline is a piece of cake if you have a cheap source of both hydrogen gas and electricity. Figure synthetic gasoline at less than $2.00 a gallon at the pump. You can get the carbon from the atmosphere to make hydrocarbon fuels, such as pure heptane or pure octane. I emailed DARPA about SHT and asked them to investigate. Ripping out the oil burning power plants in all our large navy ships and replacing them with hydrogen burners would be a chore, but would quickly save money in fuel costs.

        • Ivone

          If this pans out, the most favoured fuel from my point of view would be ammonia. It powered the x – 15 and had a density similar to kerosene, liquid methane and butane. But there’s no carbon involved. It’s cheap enough already but would drop though the floor. Excellent also as rocket fuel.

      • jousterusa

        This statement sure is strange: “the process involved in their claimed process of converting 1 liter of water into 1kg of hydrogen…” There are 18,000 gallons of hydrogen in a liter of water that can be extracted by simple electrolysis.

    • Christopher Calder

      It may be bunk, but the guy deserves an Academy Award as an actor if it is. I emailed AirKinetics and asked if they tested the unit and what is their opinion. If the guy is delusional, it will be very fast, cheap, and easy to find out. As a scam his approach makes no monetary sense because he is allowing testing. Either it works or it does not work. I like his claim that the discovery was accidental as part of a research program to find better ways to extract precious metals. Liars have a hard time keeping their lies straight. This guy responds instantly to questions as if he is telling the truth. He does not have to stop and think to make up a new lie to cover his story. The guys selling noble gas engines smell like liars. This guy smells honest, but if he is insane and delusional living in a dream world he could sound like he is telling the truth because he really believes what he is saying.

      All I am saying is that it is worthwhile for DARPA to spend a day and a thousand bucks expenses to find out the facts. That would not be difficult at all.

  • AB

    One only needed to read the claim that it uses 16 different principles to produce energy to know that it’s not real.

  • CancunKurt

    Wow, much scam, very magic, tragic

  • GreenWin

    Fossil industry would welcome “excess” H2 – because they need to compete with encroaching alternatives. Do you want to buy H2 from Exxon or make your own LENR energy?

  • Guest

    From the White House:
    On America’s path toward a clean energy future, solar power is an increasingly important building block.
    That’s why we installed solar panels on the roof of the White House — it’s a clear sign of our commitment to energy efficiency.
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/share/take-behind-scenes-look-solar-panels-white-house-roof?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=email330-video&utm_campaign=climate

    Next time an E-Cat in the basement?

  • Well, I just listened to the interview and my built-in intuitive lie detector didn’t go off. Either this guy is a very talented actor, or it is real. If it is real, then Rossi and Defkalion have competition. If they are using nickel powder, water, and frequency stimulation they are using the same basic tools and ingredients as Rossi, Defkalion, and others in a different configuration to produce a different product. They should invite DARPA to test their reactor. The military would love this device.

  • FrankM

    The phone # is 818 -that’s the San Fernando Valley -Glendale area -so it’s either a cell or?

  • Omega Z
  • kasom

    I’m convinced, Mr. Balakiryan doesn’t let all the H2 from his barbecue reactor setup escape into the atmosphere. There must be a genset/fuelcell already and of course he will have used the homemade electricity since years.

    Show us Your energy bills of the last year, that will give the most convincing facts. It doesn’t always need to have a theory…

  • If you combined a cigarette pack sized Solar Hydrogen Trends hydrogen generator, a Bloom Energy solid state fuel cell ( http://www.bloomenergy.com/ ), a five gallon tank of water fuel, and a compact electric motor, you have a light car with plenty of power and a reasonable cost of production. If you can generate lots of hydrogen gas you can take existing 747s and turn them into hydrogen powered jetliners. You would need to engineer the water tanks so that the water does not freeze at altitude. Other than that turning existing aircraft into hydrogen powered aircraft is straightforward. Manufacturing synthetic jet fuel and synthetic gasoline is a piece of cake if you have a cheap source of both hydrogen gas and electricity. Figure synthetic gasoline at less than $2.00 a gallon at the pump. You can get the carbon from the atmosphere to make hydrocarbon fuels, such as pure heptane or pure octane. I emailed DARPA about SHT and asked them to investigate. Ripping out the oil burning power plants in all our large navy ships and replacing them with hydrogen burners would be a chore, but would quickly save money in fuel costs.

    • Ivone

      If this pans out, the most favoured fuel from my point of view would be ammonia. It powered the x – 15 and had a density similar to kerosene, liquid methane and butane. But there’s no carbon involved. It’s cheap enough already but would drop though the floor. Excellent also as rocket fuel.

    • bachcole

      Aren’t we getting a little ahead of ourselves with the wishful thinking. They have no demonstration and many people here think that it is bunk.

      • It may be bunk, but the guy deserves an Academy Award as an actor if it is. I emailed AirKinetics and asked if they tested the unit and what is their opinion. If the guy is delusional, it will be very fast, cheap, and easy to find out. As a scam his approach makes no monetary sense because he is allowing testing. Either it works or it does not work. I like his claim that the discovery was accidental as part of a research program to find better ways to extract precious metals. Liars have a hard time keeping their lies straight. This guy responds instantly to questions as if he is telling the truth. He does not have to stop and think to make up a new lie to cover his story. The guys selling noble gas engines smell like liars. This guy smells honest, but if he is insane and delusional living in a dream world he could sound like he is telling the truth because he really believes what he is saying.

        All I am saying is that it is worthwhile for DARPA to spend a day and a thousand bucks expenses to find out the facts. That would not be difficult at all.

        • Ivone

          See what I’ve said about ammonia as fuel. It’s not practical right now, but with this thing it would be. The waste product is water and nitrogen.

  • jousterusa

    This statement sure is strange: “the process involved in their claimed process of converting 1 liter of water into 1kg of hydrogen…” There are 18,000 gallons of hydrogen in a liter of water that can be extracted by simple electrolysis.

    • Konstantin Balakiryan

      …” There are 18,000 gallons of hydrogen in a liter of water that can be extracted by simple electrolysis”.

      Sorry, but from one liter of water can be obtained only 1234.44 liters of hydrogen under normal conditions.
      Or 325.9 U.S. gallons

      • E_man

        Mass difference between 1oxygen atom and 16 hydrogen atoms is about 0.13 atom unit = about 2.12E-28 kg = cca 120 MeV.
        Where from Mr.Balakiryan you are taking this mass or energy?
        Many thanks for answer.

      • jousterusa

        Perhaps you have better information than I did. If that’s the case, Sorry!

  • Gints Dzelme

    After some hours of digging info in the net…how about:
    O8/16 → H1/2 + N7/14
    N7/14 → H1/2 + C6/12
    C6/12 → H1/1 + B5/11
    B5/11 → H1/2 + Be4/9
    Be4/9 → H1/2 + Li3/7
    Li3/7 → H1/3 + He2/4
    He2/4 → H1/3 + H1/1
    ..and finally we got symphony with 7 transformations… 😉

  • bachcole

    I require a skeptic like Hanno Essen, Mats Lewan, etc. to witness the reaction WITHOUT any of the SHT people being present and for him or her to say that it is real before I will believe. I required nothing less with Rossi; why should I require less for SHT?

    But, having said that, physics wise, it just doesn’t seem very probable. But the social evidence is up to 25 (out of 100). I look forward to more reports and I hope that they are telling the truth. It would be a HUGE triumph.

  • E_man

    Mass difference between 1oxygen atom and 16 hydrogen atoms is about 0.13 atom unit = about 2.12E-28 kg = cca 120 MeV.
    Where from Mr.Balakiryan you are taking this mass or energy?
    Many thanks for answer.

  • jousterusa

    Perhaps you have better information than I did. If that’s the case, Sorry!

  • Neri B.

    Any news on the demonstration of tomorrow?

    • E_man

      From http://pesn.com/2014/05/07/9602487_Chief-Scientist-Shares_SHT-Symphony-7A-Secrets/

      Trip to LA

      Jack said I’d be welcome to come for a visit, so I
      can videotape the unit in operation, enabling others to see what I’m seeing, and
      how the testing is done.

      The flight is about $350, and we’re probably looking at one or two nights hotel
      costs.

      Your help in enabling me to go would be greatly appreciated.

      And, as usual,
      we’re still getting by on donations, so your chipping in is what is keeping us
      going as a news organization. (Leaving for Brazil tomorrow [covered by FISL]
      but only have a few dollars in my account.)

  • bkrharold

    Although the mechanism for energy production in the ecat is not fully understood, there are some persuasive theories like Wisdon Larsen. The transformation of Hydrogen or Deuterium to Helium, constrained in a metallic Nickel lattice (with some secret sauce) is quite plausible, and this reaction has been independently reproduced many hundreds of times, by credentialed scientists in the US Europe and Japan. Likewise Professors Swartz and Hagelsteins Nanor reactor, which they demonstrated at MIT is equally convincing
    The evidence for Konstantins hydrogen reactor is not as convincing. The transmutation of Oxygen to Hydrogen is improbable, and even if it were possible would require a substantial amount of energy. It is not clear how this process could generate energy. There is no convincing independent verification to substantiate these claims.

  • Konstantine Balakiryan

    Enemies of the United States will use any methods to sabotage and prevent the American people to take advantage of the greatest discovery of the century.

    Here’s a good example of that – Simon Derricutt of France.

    Simon: TSI (Total Solar Irradiation) is about 1.4kW / m² above the atmosphere, and at LA I’d expect maybe around 1.1kW / m² at this time on a clear sunny day. Your estimate of solar power is about 4 times too high. The (white) water tank will not actually heat up at this rate, and you might just about get somewhere in the region of 400W heat input if you’re lucky. The water in the tank was heated by at least 4x that rate.

    Konstantin: These are the real numbers that actually exist:
    This chart shows solar insulation ( It is also called solar irradiation) in kilowatt-hours per square meter per day in many US locations.
    State___________City_____________________High____Low_______Avg

    AZ_____________Pheonix__________________7.13____5.78 ______6.58 

    CA_____________Los Angeles_______________6.14____5.03______5.62

    CA_____________Santa Maria_______________6.52____5.42______5.94 

    CA_____________Fresno___________________6.19____3.42______5.38

    CA_____________Riverside_________________6.35_____ 5.35_____5.87           

    http://www.bigfrogmountain.com/SunHou...

    He’s just fooling us and fulfilling someone’s order.

    Konstantine Balakiryan ,
    PhD.Professor.

    .

  • Christopher Calder