Stanford Scientists Develop Water Splitter Powered by AAA Battery using Nickel and Iron Catalysts

This has received some attention around the web — thanks to US_Citizen for the following comments on another thread.

Scientists develop a water splitter that runs on an ordinary AAA battery

http://phys.org/news/2014-08-scientists-splitter-ordinary-aaa-battery.html

It uses nickel/nickel-oxide and iron catalysts, more evidence that nickel has some special properties when combined with hydrogen.

Its a 2 nanometer thick nickel coating on silicon. Lithium is added to the water for protection against corrosion.
Nickel in the nanometer scale… makes you wonder.

From the article:

“Using nickel and iron, which are cheap materials, we were able to make the electrocatalysts active enough to split water at room temperature with a single 1.5-volt battery,” said Hongjie Dai, a professor of chemistry at Stanford. “This is the first time anyone has used non-precious metal catalysts to split water at a voltage that low. It’s quite remarkable, because normally you need expensive metals, like platinum or iridium, to achieve that voltage . . . It’s been a constant pursuit for decades to make low-cost electrocatalysts with high activity and long durability,” Dai said. “When we found out that a nickel-based catalyst is as effective as platinum, it came as a complete surprise.”

As far as energy production goes, this is certainly not LENR, but a potentially much cheaper method for producing hydrogen. Hydrogen is discussed widely as a potential clean ad alternative to fossil fuels, but producing hydrogen requires energy input, and then there are storage and safety issues to deal with since hydrogen is both very light and combustible. Hydrogen-on-demand systems would be attractive because they obviate the need for storage of large amounts of hydrogen.

Fuel cell technology — where electricity is produced by combining hydrogen with oxygen to make electricity — is being developed as an alternative to battery, and Honda, Hyundai and Toyota are all developing electric cars using fuel cells to produce electricity. Of course we know that LENR uses hydrogen as an essential ingredient, but in such small amounts that the cost of hydrogen is probably not very significant in terms of overall costs.

  • pelgrim108

    Its an article from the Stanford news service november 2013
    http://news.stanford.edu/pr/2013/pr-nickel-water-splitter-111213.html
    The paper was published in Science november 2013

    … the Dai team applied a 2-nanometer-thick layer of nickel onto a
    silicon electrode, paired it with another electrode and placed both in a
    solution of water and potassium borate. When light and electricity were
    applied, the electrodes began splitting the water into oxygen and
    hydrogen, a process that continued for about 24 hours with no sign of
    corrosion.

    To improve performance, the researchers mixed lithium into the
    water-based solution. “Remarkably, adding lithium imparted superior
    stability to the electrodes,” Kenney said. “They generated hydrogen and
    oxygen continuously for 80 hours – more than three days – with no sign
    of surface corrosion.”

    • pelgrim108

      Light plus electricity from the battery is powering the splitting of water.

      • Fortyniner

        A much more informative article than the ‘lead’ story. Boron hydride and lithium borohydride are both very active reversible hydride donors, and lithium borohydride in particular is being researched as a hydrogen storage medium. These compounds are probably formed in the electrolyte, following uptake of nascent H.

        Possibly the near instantaneous adsorption of nascent H facilitates the formation of more H by reducing potential electrochemical opposition to this process. The current flow and/or heating effects may then release the bound H rapidly, but away from the actives nickel sites on the cathode. Of course there is also the possibility that H is being adsorbed into the nickel, so that LENR energy gain processes become a possibility.

        Still no efficiency data though.

        • GreenWin

          Years ago I looked into proposals to use NaBH4 for H2 storage. There were always issues with slurry. And guess who’s doing R&D in this sector? Stanford. http://gcep.stanford.edu/pdfs/hydrogen_workshop/Wu.pdf

          Not much to see here. Except MS academics seem intent on making incremental announcements that might prop up Shell’s master plan to convert their gasoline stations into H2-gas stations.

          • US_Citizen71

            This technology combined with an ECat power source could make Shell’s dreams come true. Hydrogen could be generated continuously at their stations. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with that. Any energy tech that can cheaply provide the energy we need with out poisoning ourselves or causing damage to the world at large (by this I mean the end of strip mining, fracking, etc..) is a good thing even if promoted by those that have up to now been making their living providing energy by more harmful means.

          • GreenWin

            US – I agree. However, old fossil companies will have to dramatically restructure to make the economics work. They are going to compete with $.01/kWh electricity available at home or free at malls and offices. H2 is hard to manage and extremely volatile. I would prefer my family transportation be simple Li-Ion or next gen air-metal batteries – from a safety perspective.

            Remember the Hindenburg…

          • US_Citizen71

            I was hoping that they were not planing to make the storage tanks out of thermite, like the Hindenburg! : )

            But seriously there have been hydrogen powered forklifts in use for more than a decade to get by OSHA style safety regulation they already have engineered the storage tanks good enough. The scare is no different and actually less dangerous than CNG powered vehicles and we allow consumers to fuel their of vehicles now with CNG, even at home. A hydrogen leak has a much smaller chance of building up than a natural gas leak just due to its density.

          • GreenWin

            All good points. My barbeques are fueled by propane (though mesquite charcoal flavors better) and accidents are few. Still, oilcos are going to have to compete against near-too-cheap-to-meter electricity. I am not sure how the capital cost of electrolyzer, compressors, safety equipment and overhead at an H2 station can be justified without charging $4-5/gal equiv. DOE estimates $50/H2 fillup – compared to $10/charge for EVs. Additionally FC stacks are prone to poisoning & maintenance issues. EVs are a battery, a motor. Simple.

          • US_Citizen71

            I’m a believer in electric powered vehicles I am just not convinced battery tech can be scaled cheaply to the level needed to provide transportation as we now use it. We are talking exponentially more lithium needing to be extracted and refined, when compared with today, for any type of Li Ion battery to be adopted for worldwide transportation use. There are other battery types as well but none that match Li Ion for cost/power density currently.

          • GreenWin

            Lithium is 100% recyclable. But recyclers need to improve their processing methods to stay competitive. The Tesla/Panasonic Megafactories will produce massive volume of batteries. By the time (10-20 years) the light transport fleet has converted to EV, new chemistry or some kind of LENR will likely be in play. I’m not concerned with these surmountable issues. Thanks very much for the dialog US.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Give it time and there will either be electric on demand or hydrogen on demand or both if either one or both technologies materializes.

          • GreenWin

            Looking at the stats, I’ll take EV with Li-Ion over fossil or electrolyzed H2 any day. Hey, it 5X cheaper too!

          • georgehants

            Sterling Allan
            August 24th, 2014 at 10:56 PM
            LENR-to-Market Digest — August 22, 2014
            – It’s been 4.5 months since I compiled a digest. While I’ve not been
            able to be comprehensive this time, pulling from the many news sources, I
            was able to organize most all of the 120 E-CatWorld articles Frank
            posted, which gives an exciting overview of the burgeoning stage of
            development the industry is at. (PESN; August 22, 2014)
            http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

          • Ophelia Rump

            georgehants, I thought you would enjoy this. Also you might give me your opinion.

            I am not a conspiracy theorist and laugh when people talk about the illuminati, but what do you make of this. Paul Hellyer seems like such a kind and noble man. Is there some truth to this?

            Canadian Minister of Defense: We must overthrow the Illuminati
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6MyB74VoQ4

          • georgehants

            Ophelia, yes that is a well know report.
            If one does one’s own Research there are so many Wonderful things out there being hidden by the establishment etc.
            How can I say exactly what is Truth?
            Each one of us must do our own open-minded, competent Research, unlike the average scientist, to get as near to the Truth as one can.
            Cold Fusion, UFO’s, Telepathy etc. etc. you will find the solid Evidence is overwhelming, but dismissed by the establishment for their own reasons.
            But with scientists it is just plain brain-washed incompetence etc.
            Best

          • GreenWin

            Had this report attempted to appear in a U.S. territory it likely would have been received with derision, jokes, and references to “little green men.” To my knowledge no close “encounters” have reported green lifeforms. Unless of course skeptics take plants to be alien. Regardless, in spirit plants are people too.

            Disclosure: GreenWin loves plants.

          • georgehants

            GreenWin, so much to learn, if only science were to do the impossible and act like scientists.
            These days I even dislike cutting the grass.
            ——-
            Talking & Singing & Music towards Your Plants Make Them Grow Better
            http://beforeitsnews.com/metaphysics/2013/04/talking-singing-and-music-towards-your-plants-make-them-grow-better-proven-2442198.html

          • bachcole

            Only the plant people are almost entirely asleep, no matter how much coffee you feed them.

          • Omega Z

            “little green men.” Do Not Exist!!!

            Geez, How many times do I have to tell you people?
            They Were Not GREEN.

          • Bernie777

            Rossi is from Mars, Storms is from Venus. (:

  • pelgrim108

    edit – below refers to another invention from the same team but not what Franks article is about
    ——————

    Its an article from the Stanford news service november 2013
    http://news.stanford.edu/pr/2013/pr-nickel-water-splitter-111213.html
    The paper was published in Science november 2013

    … the Dai team applied a 2-nanometer-thick layer of nickel onto a
    silicon electrode, paired it with another electrode and placed both in a
    solution of water and potassium borate. When light and electricity were
    applied, the electrodes began splitting the water into oxygen and
    hydrogen, a process that continued for about 24 hours with no sign of
    corrosion.

    To improve performance, the researchers mixed lithium into the
    water-based solution. “Remarkably, adding lithium imparted superior
    stability to the electrodes,” Kenney said. “They generated hydrogen and
    oxygen continuously for 80 hours – more than three days – with no sign
    of surface corrosion.”

    • pelgrim108

      .edit – below refers to another invention from the same team but not what Franks article is about
      ——————
      Light plus electricity from the battery is powering the splitting of water.
      Maybe if they would shape the electrolyte jar into a lens and track the sun the yield would increase. Just want to emphasize that the thing runs on light.

      “Higher photocurrents than other competing photoanodes (25 mA/cm2 under ~1 sun conditions) “
      http://gtp.autm.net/technology/view/49528

      • A rather more informative article than the ‘lead’ story – but still no efficiency data.

        Boron and lithium hydrides and lithium borohydride are very active reversible hydride donors, and lithium borohydride in particular is being researched as a hydrogen storage medium. These compounds and similar ones are probably formed in the electrolyte by reactions between the potassium and lithium borates and nascent H+ at the cathode.

        It seems possible that rapid adsorption by borates of nascent H+ at the cathode surface may facilitate the formation of more H+ by reducing potential electrochemical resistance to this process resulting from build-up of H+ (charge accumulation) prior to formation of H2 bubbles. The current flow and/or localised heating effects may then release the bound H+ rapidly to re-form the original borates in the electrolyte, but slightly away from the active nickel surface on the cathode (I’m assuming that this is nickel plated as well as the photoanode).

        Of course there is also the slight possibility that some protium is being adsorbed into the nickel, so that LENR-like energy gain processes might then become a possibility.

        • GreenWin

          Years ago I looked into proposals to use NaBH4 for H2 storage. There were always issues with slurry. And guess who’s doing R&D in this sector? Stanford. http://gcep.stanford.edu/pdfs/hydrogen_workshop/Wu.pdf

          Not much to see here. Except MS academics seem intent on making incremental announcements that might prop up Shell’s master plan to convert their gasoline stations into H2-gas stations.

          • US_Citizen71

            This technology combined with an ECat power source could make Shell’s dreams come true. Hydrogen could be generated continuously at their stations. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with that. Any energy tech that can cheaply provide the energy we need with out poisoning ourselves or causing damage to the world at large (by this I mean the end of strip mining, fracking, etc..) is a good thing even if promoted by those that have up to now been making their living providing energy by more harmful means.

          • GreenWin

            US – I agree. However, old fossil companies will have to dramatically restructure to make the economics work. They are going to compete with $.01/kWh electricity available at home or free at malls and offices. H2 is hard to manage and extremely volatile. I would prefer my family transportation be simple Li-Ion or next gen air-metal batteries – from a safety perspective.

            Remember the Hindenburg…

          • US_Citizen71

            I was hoping that they were not planing to make the storage tanks out of thermite, like the Hindenburg! : )

            But seriously there have been hydrogen powered forklifts in use for more than a decade to get by OSHA style safety regulation they already have engineered the storage tanks good enough. The scare is no different and actually less dangerous than CNG powered vehicles and we allow consumers to fuel their own vehicles now with CNG, even at home. A hydrogen leak has a much smaller chance of building up than a natural gas leak just due to its density.

            Edit- What about a short caused by dendrites in a multi-Megawatt hour lithium ion battery? Would you like to be trapped in the chassis of a vehicle with that going down the highway? There is a danger in anything my friend.

          • GreenWin

            All good points. My barbeques are fueled by propane (though mesquite charcoal flavors better) and accidents are few. Still, oilcos are going to have to compete against near-too-cheap-to-meter electricity. I am not sure how the capital cost of electrolyzer, compressors, safety equipment and overhead at an H2 station can be justified without charging $4-5/gal equiv. DOE estimates $50/H2 fillup – compared to $10/charge for EVs. Additionally FC stacks are prone to poisoning & maintenance issues. EVs are a battery, a motor. Simple.

          • US_Citizen71

            I’m a believer in electric powered vehicles I am just not convinced battery tech can be scaled cheaply to the level needed to provide transportation as we now use it. We are talking exponentially more lithium needing to be extracted and refined, when compared with today, for any type of Li Ion battery to be adopted for worldwide transportation use. There are other battery types as well but none that match Li Ion for cost/power density currently.

          • GreenWin

            Lithium is 100% recyclable. But recyclers need to improve their processing methods to stay competitive. The Tesla/Panasonic Megafactories will produce massive volume of batteries. By the time (10-20 years) the light transport fleet has converted to EV, new chemistry or some kind of LENR will likely be in play. I’m not concerned with these surmountable issues. Thanks very much for the dialog US.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Give it time and there will either be electric on demand or hydrogen on demand or both if either one or both technologies materializes.

          • bachcole

            I just saw some battery technology that puts Lithium Ion to shame, but I can’t remember where I saw it. I know that it is new. I hope that someone else remembers seeing it and can give us a link. I think that it was some kind of ceramic thingie.

          • GreenWin

            Looking at the stats, I’ll take EV with Li-Ion over fossil or electrolyzed H2 any day. Hey, it 5X cheaper too!

          • Broncobet

            Exactly, look at all the mindless opposition to nuclear energy.

  • Christopher Calder

    This is an interesting development. The water crushing-smashing-transmuting technology claimed by Solar Hydrogen Trends seems to be far more significant and efficient, …if true. The two technologies are certainly partially related in some way on the atomic level. I suspect nickel powder and iron are also used in the Solar Hydrogen Trends reactor.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Wait, what?
      What is the relationship?
      If one or the other is a fraud, do you do the other a favor by tying them both to the same fate?

      If you devour the world in one bite, you will surely choke upon it.

      • Christopher Calder

        I suspect both are authentic devices. The Stanford device is an efficient device to separate oxygen from hydrogen. The Solar Hydrogen Trends device claims to do that plus break apart oxygen atoms into multiple hydrogen atoms. They are very different devices and accomplish different tasks, but both seem to benefit from the lattice structure of nickel.

        • Ophelia Rump

          The Stanford device is a very modest but breakthrough claim.

          The SHT device is an insanely outrageous claim. That is not to say that it is false, but in the history of insanely outrageous claims, most have been false.
          Extreme claims require extreme proofs. If they have something real, they can sell the gas as a worst case scenario, and they will eventually gain credibility. If they are real, they are cursed by being too successful to have any credibility at all. Add to that the attempt to pass off simple flow metrics as validation and warning alarms should be going off in your head.

          • Christopher Calder

            This is the year 2014, not 1980. Expect insane breakthroughs in science. We have reached a critical mass of information that is creating disruptive, game changing inventions in almost all fields of technology, from computers, to robotics, to energy production, to space drive technology.

          • GreenWin

            More likely the inventions have been with us but not on mainstage or off-Broadway for that matter. Some are now getting a second shot. Others like CF have achieved critical mass despite resistance. Should make for great fun. Swiss S3 Space Systems has announced zeroG weightless flights from 15 different locations next year! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psFF3MWsGOM

          • Ophelia Rump

            Don’t drink the propaganda kool-aid.

      • Charles

        ” I have been reading these things for 50 years and I am still waiting for one of them, just one, to come to fruition.”

        I have been reading these things for 70 years and I am still waiting for one of them, just one, to come to fruition. Popular Science had the hydrogen economy just around the corner in the late 1940s if my faulty memory serves me correctly.

        • GreenWin

          Charles, it may have been the April, 1947 PopSci cover. Though the Hindenberg ten years earlier likely prevented a rush to hydrogen. You can peruse covers here: http://www.replayphotos.com/popularsciencephotostore/covers-1940s-print/-_543721.cfm

          • Charles

            Sounds about right. Thanks a lot GreenWin. I was 17, almost 18, at the time. I can’t even guess how many times I have read about hydrogen being right around the corner.

            I’m looking forward to the Andrea Rossi version of hydrogen and nickel. If that one pans out the world is in good shape.

        • pelgrim108

          Thanks for the link. I tried it, but it requires an acount to be made wich I will not do.

  • This is an interesting development. The water crushing-smashing-transmuting technology claimed by Solar Hydrogen Trends seems to be far more significant and efficient, …if true. The two technologies are certainly partially related in some way on the atomic level. I suspect nickel powder and iron are also used in the Solar Hydrogen Trends reactor.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Wait, what?
      What is the relationship?
      If one or the other is a fraud, do you do the other a favor by tying them both to the same fate?

      If you devour the world in one bite, you will surely choke upon it.
      Learn to take your miraculous discovery news one article at a time. I have been reading these things for 50 years and I am still waiting for one of them, just one, to come to fruition. Hope for but do not expect just one in your lifetime.
      With that perspective, settle down. This will probably be a long wait, show some patience.

      • I suspect both are authentic devices. The Stanford device is an efficient device to separate oxygen from hydrogen. The Solar Hydrogen Trends device claims to do that plus break apart oxygen atoms into multiple hydrogen atoms. They are very different devices and accomplish different tasks, but both seem to benefit from the lattice structure of nickel.

        • Ophelia Rump

          The Stanford device is a very modest but breakthrough claim.

          The SHT device is an insanely outrageous claim. That is not to say that it is false, but in the history of insanely outrageous claims, most have been false.
          Extreme claims require extreme proofs. If they have something real, they can sell the gas as a worst case scenario, and they will eventually gain credibility. If they are real, they are cursed by being too successful to have any credibility at all. Add to that the attempt to pass off simple flow metrics as validation and warning alarms should be going off in your head.

          • This is the year 2014, not 1980. Expect insane breakthroughs in science. We have reached a critical mass of information that is creating disruptive, game changing inventions in almost all fields of technology, from computers, to robotics, to energy production, to space drive technology.

          • GreenWin

            More likely the inventions have been with us but not on mainstage or off-Broadway for that matter. Some are now getting a second shot. Others like CF have achieved critical mass despite resistance. Should make for great fun. Swiss S3 Space Systems has announced zeroG weightless flights from 15 different locations next year! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psFF3MWsGOM

          • Ophelia Rump

            Don’t drink the propaganda kool-aid.

      • Charles

        ” I have been reading these things for 50 years and I am still waiting for one of them, just one, to come to fruition.”

        I have been reading these things for 70 years and I am still waiting for one of them, just one, to come to fruition. Popular Science had the hydrogen economy just around the corner in the late 1940s if my faulty memory serves me correctly.

        • GreenWin

          Charles, it may have been the April, 1947 PopSci cover. Though the Hindenberg ten years earlier likely prevented a rush to hydrogen. You can peruse covers here: http://www.replayphotos.com/popularsciencephotostore/covers-1940s-print/-_543721.cfm

          • Charles

            Sounds about right. Thanks a lot GreenWin. I was 17, almost 18, at the time. I can’t even guess how many times I have read about hydrogen being right around the corner.

            I’m looking forward to the Andrea Rossi version of hydrogen and nickel. If that one pans out the world is in good shape.

        • Broncobet

          Gasoline is hydrogen.

  • friendlyprogrammer

    I’ve maintained science is progressing so rapidly (a la internet) that splitting water might become a quick breakthrough technology and for every company openly discussing LENR there are a dozen openly researching splitting water.

    So what if we still need to add water to our vehicles (even boats, cough) every thousand miles?

    The internet was mostly introduced to society with windows 95 and the majority of the world did not go online until a decade later. This means we have only had open access to data and information for about a decade, and online videos have arisen which provide us even more information.

    It was not so long ago if you wanted to hear about Splitting Hydrogen you would need to attend your local library and hope they have a book about it and could order one to your local branch. Even then you would be forced to agree with the various authors who only present their version of facts. If you read a book on Egypt you would be told the pyramids were built by slaves even though we know that now to be a falsehood.

    Contravening opinions and Breakthrough technologies like the ones we have shown an interest in here would not be published by most publishers as they made more money from popular opinion topics.

    So now science has a lot more freedom. Garage mechanics can replicate University experiments at home, and publish their findings in simple online videos. It is a marvel.

    Technology has no choice but to move at ten times (or greater) the pace.

    We have all heard about Blacklight Power/Mills, but he started his fundraising in a day when printed media reigned supreme. The demonstrations they put forth now would not have even been a consideration 25 years ago. The film would need to be developed in a photo lab, edited and shipped to interested parties via mail.

    Splitting water is such a topic where we only have seen a surface of the research, but already there are hydrogen buses and cars in operation. There are safe methods of hydrogen storage and transport now. These types of things are making headway daily.

    Hydrogen is green/smog free. Another advantage it would have is it could run the internal combustion engines of today without too much modification. A steam car would require a dozen years of prototypes before a market ready model would be practical, If steam power becomes practical in cars I think we would see variations convert to electric motors long before we saw a steam driven powertrain.

    This is exciting. A month back this website discussed a process of splitting ammonia. There are many fronts of this research and we are about due for a scientific breakthrough.

    I am hoping for something simple and open source so we can all build our own without reprisals, and competition can thrive.

  • friendlyprogrammer

    I’ve maintained science is progressing so rapidly (a la internet) that splitting water might become a quick breakthrough technology and for every company openly discussing LENR there are a dozen openly researching splitting water.

    So what if we still need to add water to our vehicles (even boats, cough) every thousand miles?

    The internet was mostly introduced to society with windows 95 and the majority of the world did not go online until a decade later. This means we have only had open access to data and information for about a decade, and online videos have arisen which provide us even more information.

    It was not so long ago if you wanted to hear about Splitting Hydrogen you would need to attend your local library and hope they have a book about it and could order one to your local branch. Even then you would be forced to agree with the various authors who only present their version of facts. If you read a book on Egypt you would be told the pyramids were built by slaves even though we know that now to be a falsehood.

    Contravening opinions and Breakthrough technologies like the ones we have shown an interest in here would not be published by most publishers as they made more money from popular opinion topics.

    So now science has a lot more freedom. Garage mechanics can replicate University experiments at home, and publish their findings in simple online videos. It is a marvel.

    Technology has no choice but to move at ten times (or greater) the pace.

    We have all heard about Blacklight Power/Mills, but he started his fundraising in a day when printed media reigned supreme. The demonstrations they put forth now would not have even been a consideration 25 years ago. The film would need to be developed in a photo lab, edited and shipped to interested parties via mail.

    Splitting water is such a topic where we only have seen a surface of the research, but already there are hydrogen buses and cars in operation. There are safe methods of hydrogen storage and transport now. These types of things are making headway daily.

    Hydrogen is green/smog free. Another advantage it would have is it could run the internal combustion engines of today without too much modification. A steam car would require a dozen years of prototypes before a market ready model would be practical, If steam power becomes practical in cars I think we would see variations convert to electric motors long before we saw a steam driven powertrain.

    This is exciting. A month back this website discussed a process of splitting ammonia. There are many fronts of this research and we are about due for a scientific breakthrough.

    I am hoping for something simple and open source so we can all build our own without reprisals, and competition can thrive.

  • Bernie777
    • Fortyniner

      A glimpse behind the scenery. Most of these connections were been discussed on this blog some time ago (http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/04/21/the-industrial-heat-web-of-connections-includes-ge-others/ http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/01/27/rossi-confirms-position-at-industrial-heat-llc/ etc.)

      The Coldfusion article omits the following ‘connections’ (copied from the thread at the 2nd link above):

      “Power Generation Services Inc. – PGSI. CEO Jim Szyperski is listed by Cherokee as an ‘advisor’. Elizabeth Darden has had a senior position (Operations Coordinator) with this company since shortly after the formation of Industrial Heat, despite having no apparent qualifications for such a job (she was previously a teaching assistant).”

      “RTI International (rti.org) – Tom Darden is a director. “We support a wide variety of philanthropic programs as well as efforts that promote science, education, and environmental sustainability.”. This organisation would fit well with some of Rossi’s references to a philanthropic ‘partner’. RTI currently have contracts with the National Energy Technology Laboratory, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense.”

      • Bernie777

        Just reinforces by opinion there is a big player lurking behind IH pulling the strings.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer
    • A glimpse behind the stage scenery. Most of these possible connections were discussed on this blog a few months ago (http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/04/21/the-industrial-heat-web-of-connections-includes-ge-others/ http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/01/27/rossi-confirms-position-at-industrial-heat-llc/ etc.)

      The Coldfusion article omits the following ‘connections’ (copied from the thread at the 2nd link above):

      “Power Generation Services Inc. – PGSI. CEO Jim Szyperski is listed by Cherokee as an ‘advisor’. Elizabeth Darden has had a senior position (Operations Coordinator) with this company since shortly after the formation of Industrial Heat, despite having no apparent qualifications for such a job (she was previously a teaching assistant).”

      On edit – Elizabeth Darden (now Darden-Wooten) is Tom Darden’s daughter.

      “RTI International (rti.org) – Tom Darden is a director. “We support a wide variety of philanthropic programs as well as efforts that promote science, education, and environmental sustainability.”. This organisation would fit well with some of Rossi’s references to a philanthropic ‘partner’. RTI currently have contracts with the National Energy Technology Laboratory, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense.”

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Just reinforces by opinion there is a big player lurking behind IH pulling the strings.

  • Fortyniner

    The claim seems to be simply that electrolysis becomes possible at a lower voltage than previously possible. But voltage is not a problem – applied voltages can be increased or decreased in many ways. The question is, what is the efficiency of the new process? A few data points of this kind would have been nice.

    • US_Citizen71

      The claim is definitely electrolysis but with less input energy than is normally needed and cheaper longer lasting electrodes that function as catalysts to the reaction. The secondary article pelgrim posted appears to be from the same team at Stanford and appears to be another use for the nickel catalyst electrode. The solar powered version while interesting fails the KISS principle in my opinion and will likely come in to use much later. The device and technology in the article is simple and could be used to modify current hydrogen production means to increase efficiency and lower cost of production. I don’t see this device solving the world’s energy needs alone, but if used along with solar,wind, tide, ECats, etc.. I believe it will help. Beyond providing fuel for rockets during the first 50 miles or so of their journey from the Earth’s surface, I see this tech providing a means of energy storage. The ECat will be a base power provider no matter if it is thermal or electrical power that it provides. The ECat simply doesn’t increase power output fast enough to tackle the ever changing demand of the grid. Using a technology like the one in this article to store energy from the energy made by ECat, solar, wind, etc… will be needed. Fuel cells or even turbines spun by burning hydrogen will be able to ramp up power more quickly than a ECat would. The world will not be powered by a single type of energy tech but by many for years to come.

      • pelgrim108

        Yes you are wright US-Citizen71. I was refering to another invention from the same team without knowing it. Sorry for the confusion. I will edit my previous comments to stop further confusion.

      • Allan Shura

        At the coal power plants the increase in power is done by adding more fuel and or activating additional boilers not being used. The increase in power output is not immediate either so it the e-cat replaces coal in these existing boilers then that aspect would not be much different.

  • The claim seems to be simply that electrolysis becomes possible at a lower voltage than was previously possible without using expensive metal catalysts. But voltage is not a problem – applied voltages can be easily increased or decreased in many ways. The question is, what is the efficiency of the new process? A few data points of this kind would have been nice.

    Without such information this looks rather like another of those diversionary articles with the unstated bottom line – “Don’t bother with the ‘alternative’ nut jobs – real science has got this covered.”

    • US_Citizen71

      The claim is definitely electrolysis but with less input energy than is normally needed and cheaper longer lasting electrodes that function as catalysts to the reaction. The secondary article pelgrim posted appears to be from the same team at Stanford and appears to be another use for the nickel catalyst electrode. The solar powered version while interesting fails the KISS principle in my opinion and will likely come in to use much later. The device and technology in the article is simple and could be used to modify current hydrogen production means to increase efficiency and lower cost of production. I don’t see this device solving the world’s energy needs alone, but if used along with solar,wind, tide, ECats, etc.. I believe it will help. Beyond providing fuel for rockets during the first 50 miles or so of their journey from the Earth’s surface, I see this tech providing a means of energy storage. The ECat will be a base power provider no matter if it is thermal or electrical power that it provides. The ECat simply doesn’t increase power output fast enough to tackle the ever changing demand of the grid alone. Using a technology like the one in this article to store energy from the energy made by ECat, solar, wind, etc… will be needed. Fuel cells or even turbines spun by burning hydrogen will be able to ramp up power more quickly than a ECat would. The world will not be powered by a single type of energy tech but by many for years to come.

      • bachcole

        Voltage is not a measure of energy.

      • pelgrim108

        Yes you are wright US-Citizen71. I was refering to another invention from the same team without knowing it. Sorry for the confusion. I will edit my previous comments to stop further confusion.

      • Allan Shura

        At the coal power plants the increase in power is done by adding more fuel and or activating additional boilers not being used. The increase in power output is not immediate either so it the e-cat replaces coal in these existing boilers then that aspect would not be much different.

    • Frechette

      Decreasing the voltage does make a difference since this decreases also the power. The current remaining the same.

  • US_Citizen71

    Here is a link to a preview of the paper they published, it is behind a pay wall. Since I do not have the training in the right disciplines to fully comprehend the paper I have not viewed the full paper: http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/ncomms5695?utm_campaign=readcube_access&utm_source=nature.com&utm_medium=purchase_option&utm_content=button_version

    They published some supplementary information here including a video of the beaker bubbling:http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140822/ncomms5695/full/ncomms5695.html#supplementary-information

  • US_Citizen71

    Here is a link to a preview of the paper they published, it is behind a pay wall. Since I do not have the training in the right disciplines to fully comprehend the paper I have not viewed the full paper: http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/ncomms5695?utm_campaign=readcube_access&utm_source=nature.com&utm_medium=purchase_option&utm_content=button_version

    They published some supplementary information here including a video of the beaker bubbling:http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140822/ncomms5695/full/ncomms5695.html#supplementary-information

  • Andy Kumar

    Stanford is main stream. If nothing comes of it in 3 years, will George say it is being suppressed. A lot of it is all hype.

    We could have had an electric car hundred years ago, but those damn batteries won’t cooperate. Devil is in the details.

  • georgehants

    Newsweek
    A Future Powered by Cold Fusion Draws a Little Closer
    By Roger Highfield
    http://www.newsweek.com/future-powered-cold-fusion-draws-little-closer-265611

    • builditnow

      Curious use of Cold Fusion in the title since the article is only about hot fusion and makes absolutely no reference to cold fusion.

      • georgehants

        Is this the start of the establishment muddying the waters against COLD FUSION.

        • GreenWin

          Clearly there is some scheming here. Testing the waters as to how the term will fly? Or plain disinfo to confuse the now certain positive report from TIP scientists. Hot fusion clowns claiming credit for the work of cold fusion mavericks. Pathetic.

          • Curbina

            In a simpler world it could be easier to blame the confusion on a lazy and careless reporter and editor. I’m not so sure about this one as Newsweek is a very mainstream publication. Even the hot fusion account was trying to defend the ITER, so I’d say this is a non so naive article.

    • GreenWin

      ?????????? Newsweek Editor Jim Impoco must have a death wish, a bag of cash, or some kind of neurological parasite. Nothing in this story is about cold fusion. It’s more like a paid advertisment for the world’s biggest science boondoggle, the 400% overbudget and 8 year-behind-schedule – ITER. The video at the end pitches what seems like an HHO range extender. WTF?

      Also note there is no discussion of the “T” in the mention of a D-T fuel to make these alternative fusion gadgets work. The T is of course Tritium – which empowers nuke weapons. A catchy headline with no substance. Softening the sheeple to eventual REAL CF?? Dunno. Don’t care. Off to the beach…

    • bachcole

      Why didn’t you guys ( georgehants, GreenWin, builditnow, et. al.) leave a comment. I want you guys to go back and leave a comment. The compassionate thing to do is to let Roger Highfield know that his professional career as a journalist is coming to an end soon.

      • pelgrim108

        I wanted to comment but then saw the Facebook thing. I dont have a Facebook acount and I never will have one.

        • GreenWin

          Heh heh, scared d’Ecat. How is high is Roger’s field??

          • pelgrim108

            His field may be high but its pretty barren of comments.
            Anyway, we have the high ground ☺

      • georgehants

        Roger, fully agree but this site is enough for me usually.
        Remember that there are millions of scientists out there that one would think would be commenting everywhere on the censoring etc. regarding Cold Fusion and many other subjects.
        You me and others try to do our best here to show the problems and because no official comic will cover these subjects, ECW is one of the only places in the World where Cold Fusion etc, can be studied by all of science and the public.
        One would think many scientists would go crazy and rebel against being kept in the dark and manipulated by their establishment, but most just cower in a corner and hide somewhere I think.

        • bachcole

          I don’t think that any official policy or establishment is keeping people way from checking out the evidence of cold fusion. I think that it is groupthink and group anxiety. People are afraid of castigation and losing their funding and reputations.

          • georgehants

            Dear Roger, who do you think it is that creates the “group-think” in the first place, if not the establishment, meaning the official science comics, the media, academia, etc. etc.
            All controlled and politicized by the rich and powerful.

    • pelgrim108

      They changed the title. Its now:

      A Future Powered by Fusion Draws a Little Closer.
      They did away with the word “cold”.

      • Fortyniner

        I don’t know if the article itself has been changed (“Filed: 8/24/14 at 6:32 PM | Updated: 8/24/14 at 11:54 PM”, but it is now entirely about ‘hot’ plasma fusion, so the current title is appropriate.

        • Omega Z

          Again: Updated: 8/26/14 at 7:51 AM

    • bkrharold

      So according to the article, by 2040 after wasting more $billions of taxpayer money, we “might” reach the break even point for hot fusion with a cop of 1. Meanwhile Rossi is routinely getting COP 6 or more, and it has not cost anywhere near that amount.

  • georgehants

    Newsweek
    A Future Powered by Cold Fusion Draws a Little Closer
    By Roger Highfield
    http://www.newsweek.com/future-powered-cold-fusion-draws-little-closer-265611

    • builditnow

      Curious use of Cold Fusion in the title since the article is only about hot fusion and makes absolutely no reference to cold fusion.

      • georgehants

        Is this the start of the establishment muddying the waters against COLD FUSION.

        • GreenWin

          Clearly there is some scheming here. Testing the waters as to how the term will fly? Or plain disinfo to confuse the now certain positive report from TIP scientists. Hot fusion clowns claiming credit for the work of cold fusion mavericks. Pathetic.

          • Curbina

            In a simpler world it could be easier to blame the confusion on a lazy and careless reporter and editor. I’m not so sure about this one as Newsweek is a very mainstream publication. Even the hot fusion account was trying to defend the ITER, so I’d say this is a non so naive article.

    • GreenWin

      ?????????? Newsweek Editor Jim Impoco must have a death wish, a bag of cash, or some kind of neurological parasite. Nothing in this story is about cold fusion. It’s more like a paid advertisment for the world’s biggest science boondoggle, the 400% overbudget and 8 year-behind-schedule – ITER. The video at the end pitches what seems like an HHO range extender. WTF?

      Also note there is no discussion of the “T” in the mention of a D-T fuel to make these alternative fusion gadgets work. The T is of course Tritium – which empowers nuke weapons. A catchy headline with no substance. Softening the sheeple to eventual REAL CF?? Dunno. Don’t care. Off to the beach…

    • bachcole

      Why didn’t you guys ( georgehants, GreenWin, builditnow, et. al.) leave a comment. I want you guys to go back and leave a comment. The compassionate thing to do is to let Roger Highfield know that his professional career as a journalist is coming to an end soon.

      • pelgrim108

        I wanted to comment but then saw the Facebook thing. I dont have a Facebook acount and I never will have one.

        • GreenWin

          Heh heh, scared d’Ecat. How is high is Roger’s field??

          • pelgrim108

            His field may be high but its pretty barren of comments.
            Anyway, we have the high ground ☺

        • TomR

          Pelgrim108, there is a good facebook page called “Cold Fusion, LENR and Andrea Rossi” where there are always good discussions on cold fusion.

          • pelgrim108

            Can you supply a link that would work, since I dont have an acount.

          • TomR

            Here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ECat.LENR/ You might have to join to use it. If you join, you don’t have to answer very many of their questions if you don’t want to.

          • pelgrim108

            Thanks for the link. I tried it, but it requires an acount to be made wich I will not do.

        • bachcole

          I thought that it was Disqus. I hate Facebook, but it is helpful in order to logon to comment sections.

          • pelgrim108

            Convinience versus balance of power.

          • bachcole

            I don’t give a rat’s ass about any “balance of power” issues, whatever that means. I hate Facebook because it is complicated and illogical and doesn’t run smoothly and I never know where I am, and the worst part is people collecting “friends” as though this is anything other than a completely empty accomplishment. I do like the convenience; it allows me to spread my wisdom and knowledge faster and easier.

      • georgehants

        Roger, fully agree but this site is enough for me usually.
        Remember that there are millions of scientists out there that one would think would be commenting everywhere on the censoring etc. regarding Cold Fusion and many other subjects.
        You me and others try to do our best here to show the problems and because no official comic will cover these subjects, ECW is one of the only places in the World where Cold Fusion etc, can be studied by all of science and the public.
        One would think many scientists would go crazy and rebel against being kept in the dark and manipulated by their establishment, but most just cower in a corner and hide somewhere I think.

        • bachcole

          I don’t think that any official policy or establishment is keeping people way from checking out the evidence of cold fusion. I think that it is groupthink and group anxiety. People are afraid of castigation and losing their funding and reputations.

          • georgehants

            Dear Roger, who do you think it is that creates the “group-think” in the first place, if not the establishment, meaning the official science comics, the media, academia, etc. etc.
            All controlled and politicized by the rich and powerful.
            Who do you think it is that leads the group-think that Homeopathy is junk without doing the good Research, if not the drug company’s that do not want their profits diluted by other therapies.
            You say “I don’t think that any official policy or establishment is keeping people way from checking out the evidence of cold fusion.”
            Are you seriously suggesting that an average scientist is capable of doing their own Research to find the Truth on a subject like Cold Fusion.
            If that where so then Cold Fusion would be the exciting talk across the whole of science.

          • bachcole

            “who do you think it is that creates the “group-think” in the first place”? Human nature. Each and every person is responsible for their consciousness and the responses that they give in each situation. No one forced me to get a girl pregnant when I was 19. No one forced me to shy away from a perfectly decent fellow when I was 25 just because he had had smallpox and his face was not very appealing. Any other perception of group-think or any other manifestation of human nature enables bad behavior in one’s self and in others.

          • georgehants

            bachcole, agreed but you are seemingly missing the point that people are psychologically effected by brainwashing from the PTB etc.
            People like “group-think” without it they feel vulnerable and alone, outside of the tribe.
            It takes a strong mind to go against group-think.
            You may have noticed that my point is always for people to “think for themselves” and not be taken in by this brain-washing, that leads simple scientists to debunk Cold Fusion etc, because their establishment and peers do etc.
            This applies equally to UFO’s, Homeopathy and many other serious scientific and social subjects.

    • pelgrim108

      They changed the title. Its now:

      A Future Powered by Fusion Draws a Little Closer.
      They did away with the word “cold”.

      • bachcole

        They also deleted my comment. But someone has to read the comment in order to delete it. So I gave him/her a taste of things to come.

        • GreenWin

          You’re a good soldier Roger. 🙂 Or should I say, angel.

      • I don’t know if the article itself has been changed (“Filed: 8/24/14 at 6:32 PM | Updated: 8/24/14 at 11:54 PM”), but it is now entirely about ‘hot’ plasma fusion, so the current title is appropriate. If there was previously any mention of cold fusion, it’s gone now.

        On edit: I see that GreenWin and builditnow have already pointed this out.

        • Omega Z

          Again: Updated: 8/26/14 at 7:51 AM

    • bkrharold

      So according to the article, by 2040 after wasting more $billions of taxpayer money, we “might” reach the break even point for hot fusion with a cop of 1. Meanwhile Rossi is routinely getting COP 6 or more, and it has not cost anywhere near that amount.

  • Ophelia Rump

    I wonder how long it will be until we can buy electrodes made from that material online?
    It would revolutionize the HHO industry. They are plating carbon nano tubes. A little tricky but not impossible to garage manufacture.

  • pelgrim108

    Can you supply a link that would work, since I dont have an acount.

  • pelgrim108

    Convinience versus balance of power.

    • bachcole

      I don’t give a rat’s ass about any “balance of power” issues, whatever that means. I hate Facebook because it is complicated and illogical and doesn’t run smoothly and I never know where I am, and the worst part is people collecting “friends” as though this is anything other than a completely empty accomplishment. I do like the convenience; it allows me to spread my wisdom and knowledge faster and easier.

  • georgehants

    Today we have a report on something that changes climate and CO2, that has just been found.
    These things are all around us, but our Wonderful scientists manage to reach a “consensus” on GW with almost zero knowledge of what changes the climate.
    These comedians, like those holding back Cold Fusion etc. need a re-education to understand science principles.
    ——
    IBTimes
    Global Warming: Discovery of 500 Methane Vents On Atlantic Ocean Floor Has Major Implications.
    The discovery of the methane vents “highlights a really key area where
    we can test some of the more radical hypotheses about climate change,”
    John Kessler, a professor at the University of Rochester, who was not
    involved in the research, told The New York Times,
    adding that further “long-term studies” were needed to assess the link
    between climate change and the release of methane underwater.
    However, not all that is released reaches the surface. “The methane is
    dissolving into the ocean at depths of hundreds of metres and being
    oxidised to CO2,” Prof Adam Skarke from the Mississippi State University, who led the study, told BBC.
    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/global-warming-discovery-500-methane-vents-atlantic-ocean-floor-has-major-implications-1462487
    http://www.ibtimes.com/hundreds-methane-vents-causing-widespread-leakage-discovered-along-us-atlantic-margin-1667802

    • BroKeeper

      Georgehants,

      The GW comedians have a great purpose in the allowed pre-determinacy. They add urgency dynamics within the equation by which the E-Cat fits the bill nicely in the minds of the GW propagandized brainwashed followers. This can only give an added boost for much needed near-infinite clean energy and economical equilibrium.

      Besides, when Cold Fusion is vastly predominating in energy production they will conclude their folly when it has little effect on positive climate change. So leave the GW comedians alone for the LENR/QUAR proliferation cause. 🙂

      • georgehants

        BroKeeper, ha, a devious theory.

      • Bernie777

        BroKeeper: I am not a
        climate scientist. When 95% of climate scientists say that human activity
        is causing climate change, I have a tendency to believe them. If 95
        heart doctors tell me I have blocked arteries and I need a heart bypass, but
        five heart doctors tell me I do not need the bypass,
        any reasonable man would opt for the bypass.
        Now, substitute our planet for the heart above.
        Any reasonable man would opt for
        mitigating the problem, especially when there is increasing evidence
        of climate disruption. To be a denier and say it is all a
        grand conspiracy, is gambling on my grandkids quality of life. Deniers
        had better come up with solid proof; I have not seen that proof.

        • bachcole

          Bernie666, you didn’t look for the proof; you didn’t look at the most excellent presentation by Burt Rutan. ( http://burtrutan.com/downloads/EngrCritiqueCAGW-v4o3.pdf ) 99.99% of all physical scientists say that cold fusion is impossible. But I looked very closely at the evidence, and now I believe it. So much for consensus science.

          And most people could avoid heart bypass surgery if they lived and ate properly. And, in fact, most heart doctors are total ignoramuses when it comes to any therapy outside of their mainstream, mucho dollar generating bypass surgery. Even worse, they put-down any threat to their dollar stream as being quack medicine, saying that there is no scientific proof blah, blah, blah. Yesterday, while waiting for my wife to make a decision about work shoes, I tested my heart beat at 53. This is no big surprise for me; I always record a pulse below 55, and I have not done any exercise for months. I always go with the guy who has the results.

          So much for consensus science.

    • Bernie777

      It’s the cows fault, livestock makes up 51% of greenhouse gases causing climate change.

      http://timeforchange.org/are-cows-cause-of-global-warming-meat-methane-CO2
      http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294

  • georgehants

    Today we have a report on something that changes climate and CO2, that has just been found.
    These things are all around us, but our Wonderful scientists manage to reach a “consensus” on GW with almost zero knowledge of what changes the climate.
    These comedians, like those holding back Cold Fusion etc. need a re-education to understand science principles.
    A good principle may be, when they do not have a clue they just say, we don’t know, instead of trying to make out how clever they are.
    ——
    IBTimes
    Global Warming: Discovery of 500 Methane Vents On Atlantic Ocean Floor Has Major Implications.
    The discovery of the methane vents “highlights a really key area where
    we can test some of the more radical hypotheses about climate change,”
    John Kessler, a professor at the University of Rochester, who was not
    involved in the research, told The New York Times,
    adding that further “long-term studies” were needed to assess the link
    between climate change and the release of methane underwater.
    However, not all that is released reaches the surface. “The methane is
    dissolving into the ocean at depths of hundreds of metres and being
    oxidised to CO2,” Prof Adam Skarke from the Mississippi State University, who led the study, told BBC.
    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/global-warming-discovery-500-methane-vents-atlantic-ocean-floor-has-major-implications-1462487
    http://www.ibtimes.com/hundreds-methane-vents-causing-widespread-leakage-discovered-along-us-atlantic-margin-1667802

    • Brokeeper

      Georgehants,

      The GW comedians have a great purpose in the allowed pre-determinacy. They add urgency dynamics within the equation by which the E-Cat fits the bill nicely in the minds of the GW propagandized brainwashed followers. This can only give an added boost for much needed near-infinite clean energy and economical equilibrium.

      Besides, when Cold Fusion is vastly predominating in energy production they will conclude their folly when it has little effect on positive climate change. So blessed are the GW comedians for the LENR/QUAR proliferation cause. 🙂

      • georgehants

        BroKeeper, ha, a devious theory.

      • friendlyprogrammer

        At least mankind is trying to examine its impact on the environment. This is an amazing feat in itself in a society where folks would rather vote out their leaders if they spend taxpayer money helping nature.

        How will LENR remove all the carbon from the environment? It may stop us adding to it, but it won’t make it go away unless you are imagining something magical..

        @ Brokeeper,
        You and others sound as if you are doubting Global Warming is occurring. The truth is it is not deniable at all unless someone closes their eye at he facts.

        Making assumptions that it is a natural occurrence without man made causes is a nice thought, but GW has taken lives already and will take thousands of lives in the years to come.

        Mankind has affected the ozone and The Montreal Protocol has put us on a path where the ozone might start repairing itself in about 20 years, so politics and nature have a role. Diminishing that role in any sense is going against some well fought battles.

        The future is facing GW (no matter what the causes), Water shortages (even if from population growth), Endangered species (yeah roads and villages do reduce wildlife), and even though the ozone may repair itself, it has not yet started.

        Your argument seems to be one of a taxpayer who has no progeny upset that we try to plant the odd tree with taxpayer funding.

        But again. Carbon that has been introduced to the environment will not magically vanish no matter what green fuel is developed.

        • Brokeeper

          I appreciate your passion on GW as I once had, however there is more evidence CO2 is not the overwhelming cause for climate change. Nature itself will correct the imbalance to equilibrium through enhanced plant growth both on land and in the seas. Yes, there is a cause but no one yet knows for sure whether excessive CO2 is trapping accumulative heat. However, this said the black carbon particulates created from coal generated electric plants does have an effect not only on raising temperature average but affecting peoples health, and eventually most will fall to earth once it is stopped. No offense intended but, in my opinion only, GW is overstated. Keep up the good fight, Bro.

          • friendlyprogrammer

            Your statement, “no one yet knows for sure” is a good summation. So when the future of millions of peoples lives are at risk is it not at least prudent to investigate?

            Or – Is it better to let them all die without even attempting to ascertain the causes?

            It may be overstated to some degrees, but if you realized how incompatible politics is with long term interests you might ease up on your critique.

            If every taxpayer was told they could subtract 20% from their monthly budget and have a free and green energy source in 15 years, would they
            A) Eagerly give up 20% of their monthly income for 15 years?
            B) Vote for a new leader that cut out the green fuel investment and left their money alone.

            What if that scenario was changed to pay 20% of income for 15 years and save the lives of 1000 families? Would the public still vote for self serving interests? I bet the majority would vote for keeping their money.

            So.. your claim, “Yes, there is a cause [of GW]” should be enough to appreciate the efforts of GW efforts.

            You admit GW is real so why should we not be studying the “Heck” out of it?

          • Brokeeper

            I believe they are. That’s why you and I see the best hope in AR’s E-Cat as the resolution to these physical delimas vs. changing our hearts which is reserved by only one true power.

        • Broncobet

          Well your attitude towards GW is correct,if ,and that’s a big if,CF or any other type of energy like fission or hot fusion or solar or natural gas,was plentiful enough we could drain the ocean of excess CO2,it’s geoengineering relying on energy and chemistry,of course it’s so much easier to do something now rather than fix it later,wish I had the link to the process needed so you end up with thousands of cubic miles of carbon rich material,I think carbonates. The Ozone problem is mysteryiously coming back after we had made such good progress. Aren’t people on this website odd? You would think CF if real could help with GW but they hate the idea like the plague. I hope this report has some positive outcome with hope for CF.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        BroKeeper: I am not a
        climate scientist. When 95% of climate scientists say that human activity
        is causing climate change, I have a tendency to believe them. If 95
        heart doctors tell me I have blocked arteries and I need a heart bypass, but
        five heart doctors tell me I do not need the bypass,
        any reasonable man would opt for the bypass.
        Now, substitute our planet for the heart above.
        Any reasonable man would opt for
        mitigating the problem, especially when there is increasing evidence
        of climate disruption. To be a denier and say it is all a
        grand conspiracy, is gambling on my grandkids quality of life. Deniers
        had better come up with solid proof; I have not seen that proof.

        • bachcole

          Bernie666, you didn’t look for the proof; you didn’t look at the most excellent presentation by Burt Rutan. ( http://burtrutan.com/downloads/EngrCritiqueCAGW-v4o3.pdf ) 99.99% of all physical scientists say that cold fusion is impossible. But I looked very closely at the evidence, and now I believe it. So much for consensus science.

          And most people could avoid heart bypass surgery if they lived and ate properly. And, in fact, most heart doctors are total ignoramuses when it comes to any therapy outside of their mainstream, mucho dollar generating bypass surgery. Even worse, they put-down any threat to their dollar stream as being quack medicine, saying that there is no scientific proof blah, blah, blah. Yesterday, while waiting for my wife to make a decision about work shoes, I tested my heart beat at 53. This is no big surprise for me; I always record a pulse below 55, and I have not done any exercise for months. I always go with the guy who has the results.

          So much for consensus science.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            bachcole…I hope you are not relying on Burt Rutan’s “report” to base your opinion on climate change. His report has been soundly discredited many times by several sources, here is just one. My doctor tells me exercising an hour a day is an absolute must do.

            http://blog.metasd.com/2012/04/burt-rutans-climate-causality-confusion/

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      It’s the cows fault, livestock makes up 51% of greenhouse gases causing climate change.

      http://timeforchange.org/are-cows-cause-of-global-warming-meat-methane-CO2
      http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294

  • georgehants

    Sterling Allan
    August 24th, 2014 at 10:56 PM
    LENR-to-Market Digest — August 22, 2014
    – It’s been 4.5 months since I compiled a digest. While I’ve not been
    able to be comprehensive this time, pulling from the many news sources, I
    was able to organize most all of the 120 E-CatWorld articles Frank
    posted, which gives an exciting overview of the burgeoning stage of
    development the industry is at. (PESN; August 22, 2014)
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

    • Ophelia Rump

      georgehants, I thought you would enjoy this. Also you might give me your opinion.

      I am not a conspiracy theorist, but what do you make of this. Paul Hellyer seems like such a kind and noble man. Is there some truth to this?

      Canadian Minister of Defense
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6MyB74VoQ4

      • georgehants

        Ophelia, yes that is a well known report.
        If one does one’s own Research there are so many Wonderful things out there being hidden by the establishment etc.
        How can I say exactly what is Truth?
        Each one of us must do our own open-minded, competent Research, unlike the average scientist, to get as near to the Truth as one can.
        Cold Fusion, UFO’s, Telepathy etc. etc. you will find the solid Evidence is overwhelming, but dismissed by the establishment for their own reasons.
        But with scientists it is just plain brain-washed incompetence etc.
        Below is a scientific report and not dumb “opinion” that most scientists cannot work out has no value.
        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-kean/chile-declares-ufos-pose-_b_5670136.html
        Best

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Rossi is from Mars, Storms is from Venus. (:

  • BroKeeper

    I appreciate your passion on GW as I once had, however there is more evidence CO2 is not the overwhelming cause for climate change. Nature itself will correct the imbalance to equilibrium through enhanced plant growth both on land and in the seas. Yes, there is a cause but no one yet knows for sure whether excessive CO2 is trapping accumulative heat. However, this said the black carbon particulates created from coal generated electric plants does have an effect not only on raising temperature average but affecting peoples health, and eventually most will fall to earth once it is stopped. No offense intended but in my opinion only it is overstated. Keep up the good fight, Bro.

  • georgehants

    bachcole, agreed but you are seemingly missing the point that people are psychologically effected by brainwashing from the PTB etc.
    You may have noticed that my point is always for people to “think for themselves” and not be taken in by this brain-washing, that leads simple scientists to debunk Cold Fusion etc, because their establishment does etc.

  • bkrharold

    Besides being an interesting scientific novelty, I cant see any practical application for this. Since they are not claiming over unity COP. They create hydrogen efficiently from a cheap catalyst, which can then be used to create electricity in a fuel cell, most probably using a more expensive catalyst. Am I missing something here?

    • Justin Church

      If you study the art of electrolysis and go over the reports based on over 100 years of work you will find this to be a big deal. Why? Commercial electrolyzers run between 2 and 3 volts between anode and cathode. In perfect conditions you only need a little over 1 volt for electrolysis to occur. The higher the voltage potential between the electrodes the faster you will create Hydrogen and Oxygen gas. You will also create more gas for a given amount of time as well. The downside to this is you will lose efficiency as you step the voltage between anode and cathode up. Lots of studies show that while over voltage produces more gas and faster than the electrolyzers which are set to a lower voltage, they are also less efficient.

      If I tried to apply 1.5 volts between anode and cathode I would be really disappointed in the gas production. I have to take it up to 2-3 volts to really get any use out of it. Build a electrolyzer out of this type of Nickel/Iron catalyst and now you can drop the voltage down to get the same gas production as an electrolyzer that needs 2 or more volts to function. This means that we get even closer to 100 percent conversion of electricity to gas production. Making it very practical and cheap to produce Hydrogen and Oxygen gas on site using room temperature electrolysis. Right now, electrolysis still remains a expensive method for Hydrogen extraction due to the efficiency numbers. With this breakthrough, not anymore…

      • bachcole

        Whenever experts say anything logically positive, like you just did, Justin, I believe that what they say is true. And I thank you for that.

        Whenever experts say anything logically negative, like “you can’t do that” or “that is impossible” or “we can’t do anything more for you”, then I tend to doubt what they have to say. When they say “there is no cure for that”, it is time to run, not walk, to the nearest exit.

      • bkrharold

        Justin thank you for your detailed explanation. My mistake was thinking in terms of expecting to get more energy out than going in. This probably comes from reading too much about LENR. I see now how this could help store excess energy from wind and solar for when demand for electricity is low to be used later.

        • Justin Church

          No problem at all. I’m glad Frank post articles like this too. LENR and Hydrogen go hand in hand. I’m currently working on an off grid solar hydrogen system. When I’m done with it, I really won’t need a LENR device to keep me warm or power my home. I have plenty of sunlight and wind here. With new electrode technologies like this one, we can have our own water fuel refineries in our back yard. I’m heavy in the study of LENR as well but we should all take a step back and appreciate news like this.

          • bkrharold

            I agree, all these alternatives energy solutions are not competing, they complement each other. I am endlessly fascinated by the prodigious amount of energy put out by our Sun. It would be very foolish not to use it.
            Good luck with your projects

  • BroKeeper

    I believe they are. That’s why you and I see the best hope in AR’s E-Cat as the resolution to these physical delimas vs. changing our hearts which is reserved by only one true power.

  • Justin Church

    If you study the art of electrolysis and go over the reports based on over 100 years of work you will find this to be a big deal. Why? Commercial electrolyzers run between 2 and 3 volts between anode and cathode. In perfect conditions you only need a little over 1 volt for electrolysis to occur. The higher the voltage potential between the electrodes the faster you will create Hydrogen and Oxygen gas. You will also create more gas for a given amount of time as well. The downside to this is you will lose efficiency as you step the voltage between anode and cathode up. Lots of studies show that while over voltage produces more gas and faster than the electrolyzers which are set to a lower voltage, they are also less efficient.

    If I tried to apply 1.5 volts between anode and cathode I would be really disappointed in the gas production. I have to take it up to 2-3 volts to really get any use out of it. Build a electrolyzer out of this type of Nickel/Iron catalyst and now you can drop the voltage down to get the same gas production as an electrolyzer that needs 2 or more volts to function. This means that we get even closer to 100 percent conversion of electricity to gas production. Making it very practical and cheap to produce Hydrogen and Oxygen gas on site using room temperature electrolysis. Right now, electrolysis still remains a expensive method for Hydrogen extraction due to the efficiency numbers. With this breakthrough, not anymore…

  • Justin Church

    No problem at all. I’m glad Frank post articles like this too. LENR and Hydrogen go hand in hand. I’m currently working on an off grid solar hydrogen system. When I’m done with it, I really won’t need a LENR device to keep me warm or power my home. I have plenty of sunlight and wind here. With new electrode technologies like this one, we can have our own water fuel refineries in our back yard. I’m heavy in the study of LENR as well but we should all take a step back and appreciate news like this.