Patent Application Published of Brillouin Energy’s LENR System

Thanks to David Nygren for posting here about the publication of a new patent application by Brillouin Energy. We’ve seen that Brillouin has been active of late talking to people about their technology, and this is another sign of activity.

The patent is titled “Control of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Hydrides, and Autonomously Controlled Heat”, and here’s the abstract:

A treatment of a possibly powdered, sintered, or deposited lattice (e.g., nickel) for heat generating applications and a way to control low energy nuclear reactions (“LENR”) hosted in the lattice by controlling hydride formation. The method of control and treatment involves the use of the reaction lattice, enclosed by an inert cover gas such as argon that carries hydrogen as the reactive gas in a non-flammable mixture. Hydrogen ions in the lattice are transmuted to neutrons as discussed in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0206715 (Godes_2007)). Hydrogen moving through the lattice interacts with the newly formed neutrons generating an exothermic reaction.

Here are a couple of excerpts from the application that caught my interest:

“Embodiments generate thermal energy by neutron generation, neutron capture, and subsequent transport of excess binding energy as useful heat for any application.”

“Transmutation of the lattice, which is undesirable as it degrades it over time, can be reduced and perhaps avoided if sufficiently high populations of dissolved hydrogen ions are constantly migrating in the lattice. These hydrogen ions interact in one of two ways: by electron capture or by neutron capture, with the newly formed neutrons forming deuterons, tritons, or H.sup.4. The neutrons are formed from protons that have captured electrons by absorption of sufficient energy for transmutation from separate proton and electron to neutron. When enough ions are present and in motion in the metal lattice, hydrogen ions will capture the newly formed neutrons with higher probability than will lattice nuclei or other elements present in the lattice. Embodiments of the present invention can thereby reduce and overcome capture by the metal lattice nuclei as well as avoid scenarios in which the reactions run away and melt down the reaction lattice or container holding the reactive material whether it is Ni or any other material that hosts the reaction discussed in Godes.sub.–2007, or Rossi.sub.–2011, or Piantelli.sub.–2011. ”

A text version of the patent is here.

It’s nice to see this from Brillouin, which shows that they remain active and serious. Mats Lewan has remarked that if history is anything to go by, when a new technological breakthrough is made there are usually manifestations of the same technology simultaneously from independent parties — and this looks to me like an example of that.

  • Gerrit

    The reaction appears so easy to reproduce / validate that it is unexplainable that science doesn’t focus on this topic.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    If the thermal neutron cross section is an indication of the size of the target a neutron would see, it would be much easier for a neutron to find a nickel nucleus rather than another proton.

    Thermal Neutron Cross section (Barns)

    Hydrogen 0.3326 Barns

    Nickel 4.49 Barns

    • Gerrit

      Wouldn’t it matter where the newly created neutron is located and what is in its proximity, a Nickel atom as part of the lattice or a Hydrogen atom floating in the lattice ?

  • Freethinker

    It is indeed interesting the notion of the role of the lattice. It degrades (transmutes) if there is not sufficient amount of hydrogen loaded. That means, when this has been optimized to its ultimate point, it is only hydrogen being transmuted. It would likely be able to run effectively in self sustaining mode far better, as there is less risk for core melt down. At the other end, the transmutation of the lattice could be very efficient – perhaps as seen in the Lugano report – if that is the application.

    Haven’t read the patent application yet though, it will be interesting.

  • Summary: the patent is mainly about controlling the reaction using a particular setup for gas flow/mixture and phonon generation (using heat, EM pulses or sound). The magic happens when phonons coupled with the metal lattice (e.g., nickel powder) are able to generate neutrons through a hydrogen capturing an electron. From there the neutrons are mostly gobbled up by the loose hydrogens, eventually making helium.

    Differences between the E-Cat and the Brillouin reactor (we need a name for these) are that the E-Cat generates its hydrogen in situ and does not require any pipes for gas flow and that the E-Cat seems to include Nickel-62 growth while Brillouin’s reactor tries to minimize the lattice acquisition of neutrons and the accompanying transmutation, which they say degrades performance. So Rossi appears to have found a way to work with the lattice transmutations and still keep a controllable reaction going, while Brillouin has found a way to minimize lattice transmutations and controlling the reaction rate by making sure there’s enough hydrogen that it soaks up most of the neutrons.

    All signs point toward neutron formation being at the root of all observed LENR+ phenomena. Brillouin says it’s due to electron capture triggered by lattice phonons. If I remember correctly though Rossi blew off the idea of electron capture being important in the E-Cats.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Thank you that answered well the question which this brought to mind.

      • Job001

        Progress! Previously CF patents were patent prohibited, apparently by obviously wrong Great physics Gurus counsel.
        Let the patent fights can begin!
        As a science skeptic, I advocate weak faith in theory or guru especially when funding bias is involved. Theory and guru believability depend significantly on a lack of bias.
        Cui bono!

        • Omega Z

          I invested several $1000 dollars in Intel when it was about 13 cents a share. A couple months later, I sold those shares to help out a sibling who got himself in a financial pickle. Who by the way ended up in bankruptcy less then a year latter.

          I often think how much I could help my extended family today had I not been such a softy back then. Incidentally, He has little use for me today. To his thinking, I could have done more. Like take out a loan on my home. Seems no good deed goes unpunished.

          • tammons

            The patent will be denied, not on the basis of physics but chemistry. It is not accepted science that hydrogen absorption by a metal creates hydrogen ions, protons. Without that electron capture by protons is not a possible mechanism to explain LENR.

          • Freethinker

            Well …

            * The patent will be denied

            You lack the information to claim that. You do not know if it will be denied. Its an application. There will be a dialog between USPTO and the inventor. If the inventor care about the patent, they will fulfill the requests by USPTO, and it will be accepted.

            * It is not accepted science that hydrogen absorption by a metal creates hydrogen ions, protons.

            Loading of hydrogen and hydrogen gas is an established fact and well known process. What would make the hydrogen a proton in a strong electromagnetic or phonon field in a lattice, I can at this point only speculate on, but I am sure that there are situations where protons can be said to have been loaded into the lattice.

            Check these two I got from a quick Googling of the subject



            * Without that electron capture by protons is not a possible mechanism to explain LENR.

            And how can you even begin stating that. The process is right now UNKNOWN, why research is imperative. For you to simply preemptively reject a theory, as wrong as that is on its own merits, does not mean that there are no other possibilities.

            That is almost every word you wrote. You scored 0 (3).

          • curious

            However, the patent only covers the reactor -see the claim 1- not the nuclear process. And it is a very general description of a gas reactor. In that sense it is similar to Rossi’s patent. There is even a paragraph that mentions a reactor filled with powder, clearly an attempt cover Rossi’s embodiment. But that is not included in the claims.

            But this one is profesionally written. There is significant detail, and if the process proves to be possible I guess some claims would be valuable.

            I wonder: can it be that simple as flowing hydrogen through some nickel? That is hard to believe

          • J Storrs Hall

            Works with D and Pd: see the 1989 Fralick experiment at NASA Glenn.

          • Freethinker

            😀 Yes. A good summation here on other stuff Fralick done on LENR.

          • Sanjeev

            BEC was granted a patent in 2012 in China.

            I guess it was for their “wet” lenr reactor. I guess they must have applied for the dry Ni-H reactor too in China, and may get it. Looks like physics and chemistry work differently in China 🙂

    • Axil Axil

      Rossi rebuilds his nuclear active environment(NAE) continually whereas Godes does not. Godes uses static NAE only(nickel). His reactor will degrade in time as a fixed number of NAE are gradually destroyed over time, whereas Rossi’s reactor get better as time goes on as more lithium is transmuted. On the positive side, Godes reactor will never meltdown. This dynamic NAE production that Rossi’s reactor performs is based on the generation of nanoparticles through the generation and cooling of plasma by applying heat to alkali metal(secret sauce – lithium) Godes does not use any additives.

      • They both seem to have their pros and cons. The E-Cat’s time limited self-contained charge is easy to use in may applications. Brillouin’s reactor might have a wider performance profile and could theoretically run indefinitely if they can figure out a way to renew the lattice during operation (or with a short down time). Brillouin’s reactor may be less of a melt down threat, but piping in hydrogen gas limits where it could be reasonably deployed.

        When there are 20,000 engineering firms working on this stuff instead of 2 or 20 we’ll see the basic phenomenon optimized for many conceivable uses. FREE LENR NOW!!!

    • Omega Z

      “If I remember correctly though Rossi blew off the idea of electron capture being important in the E-Cats.”

      Ahh, but IMO, this is exactly the situation where Rossi would give false information in order to confuse the competition. I always take a grain of salt when Rossi makes these statements. This is where to much information is bad in Rossi’s view. Protect the IP…

      • Maybe so.

        We should start converging rapidly on the right theory now. Industrial Heat and maybe Brillouin should be able to determine exactly what’s going on in the fuel/ash with their current resources and hundreds of working reactors. They most certainly are working that issue night and day.

  • jousterusa

    I hope you’re right about Godes and Brillouin, Frank. I would be a lot more comfortable, though, if a neutral observer like Prof. George Miley, or perhaps Andrea Rossi, weighed in on the viability of this idea. If I have been too tough on Godes, I’d like to be able to reverse my opinion. My first take on this, though, is that he is attempting to solve a problem – the potential destruction of the lattice – that has not been a problem in Rossi’s current work.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    There appears to be nothing new from a theoretical point of view. Electron capture with subsequent neutron capture is one of the most popular concepts in LENR theory, thanks to Widom & Larsen. More interesting are the technical details: Usage of a carrier gas (for example, argon) and the declaration of four different methods for the excitation of phonons: thermal, ultrasonic, electromagnetic, and electrical (all of them have been suspected to be utilized in Rossi’s reactors).
    As has been pointed out by Edward Storms, one of the main problems in LENR is the removal of reaction products from the lattice. What happens if all the hydrogen has been transmuted to helium? One might expect that they need to degas the lattice in regular intervals. Another option is that the reaction occurs mainly at the surface, so that the helium could escape immediately. This would also be in a better agreement with other models, especially SPP theory. In addition, the presence of a SPP layer could (perhaps) explain the absence of gamma radiation.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Of course it is Edmund Storms, not Edward. I must have mixed him up with Edward Teller…

  • Oceans2014

    I recall that Godes was very hard on Rossi for not sharing information, lets see now that he has his patent issued that Godes could now be more open?

    • Omega Z

      Actually, Godes offered a possible collaboration with Rossi.

      IMO, At that time, they both had different parts of the puzzle & would have benefited both. However, Rossi had “Recently at the time” already been burnt in his dealings with DGT, So I don’t blame Rossi for declining the offer.
      It was just a matter of bad circumstances at the time. We can only speculate whether this would have turned out differently if not for the DGT experience….

  • mcloki

    Seems like the “Gold Rush” is on. Hopefully this spurs a ton of Patent applications. Research money and investment money should start flowing publicly into these ventures.Frank maybe we should start a LENR mutual fund that holds shares of any publicly traded LENR participating company.

    • ecatworld

      Re: Mutual Fund idea.

      Interesting, but I think very high risk, and not something I would want to try to do personally. I recall Andrea Rossi fending off investment offers saying he doesn’t want to play football with other people’s bones.

      I would not be surprised if someone tries to do this, however

      • mcloki

        I was just thinking as we are all very early adopters of the LENR idea, we could stand to benefit by being aware of companies to invest in. It would be like in 1980 following companies like Microsoft, Apple, and then buying stock in those companies because we believed that computers would be a useful.

        • ecatworld

          Sure, it’s hard to do at this point with no publicly traded LENR companies selling shares.

        • pg

          Your investment advantage is in the knowledge. What industries and countries stand to win or lose from LENR? At this point that is your edge.

    • Ophelia Rump

      The best possible investment would be to purchase a piece of the technology which can yield a 500% profit powering a steam piston driven generator. I doubt anyone with access to the well will be allowing the public to drink directly from it.

      • Bernie777

        Big multinational corporations with the capital are already invested or will buy in at the right time: GE

        • Ophelia Rump

          I mean a personal investment. If you could buy stock or some such nonsense and hope to profit, or buy a LENR device with a guaranteed 500% profit. Purchasing a small scale piece of the technology and selling the electricity back to the grid would be the winning choice. With it you could in short order double and redouble your investment into a personal fortune.

          • Omega Z

            If it were that easy, Soon, everyone would be trying to sell electricity to the power companies & there would be no market.

            There are Laws, Rules & Regulations that keep the average Individual from investing in certain developments. There Intent is to keep you from getting ripped of. They also keep you from investing a couple $1000 & waking up 5 or 10 years down the road as a bazillionaire. Think Facebook. Only the Big Boys are allowed to play.

            This only leaves a couple options. Invest in a small company that is positioned to take advantage of the new technology at a few dollars a share that has the possibility of growing exponentially. Think Wal-mart when it only consisted of 100 stores.

            Another option, If young & have the skills or the ability to obtain the skills, Get involved with or start a business that will be essential to distribution/installation of this technology. Leading the herd can lead to being a national chain or franchise operation.

          • Bernie777

            I am talking of a “personal investment”, one way to invest in LENR is to buy companies like GE and ABB that will profit in a huge way by direct and indirect investment in LENR. Of course, like any investment, timing is the important factor.

          • Bernie777

            I am referring to personal investment. The above large energy service companies are positioned to profit in a huge way by direct and indirect LENR involvement.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Steam engine is too much maintains. You want to use a high quality stearling engine. A BRILLIENT engine desing that is just going commercial can be found here: Kamen

        The video(s) you want to watch is starting at video #32, but if you love listening to brilliant people, then watch them all. Once you watch this, you realize that a good sterling engine is FAR less maintains then steam and is IDEAL for home and for the e-cat.
        A MUST watch video. So for home generation, you need something FAR MORE reliable then even your car. It has to run 24/7, and without maintains. A strealing engine fits this bill perfect.
        Albert k.

    • Alain Samoun

      If you need to put some money to advance the project see:
      MFMP Dog Bone Experiment

  • Arnd Rosemeier

    It’s strange that the Brillouin web site is sooo dated. And it’s unfortunate that neither Brillouin nor the e-cat-people have an official forum. This leads to all these speculations. I wonder if that is intended.

    Would be nice to have official places to visit for accurate information.

    • Ophelia Rump

      The more they reveal, the more they are attacked and beaten with it.
      Blame the attackers.

      • US_Citizen71

        Not to mention if they hosted a forum they would need to employ a full time moderator.

    • Bernie777

      It is more unusual for an inventor like Rossi to have a site like JONP answering questions!

    • Daniel Maris

      It’s odd. Because it’s not that difficult for a scammer to produce a nice looking website…in fact a scammer would have a strong incentive to produce something v professional-looking.

  • JDM

    Perhaps a posting of links to known LENR-related patent filings would be in order?

    • US_Citizen71

      Or a dedicated thread for such.

  • Pietro F.
    • Was Bill Gates at the ENEA, or the italian foreign Minister Gentiloni? Would be nice to hear that Gates is interested in cold fusion.

      He also invested in a development of a fission reactor which uses already used uranium from big fission plants as fuel.

      • bitplayer

        “and then focused on cold fusion, frontier research in the field of nuclear fusion,”

        “We are delighted to have had such a prestigious guest, a sign that too often the excellence of Italian research are appreciated more abroad than in Italy – said after the visit of Aldo Pizzuto, head of the technical unit in the field of fusion -. Gates was a very curious and attentive host. He asked many questions, all relevant: one senses his scientific background and an uncanny ability to understand. ”


        • Cool! Maybe someone could ask Gates at his twitter account if he’s interested in it. A LENR reactor would support his effords in the third world.

        • psi2u2


      • Omega Z

        I believe Elon Musk follows Robert Godes “Brillouin” on twitter.

        Note that LENR will not be a negative impact on battery technology. To the contrary, it will give it a boost. Should a time come where people disconnect from the grid, it can be the difference of needing a dozen E-cats with 80% of the energy being wasted or 4 or 5 E-cats with excess energy stored in batteries to fill peek demand periods.

        We need 2 additional technology advances for LENR to be fully economical for individual use.
        #1 Cheap, High Capacity, near unlimited Charge/Discharge cycles with a average 20 year life cycle.
        #2 A Cheap, direct Heat/Electric conversion of 30% to 50% efficiencies.

        Both of these technologies are possible, tho likely a decade away from coming to market.

        • Daniel Maris

          Yes, you’re right about batteries becoming even more important.

  • LuFong

    Very interesting patent with seemingly lots of critical detail but unless you are nuclear physicist it is difficult to analyze for plausibility. Where is the prototype and what are it’s characteristics? Is Brillouin running out of money or are they about to go commercial? These are interesting times.

  • LCD

    There is a rumor going around that Brilloin has gotten repeatable high SNR levels of tritium and are having others repeat the findings before publishing.

    If I’ve heard it I’m sure there are others.

    • Where did you heard it?

      • LCD

        Yeah, not at liberty to say. Sorry. Pretty reliable source though.

  • jousterusa

    Not a lot of people will remember the article that rang the death knell for cold fusion in 1988, a report that to this day has never been corrected or reviewed in light of subsequent information. This is a big part of the reason the New York Times has never revisited the issue:

  • psi2u2

    ‘Mats Lewan has remarked that if history is anything to go by, when a new technological breakthrough is made there are usually manifestations of the same technology simultaneously from independent parties — and this looks to me like an example of that.’


  • psi2u2

    A useful caution.

  • Daniel Maris

    Isn’t that where you are in Casimir territory? Not claiming to understand it but virtual particles can come to interact with the macro world.

  • Freethinker

    While on the subject on patents, Iwamura granted Pd-D transmutation European patent has now been published:

    EP1202290 – Nuclide transmutation device and nuclide transmutation method
    Status: No opposition filed within time limit
    Database last updated on 13.11.2014
    Most recent event 10.10.2014 No opposition filed within time limit
    published on 12.11.2014 [2014/46]

    It does not get more complete than that.

    • Dods

      Its like Buses right now nothing for ages then 3 turn up at once.
      Exciting times.

      • Freethinker

        The Iwamura patent was ready to be granted last year in June, but then a fee was to be paid, a grace time for opposition, and now we are here. It is formally published.

  • Lots of reactor runs terminated at various time points with the fuel input and ash (including any gas) examined in enough detail to get precise measurements and characterizations of each component. The third party report of the E-Cat was a step in that direction but we need much more of that. Same for Brillouin’s reactors if they haven’t already.

  • jousterusa has been updated in several very significant respects…

    • BroKeeper

      Joe, I think the link is broken.

      • jousterusa

        Here is the link to the CNN story. The Disqus protocol only displays part of it, but clicking on it will bring you to the story. In this latest update, I was able to discuss very carefully the nature of the link between the E-Cat and the President, which otherwise remains a secret. The link is at and so far (at 11:21 this evening) there have been 945 readers and many shares. Thank you!

        • NT

          Hey Joe, I like your body language interpretations – good article and you got Mayrrugao’s attention which indicates you hit a major nerve of the pathoskeptics…

  • Sanjeev

    Real time spectroscopy ?
    Cloud chamber ?

  • Alan DeAngelis
    • Obvious

      I love the sound of an Atomic Arc. It gives me the heebee jeebees every time.

  • Omega Z

    We will sell Gas at $1 a gallon, but if you waste 9 gallons, the 1 gallon cost you $10. That’s10% efficiency.
    if you waste 8 gallons, the 2 gallons cost you $5. That’s20% efficiency.
    Even at 50% efficiency that $1 gas cost you $2.
    Efficiency is Important. And note, part of that energy has to go to powering the E-cat.

    Also, the less efficient, the more E-cats you will need. They cost money as with the electronics as does the additional hardware to convert that heat to electricity & to dispose of that wasted heat. There also wont be no ultra cheap about it. Not even made in China.
    And batteries will never be cheap & if you have to replace them every couple years, Well, so much for cheap energy. Wont happen.

  • Omega Z

    Actually Roger, there were conditions set, tho none were met. And I was still young, dumb & naive as this was in the later half of the 70’s. Being Family doesn’t help either. However, I had similar experiences with so-called friends back in the day. I’m not alone, Most people have been through the same situations.

    • bachcole

      I also have the memory of a broken promise of repayment from my nephew who will have to pay me back the equivalent of $2000 in a future life. (:->) I am hoping also for interest. (:->)

  • Josh G

    The energy comes from the energy input into the system. Godes has described the process as two-step, with the first step being highly endothermic due to creation of the neutron (so you’re right in asking where the energy comes from, because it needs energy to absorb to get started). The second step(s) however release much more heat than was captured in the first step. The way I think about this is that they hijack the weak nuclear force to generate energy from the strong nuclear force. But I might be wrong about that…

    Here is a link to their video discussing the process:

  • georgehants

    It would seem that not satisfied with science hiding Cold Fusion for 25 years, many scientists on page do not want to acknowledge the Wonderful report in the Worlds premier scientific journal on Mr Rossi’s TPIR.
    This is the first honest report in a peer reviewed journal anywhere in the World and trying to hide how uncensored and uncorrupted and how competent the Russians are compered to the USA and UK is just more childish and unprofessional behaviour by scientists.
    “This is a peer reviewed nuclear physics magazine and Dr Uzikov is a
    preminent figure of the Russian Nuclear Physics world. Congratulations
    to the Professors of the ITP, this is an important endorsement from the
    mainstream Russian scientific environment. If you come in Russia you
    will find friends of much higher level than you can even imagine.
    From Russia, with love and with the regular Warm Regards,”
    D. Travchenko

    • Guest

      I must have missed some update. In which major journal was
      the TPIR published ?

      • georgehants

        I have given a link above.

        • Rui Germano

          The link is to I respect this site but I would hardly call it a major journal 🙂

          • georgehants

            I think you will have to read the report on that “strange” website to find your answer.
            Any journal that publishes the TPIR with fair comment, by definition proves itself to outrank all other scientific comics.
            Do you not agree?

  • psi2u2

    We now have it. See the new thread….this is getting really interesting, huh?