Disrupt Your Own Company – Before LENR Disrupts It For You (Michel Vandenberghe)

The following post by Michel Vandenberghe, CEO of LENR-Cities is reposted from LinkedIn Pulse with permission. Original post is at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/disrupt-your-own-company-before-lenr-disrupts-you-michel-vandenberghe?trk=pulse-det-nav_art

Disrupt your own company – Before LENR disrupts it for you
Nov 12, 2015

Low-Energy Nanoscale/Nuclear Reactions (LENR) technology1 will soon appear on the market; it is only a matter of time. LENR is a disruptive technology whose main application is as a dense, clean and high-quality source of energy. This makes LENR a serious candidate to replace all fossil fuels. LENR technology has worldwide applicability and can potentially be used by nearly everyone.

To know more about LENR, have a look at:



  • About disruptive innovation.
  • Let’s consider some scenarios
  • A global Challenge
  • About a massive adoption model
  • What is the LENR-Cities proposal?

About disruptive innovation

By definition, a disruptive innovation has no market and the LENR technology needs a market to move from the research up to a market ready product, in order to become an innovation – it is how innovation works.

If LENR technology can disrupt the fossil energy business (in particular), it would trigger the collapse of the financial market and so on, then it is a disruptive technology. It would require a massive communication to explain to people not to anticipate LENR ready product availability. Innovating in Energy will trigger innovation in all sectors.

Economy is as any system, a system which reinforces its own rules and it applies to innovation. At LENR-Cities even at Oxford, The airbus chief scientist had made an interesting mathematical presentation about this. LENR breaks the rules.

We face a major dilemma. We need to make a market to get LENR but making a market might disrupt the market itself.

Let’s consider some potential scenarios.

One option is to be able to flood the market with one single product as demand is very high in order to get a wide share and increase the access cost of this market. In practice, this strategy will unlock a massive investment by all actors in developing other implementations but will not address the risk of major destructive creation with a global market collapse.

Next option is to sell a product to address a specific need. For instance, boilers. How much time it will take to get some companies to disassemble this boiler to see how to apply this technology to other usage.

A national agency for a large country set up a global facility to develop and industrialize the technology with the objective to control its development. Right. It will just enable other options. And what about other countries?

One country in the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) is making the technology to address its own need. Let’s say for instance China for obvious reasons. India has already a national program; same in Japan.

Organize the LENR 21, thinking about COP 21. Hum..; would be good. But facts show that some organizations are very performant but collectively we are really unable to address any global challenges. But we might be optimistic.
A large enterprise is entering into the game. As some of them are in a position the buy the market (not to make it), some might try. It will trigger a massive investment by all Corporates. Any startup or organization makes some technology available, open or not. Making the technology is not enough.

BTW, it does not make sense to have the willingness to control a technology if this technology by design is an infrastructure technology. As there’s not only one LENR technology, one will create a huge fragmentation which is the worst scenario to make it happen

It has been seen with Electricity. It has been seen with dozen of thousands of new businesses, all of them with the objective to get a share of the cake, But in old times, the world was a lot less integrated with more time to do things…

With LENR, Actors will differentiate by developing applications but not the technology.


A global challenge

We know that all corporates are waiting for a market evidence to invest massively. Let’s say the collapse can be avoided. But there’s still an issue. LENR enables a fully decentralized energy production making any machine, equipment energetically self-sufficient. Obviously, it will take time to be fully implemented.

What is the cost of energy in any enterprise business? What is the cost of energy for your car or your house? And so on. What is the weight of energy as part of WW GDP?

But why to invest massively in new big generator. In the first stage, market will move from a capital intensive model to a consumer oriented market with small and compact generators. It will leverage a bottom-up model of Grid.
It would require states to adapt quickly as taxes on energy represent a major share of state revenues and so on…

If one had not global challenges in energy and climate, nothing will happen. But we have global challenges and we know corporates and states are fully unable to address them. At the same time, Digital economy is disrupting any business. . .

Global challenges and disruptive innovation have both massive impact of the society. In both case, nobody is leading and nobody can the leader (Even if some people forget that any viable evolution process has no center) Disruptive innovation leverages the force of economic logic to change the economy itself and LENR is a unique opportunity to address global challenges.

So what?

About a massive adoption model

Except if all actors agree to move forward at the same time. “When everything is changing at the same time, nothing change”. It is only a relative true but enough. What else?

Making the technology widely available is mandatory but not enough. We also need to implement Open Business to develop LENR.

To make LENR to be adopted by the market using a pattern close to the Internet pattern. Our point is that LENR technology itself does not impose such adoption pattern and in order to do that one needs to build a business model with two characteristics: Force a viral Open adoption model and provide a competitive advantage to be adopted by all the players as the market is developing itself.

It means: To create an initial market in a way that the global offering of this market is to enable any actor to implement technology and applications LENR quickly. This initial market will move LENR from research to market ready technology with a market being designed in order to enable any actor to be LENR ready. Key is the business model of this offering. Any actor willing must join the initial market and endorse its objective. It is the only way to scale fast and to reduce the overall impact.

What is the LENR-Cities proposal?

Let use a picture. Flooding (LENR) is coming. Participate in the construction of a factory (market) which produces ships (enabler) in order to get a ship (be LENR ready).

Why LENR-Cities instead of any large existing company?

LENR-Cities is a pure player, and has no existing market then is neutral. To create an initial market (an ecosystem), is its business!

But if your ecosystem scales fast, you need to scale fast. How do you plan to manage?

We are working on a digital platform to implement the global process

What is missing to LENR-Cities for the second stage of its project?

We have a team, an offering, a strategy and a market, a prototype (an initial ecosystem, some initial players. LENR-Cities prototype is an ecosystem prototype (it is our “product”), our prototype (LENRG): which has the basic capabilities to implement the business model and make the initial market.

As regards the LENR-Cities scientific team: Allan Widom, Yogi Srivastava, Luca Gamberale and John Swain have joined LENR-Cities.

Any scientist working on LENR can send a request to know what the process to join is: [email protected]

    We are missing:

  • Funding: to create the tool to enable the development of the initial market.
  • Coverage in all countries.
  • More Talents

  • We have a proposal of investment project for people willing to participate in LENR-Cities project.
  • Teams and organizations with compatible objectives can join LENRG.
  • You are an innovator. Join us!

LENR Cities Elevator Pitch

  • SG

    I like the idea of LENR-Cities. Execution of the idea is more important than the idea itself. I hope it gains traction and they achieve what they have set out to achieve. The post above was a bit hard to follow and could use some light editing.

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      Thank you for your positive comment. I’m not English native. I would prefer to post in French but Google is not speaking french very well; Sorry for that.

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      For information. Project begun in 2012. Company has been incorporated in August 2014. We have learned a lot. What we want to achieve is not business as usual and can only be achieved with many other people in many different organizations.

  • Ophelia Rump

    The automobile disrupted the buggy whip market. Where have all the buggy whips gone?

    Change is normal, they said not so long ago that the computer would destroy the paper industry. So what if it had? It did not, it had the opposite effect, but so what if it had.

    LENR will bring a wave of growth and prosperity to every person on earth and do it while being seen as an ecological savior to the survival of humanity and the perpetuation of civilization itself.

    Please stop repeating this disruptive economy nonsense of doom and gloom. Pick up a LENR device and find something useful to do with it for yourself and humanity.

    • kenko1

      Hear hear!

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      Disruption does not mean the end but something globally different. The true question is how much time it takes to change. May be what I usually read on HBR is just fake 🙂

      “LENR will bring a wave of growth and prosperity to every person on earth and do it while being seen as an ecological savior to the survival of humanity and the perpetuation of civilization itself”

      I agree but first for people in India or in China.

    • Billy Jackson

      People fear change for the sake of change. what is known is safe. the fear of the unknown and its potential effects are powerful incentives to protect or guard what keeps you in your safety bubble.

      We need not fear LENR and its changes. Better yet embrace it and power all the ideas that are now out of reach or unsustainable due to high energy costs. 100’s of industries will be effected by LENR. Ever heard of A&P Groceries? how about Woolworth? Sears?. all of these were leaders in their field and the largest in the world at one point..their mistake, they didn’t adapt and were replaced overtime by Walmart..

      don’t fear change just because its change.. sometimes change can be good.. even if it causes damage at the start.

      I see disruption followed by the biggest economic boom we have seen world wide shortly after as the world adapts and then thrives on the new possibilities that become available to us.

    • Omega Z

      Where have all the buggy whips gone?

      Coming round the corner in the far lane. 🙂

  • lkelemen

    it translates to this to me: give me money and I will do stuff

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      Read the Pitch file. It has been rewritten by an american guy with a lot of talent.

  • Agaricus

    Prognostication can be fun, but until real events begin to play out and narrow down the possibilities, it’s not a good basis for a business.

    Three main forces will meet, probably quite soon: (a) the entrepreneurs behind commercially viable CF reactors, (b) the market for their devices, and (c) those who wish to take control (or if that proves too problematic, to make the whole thing go away). Of these factors, (a) is largely unknown, (b) can be estimated, and (c) is totally unknown for the moment. One out of three is not good.

    It won’t be clear for months, possibly years after disclosure of a working reactor, how these forces will balance out. Good luck to LENR-Cities, and all others who have seen possible futures they may be able to take part in, but at the moment there is insufficient information available to outsiders to make anything more than most tentative investment decisions.

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      You are right. You just confirm that LENR market is unknown which basically means there’s no existing market. Entrepreneurs have no other choice than to do some prognostication and, to design a very flexible business model. Thank you.
      Let me just add, that even the idea of reactor is also based on today understanding. For your information, we are not working on another path.

  • Michel Vandenberghe

    Science is powerful in other languages. My recommendation is to learn other languages. It should be useful in the coming time.:-)

  • artefact

    Speaking of disruption:

    “Andrea Rossi November 13th, 2015 at 2:15 PM
    Tom Conover:
    The E-Cat X is going very well.
    The numbers are stunning.
    But green.
    Warm Regards

    • bachcole

      “The numbers are stunning. But green.” What does that mean?

      • ecatworld

        I think he means it’s early days still.

      • HS61AF91

        nolo radiation

  • MasterBlaster7

    I don’t think that the electric car is the right analogy. There is range anxiety and worries about the cost of battery replacement. LENR is Boom! Poof! everything is better. Maybe the roll out of electricity and the light bulb is a better comparison. Its simple and its Boom! Poof! better….although it is a dated reference. Even computers aren’t a good example because there was a fairly lengthy evolution…not Boom! Poof!. Or maybe the airplane, but again, dated. There hasen’t been a boom! poof! black swan in over 50 years. Maybe the CD, the DVD, the smart phone…..but agian those had more of an evolutionary tract not Boom! poof!

    • MasterBlaster7

      Oh…also in reply to the second part of your statement. Oil will never go out of business…at least 20% of oil is used for ‘other’ than energy purposes. Plastics, fertilizer, asphalt..list goes on…but the number is somewhere around 20%. But the real question is this, what will the oil FUTURES MARKET do once the bone chilling realization rattles through the market that oil, as energy, now, has an expiration date?! You think Saudi Arabia was something when it waved its magic wand and cut the price of oil futures in half….just wait till all of those speculators ‘psychologically’ realize that oil is done….its over….like the Sopranos.

      • Michel Vandenberghe

        Oil is only one. Nuclear. Water,…but all industries with a long product life cycle will have to adopt an appropriate model.. we are working on designing a business model to cope with this major issue since early 2012. …

        • MasterBlaster7

          LENR is going to disrupt water? Woah. Haha

          • Michel Vandenberghe

            Not in your kitchen 🙂
            Disruption means changing the rules.
            Think about the middle east, in many countries water is a key concern.

      • Omega Z

        Yes, Without oil, coal or natural gas, there will be no LENR.

        These products effect many things beyond just energy.

        • Michel Vandenberghe

          LENR is NOT only energy. We had organized an event at Oxford in the UK in January 2015 to show that LENR spans from energy to transmutations, electricity and hydrogen production, superconductivity, even biological applications…and more…

    • Publius

      The advent of electricity did not destroy the candle and lantern industry. There is always a transition phase and there will always be a market for petroleum. LENR will likely lead to an easier policy of carbon taxation, so oil reserves will become less valuable, but we will not be able stop our dependence overnight.

      • Michel Vandenberghe

        A growth of few % of interest rate will kill entreprises even nations.just an example… The issue is not about the relative share of oil bla bla but impact of an absolute few % change in many sectors with the development of energetically self-sufficient machines, equipments, houses, cars, …. cities.

        Huge growth!

        The true question is how much time it will take to get a mature lenr technology. But at the same time we know well that if we allocate resources to develop the technology, it will be done faster.

        A dense, compact and decentralized energy will change everything. Including the way to manage resources.

        How to manage such massive change is the issue? It is about which technologies/business model can enable a smooth transition.

        In E.U our most advanced project is about nuclear waste remediation… we experiment how our new model might be applied…

  • Michel Vandenberghe

    Sure it will takes time but markets anticipate…and pension funds have strong shares in blueships. When everybody moves in the same direction one knows what happens… anyway, we have a focus on accelerating the development of LENR. Energy sector but all sectors will innovate…

    • Omega Z

      It’s going to take decades to transition. And if you should transition to fast, you collapse the economy & it takes even longer.

      • Michel Vandenberghe

        Thank you Omega. It is the core issue. How to transition fast without a collapse ? And how to, with no collapse, get a fastest transition? Considering our global challenges, a good project manager would say: maximum two decades for all.

      • Michel Vandenberghe

        What is the innovation process? Innovation process is a market process where actors find mutual self-interests to adopt X. The idea that an actor can change the market is a naive idea. It happens only when the actor which create a change is not market actors i.e. do not need the market to make the change AND the markey has no immunity to kill these changes. And all disuptive innovation are at market scale The issue is how to engage a major change without changing the market rules…. all the major changes we have to do in the next coming 20 years. Nobody can say when the lenr technology will be mature enough. It is not a matter of massive investment but more how we can know what we ALREADY know first…

  • MasterBlaster7

    Are you invested in oil or something Gerald? Because, I am ecstatic about the low price of gasoline.

  • Saudi Arabia has many reasons to pump more oil right now. One reason is to slow down US and Canadian oil production, which requires tighter supplies and higher prices to be profitable. Another possible reason is that perhaps they know a little about LENR and suspect that they may as well sell oil now while it still has value as fuel.

    • MasterBlaster7

      No. Not to sell oil while it still has value..but to protect their market share in the face of an F9 Black Swan.

      You know, even a month or two ago, I would have highly doubted that LENR had any effect on Saudi Arabia or oil speculation. I still dont think there is any effect on oil speculation, but in light of the SPAWAR anouncement….I think….maybe…Saudi Arabia may have been tippped off by the US. Remeber, SPAWAR is still years ahead of what it has published and they said that profound predictable breakthroughs were only made a couple of months ago. I dunno. It is still a reach….but it now makes me go hmmm.

      • “they said that profound predictable breakthroughs were only made a couple of months ago”

        Please post the link to the exact quote you are talking about.


      • Alain Samoun

        Hope you are right ! What are the profound predictable breakthroughs?

  • gerald

    Delete my message we just danced on Bob Marley. Everything’s gonna be alleight.

  • Roland

    Yup, there is something very disconcerting about bad writing as the first take is that the author lacks clarity of thought while engaging in an enterprise that will only benefit if absolutely brilliant clarity of thought is applied.

    Get a real writer on the team ASAP.

    • Michel Vandenberghe

      let’s say you are right. There’s a link between the quality of writing and the quality of thought. Obviously it only makes sense if the writing is good. It seems that not only the language is different but logic is. A paper written in good english is attached. We already have writers in German, Italian, French. If you want to tell that we need an english writer. I’m ok. And i apologize if this text is only a quick rewrite in english of a french text. This is part of plan to get an native english writer even if it would be valuable to have a japanese one.

  • pg

    The tragic events in Paris should teach everyone how the dependence of the west from oil has to stop as soon as possible.

  • pg

    One of the main reasons for these attacks is to raise oil prices, that are vital for isis to fund itself, even at the risk of Europe retaliation.
    That how important oil is for them

    • Mats002

      Do you have some links about that? Would be interesting to read more, especially after the sad news from Paris…

      • pg

        I don’t have links about this particular one, but all these kinds off attacks, ( you can look at september the 11th and other terrorist attacks in the west, east european invasions recently, that all have as a common denominator panic and a spike in the price of oil, which isis is desperate for funding their war, as they can not rely on any real middle eastern country funding.
        To make it clear, I am not trying to speculate on this tragedy, I have one of my best friends that thinks two friends of his are either badly injured or dead in the attack, I am just stating things for what they are

        • Alain Samoun

          The Islamonazi terrorists get their finances directly from the “allied” of the US: Saudi Arabia and golf states to teach Wahhabi Islam,their own brand of Islam, and brain wash their youths to prepare them to be killers and suicide bombers. All that to protect their oil business.

          • pg

            Actually they do not. Al qaeda did, but Isis is viewed as too extremist even for them, and Isis is calling itself the only true Islamic State, making all the other gulf countries not happy about it. Their money comes from small donations from normal people, and for the most from oil that they sell back to countries like Syria (ironically)

          • Mats002

            After a bit of study I agree with your view pg. They have not only oil as an income source, also donations, taxes from people in their (growing) territory and ransoms.

          • bachcole

            “normal people”, like people who think that the way into heaven is to kill and maim and torture innocent people.

          • bachcole

            This thinking is an example of the economic cause of all conflict. Progressives love it. And I do believe that it greatly contributes to the conversation, so I am not disparaging you, Alain. But economic causation if not the only cause.

            I sit here and I type and converse. What is the cause? Economics allows me to type and converse. But it is not why I type and converse. In fact, if I won the $100 million lottery, I might find other things to do, but those things would still be the result of my desire to serve and share. ISIS wants to kill, dominate, and convert; economics can only enable or discourage that, but the desire will remain. And they will find a way to make it happen.

            Many Americans went to the Middle East to join ISIS. Their motivation isn’t because Saudi Arabia (or whoever) funds ISIS. They had a religious motivation.

  • pg

    You are exactly right, but they will not find any other source of revenue after that, and they need to make oil as expensive as possible now

  • Alain Samoun

    Green in this case means clean not polluting (I think)

    • Omega Z

      Green around the ears-“immature”

  • bachcole

    Rheulan gets the cigar. That makes sense to me.