BlackLight Power, Inc. has Changed its Name to Brilliant Light Power, Inc. (Becktemba)

The following post was submitted by Becktemba

The former emerging energy company known as BlackLight Power, Inc. Has changed its name to Brilliant Light Power, Inc. It was posted on it’s Blacklight Power website on 11/18/2015.

Brilliant Light Power

It’s the first news from the Company in eight months. Are they ready to reveal a working prototype? From prior announcements the company should have put out some sort of prototype six months ago. After 10 years are we finally going to see a working product from Brilliant Light Power, Inc?


Editor’s note: While the old website still exists, BLP has a new website at this address: , where the main caption reads:

BrilliantLight has developed a commercially competitive, nonpolluting source of energy from water. A SunCell™ catalytically converts H2O-based solid fuel directly into brilliant light which is converted to electricity using photovoltaic panels.

  • bachcole

    I will believe it when I see it in a demo that isn’t pathetic.

    • mike wolf

      If you take out the option of blatant fraud, Mills’ demo was magnificent and far beyond Rossi’s making steam.

  • Gerard McEk

    Black light power was a bad name anyway, if you need sun glasses to protect against welder’s conjunctivitis.

    • GreenWin

      Gerard. Surprised you cannot see the benefit of an energy reactor that also serves as a tanning bed. Apologies for sarc.

      • Gerard McEk


  • Bob Greenyer

    Should be good for another $50m

    • Sanjeev

      I was just waiting who would say this first. 😀

      As they say, desperate times need desperate measures.

      • Bob Greenyer


        I am very glad they went from Black to Brilliant, it is a subliminal change – It must mean that they are just weeks/months/years/decades (delete as appropriate) away from another major announcement of a demonstration that will produce a reactor design in two weeks that anyone can make with the contents of their cardboard recycling bin.

        Imagine if we had had to endure

        Glimmer Light Power
        Dim Light Power
        Eco Light Power
        Low Light Power
        Warm Light Power
        Warmer Light Power
        Hot Light Power

        Really Hot Light Power
        Hottest Light Power
        White Lightning Power (OH group fuelled)

        Then and ONLY then would they change to Brilliant Light Power.

        I for one am very happy to see the end of the “Dark Ops”, if that is what this is about.

        • mike wolf

          I don’t know Bob, I think you are just angry that Mills is closed handed and not open like Rossi. But Rossi doesn’t have a theory to protect. He is still looking for one. And aren’t you struggling just to get a reaction? Come on man, let’s be reasonable.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Well, we got a seemingly positive result within a few months of testing Celani’s tech. Huge per Kg, but not going to change anything on the nominal. It turns out that system electronics errors accounted for the seemingly higher Celani figures at NI-Week and ICCF-17, in effect we verified the true level of excess heat – but the original experimenter had to down-size their figures having been presented with our discoveries.

            With regards to the post Lugano experiments – we empirically established very clearly and quickly that the Lugano research team had selected the wrong basis for the Alumina emissivity – therefore the excess claimed was at least severely diminished – in scientific terms this is a very good result from an experimental point of view. Also for replicators – it sets the bar at a more realistic level, one at which the GS3 reactor series of tests saw some evidence of achieving in its unexplained anomalies.

            Lastly, the multiple, truly independent, double blind testing of the ash from *GlowStick* testing we conducted, proved that Parkhomov was honest about his fuel and that there was no Nickel transmutation in our tests to date that have had this isotopic analysis done. This along with a wealth of circumstantial evidence, patent paragraphs, even heat production in the reactor, distancing statements by Rossi and a direct from the horses mouth testimonial from a 62Ni isotope supplier indicates that the 62Ni in the Lugano reactor ash was likely physically vapour deposited on the heat extraction surfaces of the E-Cat, 1MW and HotCat.

            This could explain why

            1. reactors may not be as economical as first expected (unless reactors do eventually breed 62Ni)

            2. The Lugano / 1MW reactor gets more efficient over time (given ready supply of 7Li)

            3. Replicators are only seeing excess in the order of Celani wires (i.e. principally from 1H + xNi reactions)

            See my presentation given last weekend – hopefully the video of the event will be published soon.


  • MasterBlaster7

    Well…if you cant change the world…

  • BillH

    Re-branding is typical of a company wishing to distance itself from past failures to deliver. At least no one here will be fooled.

    • Mark Underwood

      I’m here, and ‘fooled’, and quite satisfied about it.

      • bachcole

        I’m also here, and I see two re-brandings, and given the demos that would make a middle school teacher blush and Mills’ abusive manner, I am not fooled, but I am perfectly satisfied about that also. So I guess we are both satisfied.

        • Omega Z

          The Demo wasn’t that bad, but it would have been better having some solid data to back up his claims. I would imagine that Data is available to those within his circle.

          As to your opinion of Mill’s the man, I concur. The more he speaks, the lower my opinion of him. Note I have no problems with someone making a profit providing people cheap energy. But with Mill’s, it seems to be ALL about the potential Profits. Cheap energy for the masses doesn’t seem to enter his equations.

  • Timar

    Maybe, with this name, they hope to be confused with Brillouin Energy…

  • georgehants

    Being a little strange, I would find all the skepticism a little more justified if after all this time somebody would put up a link to legal action being pursued against the company for fraudulently raising funding or something similar.

    • GreenWin

      There is a pattern here. But it does not indicate fraud of any sort as BLP has raised more than $70M from experienced VCs and institutional investors – with no complaints. This suggests satisfied customers getting a return of some kind.

      Dr. Mills is IMO a facilitator of tech transfer. BLP develops product concepts e.g. Ni/H2 reactor, CIHT, H2O-based sold fuel, Sun Cell and Millsian chemistry. Mills earliest work was with Thermacore Inc… a defense contractor. Connecting the dots and lack of investor complaint paints a reasoned picture. It is neither Rubens or Modigliani. Far more left brained I imagine. Have a lovely evening George. 🙂

    • mike wolf

      Actually I read That mills has files a defamation suit or two against some folks at wikipedia recently. I don’t see him doing so without proof. So I am very hopeful here.

  • For the record it’s the third name that the company has operated under, the first was HydroCatalysis Inc.[1] in 1991.[2]

    • bachcole


    • mike wolf

      I hope it is the last change. I bought the rest of the domain names in case it is.

  • So how do you get a username and password? Is the site only for investors? Why have a website if the public cannot see its contents?

    • artefact

      It is not fully set up yet.

      • GordonDocherty

        Can confirm the site is not live yet (I asked Blacklight) :

        “ is not live yet. Please continue to use until further notice”

  • Bob Greenyer

    Well he is nearly 3 orders of magnitude cheaper than the hot fusion guys – so not only is he many 100s of times more efficient in generating his energy technology, we can all give the company a few hundred years slack to deliver and we are still quids in.

    • Mills stated a year ago that it would take 18 weeks to have a working prototype. Maybe they have one- but no one has seen it. Last word was that they were having material sourcing problems on new parts for their new product.

      • US_Citizen71

        “Last word was that they were having material sourcing problems” – Like finding photo-voltaic cells that do not melt at the required working temperature.

  • Bob Greenyer

    My branding experience tells me they should re-name again to “Brilliant Strong Power” after all, “Light” is a bit weak don’t you think?

    • Timar

      It’s sugar-free though. Think of the obesity epidemic…

    • Omega Z

      I think Black Light was more descriptive of the original process. Perhaps they are thinking of utilizing a different light spectrum now instead of the UV. Personally, I would focus on getting a useful device 1st. Worry about the proper name latter.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I think that all their investors were struggling with the word “Black” when it is claimed to produce ridiculous amounts of light.

        I fully agree with your second point.

    • mike wolf

      I was hoping the name change is to keep research and commercialization separate.

  • Omega Z

    There’s much skepticism on page, But I somewhat think Mills has the goods with good reason. Much of his work has been replicated by completely independent 3rd parties. It appears Mill’s issues are scaling up & harnessing the process like so many others.

    Recall the ICCF-18 Conference – University of Missouri headed by Robert Duncan. Many researchers shown COP’s of 10’s, 100,s even COP>1000. However, it is such small scale as to be useless. A Novelty.

    When attempting to scale up, COP decreases accordingly. By the time you have energy of use, you have no COP>1. They all have 1 thing in common. They are always within a year or 2 from developing a working useable device.

    This issue goes all the way back to the days of P&F and it is an issue that Mill’s has not overcome himself. Thus, he created the Sun Cell which has it’s own issues. It produces large amounts of excess energy, but only for a nanosecond.

    Engineering a system that can harness the Sun cell will be quite complex. Electricity coming out like a sputter gun is of little use. It’s output is also highly concentrated. How many solar cells can you position around it to collect the output knowing that energy drops off with distance.

    When Mill’s said they would have a refined product within a couple months, I was extremely skeptical. Perhaps he should have substituted years in place of months. I think Mill’s in time will produce a working product. What I expect from Mill’s is Cheap to produce, Expensive to the consumer electricity. Mill’s is not about cheap energy for the consumer.

    On the upside, Mill’s is just 1 of several. Competition is on the consumers side & beyond that, Patents expire after 20 years.

  • Bob Greenyer

    I find it wearing when someone claims to have the solution to the worlds energy needs, for like, decades – and yet millions have been displaced or have lost their lives, basically because of energy security. My sarcasm is born out of frustration because I think he may be onto something.

    Why? because I actually have strong respect for Mills for this reason…

    Piantelli was one day doing a frank and critical review of other theorists, and he comes across Mill’s voluminous theory – he looks at us and says “Mill’s is the closest” then he feverishly flicks through his work, stops on a page and points at it forcefully saying “but he’s got this wrong”.

    Well – you don’t always have to have everything right to make something work.

    • Omega Z

      I’m waiting for BLP, Brillouin, E-cat and any others to come to market. When that happens, I expect great improvements to evolve. As I see it, They all have there drawbacks & benefits. Perhaps these different approaches can be combined pick/choose providing a device with few if any of the drawbacks.

    • mike wolf

      Ok, I take back my last response. This is the Bob I know. And I think you and Piantelli may be right. And Dr Mills is certainly a cad.

  • Alain Samoun

    Just a fact:
    We never have been so close to the solution.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Competition sure is a good thing.

      The closer we get to the end of the 1 year test – the more feverish these kind of marketing moves will be, we should expect another announcement of “imminent hot fusion” (in 5 years) from the Skunkworks team in all the major science press.

      I really want the answer delivered this time conclusively, be it good or bad.

  • Bob Greenyer

    On you last point – agreed, but if real, we feel we are getting close.

  • Bob Greenyer

    @Mike Wolf

    As I said below, Piantelli (who is the only person I have met that has both fully read and understood Mill’s theories) says that he is the closest to understanding the process, but that he has one strong flaw in his work.

    Of course, Piantelli maybe wrong.


    I too have done a 10 year stint in the finance industry (as a graphic designer – no bonuses – but working on the bleeding edge) – in my experience, VCs don’t like to walk into a building until they have documented all the exits – and ideally want to leave through the ones that takes them to a nicer place – failing that – they will invest on a large success to multiple failures basis and when reporting the performance of their funds, they rarely go into great detail about their poor decisions, rather, they focus on return metrics for the fund as a whole.

  • Alain Samoun

    26 years ! Gee bachcole,she must have a lot of humor 😉

  • Mark Underwood

    Mills has no evidence? Untrue. Have you actually read the dozens of papers examining the evidence in detail?

    Zero results? Untrue. The late Eugene Mallove believed Mills was getting the most consistently positive results out of all the cold fusion type of experiments going on, even back in the 1990s. The problem was achieving power densities to be of practical use. That is why through the years Mills has been progressively altering the way he is initiating and harvesting hydrino transition energy.

    And now you are saying that Luke Seltzer, the founder of the Hydrino study group, discontinued the group because he thought Mills was full of it? I was there, and I got no such impression. Please.

  • Mark Underwood

    My impression of Mills’ vision to date is this:

    BLP (now Brilliant Light Power) licenses the technology to manufactures, who then mass produce SunCells for BLP (much like the Apple model). Approved distributors then procure the SunCells from BLP. The public and certain entities such as car companies obtain the SunCells from the distributors *free of charge*. But the individual SunCells are somehow metered, and the end user is billed per amount of electricity generated by the SunCell. BLP, it’s investors, the manufacturers and the distributors get their apportioned piece of the pie.

    Mills envisions a decentralized grid, powered primarily by SunCell cars that are idle – as most cars are at any given time. He also envisions a transition from AC to DC power.

    Of course, what is envisioned often does not correspond to what actually transpires. But we shall see.

  • Allan Shura

    I still can`t find the ultra-high capacity solar panel they said was available on the market a
    couple of years ago.