UK Consults on "Energy Revolution"

The following post has been submitted by MW

I want to bring to the attention of E-Cat World Readers that the UK Parliament is running a consultation about disruptive or revolutionary energy technologies. Please follow this link for details:

Anybody can respond to the consultation, you can do it online and can also submit videos and even tweets. The question is simply this:

“Which innovations have the greatest potential to revolutionise energy markets, and why?”

This is an opportunity that shouldn’t be missed to communicate to members of the UK government that LENR/Cold Fusion is far from dead – as most of them probably assume it is. I thought some readers might like to respond.

I have a lot of dealings with the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change and I can honestly say they (or their predecessor departments) have never been as receptive to new technology ideas as they are now. I believe there has finally been a realisation that CCS (carbon capture and storage) is unworkable and that conventional new nuclear such as the European Pressure Reactor is incredibly expensive and difficult to deliver considering all the safety features we now want.

I would readers to seize this opportunity to build some momentum in the minds of our policy makers and take 5 minutes to respond – more responses means more attention and there will be many competing technologies clamouring for that.


  • Andrea Calaon

    Is it a way to estimate how many people are aware of the upcoming Cold Fusion change?

  • GordonDocherty

    Many thanks for this Frank. I will certainly be writing a response to this consultation. Of course, some more details re. the 1MW 1 year long test would be (have been ?) useful here… I note the deadline for submissions is May 3rd

  • LuFong

    Wow, “Department of Energy and Climate Change“. I’m impressed.

    • Ged

      Part of their “no gravy train left behind” initiative.

    • Mark Underwood

      Here in Canada we have a Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, and a Ministry of Energy, Mines and Resources. I think I prefer how the UK has grouped energy and climate change together. It seems to have more proactive potential to change the means of producing energy.

      • Sandy McKellar

        On March 22nd I sent a letter to 14 cabinet ministers in BC, Alberta, Ontario and Ottawa alerting them to Rossi’s technology and the Mats Lewan symposium in June . I have not heard back from any of the ministers as yet.

        • Steve Savage

          Sandy I have done similar over the past 3 years.. No response, except in some cases thank you for your interest replies. The limited mind set (intelligence?) of the people hired to keep us safe and moving in good directions is astounding. It is absolutely mind boggling to me that they should not have, at a minimum, responded that they were aware and were looking at the possibilities to invest research money to find out more.

          • Montague Withnail

            Civil servants – people who have to read these letters, are only interested in what they are told to be interested in. They are not usually responsive to unsolicited enquiries.

            That is why, when they tell us that they are listening, we must speak.

        • Skip

          Ya. I had a conversation with Canada’s Energy, Mines and Resources years ago. They said they were watching LENR and Rossi specifically, but they ignore me now. I did let them know about the Mats symposium anyway…

    • Frank, I only see a link on the UK site for written submissions. Is there another link for tweets, videos?

      • Montague Withnail

        Hi Simeon

        I don’t know much about tweeting but I believe if you use @CommonsECC and #NewEnergyTech it will register with them. Videos to be submitted this way via twitter.


  • Hank Mills

    What we need is a guaranteed to work Ni-LiAlH4-Li formula, with exact guidelines to follow, that we could give them to prove the phenomenon for themselves. The most recent tests of Songsheng show massive excess heat, and I’m surprised the Chinese government is not paying much more attention and money to his research. Here we have a form of table top nuclear power that uses only common lab chemicals for fuel, emits no ionizing radiation, produces no radioactive waste, and can self sustain for hours at a time. Every government of the world should be clamoring to prove this technology for themselves and then work out a deal with Leonardo Corporation or one of their licencees.

  • Anon

    What is the possible motivation for me to wanna spend my time and money on giving away valuable information to the government?

    • Mark Underwood

      So the government will chose more wisely how to spend your taxpayer money?

      A few weeks ago I (and many others) petitioned the premier of Ontario to hold off on committing billions of dollars to the nuclear industry in Ontario over the next twenty years or so. Frankly if it wasn’t for cold fusion I would be supporting nuclear power, especially the newer iterations. (Much preferable to burning fossil fuels.) But cold fusion and hydrino energy change everything. If billions are invested into traditional nuclear it will be a huge misappropriation of our money, given that cold fusion works out as I anticipate.

    • Montague Withnail

      5 minutes of your time and none of your money. You won’t be giving them information, just highlighting information already in the public domain.

  • Stefenski

    THEY are the Ones who should be informing the public about ColdFusion/Lenr E-Cat etc.. , & Not the other way around !
    I replied, pointing them in the proper direction anyway.

  • wpj

    Considering that Hydrofusion is UK based (OK, a serviced office above a Tube station) then maybe they ought to be the ones to inform and advise this committee.

  • Jonnyb

    Maybe they should just speak to the Universities and MOD contractors who are no doubt working on it hard.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    Actually, as noted for those in the UK, this is a great chance to be heard.

    I stated many times I believe high levels of government are aware of LENR.

    This survey is simply a survey to “judge” the public awareness of LENR and so that inaction by the government does not result in an angary mob of people on the steps of parliament.

    So this is really a “test” to see what the public knows about technologies like LENR. Governments don’t like it when the people arrive on the steps of parliament with pitch forks.

    As long as the public is in the dark about LENR, then governments are free to do nothing and hold on to their status quo.

    However, as people become aware, then we question why are we funding the DOE, or NASA, or any research into CO2 or windmills when we have LENR? The simple matter is such organizations and institutions are selling everyone out – no different then what occurred at the time of P & F.

    So governments seek input from the public to ensure that they can continue to do nothing until such time the political cost of doing nothing forces them into action.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Bruce__H

      If LENR is real then it will spread and restructure economies just by virtue of its reality. if i isn’t then it won’t. I don’t think conspiracy theories like this are helpful.

    • Montague Withnail

      This is not my experience of DECC at all (although I should mention that this not a DECC consultation, it is being run by the parliamentary committee). In fact they have no intention of maintaining the status quo; other than Germany I don’t know of any other country with such radical plans to decarbonise their energy infrastructure, or with such a liberal and open-to-innovation electricity market.

      I should also point out that this is not a survey about LENR, it is about any revolutionary energy technology and you can expect a broad spectrum of responses on that. I think a strong response about LENR will be helpful for LENR but it will only be a brick in the wall, it won’t change the world overnight.

      I know a couple of people on this committee (a little bit – not to invite them to my wedding) and they would not be remotely capable of – or probably interested in – the kind of conspiratorial approach that you imply.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        But you should be aware that Germany is closing down their nuclear plants and going HUGE on coal to replace that lost power.

        Of course going coal means the financial industry can trade carbon credits, and the government can reap huge profits from the carbon taxes. In other words, the government taxes the carbon, and the financial industry gets to trade carbon credits. So they BOTH lobby and LOVE this setup!

        And same goes for Japan. They are closing down their nuclear, and JUST like Germany are going all coal (they not choosing natural gas, since that only produces half the CO2 as coal – why choose something that produces half the CO2 that you planning to tax and trade).

        So both Germany and Japan are going coal – the reason is simple and the resulting CO2 taxes and trading are supported by both governments and the financial industry.

        So in fact Germany is going FULL SPEED ahead with carbon based technologies, and are eliminating their nuclear option. Germany is adopting coal power in a HUGE way now. So what they “say” about carbon based fuels as opposed to what they are doing are FAR different stories.

        Germany –

        Ten new coal plants are schedule to come on-line in the next two years. And they are huge ones!

        Japan – New 1,000 MW power plant to be built

        So both Germany and Japan are going FULL speed ahead with a coal power plant building binge. The headlines might attempt to make you think otherwise but actions speak louder than words.

        And as I stated, Coal also generates huge income for these governments due to CO2 taxing and trading of CO2 credits.

        Nuclear or LENR does nothing for the government in terms of taxing CO2.

        It is all about taxes! So burn coal is the answer! Japan and Germany are thus going down this MASSIVE coal plant building binge due to large sums of money that governments gain from such projects.

        The above is why we so dearly need LENR!
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Montague Withnail

          Germany is not replacing nuclear with coal. Germany has replaced a lot of old coal with new (more efficient) coal and at the same time is shutting nuclear but also has built an absolutely astonishing amount of renewables: 45 GW of wind and 40 GW of solar – against a peak load of 86 GW, that’s what I’m referring to above.

          Japan is a different situation, driven by Fukishima. In both cases it simply doesn’t make sense that they are doing it in order to tax and trade carbon credits.

          Personally I am strongly against further coal, and strongly in favour of a sizable public funding commitment to LENR research, I’m with you on that, but I’m afraid you attribute far too much cunning and capability to the UK government.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            In august 2012, Germany opened a new 2200MW plant (that is one of the largest built in decades).

            Furthermore, Germany has 23 new coal plants planned or under construction.

            As for wind/solar? Germany has hoped they can get up to 30% of “rated” capacity. The numbers show that after all that “massive” investment, over the last 10 years such resources are only producing 16% of rated capacity! They are producing at HALF the estimated levels they expected. So you install 3000MW of wind, they expected 900MW – but they obtaining HALF that amount! So you investment in 3000MW, you only get 450MW outputs!

            Worse still have to invest in traditional power when the wind and sun don’t blow.

            So you paying multiple orders for that power. The wind systems are only outputting 16% of full rated, and worse you STILL have to spend money on traditional power for when the wind don’t blow!

            As a result, Germany really is returning to coal in a big way.

            Talking about “capacity” of renewables vs what they produce are VERY different stories.

            No question that large gains been made in renewables, but the soaring cost of electricity in Germany is chasing industry away.

            Their answer is coal!, but it should be LENR.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Bob Greenyer

            One of the members of the MFMP was working directly with the previous UK energy minister and meeting with him on a weekly basis.

            We will make a submission.

          • kdk

            Awesome, I didn’t know that.

    • I don’t think that governments as a group personality are aware, but some people in them are.

      this idea is impossible to transmit because of the reputation trap and the mindguards.

      people in governments work on LENr project, in public.
      information are not transmitted by media, and when they are, they are not relayed by others.
      when people look at LENR project, they see it is not a bad idea, but it is a bad idea to talk of it, to say you see it, to support or criticize it.

      this is why there is a governmental project on LENR in UK, like in Italy, in Sweden, in Norway, in US, in China, in Japan, probably some awareness in France, in russia, Finland, Netherland .
      and in other countries where I have NDA.

      • kdk

        Thanks to you and Frank, for all you’ve done about getting the word out there.

  • Nukey is created in UK with clear intent (work on nuclear remediation).
    Guess whose letter was read at LENRG meeting in oxford.
    read this presentation of thornton research park
    search too there

    what is more surprising is that all is public, and there is more.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Who is ” Brust Energy”? I have never heard of them.

  • Montague Withnail

    They genuinely would like to know, although they will be sceptical considering the “scientific consensus”. They are a lot more open minded than you would think. They recently committed £250m to private sector R&D on modular nuclear reactors (fission) that’s a lot of money for the UK, and it has been brought forward on the basis of companies and individuals talking to DECC and convincing them that there is an opportunity for the UK worth investing public money in.

    I would encourage you to re-think this approach, it would only take you 5 minutes typing (some of which you have already spent on your comment). You have nothing else to lose. We should not put all our eggs in the Rossi basket. I really hope he delivers and becomes the new Edison, but the most probable way that LENR will be cracked is by a publically funded research effort. We need to convince governments that it is worth funding.

    • Steve Savage

      MW – If they are as open minded, and intelligent as you say, why would they waste 250 million pounds on modular nuclear reactors when there is clear and compelling evidence for better solutions sitting in plain sight? It is not that difficult to know about LENR. These people do not know how to do their jobs. They have failed the people of GB and of the world. They all should be terribly ashamed. Idiots could do better.

      • Montague Withnail

        That’s a little unfair, there’s only a limited extent to which civil servants, let alone politicians, can go against mainstream scientific consensus.

        Replying to this consultation probably won’t suddenly change that, but it might help the government to shine a light on why mainstream academia rejects LENR so fully with such little basis.

  • Brokeeper

    Submitting Frank’s text conclusion of “Why I believe in the E-Cat” with its link below should pretty much sum it up adding an “I ditto this, plus…”

  • we want LENR Fusione Fredda
    • artefact

      Yes. Sometimes over 60 🙂
      (and the e-cat x (quark) is said to be even better)