This comment came up in the ‘How big a deal is cold fusion thread’, and I thought it was interesting enough to warrant putting in a separate thread. Thanks to ‘Investor’ for sharing his perspective.
Greetings. I am the Blacklight Power investor who posted earlier. I was not so familiar with LENR technologies but I have gone through the processes and have come to some tentative conclusions. In every case I see that the processes are in fact misunderstood hydrino forming reactions previously demonstrated by Mills. This fact is hidden by the interpretation of the reactions as deriving from nuclear fusion.
In all cases the supposed catalysts, secret sauces, pixie dust, or more plainly, electrolyte, is in fact a hydrino forming catalyst long ago identified in BLP papers. The key to hydrino creation is a resonant, non-radiative energy transfer from atomic hydrogen to a catalyst capable of accepting energy equal to an integer multiple of of the potential energy of atomic hydrogen which is 27.2 eV. Relevant Mills papers, available on the BLP website include the following:
a. Commercializable Power Source Using Heterogeneous Hydrino Catalysts,
b. Catalyst Induce Hydrino Transition (CIHT) Electrochemical Cell,
c. Solid Fuels that Form HOH Catalyst.
Going all the way back to Pons and Fleischmann it turns out the their electrolyte was Liithium dioxide. It was identified that Lithium deposits formed on both the cathode and anode. Mills identified Alkali Metal Hydrides such as LiH, NaH, and KH as key catalysts along with many others all having the appropriate energy multiple. Hydrinos are formed by the energy transfer from H to Li under appropriate conditions. Reports indicate that the Rossi and Defkalion processes use a potassium or potassium carbonate. Potassium carbonate was used as the electrolyte in Mills 1991 cell tested at Thermacore. Brillioun appears to be using a more advanced system but already identified by Mills in paper c. above.
How do we know that fusion is not what is driving the measured energy gains? Because these experiments can be designed to yield excess energy with or without fusion products. In fact Mills has written that hydrinos, under the right conditions, have a statistically measurable probability of fusion due to the reduced electron orbit sphere. However the excess energy can be created without any fusion by-products proving that fusion is not the driving source of energy.
Thus all the frustration in finding consistent fusion signatures and also the non optimized experiments that try to maximize fusion while ignoring the real source of the excess energy. Mills has long ago understood what is going on here, hence his continued insistence that this is not cold fusion. This was not due to any fear that he would be tarred with the cold fusion label but rather because he understood that the statistically small fusion signatures were irrelevant to the process. These other firms are really where Mills was years ago but still without any real understanding and hence flying blind so to speak. In the meantime Mills has been seeking to optimize a commercially viable system by finding ways to regenerate the catalysts. Thermal regeneration was thought to be the key but this has now been replaced with regeneration by rehydration – a significant breakthrough. That along with the ability to create a high velocity plasma which can efficiently be converted directly into electrical energy puts him way ahead.
From a broad perspective I do not see this so much as a contest as a wonderful gift to the world. I am actually pleased to discover that these LENR experiments share quite a bit with earlier Blacklight Power experiments.
Reading these pages I get a sense that commenters are picking favorites based upon the mistaken belief that one company will seek to control the energy marketplace. The ideal is that energy production will be liberated from the large corporations and given to the people. I believe that is actually Blacklight’s intention – to widely license and joint venture the technology at very reasonable cost and to encourage new applications and further technical innovation. That model would provide ample return to BLP investors while making energy as widely and cheaply available as possible. If control of, or God forbid, suppression of new energy technology is to come about, its source will not be from BLP or any of these other small firms, but rather governments and the existing powers that control them.