Japan Takes the Lead in Sponsoring a National LENR Research Program

I think that the release of the Brief Summary Report titled “Phenomenology and Controllability of New Exothermic Reaction between Metal and Hydrogen” by the Japanese research team is highly significant for the LENR field.

One of the researchers in the group, Akito Takahashi has added an update on Researchgate about the program.

“Leading the Japanese Gvt NEDO project on anomalous heat effect of nano-metal and hydrogen gas interaction. Goal: To confirm non-chemical (namely nuclear origin-like) high energy-density heat genration by nano-metal and hydrogen gas inetraction at elevated temperature and to extend R&D program for new hydrogen energy devices.”

NEDO is the Japanese government’s New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization, established in 1980 to promote the development of new energy technologies.

The following comes from the NEDO website:

NEDO’s Missions

NEDO plays an important part in Japan’s economic and industrial policies as one of the largest public research and development management organizations. It has two basic missions: addressing energy and global environmental problems, and enhancing industrial technology.

■ Addressing energy and global environmental problems

NEDO actively undertakes the development of new energy (e.g., photovoltaic, wind power, biomass and waste, geothermal power, thermal utilization, and fuel cells) and energy conservation technologies. It also conducts research to verify technical results. Through these efforts, NEDO promotes greater utilization of new energy and improved energy conservation. NEDO also contributes to a stable energy supply and the resolution of global environmental problems by promoting the demonstration of new energy, energy conservation, and environmental technologies abroad based on knowledge obtained from domestic projects.

■ Enhancing industrial technology

With the aim of raising the level of industrial technology, NEDO pursues research and development of advanced new technology. Drawing on its considerable management know-how, NEDO carries out projects to explore future technology seeds as well as mid- to long-term projects that form the basis of industrial development. It also supports research related to practical application.

One thing that is interesting is that nowhere in the Brief Summary that was released, is the term LENR used. They talk about a “new exothermic reaction between nano-metals and hydrogen” (which is what LENR is all about), but the “n” word is conspicuously absent.

Regardless of the terms used, it seems to me that it is clear now that the Japanese government, through NEDO, is now sponsoring a serious LENR research program. They have some of the nation’s top universities involved, as well as the auto giant Nissan Motors, and according the report issues, they are encouraged by their results and are already looking ahead to how they can implement this technology. From the report:

Information survey in over sea USA and European countries has been done. Trends of research studies was picked up by participating international meetings as ICCF20 (the 20th International Conference of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science) Sendai 2016 and IWAHLM12 (the 12th International Workshop for Anomalies in Hydrogen Loaded Metals) Italy 2017. Survey of Russian activity was done by Nissan Motors Co. Activity in this field is now growing up worldwide. H(D)-gas loading method is now the major experimental approach in the world. However research grades in over sea groups at present do not look so high as providing highly accurate excess heat data with good reproducibility. Our progress in this MHE project seems going much ahead in the world.

Foreseeing the industrial applicability, road-map study was made by our joint-team to draw the realization of industrial devices in 5-10 years later. Direct usage devices of excess heat for warming EV cars and family rooms as well as electric power devices with thermos-electric conversion systems are looked for realization in 10-20 years later.

In other words, the Japanese team thinks that after looking at the state of research in the LENR field, they think their own program is superior to others out there, and they see their progress as being significant. For decades now people have been discouraged by the lack of resources being put behind LENR research. It appears that Japan is now taking LENR very seriously and has taken the lead in establishing a national research program. Japan has a strong track record in technological development, and the fact that are already in the planning stages for LENR industrialization and commercialization could be a very significant development in the field. No doubt other countries and organizations will begin to take notice, spurring competition and further research.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Cold Fusion Now! podcast with Dr. Michael McKubre

The second in our series surveying the cold fusion landscape features Dr. Michael McKubre, former Director of Energy Research at SRI International, previously Stanford Research Institute, where there continues an-almost-thirty-years program of experimental research in LENR/cold fusion. Dr. McKubre semi-retired to New Zealand in March 2016, and is currently consulting informally with several international research …

Continue reading "Cold Fusion Now! podcast with Dr. Michael McKubre"

Research Team in Japan Reports Excess Heat from Exothermic Reaction between Metal and Hydrogen”Encouraging Towards Industrial Application of Thermal and Electric power Devices”

Thanks to Michelangelo de Meo for posting about the following on the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Researchers from Technova Inc. Nissan Motors Co., Kyushu University, Tohoku University, Nagoya University and Kobe University in Japan have published a paper in which they report on research activities conducted between October 2015 and October 2017 in which they have been carrying out experiments in search of excess heat in reactions between hydrogen and various metals.

A link to the report is here.

Heat measurement were carried out with an oil-mass calorimetry system that has been set up at Tohoku University, and 16 different experiments have been carried out over the course of two years.

The experiments have found that excess heat production (assumed to be non-chemical) in some of the experiments which have been carried out with various metals at different temperatures. The report states:

Form these obtained knowledge, we will be able to conclude that Ni-based multi-metal nano-composite samples are of very required necessary condition for generating sustainable high intensity heat-power generation at elevated temperatures more than 200°C. It is encouraging towards industrial application of thermal and electric power devices.

The researchers state that a full-length report has been published in Japanese language only.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi’s Spectrometry Based Power Calculation at the 10/24/2017 Demonstration (Michael Lammert)

The following post has been submitted by Michael Lammert

Rossi’s Spectrometry Based Power Calculation at the 10/24/2017 Demonstration
by Michael Lammert (aka Dr. Mike)

Although Andrea Rossi was unable to complete a measurement of the output power of his 3 QX devices using spectrometry in the 11/24/2017 demonstration, he did make a calculation of the output power based on spectrometry data previously observed, which is described in the video of the demonstration from about 2:25:00 to 2:28:00. At about 2:27:45 Rossi asserts that “believe me, the final result will be about 70-71W”. How did Rossi arrive at 70-71W? The 70-71W does not agree with the 61W he calculated when he mistakenly used degrees C, rather than degrees K, in the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, or the ~40W when he did the calculation correctly.

I believe there was an error in his area calculation. At the 2:27:25 mark in the demonstration Rossi calculates the area (in cm^2) of the reactor as “2 times 0.08 times pi times 0.6”, whereas the actual area should have been “pi times 0.08 times 0.6” (πDL). (Note: In this calculation Rossi did specify the internal reactor diameter as 0.08cm and the length as 0.6cm, not mm.)

This means that Rossi’s calculation was off by a factor of 2, and therefore the result of his math in the presentation should have been “80-81W”, which would have been a factor of 2 greater than correct calculation of 40W. (Note: It has already been pointed out in comments on e-catworld that Rossi was neglecting that the spectrometer would have been measuring the output of 3 devices so the devices area should have been multiplied by a factor of 3.)

If the spectrometer measurement had been successful in the demonstration, would the measured spectrum have really shown an energy peak at a wavelength of 1.1μm? The answer is “no” assuming Rossi was really running 3 QX devices in parallel at 30% output power as he claimed. If it assumed that the full power temperature of reactor is 2636ºK (as claimed by Gullstrom in an earlier paper and Rossi in his JONP blog calculation), then the operating temperature of a reactor operating at 30% output power should be equal to 2636ºK divided by the 4th root of 1/0.3, or 1951ºK. The wavelength at the energy maximum on the spectrometer’s output should have been 2900μm-ºK / 1951ºK = 1.49μm (Wien’s Law). The total output power for the 3 QX devices would have been calculated from the Stefan-Boltzmann equation (assuming ɛ=1.0) as:
Pout = 3 x π x .08cm x 0.6cm x 5.67E-12W/cm^2/ºK^4 x (1951ºK)^4 = 37.2W

Does Rossi’s claim that the expected energy maximum for the spectrometer output should have been at a wavelength of 1.1μm mean that he hadn’t measured the devices with the spectrometer when operating at 30% power prior to the demonstration? The only other explanation for the claim that energy spectrum would show a peak at 1.1μm would be that the demonstration really consisted of a single device operating at full power. It’s too bad the spectrometer measurement in the demonstration didn’t work as it would have given some valuable information on how the demonstration was really run.

(Notes: 1) For those that might argue that a QX plasma temperature might really be 2636ºK when operating at 30% power, the full output power temperature would have to be 2636ºK times the 4th root of 1/0.3 or 3562ºK- way too hot! 2) An argument could be made that Rossi turned up the controller to full power for the spectrometry measurement. However, Rossi was very concerned with the QX devices over heating during this test, therefore it is unlikely that he would have made the over heating problem worse by turning up the power for this portion of the demonstration.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

E-Cat QX Goals Clarified

As many readers here will probably know, I have been asking questions on the Journal of Nuclear Physics trying to understand Andrea Rossi’s commercial plans for the E-Cat. Reading some of recent comments on the JONP, I have still had some confusion about the exact steps in his plans are, so I decided to ask a few more questions on the matter.

Here are my questions and AR’s responses.

Frank Acland
January 6, 2018 at 8:42 PM
Dear Andrea,

I’m trying to get a clearer understanding of your plans for the commercialization E-Cat.

1. Will the presentation of the first E-Cat QX product be made at the time you announce the launch of the E-Cat QX?


2. Where will the presentation take place?

USA and Sweden

3. Will the presentation take place after the planned robotized lines have started operating?


4. Where will the first robotized lines be operating?

USA and Sweden

5. Once you announce the launch and make the presentation, will industrial products be available immediately to buy and use, or will customers have to pre-order them and wait for them to be built?

The launch will be made when the product will be ready to buy and use

6. Will the robotized lines be making only the insides of the plants (i.e. E-Cats and controllers), or fully functioning completed plants ready to use?

it depends on the kind of applications

7. Do you plan for expansion of manufacturing following the product presentation?


8. Do you think it is realistic to expect for this to all begin in 2018?

I dream of it and it is not impossible, albeit it will be very hard. But I am optimistic ( actually I always am and many times I am wrong ) after the developments we made from the Stockholm event up to now: I can assure you we have not spent this timeframe combing the puppets of my friend Thomas Florek.

Thank you for your responses,

Frank Acland

It’s certainly an ambitious plan, especially since he is planning for manufacturing in two countries. I suppose that they are thinking that that once they get a working product perfected, they want to have products ready for sale right away. Rossi admits that getting this all accomplished in 2018 is a hard goal, and so I don’t think we should be surprised that it doesn’t happen this year. If it happens at all, it will be a great accomplishment. Rossi is aware that he is not a young man, and I know that his goal is to see his technology used extensively worldwide in his lifetime, so I am sure he is giving it his all.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Not Nuclear, Not Fission, Not Fusion — Tapping the Color Force (Engineer48)

The following has been posted by Engineer48

We need to understand that inside the nucleus of every atom other than H, there are 2 stores of potentially trappable energy: While the H nucleus has no type 1 proton and neutron binding energy, it still contains quark binding energy type 2 as below.

1) The redundant strong force energy that is carried and exchanged by pions inside the nucleus and that binds the protons and neutrons together.

2) The color strong force energy that is carried and exchanged by gluons inside the proton or neutron and that binds the quarks together.

The 1st energy store is what is tapped in fission and fusion reactions and atomic weapons.

The 2nd energy store is what makes up 99% of the non dark mass in the universe via m = e/c^2. Releasing it would be like a matter & anti matter reaction. Or energy availability that makes what we call nuclear energy seem like a firecracker compared to an atomic bomb.

So when you wonder where the energy release from LENR or other plasma OU systems could come from, look no further that tapping the redundant strong force proton or neutron binding energy or doing a mind blow and tapping the vast store of quark binding energy.

There is no requirement to invent new energy sources, as almost all the universe’s energy and mass are contained in the quark colour confinement strong force. This force gets stronger the further away are the quarks.

If what I think is going on, there is no bad radiation as this process is NOT NUCLEAR, NOT FISSION, NOT FUSION.


Cold Fusion Now! Podcast with David J. Nagel

Cold Fusion Now! says Happy New Year with a brand new podcast series featuring Ruby Carat speaking with leaders in the field of cold fusion/LENR. It will be 29 years this March since scientists have been laboring to tease out the mysterious reaction that promises an ultra-clean, energy-dense source of power. What is the level …

Continue reading "Cold Fusion Now! Podcast with David J. Nagel"

Unexpected Plasma Behavior (Dieter Preschel)

The following post has been submitted by Dieter Preschel

I’ve seen Andrea Rossis demonstration of the Ecat QX, but I wasn’t impressed about the measurements he did, particularly with the oscilloscope. I’ve been a computer professional working for IBM from 1963 til 1996 and I really know how to use a scope. Andrea Rossi didn’t show very much. Actually he did hide a lot of important things. But there was a hint about what was going on. Every few seconds there was a flash inside the reactor. Many others have seen this and the common understanding is that Andrea Rossi restarted the EcatQX by igniting a plasma discharge every 7 or 8 seconds which then started the LENR process for a few seconds. The electricity and light generation is possibly only a byproduct from the plasma discharge.

I’ve got a few additional pieces of information about Plasma behavior which even Andrea Rossi may not know about.

In 2006 the US Sandia National Laboratory reported an unknown plasma behavior which I think Andrea Rossi is also experiencing. At least some of his controller issues may come from this.



ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — Sandia’s Z machine has produced plasmas that exceed temperatures of 2 billion degrees Kelvin — hotter than the interiors of stars.

The unexpectedly hot output, if its cause were understood and harnessed, could eventually mean that smaller, less costly nuclear fusion plants would produce the same amount of energy as larger plants.

The phenomena also may explain how astrophysical entities like solar flares maintain their extreme temperatures.

The very high radiation output also creates new experimental environments to help validate computer codes responsible for maintaining a reliable nuclear weapons stockpile safely and securely — the principal mission of the Z facility.

“At first, we were disbelieving,” says Sandia project lead Chris Deeney. “We repeated the experiment many times to make sure we had a true result and not an ‘Ooops’!”

The results, recorded by spectrometers and confirmed by computer models created by John Apruzese and colleagues at Naval Research Laboratory, have held up over 14 months of additional tests.

A description of the achievement, as well as a possible explanation by Sandia consultant Malcolm Haines, well-known for his work in Z pinches at the Imperial College in London, appeared in the Feb. 24 Physical Review Letters.

Sandia is a National Nuclear Security Administration laboratory.

What happened and why?
Z’s energies in these experiments raised several questions.

First, the radiated x-ray output was as much as four times the expected kinetic energy input.

Ordinarily, in non-nuclear reactions, output energies are less — not greater — than the total input energies. More energy had to be getting in to balance the books, but from where could it come?

Second, and more unusually, high ion temperatures were sustained after the plasma had stagnated — that is, after its ions had presumably lost motion and therefore energy and therefore heat — as though yet again some unknown agent was providing an additional energy source to the ions.

The next links are patents from Paulo and Alexandra Correa about a plasma discharge device creating excess energy and a possible explanation from Harold Aspden.

“Direct current energized pulse generator utilizing autogenous cyclical pulsed abnormal glow discharges”

Energy conversion system “

“Electromechanical transduction of plasma pulses”

“Power from Space: The Correa Invention”


Essentially the core element of the Correa apparatus is an electrical discharge tube containing a rarefied gas. It is a tube having a special construction but which can be manufactured in much the same way as a fluorescent lamp.Its objective, when used in a special circuit, is not the emission of light but rather the generation of electrical power in excess of the input power needed for its operation.

This seemingly impossible feat is proved by providing a battery of electric d.c. storage cells large enough to deliver a high enough voltage to trigger the discharge which in turn feeds output to a separate battery of d.c. storage cells which store the electrical energy generated.Since the generation of electricity is the objective there can be no better way of proving that,over a period of time, the net energy output exceeds by far the net energy input. Measurements of instantaneous power and the energy transients can reassure an investigator that there is a power gain but sustained performance conditions are essential for a definitive proof.Indeed,this will be better understood when the principle of operation is explained. The pulse of energy input is ahead of the output pulse in time-phasing, owing to the intervening opening of the gate,otherwise described as the radial electric field, which allows entry of energy from the quantum activity of the vacuum field.The battery tests, repeated during a succession of charge and discharge cycles, using two banks of cells, one charging on output power as the other discharges input power, provide indisputable evidence of a substantial gain in power. This gives a verifiable accounting of an energy inflow that can be put to good use while enough energy is returned to sustain operation of the system. Though a cumbersome part of the overall apparatus in comparison with the small and light-weight tube, which is the heart of the system, such a battery of conventional electric storage cells satisfies a research need, but ultimately, since power feedback should make the device self sustaining, one can foresee a compact product not requiring these cells and which operates to deliver electric power, as if from nowhere.

A few words about Harold Aspden. He was working like me for IBM a long time. Harold Aspden died in 2011. He was a critic of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and had proposed a whole new concept of Physics. I don’t share all of his findings but there are a lot of gems in his work.


Most of his work is freely available on the internet. I got a message when Harold Aspden was very ill and I saved his work from his servers. After his death his wife gave his work free to the public.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Commercial LENR in 2018?

It’s the last day of 2017 and a natural time to reflect back on the old year and look forward to the new. In terms of progress in the LENR field I have always thought that the most important thing is that the technology become commercialized in order to be put to use in the real world. So long as it stays forever in the laboratory it is interesting scientifically, but not of much practical use.

So has there been LENR progress in 2017? For me the answer is yes, but a big commercial breakthrough has not yet happened.

Research and Development

In terms of R&D, I think that it is very significant that Andrea Rossi has come to a point where he has settled on the E-Cat design that he wants to commercialize. For over five years he has been working with E-Cats that he was constantly working on, but which apparently were problematic performance-wise for one reason or another — and at last he seems to be satisfied with the E-Cat QX, especially after he has reached the Sigma 5 level of performance. With this decision made, he can now focusing his R&D efforts on miniaturizing the control system needed to operate the E-Cats, designing industrial-grade plants using the QX, and building the production system needed to get the benefits of economy of scale.


I think the most positive event that happened in 2017 for the commercialization prospects of the E-Cat this year was the settlement reached in the Rossi vs. Industrial Heat case. From all we learned from the documents produced in the court case the working relationship between the two parties was at such a low level that it’s hard to see how they could have successfully commercialized the E-Cat together. The initial contract between Rossi and IH was heavily in favor of Industrial Heat, and if Rossi had prevailed in the lawsuit, and was awarded the $89 million he sought, he would have likely been bound by the contract which gave exclusive commercial rights for the E-Cat to IH for North and South America, Russia, China and Saudi Arabia — a huge segment of the world’s economy.

In terms of E-Cat commercialization, the settlement wiped the slate clean and gave Rossi a fresh start with no restrictions on where he is able to commercialize the E-Cat. He admits now that he was naive in signing the IH contract and states that with the legal experience gained from the lawsuit he now legal team better to prepared to help him negotiate better contracts going forward. Rossi states a new partner is now on board to help him start the commercialization process.

Is the E-Cat for Real?

After nearly seven years since Rossi first went public, that’s the big question that many people are still asking. I understand that many people still have at least some level of uncertainty, if not total doubt. The Stockholm presentation did not provide the final scientific proof that the E-Cat works as claimed, because it was not an independent scientific experiment, and that was disappointing to some. I don’t think that question will be conclusively answered for most people until commercialization is achieved, but speaking for myself, despite everything taking longer than I initially expected, I am as convinced as ever of the validity of the E-Cat. This was the year that I first saw an E-Cat for myself, and from the setup I saw it was clear to me that Andrea Rossi had been hard at work developing what has turned out the be the E-Cat QX. If the measurement instrumentation used in the test that I witnessed was accurate, then he has made a very important breakthrough in terms of energy technology.

So will 2018 be the year that the E-Cat finally hits the marketplace? Andrea Rossi says that this is his hope and goal, shared by his team and partner. He stated today on the JONP: “I am optimist about the fact that in 2018 we will reach the massive industrialization phase. In these 2 months after the demo at the IVA of Stockholm we have added much progress to the Ecat QX in the direction of its industrialization.”

I do hope he is right, but since these things always seem to take longer than initially projected, I am loath to make a prediction. We will just wait and see how things play out.

Other LENR teams

Of course Andrea Rossi is not the only operator in the LENR field. There are other teams at work such as Brillouin, Clean Planet, and me356 who claim to be working towards commercialization. Brilliant Light Power does not claim to be working in LENR, but they also are active in developing what could be a significant energy technology. They have said that they hope to have some products ready for field testing in 2018. None of these has broken out commercially in 2017. Possibly 2018 may see some progress.

Rossi Describes Experimental Protocols for Theory Testing

Andrea Rossi has made the following comment in response to questions about the experiments they plan to do test his theoretical hypotheses.

Andrea Rossi
December 30, 2017 at 9:03 AM

Vince and Yuri:
We are going to make dipole and quadrupole measurements of currents deflections.
For the H/Li ion current we need a magnetic field of circa 0.1 T
To achieve a measurable electromagnetic field we will sorround the plasma with a quadrupole magnet with an angle of 67 degrees with the oscillating the field between 695 and 710 MHz and then measure if an opposite magnetic dipole field gets induced on the z- axis of the quadrupole.
The numbers come from cos30 degrees times hyperfine splitting of 7L1 S2 level and cos60 degrees times the H 1420 MHz line, combined with the spin-speed tilt of the assumed spin of the positive ions and the spin tilt interaction due to the 3 quark structure of the nucleon and the Sigma meson.
From an experimental point of view it will be also good to measure a variety of quadrupole field parameters, both for static and dynamic QM ( quadrupole measurements ), wherein dynamic means adjustable electromagnets around the E-Cat QX to generate a field and static means neodym magnets.
Basic instrumentation:
IR thermometers
Adjustable frame able to allow assembly modifications
Neodymium magnets
Heat insulators
Customized Electromagnets
Signal Generator 0.1-20 MHz
E-Cat QX
Heat exchanger
Control Box

Warm Regards,

One thing that jumps out here is Rossi’s description of a “H/Li ion current” which I have not heard Rossi describe before — I wonder if this is his description of the plasma. Maybe Rossi will update us with some results at some point.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged