Another Cold Fusion Device Attracts Commercial Interest

Oil Price.com ^ | Thu, 19 September 2013 22:40 | Brian Westenhaus

[Kevmo]

Brillouin Energy has entered into its first international licensing agreement covering three nations. The firm is involved in on-going negotiations for other potential international partners. This makes the second Cold Fusion or Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reaction (LANR) and Brillouin’s Controlled Electron Capture Reaction (CECR) idea to attract commercial interest.

.... Brillouin’s CECR starts by introducing hydrogen into a suitable piece of nickel (or other metal with the correct internal geometry). A proprietary electronic pulse generator then creates stress points in the metal where the applied energy is focused into very small spaces. This concentrated energy allows some of the protons in the hydrogen to capture an electron, and thus become a neutron. This step converts a small amount of energy into mass in the neutron.

.... Brillouin’s power equation is 2.4 units of energy going in and 24 units coming out.

The Brillouin CECR is thought to be quite versatile. The released energy is initially absorbed by the metal element, and then made available as heat. At lower temperatures, this generated heat can be used directly for space heating, hot water and similar applications. Further refinements of the Brillouin Energy system will produce the higher temperatures needed for electrical generation, dry industrial stream and industrial processes. ......

Big investment money is lining up. Brillouin has raised about $3 million in funding. A “second stage” $20M investment conditional agreement from Sunrise Securities of New York for $20 million is now in place.

The Sunrise deal offers to purchase 15% of Brillouin post-money, conditional on Brillouin moving ahead with and completing successful testing of its CECR at SRI.

....

The $20M Sunrise offer would fund full commercial launch of this merchant power supply retrofit business model after successful testing of the CECR called NHB™ at SRI.

[mad_as_he$$]

Why waste your time responding if it is such garbage?

I appreciate Kevmo posting these items so I don't have to spend time looking for them.

[B4Ranch]

>>People will always find ways to separate fools from their money.<<

I have met people where the “more money than brains” certainly applied. In some cases it was just $20, in others it was in the high millions. Where do you fit into that picture?

[Wonder Warthog]

"If they can make this portable enough to fit underneath the hood of a car, then it will be the end of the oil era. Oil will just be used to make plastic products."

It would be the end of the oil era even if inventors don't manage that degree of shrinkage. With very-low-cost energy available, we can synthesize any fuel we want from "organic waste" (actually any carbon containing material that needs to be "destroyed"), whether that fuel be methanol, ethanol, gasoline, or diesel, or some other more exotic choice.

[B4Ranch]

I am so glad the world has people such as yourself who are always trying to keep me from making bad investments. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[Wonder Warthog]

"It's called electron capture (where the nucleus captures an inner electron and a proton becomes a neutron) and it does occur in nature as a recognized isotope decay mode. See link. Beryllium-7 decays into Lithium-7 via electron capture."

Thanks for the info. I actually "did" know that, but was having trouble dredging the name up out of deep storage (pre-coffee syndrome, y'know). The last time I had to think about this stuff was forty years ago......

[Moonman62]

This model could be used to fleece city slicker leftists out of their money.

The cold fusion scammers will sell you licenses, distribution rights, and shares. They'll sell you everything but a working device.

[Truthoverpower]

A fool and his money are soon parted

By slick sounding ‘scientists’

Look spend all the money you want to make nuclear reactions occur at room temp and then be able to be carefully controlled and produce real power on the order of either existing fission or even solar photovoltaics

I’ve met these brillouin guys. In an engineer with 20 yrs in the energy business here in the sf bay and these guys are just line the ‘nano tech’ solar guys who got 100 million in 2003 and were going to revolutionize the p. industry. Result. Nothing. Not one panel of Anything for 100m$

Oh and then there was solyndra you’ve heard of them right? They too were going to revolutionize PV

Look if you don’t have a background in nuclear chemistry and physics just relie on us engineers

We ask simply about this science- ok so how is this going to be useful AND competetive with existing technology in the real world?

I’ve seen their proposed designs it’s all crapola. You can do all kinds of things in a carefully controlled lab that will not work at scale. You can also embellish lab results and skew parameters easily as well and then BS about them in white papers

Who the heck wants a 50000$ nuclear reactor for a water heater. Which costs 200$ and uses 30$ of gas a month

If that’s annoying to you then solar thermal is well established and works fine for about 6-8 k$ and then you have no gas bill again

So as you can plainly see this is nonsense unless they are trying to make real power (ie < 10MW continuous).

And even if it would work which it can’t good luck powering a nuclear anything here in ca , isotopes of hydrogen or not

So there’s your cold water in the face, charlatans and their gullible believers in the pie in the sky and free energy and let’s ignore the second law of thermodynamics

For those in rio Linda that is energy cannot be created or destroyed. Only changed from one form to another

Mark my words Freepers

[PapaBear3625]

In a peer-reviewed article in Physical Review Letters: Strong Flux of Low-Energy Neutrons Produced by Thunderstorms:

Received 13 July 2011; published 19 March 2012

We report here for the first time about the registration of an extraordinary high flux of low-energy neutrons generated during thunderstorms. The measured neutron count rate enhancements are directly connected with thunderstorm discharges. The low-energy neutron flux value obtained in our work is a challenge for the photonuclear channel of neutron generation in thunderstorm: the estimated value of the needed high-energy γ-ray flux is about 3 orders of magnitude higher than that one observed.

© 2012 American Physical Society

So lightning seems to be creating low-energy neutrons, by some unknown mechanism. My speculation is that perhaps intense electric fields may cause electron capture somehow.

[Red Badger]

"A proton plus an electron does NOT create a neutron. A neutron is an elemental subatomic particle with no charge and you can’t create one by “mashing” an electron and proton together."

I thought that is what the Large Hadron Collider does.......

[Truthoverpower]

Science does not equal engineering. You can do stuff in a lab that will never be practical in the real world. This is not evil or bad just academics

Oh and lots of taxpayer$ usually

[PapaBear3625]

Where the findings at the link in #28 become relevant, is that the Widom-Larsen theory of LENR:

Allan Widom and Lewis Larsen propose that, in condensed matter, local breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation occurs in homogeneous, many-body, collectively oscillating patches of protons, deuterons, or tritons found on surfaces of fully loaded metallic hydrides; Born-Oppenheimer breakdown enables a degree of electromagnetic coupling of surface proton/deuteron/triton oscillations with those of nearby surface plasmon polariton (SPP) electrons. Such coupling between collective oscillations creates local nuclear-strength electric fields in the vicinity of the patches.

SPP electrons bathed in such high fields increase their effective mass, thus becoming heavy electrons. Widom and Larsen propose that heavy SPP electrons can react directly with protons, deuterons, or tritons located in surface patches through an inverse beta decay process that results in simultaneous collective production of one, two, or three neutrons, respectively, and a neutrino. Collectively produced neutrons are created ultra-cold; that is, they have ultra-low momentum and extremely large quantum mechanical wavelengths and absorption cross-sections compared to “typical” neutrons at thermal energies.

Finally, Widom and Larsen propose that heavy SPP patch electrons are uniquely able to immediately convert almost any locally produced or incident gamma radiation directly into infrared heat energy, thus providing a form of built-in gamma shielding for LENR nuclear reactions.

The thunderstorm-generated low-energy neutrons may indicate that there are mechanisms by which low-energy neutrons are generated by strong electric fields.

[Kevmo]

Proof? You want proof this is bogus?
***Yes. He said it was provable, so I’m asking for that proof. All I get is crickets. Because there is no proof.

[Kevmo]

How about basic chemistry? A proton plus an electron does NOT create a neutron. A neutron is an elemental subatomic particle with no charge and you can’t create one by “mashing” an electron and proton together.
***That just means the guys at oilprice.com aren’t very good writers. That doesn’t prove LENR is bogus.

Also note the vague “scientific” jargon like “suitable internal geometry”. What does that even mean?
***The Internal geometry of the metal lattice matrix is known to be critical for LENR formation. Whether it’s Palladium with Deuterium or Nickel with Hydrogen. Both lattices have shown that the internal geometry is critical. Of course, if you haven’t been following LENR, you wouldn’t be aware of that. But doesn’t mean LENR is bogus, it means you don’t have the background to loudly proclaim it to be bogus.

Sounds like a better worded Nigerian scam email.
***And your bloviating sounds like all the other hypercritical anti-science bloviating we’ve been witnessing here on FR for the past few years.

People will always find ways to separate fools from their money.
***So your concern is duly noted, over $20M of private funding. Where is your concern for the hundreds of $Billions poured down the rathole of hot fusion? Silent, just like your scientific background.

[Wonder Warthog]

"So lightning seems to be creating low-energy neutrons, by some unknown mechanism. My speculation is that perhaps intense electric fields may cause electron capture somehow."

There have been occasional references to both this and earthquakes as producing low-energy neutrons. The hot physics community has been stalwart in denying that either was possible. Same as for LENR.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I thought that is what the Large Hadron Collider does....... "

Yes, but that fits into the category of a high-energy process, and thus is well-accepted by the hot physics folks.

[Kevmo]

A fool and his money are soon parted By slick sounding ‘scientists’
***A poor writer and a worn-out cliche are soon united. Or is it that you’re concerned about all those hundreds of $billions of public money already spent on the hot fusion scam? Those were certainly some slick sounding scientists. My guess is that you simply need to take a good writing class.

Look spend all the money you want to make nuclear reactions occur at room temp and then be able to be carefully controlled and produce real power on the order of either existing fission or even solar photovoltaics
***That’s exactly what they’re doing, so what is your problem with it? Again, perhaps you need to take a writing class.

[Kevmo]

I’ve met these brillouin guys. In an engineer with 20 yrs in the energy business here in the sf bay
***I’m an engineer in Silicon Valley as well and I’d love to be introduced to these guys. Care to make the introduction?

and these guys are just line the ‘nano tech’ solar guys who got 100 million in 2003 and were going to revolutionize the p. industry.
***You mean these guys?
http://www.nanosolar.com/company/company-overview/
They’re still in business.

Result. Nothing. Not one panel of Anything for 100m$
***That happens all the time in Silicon Valley. I don’t see you calling all those failed startups fraudulent.

Oh and then there was solyndra you’ve heard of them right? They too were going to revolutionize PV
***There are dozens of examples of failures. It proves nothing. You’ve heard of the Wright brothers, haven’t you? They, too, were accused of being frauds for 5 years before they were allowed to demo to an actual contract.

Look if you don’t have a background in nuclear chemistry and physics just relie on us engineers
***95% of the electrical engineers I work with in the valley do not have a background in nuclear chemistry nor nuclear physics. Where do you get the idea we can rely on engineers to make these kinds of decisions? What gives any of us freepers the confidence that we can rely on YOU for any technical advice, when what you’ve posted has already been refuted and you deliver crickets on the rest?

[Kevmo]

We ask simply about this science- ok so how is this going to be useful AND competetive with existing technology in the real world? ***You honestly can't see that a new, emission-free power source that has 10,000X the energy density of gasoline is going to be useful in the real world? Where do you come up with this garbage? I’ve seen their proposed designs it’s all crapola. You can do all kinds of things in a carefully controlled lab that will not work at scale. ***Right here you self-refute. You acknowledge that the effect works in the lab but hint that it won't work to scale. Same thing happened to the transistor. It took time, but it became utterly reliable. If the effect didn't work at all in the lab, you might have some ground to stand on but you have already relinquished that ground. You can also embellish lab results and skew parameters easily as well and then BS about them in white papers ***That's a mighty wide conspiracy theory you've got going there. 14,720 replications, all "embellished" and "skewed parameters"? Bowlsheet. The only scientists caught fraudulently embellishing their LENR results were at MIT when they tried to shut down LENR and it turned out their own results showed excess heat. But we wouldn't expect someone like you to know that kind of thing, seein' as how you have not taken the time to come up to speed on this nascent technology. Who the heck wants a 50000$ nuclear reactor for a water heater. Which costs 200$ and uses 30$ of gas a month ***No one other than people in space or antarctica who can't get gas delivered. Who would want a $300 water heater that uses $30 worth of hydrogen over its entire lifetime? Millions, that's who. If that’s annoying to you then solar thermal is well established and works fine for about 6-8 k$ and then you have no gas bill again ***First, let me just say that your writing is so painful to follow that I can't just let it pass without comment. Please, please... take a writing class. You have established a $6-8k baseline for useful technology, assuming you don't move the goalposts like everyone else who has argued from your position. LENR is going to be made from Palladium or Nickel and some hydrogen + some lead shielding. It will be easy for it to beat the baseline you've established. For one thing, it will work when the sun does not shine. So as you can plainly see this is nonsense unless they are trying to make real power (ie < 10MW continuous). ***Please show us where you've come up to speed on this issue by letting us know which LENR guys are aiming outside of the parameter you just posted... assuming you meant <10MW continuous, or did you mean >10MW continuous? Either way, show us what the hell you're talking about rather than just bloviating and displaying your foolishness like a peacock. And even if it would work which it can’t good luck powering a nuclear anything here in ca , isotopes of hydrogen or not ***As a Californian, I often find myself apologizing for other californians who think that if it can't be done here it ain't worth doing. So there’s your cold water in the face, charlatans and their gullible believers in the pie in the sky and free energy and let’s ignore the second law of thermodynamics ***Who says the 2nd law is being ignored? Have you read up on the Widom-Larson theory? How about KP Sinha's theory? Or is it that you don't trust PhD Nuclear Physicists? For those in rio Linda that is energy cannot be created or destroyed. Only changed from one form to another ***Wow, that just blows my hair back the way you explained it... /s Mark my words Freepers ***I am marking your words, noting how poor those words have been written down, and how poorly you defend your thoughts.

[Kevmo]

We ask simply about this science — ok so how is this going to be useful AND competetive with existing technology in the real world?
***You honestly can’t see that a new, emission-free power source that has 10,000X the energy density of gasoline is going to be useful in the real world? Where do you come up with this garbage?

I’ve seen their proposed designs it’s all crapola. You can do all kinds of things in a carefully controlled lab that will not work at scale.
***Right here you self-refute. You acknowledge that the effect works in the lab but hint that it won’t work to scale. Same thing happened to the transistor. It took time, but it became utterly reliable. If the effect didn’t work at all in the lab, you might have some ground to stand on but you have already relinquished that ground.

You can also embellish lab results and skew parameters easily as well and then BS about them in white papers
***That’s a mighty wide conspiracy theory you’ve got going there. 14,720 replications, all “embellished” and “skewed parameters”? Bowlsheet. The only scientists caught fraudulently embellishing their LENR results were at MIT when they tried to shut down LENR and it turned out their own results showed excess heat. But we wouldn’t expect someone like you to know that kind of thing, seein’ as how you have not taken the time to come up to speed on this nascent technology.

[Kevmo]

Who the heck wants a $50000 nuclear reactor for a water heater. Which costs 200$ and uses 30$ of gas a month
***No one other than people in space or antarctica who can’t get gas delivered. Who would want a $300 water heater that uses $30 worth of hydrogen over its entire lifetime? Millions, that’s who.

If that’s annoying to you then solar thermal is well established and works fine for about 6-8 k$ and then you have no gas bill again
***First, let me just say that your writing is so painful to follow that I can’t just let it pass without comment. Please, please... take a writing class. You have established a $6-8k baseline for useful technology, assuming you don’t move the goalposts like everyone else who has argued from your position. LENR is going to be made from Palladium or Nickel and some hydrogen + some lead shielding. It will be easy for it to beat the baseline you’ve established. For one thing, it will work when the sun does not shine.