Return to the INE Main Page

COLD FUSION CONFUSION REIGNS IN WASHINGTON

By Steve Kaplan

From: Steve Kaplan 
To: "'Patrick Bailey'" 
Subject: Editorial I wrote concerning new energy R&D
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:34:04 -0700
X-Rcpt-To: pgb@padrak.com

Patrick:

The Oregonian, our state's largest newspaper, published on June 10, 1998,
the attached editorial I wrote concerning new energy R&D.

It took alot of persistence to get them to publish the article, but it is a
small step toward breaking open completely the press blackout on new energy
matters.

I'm planning on submitting the piece to op ed sections in other newspapers
across the country.

Best regards,

Steve

COLD FUSION CONFUSION REIGNS IN WASHINGTON

BY STEPHEN KAPLAN

[Published in: The Oregonian, June 10, 1998]

President Clinton has expressed great concern about global warming and the long-term impact of the burning of fossil fuels on the environment. He claims that new energy technologies will help us move beyond our dependence on highly polluting ways of producing energy.

However, he is not receiving accurate advice from the Department of Energy (DOE) about one possible new source of clean energy: low-temperature nuclear reaction proceses (popularly known as "cold fusion").

In a recent letter to Congresswoman Elizabeth Furse, the Department claims that the reports of "anomalous excess energy and "anomalous nuclear effects" in cold fusion experiments have not been verified and that there is "no scientific evidence... that would suggest transmutation of radioactive materials can be achieved through low-temperature nuclear processes."

This position reflects the stand the DOE took in 1989 when one of its panels recommended that no government funding should be provided for research in this field. When that judgment was made, not all the evidence was in. Now that many years have passed, during which substantial research has been done in this field worldwide, it is clear that its conclusion was seriously inaccurate even in 1989. It is even more so today.

There is a growing body of experimental evidence that indicates anomalous excess heat and transformation of elements are regular occurrences in cold fusion experiments. In thousands of experiments, credible researchers have immersed rods of palladium, nickel, and titanium in water, charged them with electricity and observed not only the byproducts of nuclear reactions, but also have seen more energy coming out of the reactions than it takes to create them..

This was confirmed by scientists gathered at the Seventh International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-7) that was held in Vancouver, BC April 19-24, 1998. At that conference, Dr. Les Case, a New Hampshire engineer, shared his path-breaking research on a cold fusion cell that appears to dependably produce excess energy. Subsequent tests of that process by scientists at Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. verify his claims.

Not only has there been tremendous progress in basic research, but several companies in the United States are working hard to bring commercial units to market. Moreover, there is also evidence that indicates that low-energy nuclear processes can transmute radioactive elements into non-radioactive substances. Two companies - CETI and the Cincinnati Group - have sold demonstration transmutation devices to other scientists. The CETI power cell was highlighted on ABC's Good Morning America and Nightline. Moreover, the transmutation of radioactive elements by both of these devices has been independently confirmed by other laboratories.

Although the evidence for the reality of low-energy nuclear processes is being denied by the DOE, it has not escaped the attention of scientists advising foreign governments. Prominent scientists from Japan, China, Russia, Italy, France, Germany and other countries are involved in cold fusion research. Among them is Dr.George Lonchampt of the French Atomic Energy Commission. He successfully replicated the original cold fusion experiment of Drs. Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, and at his urging, the Commission is now funding cold fusion research.

Many years ago, the U.S. government ignored the scientific claims of Robert Goddard, the inventor of the liquid-fueled rocket. Germany did not ignore his research with devastating and almost disastrous results for the world. Will a mistake like that be repeated today?

Unless President Clinton reaches out to get scientific counsel from a wide variety of advisors, he will not be able to develop a rational energy policy for the future. If the DOE has failed to provide balanced judgement regarding cold fusion research, in what other ways vital to national security and well-being might it be misleading the President?

Return to the INE Main Page