Edmund Storms : The Present Status of Cold Fusion and its Expected Influence on Science and Technology (Innovative Energy Policies)

In the open access peer-reviewed journal "Innovative energy policies" Edmund Storms have published a general article on LENR.
"The Present Status of Cold Fusion and its Expected Influence on Science and Technology"

It explain the cause of current rejection, the line of evidences availables like Helium and tritium, the problem with theories, and finally the fact that "LENR can generate ideal energy", and also "reveals a new type of nuclear interaction"

This point is to remember, and it is not enough emphasised.

Quote

LENR reveals a new type of nuclear interaction
Since LENR has little to do with hot fusion something very unusual must happen in certain materials that are not possible in plasma where hot fusion takes place. This unusual process allows two hydrogen nuclei to come close enough to fuse without applied energy, without the resulting excess mass energy being dissipated without destruction of the nuclear product, and without significant radiation being detected. Hundreds of attempts have been made to explain how this is possible. At the very least, two or more nuclei need to find each other in an array of metal atoms. Further, simply being able to get close is not enough, because when this separation is reduced, hot fusion produces fragmentation of the nuclear product into energetic neutrons (n), protons (p), tritium (3 H) and helium-3 (3 He), which are not observed in LENR.

Nevertheless, in LENR the excess mass energy resulting from D-D fusion is measured as heat having a magnitude consistent with the amount of helium-4 (4 He) detected. In addition, tritium is made without the expected neutron. Clearly, a novel and previously overlooked mechanism is operating. Once this mechanism is understood, many other kinds of unexplained nuclear reactions will be easier to explain, including biological transmutation [35].

The paper is gathering essential information in what I interpret as an intent to make the consensus change, to make current policy integrate LENR as a key technology to develop, and not as bad science like it is considered today.

In a way Edmund Storms paper, works in the same direction as Thomas Grimshaw's plan for an "evidence based policy", and as Current Science LENR Special Section.
EDIT: I added the link to the paper

The site dedicated to Edmund Storms book present that article, and synthesize it's keys statements.
http://lenrexplained.com/2015/…n-science-and-technology/

Quote

“Three messages are important to hear”, writes Edmund Storms. “LENR is real, LENR can generate ideal energy having important economic and political implications, and LENR reveals a new type of nuclear interaction having important scientific implications.”

These issues are the focus of the paper.

Storms writes, “… the world is presented with a choice. If this energy source is ignored, the damage to the environment will grow until some country discovers how to make essentially free energy using the method, thereby giving this country great advantage.”

“Or, the world can invest in discovering how LENR works while finding ways to introduce the energy source without causing too much economic damage. This problem is not going to go away by blind rejection. Pandora’s Box has now been opened.”

Display More

Yes, Pandora box is opened, and disruption problems won't go away by denying LENR. This is the power of competition, to force coward actors to be realists.