SPAWAR JWK LENR and the claims made by Global Energy Corporation (GEC)

  • "United States Government LENR Energy 2018" Reviewing twenty five years of U.S. funded ‘cold fusion’ projects including patents, contracts, publications and public/private sector partnership efforts towards LENR energy applied engineering and LENR energy commercialization. https://gbgoble.kinja.com/unit…18-a-review-of-1822335542


    “I began to compile this review in the fall of 2017. The reason being, I had asked a few editors of LENR news sites what they thought of the claims being made by Global Energy Corporation. Each editor asked me to provide any recent follow up to those claims. None that I could find; so I decided to compile this review as a frame of reference for the question: What are your opinions of these claims?” - Greg Goble


    I would like to hear the opinions of LENR Forum members. I find it odd that there is little to no discussion at LENR sites about GEC or their claims. If Rossi, Brillouin, the MFMP, or Randy Mills, were making similar claims, it would be discussed, scrutinized, and become the focus of our attention.


    Please keep comments on topic... Are these claims truthful or a scam? If truthful, what affect might this have on others racing to LENR commercialization. GEC has developed LENR Transmutation of nuclear waste. How will this help or hinder the nuclear power industry? Why haven't these claims been presented by GEC et.al. at ICCF? Other questions are sure to arise; Please pose pertinent questions to this thread...


    The claims are:

    "GEC is currently negotiating several new SMG construction contracts ranging from 250MWe to 5GWe around the world."

  • http://www.mvariety.com/cnmi/c…offers-nuclear-energy.php


    "Genie reactors, Forsley said, don’t have nuclear waste problems. It doesn’t need a spent fuel pool nor a spent fuel waste storage dump. It “burns” uranium-238 that comprises 95 percent of conventional nuclear waste. Therefore, Genie actually “cleans” nuclear waste, he added."


    In one of the YouTube presentations from 2013, they claim to use Uranium-zirconium based fuel.


    To be blunt, I don't see this specific reactor as being very LENR-like at all. Moreover, due to the fact that it utilizes uranium, I doubt it would ever be utilized in homes or cars like nickel-hydrogen reactors could.

  • Greg,


    Good to see you back. GEC/JWK/SPAWAR are subjects near and dear to me. As have you, I have written about them also. Who could not after that Guam episode? That is the most interesting story to ever have happened in LENR IMO. I remember you did a nice round up of it a few years back. I tried to contact them about a year ago for an update, and never received a reply. Hard to imagine after Guam they would just go silent. Well, maybe not totally silent:


    You do know that NASA Glen Research in Cleveland, Oh. has teamed up with Forsley of JWK/GEC, and Pam Moss-Bosely formerly of SPAWAR? On the NASA side is an old familiar name (Fralick), who has been involved with LENR almost as soon as FPs announced in 1989. They put out that Arxiv paper (Moss-Bosely not an author) about a year ago, and followed up with a patent application this past September. It appears the master brain behind the collaboration is a man named Pines of PinesSci. Or at least that is how I, and Ahlfors interpret their effort to grant him another uncontested contract.


    A very tangled web as the title of your thread shows, and amazingly it goes back to 2005. So much we do not know. Too bad no one will, or can talk about it. Who knows, if they would, they may light a fire in LENR, and maybe even spur the mainstream into taking notice. Yes, I am a dreamer.

  • To Alan Smith,


    Correct me if I'm wrong, your comment lends credence to the claims of GEC. -gbgoble


    To Director,


    This is LENR energy technology.


    Mitsubishi Heavy Industries pursues transmutation of nuclear waste to benign elements through a LENR process, which will prove to be a very profitable and much needed LENR energy technology.


    NASA has pursued a LENR energy technology that does not utilize uranium or nuclear waste; SPAWAR LENR energy technology does.


    What's so interesting about LENR is the many different ways it can be done...


    From


    May 2013 NASA (publication) NASA/TM-2013-217981, L-20240, NF1676L-16305- “Advanced-to-Revolutionary Space Technology Options – The Responsibly Imaginable” Apr 1, 2013 Dennis M. Bushnell - See pg. 13, ‘Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, the Realism and the Outlook

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/….nasa.gov/20130011698.pdf

    Quote

    So, is LENR “Real”? Evidently, from the now long standing and diverse experimental evidence – yes - With effects occurring using diverse materials, methods of energy addition etc. This is FAR from a “Narrow Band”/episodic set of physical phenomena.


    What is your opinion Director, Are the claims of GEC truthful or a scam? -gbgoble

  • I can definitely see LENR, as I understand it, applying to uranium. There are many different understandings of LENR. If one sees it as likely to be going back to induced alpha and beta decay and fission, uranium would be a promising candidate. If one sees it as somehow related to fusion, e.g., of deuterium, then not so much.


    I don't know what Larry Forsley's connection to GEC is. But I would take his word over that of Rossi or Mills in a heartbeat.

  • To Shane D,


    Can I read your article? I take it you give a thumbs up to the claims of GEC. Your comments made me smile and laugh just a little bit... sad when I think that this may have lent credence to the field when needed. I'm fairly positive that LENR is taking off like a rocket now. Hence government disclosure... we should see quite a bit more soon.


    Your knowledge of PineSci impressed me and is correct... Glen Research Center offers licensing of this LENR energy technology for commercialization. Here is what I have in the review: if you have more to add to the PineScie story let me know. -gbgoble


    2016 NASA Patent “Methods and apparatus for enhanced nuclear reactions”US20170263337A1 Inventors: Vladimir Pines, Marianna Pines, Bruce Steinetz, Arnon Chait, Gustave Fralick, Robert Hendricks, Paul Westmeyer - Current Assignee: NASA Glenn Research Center, Pinesci Consulting - Priority date: 2016-03-09, Application: 2017-09-14. editor note- US20170263337A1 claims that many types of materials are suitable for LENR. - end note


    Quote:

    [0082] It should be understood that any material which may be hydrided may be used as the initial material, such as, for example, single-walled or double-walled carbon nanotubes. Double-walled carbon nanotubes in particular have an internal spacing consistent with the lattice spacing of palladium-silver lattices, the usage of which in experiment will be described in detail below.


    Alternatively, materials such as silicon, graphene, boron nitride, silicene, molybdenum disulfide or ferritin (editor note: ferritin BIOCHEMISTRY noun:ferritin - a protein produced in mammalian metabolism that serves to store iron in the tissues) may be used, although it should be understood that substantially two-dimensional structures, such as graphene, boron nitride, silicene and molybdenum disulfide are not hydrated similar to their three-dimensional counterparts and may be subjected to a separate process, specifically with the two-dimensional structure being positioned adjacent one of the above materials, as will be described in greater detail below.

    Similarly, ferritin and other complex materials may be filled or loaded with hydrogen using methods specific to the particular material properties. In general, the initial material may be any suitable material which is able to readily absorb and or adsorb hydrogen isotopes, such as, for example, metal hydrides (e.g., titanium, scandium, vanadium, chromium, yttrium, niobium, zirconium, palladium, hafnium, tantalum, etc.), lanthanides (e.g., lanthanum, cesium, etc.), actinides (e.g., actinium, thallium, uranium, etc.), ionic hydrides (e.g., lithium, strontium, etc.), covalent hydrides (e.g., gallium, germanium, bismuth, etc.), intermediate hydrides (e.g., beryllium, magnesium, etc.), and select metals known to be active (e.g., nickel, tungsten, rhenium, molybdenum, ruthenium, rhodium, etc.), along with hydrides thereof, as well as alloys with non-hydriding materials (e.g., silver, copper, etc.), suspensions, and combinations thereof. - end quote

    https://patents.google.com/patent/US20170263337A1


    (editor note) The patent US20170263337A1 is a LENR patent by a NASA team. This patent’s citations include two patents “Method and apparatus for generating thermal energy” and “Methods of generating energetic particles using nanotubes and articles thereof” which have a classification: G21B3/00 Low temperature nuclear fusion reactors, e.g. alleged cold fusion reactors. Also note the following Glenn Research Center Publication, “Investigation of Deuterium Loaded Materials Subject to X-Ray Exposure” Apr 3, 2017, where US20170263337A1 inventors work with Lawrence P. Forsley of Global Energy Corporation (SPAWAR JWK LENR tech). - end note


    2016 NASA Glenn Research Center (LENR tech licensing offer)
    editor note-
    A search for ‘fusion’ that I did in May of 2016, at the NASA Technology Gateway, yielded this out of Glenn Research Center... “Methods and Apparatus for Enhanced Nuclear Reactions” Reference Number LEW-19366-1. Contact us for information about this technology. NASA Glenn Research Center, Innovation Projects Office [email protected] -end note

  • To Alan Smith,


    Correct me if I'm wrong, your comment lends credence to the claims of GEC. -gbgoble


    Gregory ' you bet.


    Lawrence Forsley is affiliated to JWK Corporation and GEC (Global Energy Corporation), beside U. of Texas. He is married to Pam Mosier-Boss also a SPAWAR researcher.

    GEC is a company created with ex-Spawar researchers trying to develop an hybrid fission/LENR reactor (see old thread http://www.lenr-forum.com/old-forum-static/f-86.html ).


    https://utexas.academia.edu/LawrenceForsley

  • Lawrence Forsley is affiliated to JWK Corporation and GEC (Global Energy Corporation), beside U. of Texas. He is married to Pam Mosier-Boss also a SPAWAR researcher.


    I knew he was affiliated with GEC/JWK (one and the same actually), but being married to Pam...no way? When did that happen? I thought she was single. Damn it, so cute too. :)

  • To Eric Walker,


    Your understanding LENR as it applies to uranium and your opinion of Lawrence Forsley seems to lend credence to the claims of GEC; Larry Forsley is the company Chief Scientist and patent holder... his patent history points to SPAWAR JWK LENR research and energy technology. -gbgoble


    From the review


    2007 SPAWAR Patent “System and method for generating particles” US8419919B1 Filing: Sep 21, 2007 - Publication: Apr 16, 2013 Assignee: JWK International Corporation, The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Navy - GRANT Issued: Apr 16, 2013 Inventors: Pamela A. Boss, Frank E. Gordon, Stanislaw Szpak, Lawrence Parker Galloway Forsley https://www.google.com/patents/US8419919B1



    2008 Patent (SPAWAR JWK LENR tech) “A hybrid fusion fast fission reactor”WO2009108331A2 - Publication date: Dec 30, 2009 - Priority date: Feb 25, 2008 Inventors: Lawrence Parker Galloway Forsley, Jay Wook Khim - Applicant: Lawrence Parker Gallow Forsley https://www.google.com/patents/WO2009108331A2

  • Gbgogle, when assessing an opinion, you must always do due diligence on the opinion holder. But yes, I take a lot of interest in the years of work that Larry Forsley did alongside Pam Mosier-Boss and others at SPAWAR. There are some results that I think need to be revisited with more rigorous methods, but they are very interesting nonetheless.


    My views of the likely mechanism underlying some varieties LENR are not commonly held.

  • There were two papers that were discussed a few months ago, one of which was the one at the top of this thread, as I recall. This one, however, is looking at the effects of a beam of 2 MeV photons, which are energetic enough to be well outside of the scope of LENR. I think the other paper was a more relevant one. (The second paper is probably mentioned later in the thread.)

  • Wasn't the governor of Guam involved in the GEC reactor deal somehow? His subsequent impeachment for corruption or similar (?) lead to everything going quiet. Not that the two were necessarily linked.


    The strangest bit to me is Guam itself... it's just one big naval base really - there's almost no other reason to go/do any business there. (Unless you want to put 'made in America' on your sweatshop clothing brand perhaps).


    So i reckon it's spun-off Navy technology that they still want to keep an eye on.


    Didn't Forsley and DeChiaro write some PowerPoint slides together? Might be a wrong. But I maybe recall seeing their names together somewhere.

  • Zeus,


    That is correct. Guam's Governor OKed the deal with CEO Kim of GEC. Kim was only going to charge Guam for the electricity the hybrid Genie reactor produced. Great deal if you ask me. Later he was impeached for corruption. Part of the charges was his signing the deal with GEC. Not that the deal was corrupt, but I think because the word nuclear popped up and scared the islanders. You know..."oh my gosh, he is going to allow a nuclear plant on our island. We are all going to die!"


    Been to Guam many a time. We use to deploy out of there to patrol up the Marianna Islands to the north, and Palau south. Has a little more going for it than military bases. I was not impressed with it though. Hot, humid and dirty, but the diving was good.

  • "Genie" was hot stuff in 2013 along with Defkalion and Rossi as per this article:

    https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Is-Cold-Fusion-Entering-the-Final-Stages.html


    In the comments, Greg Gobble wrote:



    Lots of questions come to mind! What happened in the almost five years since the article? Shouldn't we have a working prototype somewhere somehow by now? Why choose Guam to set up a demo? Why sell the electricity instead of the power plant? Why not license the technology, given that it's patented?


    If indeed this technology can process nuclear waste, it's needed everywhere worldwide and would be worth billions and billions of dollars. Why has nothing been heard which would be meaningful about its success? It seems very strange that the only way to work it out all these famous people thought up involved a crook who is now impeached. And that they have done meaningful since. Could it be that it doesn't work? Or that it was some sort of scam to start with? Maybe a scam that only a few of the players knew was a scam?

  • Shane D.

    I think so too, that there is an interesting story to be told but it may not be what you hope for. I found this in a way back search:




    What is interesting is that it was here: http://globalenergycorporation.net/Tech.aspx  but now, that link returns a 404 error. Generation five? Working on it with the US Navy for twenty years? And the Navy knows it works and has done nothing further? And this was all in 2013? And nothing since? Does that make any sense if the thing is not a scam and actually works? And all the above-mentioned "important people" know about it? They couldn't wield enough influence to get funding?

  • snoopy , if you have a strong suspicion that it is a scam, you can reach out to the people purported to be on the board of directors and ask if they were affiliated with the venture at any point, and if they're no longer affiliated, why they left.


    Also, corporate records should show whether the venture is still incorporated and who the current board are. (Unless the venture is privately held, in which case I have no idea what will be in the public domain.)


    These details won't clear the air on whether there is/was a scam or not, but it's interesting information to have.

  • Dewey Weaver

    They are probably fine people but the question proposed here is whether they or the company they seem to be associated with have really developed a reactor which can clean up radioactive wastes while producing virtually endless power and energy economically. And that part seems sketchy.


    "Was a reactor ever built?" and "Did it work and how was it tested?" seem to be fair questions at this point, 5 years after the company and some of its principals claimed to be in the 5th. generation of the device!

  • Snoopy,


    JWK International is a very respected company that has been in business since 1973. GEC and JWK are joined at the hip, with Khim the CEO of both, and Forsley working for both. I just do not see them running a scam, or doing anything dishonest like that within a successful corporation. just does not make sense, and for that matter it would be very difficult to pull off. Like I said, Khim was going to provide the Genie free, and only charge them for the power. In other words...no electricity, no pay. That is not usually how dishonest people do it. So I think it safe to rule out anything like that.


    Not that that makes the GEC story make anymore sense. That is why Greg and Ruby keep bringing it to our attention. How could they have a turn key technology ready to ship to Guam, then just disappear off the radar after the contract was reneged on, only to resurface recently working with NASA?


    It is a head scratcher for sure, and certainly someone out there could explain it all, but won't, or can't. They may even read this, and wish like hell they could say something. LENR is loaded with these type mysteries, and for each there is someone who has the answers. Maybe one day when, or if LENR breaks out and becomes accepted by mainstream, Nobel's talked of, those [people in the know will come forward and fill in the missing pieces.

  • I did not see much change on GEC since long...

    I'm afraid the venture is dead or frozen.


    AS reported here about a year ago, that the GEC website was dead. After that, surprisingly, it came alive again. Go figure. Maybe they read LF? If not they should IMO. :)


    That said Alain, the GEC venture probably is dead as you say, but their Genie reactor technology appears to be alive and well within NASA Glenn Research in Cleveland, Ohio. I just can not see how not, considering you have NASA's earliest FPs replicator Fralick, JWK/GEC's main scientist Forsley, who in a bombshell report yesterday, married SPAWARS former main LENR scientist Pamela Boss-Bosely, who was SPAWARs main LENR pioneer, all now working together in Cleveland? Along with an Arxiv paper, and USPTO patent app that enshrines the Genie technology also?