US Navy (SPAWAR)/Global Energy Corporation/LENR

    • Official Post

    Did a little transcribing of Mosier-Boss's conclusions:


    15:08 We have observed energetic particles as a result of Pd-D co-deposition. That includes >2.47 MeV protons, >7MeV Alphas, 2.2-2.5 MeV Neutrons, as well as >9.6 MeV Neutrons, and Protons and Neutrons energetic enough to fission U-235/U238.


    16:30 Hybrid fission reactors are possible based on co-deposition, and there are a lot of advantages to such a reactor. It does not require enrichment of U-235, no green house gases, easy to shut off, and has potential to dispose of long lived radioactive fission products produced by conventional nuclear plants stored all over the world.


    Keep in mind that her husband Forsley heads up the GEC/JWK team working with NASA, and what she is describing is essentially the benefits of the Genie Reactor that was almost sold to Guam.


    Also of note in her remarks, is that the Navy lab (officially under the DOD) they (Forsley/Mossier-Boss) are working with, is the DTRA (Defense Reduction Research Agency). She also mentions getting internal funds from the Navy in her thank yous, and has a few comments about her LENR research being shut down in 2011 in her closing. Swartz also mentioned DTRA funding, but in re-reading Ruby's notes on that, it is unclear to me if he mean't he was being funded by them, or someone else?


    Interesting question to Pam, was asked by Hagelstein suggesting he is thinking ahead: "can you co-deposition uranium?"
     

    I couldn't wait till new year...over 3 months away!


    Enkutatash


    Coming up soon, it's the Ethiopian New Year day celebrated on September 11th based on the Gregorian calendar.


    From Belgium


    A bit of history before we begin...

    Belgium Missing LENR Energy and the Suppression of Cold Fusion 1991

    Proposed Satellite Meeting to the 43rd EPSMeeting on Plasma Physics on

    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions ...

    https://kuleuvencongres.be/eps…program/satellite_meeting

    Pam Boss/Forsley may perhaps be joined at the hip... or not. Consider this...


    She is chief scientist at GEC, not retired/no longer working as stated in the ICCF 21 oral presentation. Why lie down when there is so much to be presented/capitalized on?


    Smokescreens/or mirrors of deception...


    Dr. Pamela Mosier-Boss is a retired scientist from a Navy laboratory in San Diego, CA. She is an analytical chemist who has investigated the electrochemistry of thionyl chloride using spectroelectrochemical techniques first demonstrated by Fleischmann and Pons. She has explored the use of phage for bacterial detection and surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) for the detection of chemical contaminants such as perchlorate, hexavalent chromium, chlorinated solvents, and bacteria. SERS is another phenomenon that was first discovered by Fleischmann. Mosier-Boss has also been involved in the development of direct push sensors to map out subsurface plumes of heavy metals and petroleum.


    In addition to her environmental sensor work at the Navy laboratory, she has conducted research in the area of low energy nuclear reactions (LENR) for the past 26 years.


    She is currently conducting LENR research with GEC.


    In this research, she and her colleagues have employed the co-deposition process that was pioneered by Dr. Stanislaw Szpak. In the co-deposition process, palladium is electroplated onto a metal substrate in the presence of evolving deuterium gas. The resultant palladium nanoparticles load instantly with deuterium achieving the high D/Pd loadings and high deuterium flux inside the lattice to initiate LENR. Using the co-deposition process, Mosier-Boss and her colleagues have reported on the evidence of excess heat, tritium, X-ray/gamma-ray emissions, transmutation, charged particles, and neutrons. These results have been published in over 30 peer-reviewed journal articles.

    Alan Smith

    Consider that Forsley was chummed up early on with the pioneer of U238 transmutation to benign elements through an LENR process. James Patterson and Lawrence Forsley? I'm researching the history of their relationship... any other leads appreciated.


    Here is an example of such:


    Did Larry build upon Jim's idea?


    https://plus.google.com/u/0/107190105791959392745/posts/NRYUXgHRzeJ


    4. My Recollections of Jim Patterson

    By Lawrence P.G. Forsley

    I developed a working relationship with Jim Patterson and his company, Clean Energy Technology Inc., in the mid-1990s, before the development of the company's cold fusion demonstration kit called RIFEX (Reaction In a Film Excited complex)


    http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2008/NET27.shtml#forsley

    Shane D.


    So the validity of the hybrid reactor proposals depends entirely on the authenticity of the measurement of neutrons with CR39 tracks, right? The idea is you use co-deposition of a metal and hydrogen on a substrate (or does that include within a solution?) to generate neutrons and the neutrons are sufficiently energetic to cause U-235 and other harmful radio-isotopes to fission? And also U-238 as an energy source?


    Forget the tracks for a moment. Have any of the alphabet soup-named companies ever caused any fission of any substance with neutrons from co-deposition? If so, where can I find the report?


    Gregory Byron Goble


    Quote

    Several 'cells' have been recently reported within the US and around the world that exhibit the ability to produce more output energy in the form of heat than input energy in the form of electricity. These at first appear to be 'over-unity' devices. However, repeatable research has shown that this is really a new form of potential energy that is just now being understood, much like the understanding of an ordinary dry-cell battery.

    From: http://www.padrak.com/ine/PPC97.html So that was 1997. Where is the experimental progress for these claims now, twenty years later?


    Same question for this from 1996-- is there any recent independent confirmation?

    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/v….730.62&rep=rep1&type=pdf


    Harold Puthoff, as open minded as anyone can be, didn't think the "kit" proved anything:


    Quote

    A series of experiments has been performed with the CETI RIFEX kit. In each experiment an electrolytic cell with a cathode composed of metal-coated plastic beads was operated for two weeks. The cathode beads were then analyzed by x-ray fluorescence for evidence of nuclear transmutations. Several elements were observed to appear in the reacted beads. Analyses of the electrolyte and other components of the system in contact with the electrolyte are not conclusive but suggest to us that these elements were present in the system initially.

    (PDF) Search for Evidence of Nuclear Transmutations in the CETI RIFEX Kit. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/p…ons_in_the_CETI_RIFEX_Kit [accessed Jun 27 2018


    https://www.researchgate.net/p…ons_in_the_CETI_RIFEX_Kit

    I'll be editing this comment over the next day or so... this thread accomplished a few things: It informed others. It garnered new leads. It brought attention to the compilation. 'U.S. Government LENR Energy 2018' (the review). It importantly helped create chapter two of the review. All of which was written/published before ICCF-21. Well done.


    Yet few here have answered my simple question (a thanks to those who did)


    I posted this thread to get LENR Forum members opinions of the bold commercialization claims put forth by GEC in 2017. Answering is fairly simple... likely true... assuredly true... an exaggeration ... perhaps bogus... clearly a scam... even an 'I don't know' or 'We shall see' would suffice.


    If you will... Please answer the question.


    JedRothwell

    @Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Brian Josephson

    brian ahern

    Russ George


    On another note... What countries "around the world" are these "several" (large and larger) GEC LENR power plants being planned/built in?


    The top in my list are Saudi Arabia (OPEC countries), Korea, UK...


    The Claims

    The following is from the Global Energy Corporation website: Quote, “GEC is currently negotiating several new SMG construction contracts ranging from 250MWe to 5GWe around the world.” -end quote


    Here is a bit of history to consider.


    GEC has published a Korea plan and a Saudi plan... Also a thorium version of their technology.


    GEC initially filed the reactor patent in the UK.


    Read this from a 2010 UK Defence Ministry Report (two years after the GEC reactor patent was filed in the UK)


    Quote:

    Cold Fusion -

    Disruptive Energy Source

    "A novel, efficient form of energy generation could be developed that rapidly lowers demand for hydrocarbons. For example, the development of commercially available cold fusion reactors could result in the rapid economic marginalization of oil-rich states.


    This loss of status and income in undiversified economies could lead to state-failure and provide opportunities for extremist groups to rise in influence." -end quotes


    Links provided in this 2012 Cold Fusion Now article... Same year as the Guam fiasco.

    UK Ministry of Defence Global Strategic Trends Report, Winston Churchill, and Cold Fusion http://coldfusionnow.org/uk-mi…hurchill-and-cold-fusion/   

    seven_of_twenty Thank you for your answer/response on topic...

    "Fairest answer is I have no way of knowing." -seven of twenty


    Yet you also state your reasons for hedging towards: An exaggeration ... Perhaps bogus...

    You know what you argued that was 'On Topic'.

    The after hour conversations...

    The bar...

    Pigs fly

    (When thrown with considerable force they become...

    A projectile. Add wings and rotors... Pigs fly.)


    Those were each a bit 'Off Topic'.


    By the by....

    seven_of_twenty


    For the record, What is your real name and occupation?

    Idiotic question or spot on?


    I like listening to the oral publications of GEC at ICCF 21... You don't like to.

    I've also found the GEC 'slide show'. Show your hand if you have.


    Investigative reasoning...


    Deductive reasoning...


    Or


    First line reasoning...


    Which is your preferred line of purview?


    All or none of the above?


    Neither... Of course you can choose and skillfully present the most

    Obscursive response to this question.


    Why did you choose the handle 'Seven of Twenty'?


    Another bit to chew on...


    Under the radar, consider this presentation sub-title... "Hiding in Plain Sight".


    Which is sort of telling, no?

    It is one of the first presented by SPAWAR to the cold fusion community... titled, 'Twenty-Year History of Lattice-Enabled Nuclear Reactions (LENR) - Hiding in Plain Sight'.


    Presented two years after the filing of their 'hidden' patent... by the by, Which they did not bother to mention.


    They (GEC SPAWAR) have taken the trouble to recently update their You Tube description... Why? I suppose to enlighten us about the commercialization of this advanced LENR energy technology now. Or to establish/strengthen a priori. It presents the GEC NASA GRC Plum Brook space hardened LENR power system contract, as presented at ICCF 21, for public purview. Nicely done.


    Twenty-Year History of Lattice-Enabled Nuclear Reactions (LENR) - Hiding in Plain Sight

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Published on Apr 28, 2011


    UPDATE April 23, 2018: NASA:


    gbgoblenote - All these are recently Updated Quotes from the 2011 SPAWAR LENR YouTube presentation.


    “For Development and Testing of a High Power Space Generator”


    The first link is an “Umbrella Agreement”: https://www.nasa.gov/saa/domestic/24838_SAA3-1529.pdf


    The second is an “Annex”:

    https://www.nasa.gov/saa/domestic/24839_SAA3-1529-1.pdf


    UPDATE: On April 16, 2013, Pamela Boss, Frank E. Gordon, Stanislaw Szpak, and Lawrence Forsley were awarded United States Patent 8419919 for the neutron particle experiments cited in this video. This milestone is well deserved, as these scientists worked in obscurity, in their spare time to make this patent possible.


    At the University of Missouri, on May 29, 2009, scientists from the US Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) lectured on twenty years of verified research involving anomalous heat and mini-explosions on deuterated metals, reported by various governmental and international research laboratories.


    They conclude that these energetic observations are of nuclear origin and sow the seeds of a true green energy source.


    The Slides: http://bit.ly/rwH3hl


    END quotes - gbgoble


    A New Clue


    The GEC website has also recently seen a few subtle/not so subtle changes... http://www.gec.solutions/home.html


    gbgoblenote - Recent GEC website addendums (quote)

    • GEC, headquartered in Annandale VA, is focused on the development and commercialization of Hybrid Fusion Energy. GEC now has three major product areas being developed, each with unique applications from the Hybrid Fusion Technology.

    Market Analysis for the Technology!


    Because GEC SMG through Hybrid Fusion Technology is safe, clean and secure, the current market potential estimate ranges from an initial market in the $billions to an ultimate market in the $trillions. This is based upon GEC specific market analysis and potential nuclear power plants that need to be built by 2050 as estimated by OECD.

    • Specifically, GEC will concentrate on the Island Nations, Middle East, Asia and Africa.

    END quotes


    gbgoblenote - I wasn't too far off. Perhaps we haven't seen full disclosure yet... Saudi? Korea? Thorium sands? Spent/on-site fuel rods?




    • Official Post

    Greg,


    Those are the type questions usually answered off the record between presentations, and at the bar after hours. If at all, as answering may reveal a client wishing anonymity, or upset a negotiation in progress. Still, I had hoped someone there at ICCF 21 would have asked him these things, and give us a hint at least. Especially so given the importance if just half of it is true.


    On another note: Skip is confirming what Jed said....Forsley and Mosier-Boss are *not* married. So we can lay that rumor to rest, not that it made any difference. This does not rule out any lab hanky-panky though. Lots of chemistry goes on in those places. Even saw this video once... :)

    seven_of_twenty

    So that was 1997. Where is the experimental progress for these claims now, twenty years later?


    Arguably progress is fueled by all professional/quality research. Once again, arguably, the bold commercialization claims of GEC are example of progress of "these claims"/all claims (across the field of LENR) over the past twenty years, no?


    Now, in your opinion, does GEC have the 'goods' or not?

    • Official Post
    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    So the validity of the hybrid reactor proposals depends entirely on the authenticity of the measurement of neutrons with CR39 tracks, right?


    Co-deposition of the Pd-D is what provides the neutrons, so yes. Mosier-Boss goes into detail about her authenticating the tracks/neutrons by other means in her presentation. You can get a good idea of how thorough she was in cross checking her work, if you only took the time to listen to the first 15 minutes of her audio. She, and those she worked with, are top-notch professionals.

    Gregory Byron Goble

    Quote

    Arguably progress is fueled by all professional/quality research.

    Yes of course.


    Quote

    Once again, arguably, the bold commercialization claims of GEC are example of progress of "these claims"/all claims (across the field of LENR) over the past twenty years, no?

    No. Claims alone are not evidence of anything. Example: Rossi (and many before him and doubtless many after him). Obviously actual commercialization is a proof of progress but it isn't essential for progress as was discussed here before. Claims of "bold" commercialization in the absence of proven, demonstrated and preferably published accomplishments proving the basis for the claim suggest errors or poor vetting or in some cases even fraud and definitely not progress. Otherwise, I can tell you I have made great advances in bold commercialization of flying pigs and you will believe I have made some progress. Of course, even the pigs know better.


    Quote

    Now, in your opinion, does GEC have the 'goods' or not?

    Fairest answer is I have no way of knowing. Truest answer is I doubt it very much. I mean why would they? They said basically all the same things 5 years ago about the Guam proposal that they claim now and that never moved beyond a few lines on paper. I'd be a lot more optimistic if they had built a minimum scale prototype or even shown conclusively that they can make suitably energetic neutrons with co-deposition crosschecking the results by using some method other than CR39 tracks. For all I know they have done that but I have not seen it referenced here. And then of course, having proven they can make neutrons, they'd have to show hybrid fission from their neutron source. I am not a physicist but that's what offline discussions have suggested to me.


    It's really not about my personal opinion, Gregory Byron Goble , it's about what these folks have done that goes beyond claims and proposals and measurements which are very small scale and which have been contested.


    BTW, Gregory Byron Goble, I don't recall what you had to say about Rossi and his claims of bold commercialization after the Rossi vs IH case. What did you think of it and do you still think Rossi's ecat make energy from nickel and hydrogen and lithium or whatever he claims?

    Quote

    if you only took the time to listen to the first 15 minutes of her audio. She, and those she worked with, are top-notch professionals.


    fair requests but I hate talks. I wish there was a transcript. Text is so much faster than voice and easier to return to parts you already did.

    • Official Post
    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    fair requests but I hate talks. I wish there was a transcript. Text is so much faster than voice and easier to return to parts you already did.


    Even with a transcript, as Jed said, you need to see the presentation slides to fully understand...except for her concluding remarks, and the "other cues" I have covered. Nonetheless, even during the more dense parts of the audio, her and her teams professionalism, and thoroughness, are obvious...Even if you have no clue about the science she is talking about.


    Other than that, I will have to say the rest of your post was pretty good.

    Years ago (after the Guam Fiasco) I posited that we will see the first GEC power plant built in Saudi Arabia. I'm now upping the ante on this wager.


    Here is a question for the Forum, Which established LENR group primarily focuses on mitigating the negative societal and economic effects of emergent LENR energy technologies?

    Gregory Byron Goble

    Quote

    Which established LENR group primarily focuses on mitigating the negative societal and economic effects of emergent LENR energy technologies?


    What a strange thing to ask before there actually is any "emergent" LENR technology? Cart before horse, no? Anyway, not knowing the characteristics of this mythical tech, how could you possibly predict its consequences? Simple minded example: there could be a workable LENR tech which could be cheap and safe. Or the best nature would allow would be extremely and irrevocably expensive and fraught with hazards from radioactivity or lack of stability, to name a couple of far out possibilities. Most probably, there is no practical way to extract useful power from LENR just as so far, there is no way to do so from muon-catalyzed fusion. ( http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph241/yoon1/ )


    "Upping the ante on this wager?" What wager? If you want to make a serious monetary wager that there will be any emergent LENR technology providing useful energy for common applications within five years from any source, I'll be happy to accommodate you up to fairly substantial amounts. Until and unless GEC builds and convincingly has tests done (not by them) of a prototype reactor which runs on its own and actually makes power, the whole project is pure vaporware, IMO. As we discussed before, so far, there is no known hybrid reactor demonstration of any sort and the only hybrid fission->fusion device known is the thermonuclear bomb whose mechanism, insofar as I know, is not related to co-deposition.


    BTW, GBG, were you not a very hot and rather militant enthusiast for Rossi and anti-skeptics in his early years of making claims for ecats? Did you not learn from that experience?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.