As NASA plays a part in roll-out of this Navy CMNS technology keep an eye on this space. One way is to Google "NASA Booz Allen Hamilton 2020" for insight. Better than just 2020 hindsight.

I've been following this space since they 'placed' to the second round of a NASA Mars Habitat contest. The BAH entry concept included a cold fusion reactor to power the habitat and construction process. Booz Allen has been watching the "cold fusion ecosphere" for as long as any of us. They are prepared for full use of LENR energy systems.

"Booz Allen Hamilton will play a major role in the transfer of advanced U.S. CMNS technology and applied engineering to industry." -gbgoble2020

"Since we assisted with NASA’s founding 60 years ago, Booz Allen has helped further the U.S. space mission—from working on the theoretical strategy for Apollo 11 to systems engineering for the International Space Station. Happy Space Day from all of us." (at Booz Allen): https://bit.ly/2LfOAsK

Colorado Air and Space Port

Imagine LENR Electric (either GEC or Leonardo Corp SKL) CMNS energy tech. on the wingtips instead of the two big turbine generators powering the all electric propulsion.

Imagine that Larry Forsley or Carl Sandifer ll of GEC and Justin S. Gray (all working at NASA GRC) chat around the coffee machine from time to time.

Or perhaps they do lunch at the much more intimate Plum Brook Station where the 'test-bed' for both the Electric Propulsion (full size) wiring/load/bus and GEC Space Power (LENR Electric) systems are optimized/safety certified for use.

Imagine the conversations they imagine.

"Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Framework with Coupled Derivative Computation for Hybrid Aircraft"

Author(s) Justin S. Gray - NASA John H. Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44139 Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion System Analysis Branch;

also

Authors, Alessandro Sgueglia, Peter Schmollgruber, Nathalie Bartoli, Emmanuel Benard, Joseph Morlier, John Jasa, Joaquim R. R. A. Martins, and John T. Hwang. Published Online: 21 Jun 2020 https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C035509

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.C035509

Abstract

Hybrid-electric aircraft are a potential way to reduce the environmental footprint of aviation. Research aimed at this subject has been pursued over the last decade; nevertheless, at this stage, a full overall aircraft design procedure is still an open issue. This work proposes to enrich the procedure for the conceptual design of hybrid aircraft found in literature through the definition of a multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) framework aimed at handling design problems for such kinds of aircraft. The MDO technique has been chosen because the hybrid aircraft design problem shows more interaction between disciplines than a conventional configuration, and the classical approach based on multidisciplinary design analysis may neglect relevant features. The procedure has been tested on the case study of a single-aisle aircraft featuring hybrid propulsion with distributed electric ducted fans. The analysis considers three configurations (with 16, 32, and 48 electric motors) compared with a conventional baseline at the same 2035 technological horizon. To demonstrate the framework’s capability, these configurations are optimized with respect to fuel and energy consumption. It is shown that the hybrid-electric concept consumes less fuel/energy when it flies on short range due to the partial mission electrification. When one increases the design range, penalties in weight introduced by hybrid propulsion overcome the advantages of electrified mission segment: the range for which hybrid aircraft have the same performance of the reference conventional aircraft is named the “breakdown range.” Starting from this range, the concept is no longer advantageous compared to conventional aircraft. Furthermore, a tradeoff between aerodynamic and propulsive efficiency is detected, and the optimal configuration is the one that balances these two effects. Finally, multiobjective optimization is performed to establish a tradeoff between airframe weight and energy consumption.

Transmutations observed from pressure cycling palladium silver metals with deuterium gas

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy2 October 2020...

1. Gustave C. Fralick
2. Robert C. Hendricks
3. Carl E. Sandifer

_{On ORCID}

_{Larry Forsley}

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0349-3096

GEC Deep Space Power Generator

GEC has developed a deep space power generator using the Hybrid Fusion Fast Fission technology.

Conundrumish

This vid 2017 a year before Forsley presented the Space Act Agreement at ICCF21.

Credibility/advancement seen in the NASA GEC LCF collaboration?yes/no

GEC market entry?

Trickle charger

Megawatt powerplant multiple projects

Iceberg tip disclosure of Indian Head Division DoD continuing GEC collaboration.

Defense/space industry partners/spin offs?

Broad, deep and far reaching rapid market entry along many orchestrated and well planned fronts?

A few years further advanced than presently disclosed?

Or

As unimpressive as this vid/slide show?

If placed in the Players category...

This thread could be titled,

"United States Government Funded (1989 - 2021) CMNS Energy Research Applied Engineering and Market Entry"

Now that the Google Inc. CMNS energy development team is at LLNL under a government contract developing patents with the DoE...

These players could be categorized together.

US Government Funded.

Quote from Shane D.

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.

Is this the first cold fusion LENR CMNS energy patent that has been assigned to the U.S. Department of Energy?

2020-03-02

Application filed by University of British Columbia, University of California, Google LLC

2020-03-02

Priority to US16/806,760

2020-03-02

Assigned to THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

2020-03-02

Assigned to GOOGLE INC.

2020-12-07

Assigned to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

2020-12-16

Assigned to UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

2021-05-20

Publication of US20210151206A1

Source

Thread

Updates from Google on LENR research

Today I came across a recently published patent application from Google / University of California / University of British Columbia.
Looks like Google deserves a dedicated thread in the Players section therefore I created this one, since I could not find an existing thread.
It may be useful to publish all upcoming updates from Google (Team) in this thread.

Regarding the Google patent application:

Apparatus And Method For Sourcing Fusion Reaction Products

Abstract

An apparatus and method for…

Rob Woudenberg

Nov 28th 2021

A Review of U. S. Government Funded LENR Energy 2018

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/review-u-government-funded-lenr-energy-2018-gregory-goble

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.

The government of the United States of America has filed many ‘cold fusion’ patents. These low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) patents take time to develop, often a number of years before filing with a patent office; each being a tedious project unto itself.

One patent’s development began with a contract from NSWC, Indian Head Division in 2008, “Deuterium Reactor” US 20130235963 A1, by Pharis Edward Williams. This patent was not filed till 2012, four years later. Another delay can occur between the patent filing date and publication date if the patent is deemed a matter of national security.

This may be the case with the 2007 SPAWAR patent, System and Method for Generating Particles - US8419919B1, with a filing date of Sep. 21, 2007 and publication date of Apr. 16, 2013, a delay of six years. Usually a patent gets published (becomes exposed) within one year of the filing date, rarely longer; for a delay of six years there seems no other explanation.

U.S. LENR patent development has been funded through the Air Force, NASA, the Navy and many other Department of Defense labs.The government may retain rights to any of these LENR patents and control licensing agreements.

Patent licensing may be granted to those who partnered with government labs in the development of LENR technology, as in the case of SPAWAR JWK LENR technology and the Global Energy Corporation.

Included with the patents in this review are U.S. Government funded LENR energy applied engineering programs and presentations, along with a few from related company partners.

A chronological review of U.S. funded ‘cold fusion’ projects and patents, accompanied with a list of the individuals, companies, universities and agencies involved may be helpful in understanding the history of, and to determine the direction of, United States of America government funded LENR energy technologies entering the marketplace.

Boeing, General Electric and many others team up with NASA and the Federal Aviation Administration developing LENR aircraft.

Both the SpaceWorks contract with NASA and the many Universities/NASA/Companies joint LENR aerospace presentations point towards NASA partnering with private industry on spaceplanes and Mars. Together they are preparing the way for low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) non-radioactive nuclear flight (NRNF).

The SPAWAR and JWK partnership developed a different form of LENR energy technology. This SPAWAR JWK LENR technology transmutes nuclear waste to benign elements while creating high process steam. The SPAWAR JWK LENR tech group is partnered with the Global Energy Corporation (GEC). Applied engineering has culminated in the GeNie reactor placed within an electrical generating unit called the Small Modular Generator (SMG). Recent commercialization claims are, “GEC is currently negotiating several new SMG construction contracts ranging from 250MWe to 5GWe around the world”. This LENR energy technology leads towards massive electrical power generation and the worldwide cleanup of nuclear waste.

magicsound

Thank you, it will be added as I create a 2022 update to the 2018 compilation. There is alot to add. The U.S. government controls more cold fusion patents than any other nation.

A few interesting things about the Pais U.S. Naval patent...

No patents listed as 'cited by' this patent.

This patent does not cite any other previously filed patent ever filed.

Unusual

Others here are better at searching the USPTO for this than I am. I would like to learn anything anyone else finds.

Also

I look for patents found under 'Similar Documents'

CN107533867A 2018-01-02

"For Producing the Method for Energy and the Device of Correlation"

2016-03-31 Application filed by Reton Holdings Ltd, Cage Spalla

This is the only cold fusion patent listed there. Quite advanced IMO similar to GEC or LCF or Google/DOE patents... though I'm no expert.

Certainly one worth studying and learning more about.

Abstract

According to present inventive concept, there is provided a kind of method for producing energy. Methods described includes：By the way that first object material is exposed in electromagnetic radiation input energy, and the first object material is set to enter higher energy state via ripple resonance, so as to produce the skew of the first isotope, and the neutron that generation is offset to obtain by first isotope in the first object material；The neutron is captured by the second target substance, so as to produce the skew of the second isotope and electromagnetic radiation output energy in second target substance.Further, present inventive concept further relates to a kind of related device.

gbgoblenote

Exploring this Chinese patent's citations I found one of my favorites listed there by the patent examiner.

US20140140461A1

*2005-04-252014-05-22

Reginald B. Little "Magnitites Pycnonuclear Reactions within Electrochemical, Radioactive and Electromagnetic Medias"

I expect significant actions by GEC in 2022. Full market entry, they continue to make the boldest claims in the field of CMNS energy technologies. I believe their earliest claims and still do. Are they truthful? We shall see.

Meanwhile

A bit of GEC history from 2013 for review... -gbgoblenote The significance of National Security Technologies, LLC (at LLNL), under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 working with Global Energy Corporation before 2013 from the US Department of Energy. The DoE now holds a cold fusion patent with Google (at LLNL). The DoD/GEC patent is long held and well known.

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific ILIR and S&T Initiatives Programs, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and JWK Corporation. The authors would also like to thank Dr. G. Phillips, nuclear physicist, retired from the Naval Research Laboratory, US Navy, Radiation Effects Branch, and P. Carbonnelle from Université catholique de Louvain for valuable discussions in interpreting the optical data. It was G. Phillips who first pointed out the existence of triple tracks in our CR-39 photomicrographs. The authors acknowledge the contributions of Dr. S. Szpak, retired from SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific, who pioneered the Pd/D co-deposition process. This manuscript has been co-authored by National Security Technologies, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 with the US Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.

Technology

GeNiE Reactor technology is based on 20 years of experimental research by Global Energy Corporation, JWK International, and SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego scientists and engineers. The results have been published in over 20 peer-reviewed technical journal articles. Our most recent publications document the ability to efficiently produce high-energy neutrons that are capable of fissioning uranium. We have answered the critical scientific questions:

Our experiments are repeatable.

Our experiments have been replicated by others.

Our experiments provide direct evidence that nuclear reactions are involved including the production of high-energy neutrons. Although our experimental results are not predicted by current nuclear physics theories, the results are real.

The GeNiE Reactor takes advantage of the efficiently produced high-energy neutrons in a proprietary hybrid fusion, fast-fission reactor design to produce power from un-enriched uranium. The GeNiE Reactor is not prone to melt down since it doesn’t rely on a chain-reaction to produce high-energy neutrons. The GeNiE Reactor will extract more energy from the fuel than conventional nuclear Reactors. The GeNiE Reactor is lower cost since it doesn’t required enriched uranium and it doesn’t produce hazardous nuclear waste that is costly to handle. By fissioning existing hazardous waste, the GeNiE Reactor can generate power and mitigate existing hazardous waste at the same time. And by eliminating the need for enrichment, the GeNiE Reactor removes all requirements for uranium enrichment except for weapons production, thereby removing the uncertainty in the purpose of enrichment programs such as the current program in Iran.

Global Energy Corporation and their collaborators are currently experimenting with small pilot GeNiE Reactors and are designing prototype GeNiE Reactors for commercial applications. While there are numerous products possible, GEC is currently focusing on the GeNiE Hybrid Fusion, Fast-Fission Reactor that will use either natural uranium or existing hazardous waste as fuel.

FAQ - GEC

Q. This sounds like Cold Fusion. Wasn’t “Cold Fusion” disproven?

A. While most people think that the Department of Energy concluded that the claims were wrong, this is not the case. In fact, after two reviews in 1989 and 2004, the DOE ENERGY RESEARCH ADVISORY BOARD found that there wasn’t enough evidence to either prove or disprove the claims and that more research was needed. Furthermore, several other countries are awaking to the fact that the phenomena may be real as documented in a recent DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY TECHNOLOGY ALERT paper.

GEC scientists and collaborators developed a different experimental protocol that allowed them to go beyond the initial claims of Fleischmann and Pons. Our experiments are repeatable, they have been replicated by others and our results have been published in peer-reviewed papers. Additionally, our experiments produce direct evidence of nuclear activity including emission of high-energy neutrons.

Q. How can this be real since it doesn’t match theory?

A. History is full of examples where the accepted theory had to be adapted to match new experimental results. At one time, theory held that the earth was flat. Galileo was put under house arrest by the church for observing that the earth was not the center of the universe. Cassini and other scientists held that the speed of light was infinite long after Romer had provided solid experimental evidence that it was 186,000 miles per second. There’s a statement in science that, “Theory guides, experiment decides.” A theory is only as good as its ability to predict or describe experimental results. If the experimental results don’t confirm the theory, it’s the theory that must change since the experimental results are controlled by nature. This is not to say that all current nuclear physics theories are wrong but that they are incomplete when it comes to explaining our experimental results. Each year, hundreds of PhD’s are awarded to students who have improved or evolved a theory so that it more accurately explains experimental results. These and many other examples show how theory must evolve to match observation. Several theories have been proposed but to date, none match all of our observed experimental results.

Q. How do you overcome the coulomb barrier?

A. Several possibilities such as a stripping reaction or the equivalent to “tunneling” in solid state electronics have been suggested as a way to overcome the coulomb barrier. More research is needed to determine the answer to this question.

Q. What technical challenges need to be overcome before this technology can be commercialized?

A. Our GeNiE pilot reactors have demonstrated the ability to produce neutrons with enough energy to fission either natural uranium, enriched uranium, or existing hazardous waste. We are currently working to optimize the reactions and increase the flux of high-energy neutrons. Once this is achieved, many commercial applications are possible.

Q. If this is real, you should all be dead because of the neutrons that would have been produced. How do you answer that since you’re obviously still alive?

A. One of the properties of our experiments is that the neutron flux is several orders of magnitude less than that predicted by conventional theory. The current flux levels are not hazardous however we are currently working to optimize the experiments to increase the flux. We recognize the dangers of high-energy neutrons and take appropriate precautions.

National Security Technologies

National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) was formed in 2006 as a joint venture between Northrop Grumman Corporation, and three other corporate partners. These partners are AECOM, CH2M Hill, and Babcock & Wilcox (B&W). With some 2,450 employees, NSTec manages operations at the 1,360-square-mile Nevada National Security Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and at its related facilities and laboratories for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Site Office. The company has satellite offices in Los Alamos and Albuquerque, New Mexico; Santa Barbara and Livermore, California; and Washington, D.C., along with a small number of employees located in nine other states and two foreign countries.

Solid State Fusion

One year after Pons and Fleischman.

From March 1990, this may be the earliest paper using the term 'solid state fusion'.

By the Bendix Field Engineering Corporation working for the Naval Research Laboratory.

NRL Memorandum Report 6617

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington, DC 20375-5000

Title

"Nuclear Fusion in a Solid via a Bose Bloch Condensate"

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/1990/1990ChubbT-NRLReport6617.pdf

T.A. CHUBB AND S.R. CHUBB*

Bendix Field Engineering Corporation

Oxon Hill, MD 20745

*Space Sensing Branch and Space Applications Branch

Space Systems Technology Department

March 5, 1990

Abstract

We present a theory of solid state fusion based on the formation of a D+ bosonic Bloch condensate within a metal deuteride. The first step towards fusion is a coalescence reaction which converts a 4-fold occupation state of zero point motion size into state of nuclear dimensions. Reaction rates for the coalescence reaction are calculated using the Fermi Golden Rule.

Introduction

This paper discusses a concept of solid state fusion based on the formation of a D3 boson Bloch condensate (BBC) 1 within a

palladium deuteride host lattice. Evidence for such solid state

fusion has been presented by Fleischmann and Pons, who have

described episodic generation of anomalous heat in Pd cathodes following extended overvoltage electrolysis of LiOD solutions.

Other evidence for solid state nuclear interactions in PdDJ

includes the observations of surface hydrogen isotopic anomalies in Pd cathodes subsequent to such electrolysis"4 and the possible observation of a small number of 20+ Mev energy release events in a Si charged-particle detector adjacent to a Pd electrode charged with D+ ions by ion implantation.