Quote from Shane D.

Thanks. We had the old thread on Google developments (post Nature), but it was getting stale so good idea to start anew with yours. It is your baby now.

Ahlfors (of course) was on to this newer patent when it came out.... RE: Google (UBC/MIT/LBNL) post Nature updates.

It looks like Google and partners are in for the longer run when it comes to LENR research, so a thread in the ´players´ section makes it more structured. The link you referred to is in the Russian section (don't ask me why, members find it hard to keep this forum structured).

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

Assigned to UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

2021-05-20

4 times a new assignee in a row.

DOE probably took over the financing of this research. Remarkable indeed.

Quote from Cydonia

It looks like what nkodama proposed here.

Do you have a reference for that, so we can check?

I do not recall nkodama ever mentioned having electrolysis part of one of his proposals.

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 sourcing nuclear fusion products uses an electrochemical loading process to load low-kinetic-energy (low-k) light element particles into a target electrode, which comprises a light-element-absorbing material (e.g., Palladium). An electrolyte solution containing the low-k light element particles is maintained in contact with a backside surface of the target electrode while a bias voltage is applied between the target electrode and an electrochemical anode, thereby causing low-k light element particles to diffuse from the backside surface to an opposing frontside surface of the target electrode. High-kinetic-energy (high-k) light element particles are directed against the frontside, thereby causing fusion reactions each time a high-k light element particle operably collides with a low-k light element particle disposed on the frontside surface. Fusion reaction rates are controlled by adjusting the bias voltage.

It's interesting to see they aim to combine electrolysis with high voltage plasma by having the cathode of the electrolysis serving as a separation membrane between the electrolysis compartment and the high voltage plasma compartment. From the application it is not clear whether they actually build this setup yet since no measurement data is provided.

To me this seems unnecessarily complicated.

Instead I would propose a high pressure gas compartment and a low pressure gas compartment with the cathode membrane acting as a seperator, with similar functions, leaving out the electrochemical part.

Cherepanov2020

None of the approx. 4000 LENR Forum members is supporting your claims.

Did that occur to you meanwhile?

Quote from magicsound

It states that the free electrons are generated by the absorption of protons into a palladium (or similar)

This effect is also used in Proton-exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells.

Well, it's actually absorption of hydrogen atoms, stripping the electrons off.

With electrolysis, the reverse process happens at the cathode.

Quote from Alan Smith

https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…-industrial-heat-llc-pdf/

Rob Woudenberg - it's in the link Ahlfors provided.

"innovative light source" is not mentioned in that document.

Or maybe I need new reading glasses.

Quote from Alan Smith

Here's more on 'superloading'...

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/46/e2110470118

Nice, but I fail to see how this relates to Brillouin.

Quote from Ahlfors

a device useful for testing an innovative light source, too.

I can't find that in the related patent application.

Where did you read this?

A closer look at the recently published patent application reveals that the excess heat generation can be as high as 5 W / cm² at a stack temperature of 800 ºC in a described example setup.

Quote from WO2021200843A1 (translated by Google translate)

The set temperature was changed about every half day and gradually increased within the range of 300 ° C. to 900 ° C. It was confirmed that excess heat was generated in the range of 300 ° C to 900 ° C. It was confirmed that the excess heat was about 10 W at around 800 ° C. The excess heat per unit area near 800 ° C. was about 5 W / cm^2. It was confirmed that the heat generation continues for a predetermined period even if the heater is turned off after the heating element 14 generates excess heat.

For a single multilayer metal stack sheet of 10 x 10 cm this would therefore result in 500 Watt.

This is a remarkable high value that therefore confirms that their technology has reached a level that supports readiness to take a next step towards industrialisation (Miura).

A kind reminder: keep this thread on topic. Don't clutter it with non related posts.

Quote from Cydonia

My question is : why it seems to be more logical ?

The answer might be: because Deuterium and Palladium are rare elements. Even if the combination of D/Pd/Ni is a bit more effective in producing excess heat than H/Cu/Ni the choice for widely available elements seems the better choice.

You might want to take a look at Iwamura's patent applications or research papers where he showed some examples of excess heat results from both combinations. These results are not very different with respect to producing excess heat.

Regarding the use of Argon for sputtering, the main reason I suggested this is that Argon ions are far heavier than Deuterium ions and therefore much more effective in releasing nickel atoms from their target electrodes by their impacts (much higher kinetic energy).

Quote from Ahlfors

September 9, 2016

Let's indeed not forget the important role of Mizuno.
Mizuno has been focussing on the combination of Deuterium, Palladium and Nickel for many years.

I remember personal discussions with Mizuno whether it would be more efficient to use Argon as a means to sputter a Nickel layer on the Palladium target. Unfortunately Mizuno's lab budget and facilities did not allow to expand and enhance these experiments based on D, Pd and Ni.

In parallel Iwamura and other Japanese researchers at various universities also looked at this D, Pd and Ni combination.

In fact they found that both combinations of Hydrogen, Copper, Nickel and Deuterium, Palladium, Nickel had similar excess heat effects. More recently Iwamura and others made a clear choice to go for H, Ni and Cu where it comes to development of commercially viable prototypes. This choice seems logical. When successful, the market demand will be so large that the use of palladium could be problematic due to its limited availability (and price).

Quote from Ahlfors

https://en-ambi.com/featured/583/

Interestingly this is a Japanese career website.

(the current link to Clean Planet vacancies is corrupt unfortunately)

Yet another new patent application by Iwamura, assigned to Clean Planet:

Heat generating device

Abstract:

Provided is a heat generating device with which heat losses are suppressed, and which has excellent energy efficiency. A heat generating device 10 is provided with a hollow container 11, a heat generating body 14 provided inside the container 11, a heater 12 for heating the heat generating body 14, a conducting wire 13 connecting a wall portion of the container 11 and the heater 12, a hydrogen supply unit 15 for supplying hydrogen-based gas containing hydrogen to the heat generating body 14, and a vacuum evacuation unit 16 for evacuating the interior of the container 11, wherein formula (1) is satisfied when TH is the heater temperature, TW is the external environmental temperature, AHC is an equivalent heat conduction area, keq is an equivalent thermal conductivity, Leq is an equivalent thermal conduction distance, AS is a sample radiation surface area, TS is a sample surface temperature, εeq is an equivalent emissivity, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, Pm is the energy required to maintain operation, and Hex is the thermal energy generated by the heat generating body 14.　Here, in formula (1), ηeq is a value (keq/Leq) obtained by dividing the equivalent thermal conductivity by the equivalent thermal conduction distance.

The principles remain the same.

This is another application that focuses on implementations of end products.

Quote from Nar

If it was a European manufacturer exporting to the US market, then they could be sued in Europe (well, the countries it now covers of Europe).

This may depend on the license details. A manufacturer located in the EU with a license might be allowed to export to the US if the licensor allows this in the contract (probably charging fees per manufactured/sold unit).

Quote from Shane D.

I was wondering about the laws on that. From an investors standpoint, will having a EU patent offer some IP protection in the US?

Basically no protection in the US regarding this one.

But it's only part of the reactor details. E.g. the electrode details are not part of this patent family.

As Godes mentioned, some details will be kept as trade secret. Probably the details of the electrode materials. Meaning that a trade secret license in the US will be required to make products based on Brillouin's technology in the US.
The only problem with this is that the materials of the electrodes will be easy to analyze and therefore enable copying (without penalty).

In an earlier (abandoned) patent application an example of the electrode details are given:

Quote from Nar

Maintained only in DE, GB, FR, SE, FI. So feel free to commercialise in, say, Italy.

There is a wider range of patent application family members ongoing regarding this European patent:

https://globaldossier.uspto.go…/publication/EP/1971985/1 to see all patent (application) members.

E.g. Japan is pending

Triggered by the recent ARPA workshop I checked the status.

EP18711985 has been granted on 2018-09-26.

I have the impression (from the youtube video) that the issue is particular with US patent applications that refer to LENR of 'cold fusion' or any nuclear reactions that have not been confirmed and proven by sufficient scientists.

At the time Robert Godes (Brillouin) filed his first patent applications (around 2005), LENR phenomena as claimed by e.g. NASA were not available yet at that. The current situation to file US patent applications seems much improved therefore. Unfortunately too late for Brillouin since the original patent applications by Robert Godes are now published although rejected or abandoned. Remaining is their formula of their catalyst(s) and probably part of their timing solutions, which now seems to be treated as trade secrets (which are not protected in the form of patent laws). Once a trade secret has been successfully replicated by another party (e.g. by reverse engineering) there is no protection any more.

When looking at for instance to the recent patent applications by Iwamura / Clean Planet Inc. it is noticeable that nuclear reactions are nowhere mentioned nor the mentioning of transmutations. Earlier patent applications by Iwamura claiming transmutations (and therefore nuclear reactions) were declined as well. It seems Iwamura has learned his lessons.

Quote from gerold.s

Maybe intentionally as a result of strategic interest?

Just imagine if this boiler setup could be applied (right away) to power a conventional (small) submarine or underwater drone?

I don't think that Brillouin's solution is much better than the existing nuclear reactors that are used in the US military (e.g. submarines and vessels). If the US military wants LENR progress secret then NASA would not have revealed their progress openly.

From the available ARPA-E workshop materials:

Brillouin and Clean Planet both aiming at boilers, both applying H₂ ,copper, nickel and a 'dielectric' layer (CaO in case of CP, possibly Brillouin similar).

[EDIT] according to this Brillouin patent application yttrium stabilized zirconia will be the preferred dielectric layer.

Very sad to hear that Brillouin's commercialization has been delayed for more than a decade by the frustrations with patenting their IP at the USPTO (Godes's youtube video).
Most of their technology is now maintained as trade secrets which makes it very difficult to commercialize due to easy reverse engineering.