I have read the Airbus patent. That Airbus system is the dekalion system. The motives of Gamberale are becoming more clear. How did Airbus get this technology? Not from Rossi. If Deflalion had nothing, then Gamberale has nothing to sell. But he is a new hot item in LENR, how and why did Gamberale get so hot?
Airbus Staff Scientist Sees Potential of LENRs <http://news.newenergytimes.net/2015/01/16/airbus-staff-scientist-sees-potential-of-lenrs/> [image: Jean-François Geneste] Jean-François Geneste *Jan. 16, 2015 – By Steven B. Krivit –* Jean-François Geneste, a staff member of Airbus Group Innovations, is optimistic about the future of low-energy nuclear reactions (LENRs), he told an audience on Saturday in England. “If LENRs really work,” Geneste wrote in his slide presentation, “the world will change dramatically. … We want Airbus to be a major actor in tomorrow’s world.” He spoke at an invitation-only meeting organized by Michel Vandenberghe, president of small Swiss-based company LENR-Cities, founded in August 2014. The meeting was held at Magdalen College, part of Oxford University, although there is no indication that the meeting was an official college or university event. The college advertises that it routinely rents conference facilities for commercial events. Geneste’s presentation contained nothing scientific about LENRs. It offered his philosophical perspective on physics and science. Geneste, trained as an aeronautical engineer, has a penchant for new physics, theory and mathematics. He is the author of several books, including *Physique: de L’esprit des Lois (Physics: The Spirit of Laws*). On Vandenberghe’s LinkedIn Web page, he describes Geneste as the “Airbus Chief Scientist.” This caused a lot of excitement among LENR enthusiasts because of the endorsement of LENRs from someone with such apparently high stature as the top scientist for the entire Airbus corporation. A quick search of the Internet turned up no official reference to any Airbus Chief Scientist. According to Marie Caujolle, a media relations manager with whom *New Energy Times* spoke on Wednesday, Airbus has no such position. Geneste responded to an e-mail from *New Energy Times* and wrote that his affiliation is not with Airbus but with Airbus Group Innovations. According to Geneste’s LinkedIn profile, his title is “Vice-President Chief Scientist at Airbus Group.” However, the Airbus Group Web page <http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/group-vision/governance/executive-commitee.html>, which lists many chiefs, does not list anybody with the title of “Chief Scientist.” *New Energy Times *spoke with two members of the Airbus Group media relations department, Christine (Eirainer) Manderscheid and Marie-Alix Delestrade. They had never heard of Geneste. After *New Energy Times* sent Manderscheid a screen image of Mr. Geneste’s LinkedIn profile on Thursday, she sent an e-mail with a title that did not include “Airbus Group.” “The title of Mr. Geneste is VP Chief Scientist,” Manderscheid wrote. According to the Web site for Airbus Group Innovations <http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/innovation-environment/airbus-group-innovations.html>, a network of research facilities, scientists, engineers and partnerships, the person in charge of that department is Jean Botti, the chief technical officer. In response to an e-mail from *New Energy Times*, Geneste wrote that he “reports effectively to Botti.” *New Energy Times* sent an e-mail to Botti and to Manderscheid seeking clarification of Geneste’s role. Botti did not respond. Manderscheid, in an e-mail that she also sent to Martin Agüera, the head of corporate media relations, did not respond to our question about Geneste’s role. “It would be nice,” Manderscheid wrote today, “if you could give us a bit more explanation on what your article is about.” Vandenberghe, a newcomer to the field, is a businessman trying to “develop LENRs’ disruptive technologies and speed their industrialization,” according to the company’s press release. Vandenberghe responded to e-mails from *New Energy Times* on Wednesday. He said his company employs no scientists and has no issued patents on LENRs. He said, however, that he is seeking investors. Vandenberghe told *New Energy Times* that he has “commercial agreements” with two scientists. The first is Yogendra Srivastava, a professor of nuclear physics at Perugia University in Italy and a former collaborator on the Widom-Larsen theory of LENRs, with Allan Widom and Lewis Larsen. *New Energy Times* sent an e-mail to Srivastava to confirm the existence of an agreement. Srivastava did not respond. The second is Luca Gamberale, a physicist who worked for Pirelli Labs for a decade, occasionally on LENRs. Two and a half years after Gamberale left Pirelli, he went to work for Defkalion Europe, a company purporting to have a working commercial LENR device similar to that of convicted fraudster <http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Andrea-Rossi-Energy-Catalyzer-Investigation-Index.shtml>Andrea Rossi. Gamberale left Defkalion after nine months and has started his own company to conduct research and development in LENRs, according to his LinkedIn profile. Vandenberghe wrote to *New Energy Times* that “Airbus Group has signed a letter of intent” to work with his company. *New Energy Times* sent an e-mail to Botti and to Manderscheid and asked whether Airbus Group Corporation had signed any kind of agreement or letter with LENR-Cities. Neither responded. A rash of new promoters has invaded the LENR field in the last few years, creating hype and false hope. Nevertheless, some funding has supported a few good scientists who are eager to work on their passion, LENRs. Although businesspeople have been promoting LENR startup companies for two decades, low-energy nuclear reactions have a ways to go before they are successfully commercialized. On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You think they invested millions and they filed against Defkalion! >> > > Defkalion said DE invested millions. Granted, they were not a reliable > source, but DE also said so, so I guess it is true. It was obvious from the > lab and other facilities that they spent at least a million. > > > >> They just used mats for the bad publicity. Not that is expensive, but, >> you took the work up to yourself. >> > > If the Gamberale report was mere "bad publicity," why didn't they respond > to it? Why didn't they repudiate it? They claimed they have positive data > from people who tested the system. (I don't believe they do, because > everyone I know who saw it told me it did not work.) Why have they gone out > of business? Their web site is gone and their phones no longer work. > > - Jed > >
