There is plenty of room to be skeptical that LENR will ever get to market. Cude was correct on that point. I think that airing alternative viewpoints on the subject of what it takes for commercialization can be quite productive for the future of the field. But of course, even discussing that is not the mission of the pathological skeptics.
Many of us really resent the efforts of those who want to impugn many years
of quality research at Universities, SRI, National Labs and so on - by top
researchers. Sure, there is some research which is substandard, but that is
not the point. The existing level of good research almost certainly proves
than nuclear reactions can occur at low temperature. To be in denial of that
evidence by skeptics is no more than intellectual dishonesty.
This still does not prove that the World will ever benefit from this
technology, but that is a completely separate subject for showing that it is
real on a laboratory scale.
That LENR is a physical reality at some scale is a given - but even so, that
situation is far removed from the ability to take the underlying principle
to market. Look at Blacklight Power after running through maybe $80 million.
Are they close to market? A PoC device from BLP was due out in February and
it is not here. If Rossi's process requires enrichment in Ni-62, as it
almost certainly now seems to be the case - then it may never make it to a
mass market. That explains why he is pursuing the military or NASA angle -
where cost is not the prime concern.
BTW the need for enriched isotopes explains why many visitors - notably
Krivit, were not shown a working device. The Rossi reactor may sometimes
work with the natural ratio of nickel-62, which is under 4% - but it is
hit-or-miss. It was a miss with Krivit and a few others. Rossi gambled and
lost on a few instances.
When Rossi uses an enriched fuel - say, it is enriched by a factor of 10
times (above natural Ni) then robust gain may be assured, but does he want
to spend a large sum for every demonstration?
Probably not, so he risked it in a few cases - and had notable flops.
He probably pays a lot less than the going rate for the enriched isotope,
but even so it is probably too steep for easy commercialization. As for
Rossi having his own process to enrich - that is possible, but doubtful -
and made even more doubtful by not being included in his patent application.
The need for isotopic enrichment explains many things in the Rossi saga.
From: Jed Rothwell
I wrote:
but dessert - you need some meat and potatoes in the form of
articulate skeptics.
If you think there is merit to a skeptical point of view,
why don't you write about it?
I would not call Cude "articulate." As McKubre often says, I
could do a better job as a cold fusion skeptic than any of the skeptics. I
know of actual weaknesses in the experiments, whereas Cude makes up stuff,
reiterates assertions that was proved wrong in 1990, and refuses to address
substantive technical issues such as McKubre's Fig. 1. Where are the meat
and potatoes?
I do not think Cude is a credit to the hardcore skeptics.
But then, I do not know anyone else who is. This is like expecting someone
to be a credible spokesperson for the Flat Earth Society. Vorl Bek should
take a crack at justifying this point of view if he thinks it has any merit.
- Jed
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
