eCatNews Direct to your MailBox

Enter your email address to follow the ecat story ahead of the crowd

I loathe spam. You can unsubscribe at any time. I will not pass your details to a third party

Randy Hekman: Energy America’s Next Space Race

December 30, 2011

The following post is copied from LENR champion and US Senate Candidate, Randy Hekman’s blog. Having this entry front and centre on a politician’s campaign profile is a big step forward for LENR science. He takes a swipe at DOE and calls for business to take the lead. Not surprising, coming from the blue corner. In this case, he may be right.

America’s economic growth is strongly related to our access to low-cost energy sources. During the past 14 years, I have been studying a promising area of energy creation called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). I devoted three of those years to full time direct research in a lab. Fortunately, I had only one tiny (non-nuclear!) explosion when a small amount of hydrogen gas ignited in my laboratory

This area of LENR began with a bang itself in 1989 when researchers in Utah, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleishmann, claimed to have created nuclear fusion at room temperatures on a tabletop. Called at the time “cold fusion,” this announcement caused a great stir among scientists worldwide. While some research facilities were able to replicate the “cold fusion” findings, most facilities could not. But, ultimately, the scientific community was nearly unanimous in saying that known principles of physics would not allow fusion to occur at room temperatures on a tabletop.

Despite this scientific consensus,  a sizable group of researchers from around the globe continued their experiments and kept documenting anomalous results that were consistent with a nuclear process occurring. How could this be?

It took a man I met at a conference in France five years ago to discover the answer.  Lewis Larsen, now CEO of Lattice Energy LLC in Chicago, looked at the voluminous data from the many experiments and together with a partner, Dr. Allan Widom of Northeastern University, developed a theory now called the Widom-Larsen theory. This theory explains the data in ways that are totally consistent with accepted concepts of science. Their conclusion: LENR is neither fission nor fusion but is still nuclear. It also has the potential of providing energy for a wide variety of applications at low cost but without harmful radiation or leaving harmful residue. Leading physicists from NASA concur that this theory best explains the data and believe the potential is so great as to ultimately grow into a trillion dollar industry. For more information on this theory, see a website developed by a friend of mine who has been reporting on this area for a number of years: 

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/WL/WLTheory.shtml

So where do we go from here? The temptation is to look to Washington, but I totally disagree. The US Department of Energy (DoE) has a very dismal record in picking winners and losers in the energy area. We do not need more Solyndras. In fact, I support elimination of this department and allowing private investment and market forces to drive new energy technologies like LENR. I fully expect adventuresome private investors will support Lewis Larsen whom I believe has the knowledge base to turn good theory into good, useful technology. 

This is a new, potentially trillion dollar industry that has the ability to solve our nation’s energy crisis, secure our country by not depending on foreign oil and turn America into an energy and technology exporter. Scientists in China and India are hard at work developing this technology and attempting to bring it to market. We cannot be left behind in our generation’s space race. 

We need America to be the world leader in solving our energy crisis. And I believe we have the ability to make it happen.

He is pretty serious about getting the word out as the post was flagged by a press release:

Energy: America’s Next ‘Space Race’

Grand Rapids, Michigan – December 30, 2011. Could a new form of virtually limitless energy that promises national security, economic strength and environmental sustainability be in our future? According to energy experts, the answer is a resounding ‘Yes’ in a form called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). LENR refers to nuclear reactions that happen at room temperature. While nuclear, they involve neither fusion nor fission and require little shielding as they produce negligible radiation.

The significance of LENR technology, according to proponents, is that it has the potential to power virtually everything with little cost and no environmental damage, including the ability to power your home and everything in it, for just pennies a day.

LENR research has the potential to solve climate and energy problems, Dennis Bushnell, chief scientist of NASA’s Langley Research Center said in a June interview with EV World, a sustainability publication.

While claims like these bring a healthy skepticism, there is also growing evidence that this technology can be exploited. In fact, LENR is finding some unlikely allies in political candidates these days including Bruce Tarr, State Senator from Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, Presidential candidate and Randy Hekman, US Senate Candidate from Michigan.

“The simple reality is that our economy depends on energy that now is primarily derived from coal, oil and natural gas to function,” Hekman states. “Energy exploration–mining and drilling–provide needed jobs, and the energy these industries produce keep our economy moving. We need to end the policies that subsidize inefficient sources of energy such as ethanol, wind and geothermal. The best alternative energy program is Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). Scientists in China and India are hard at work to overcome the technical hurdles and turn this scientific theory into useful consumer products. We need America to be the world leader in this.”

Hekman is no stranger to LENR, graduating from MIT and, in 1996 started his own research company around LENR. In 2004, he was part of a team to appear before a Department of Energy (DoE) panel to present research findings and seek scientific support. While campaigning for US Senate full time, Hekman continues to speak about LENR and is working to connect private funding sources with top LENR researchers in the U.S.

“This is a new, potentially trillion dollar industry that has the ability to solve our nation’s energy crisis, secure our country by not depending on foreign oil and turn America into an energy and technology exporter,” says Hekman. “This is our version of the ‘space-race’ where we need to develop this technology and get it to market first. Can someone explain to me again why this isn’t a top priority?”

Some institutions, such as U.S. Navy SPAWAR and NASA have been funding LENR research along with new interest from the likes of Royal Dutch Shell, the University of Missouri and others.

“But we need much more private investment in this new energy resource,” said Hekman. “The US Department of Energy (DoE) and the current administration has a dismal record in picking winners and losers in the energy area. We do not need more Solyndras. I believe in allowing private investment and market forces to drive new energy technologies like LENR.”

For more on this subject, visit Randy Hekman’s blog at http://randyhekman2012.com/_blog/Blog/post/Energy_America’ s_Next_’Space_Race’_/

Randy Hekman is a Navy veteran, former prosecutor, juvenile court judge, author and administrative pastor. In early 2011, Hekman announced his intentions to run for the United States Senate with a practical plan to bring healing to our nation. He is a Republican candidate running for the position currently held by Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow. He has been married to his best friend, Marcia, for 42 years and together, the have 12 children, ages 18 to 40, and 21 grandchildren.

[With thanks to Jed Rothwell on Vortex]

Posted by on December 30, 2011. Filed under Krivit,Politics,Press/Blogs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

20 Responses to Randy Hekman: Energy America’s Next Space Race

  1. LCD Reply

    December 30, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    Like what I read except the Krivit stuff. Also the W-L theory is an interesting theory but I have not seen the “evidence” that suggests THAT is THE theory.

    Its certainly an incomplete theory.

  2. Ivan Mohorovicic Reply

    December 30, 2011 at 10:33 pm

    Hopefully other politicians will join the bandwagon.

  3. Mahron Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 12:03 am

    If I remember correctly Rossi said he found traces of copper.
    I am not a nuclear physicist but that means fusion right ?

    • Dale G. Basgall Reply

      December 31, 2011 at 3:37 am

      Reply to Mahron, regarding statement; “If I remember correctly Rossi said he found traces of copper.”

      The traces of copper were so small some thought it could have been from the copper tubing he used.

  4. Roger Bird Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 12:15 am

    I am so happy that Hekman supports LENR so strongly and so knowledgeably. However, this election cycle will not be his year because of his support of such a radical and controversial technology. But by 2014, he could be elected, and by 2016, he could become president.

  5. Roger Bird Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 12:24 am

    I disagree that getting behind China or Italy or whoever is any big deal. As soon as it becomes obvious to everyone that ULM-LENR is the way to go, any alleged gap will be closed immediately. This is not like rocket science. The science is like rocket science, but the engineering is like steam car science, literally. The engineering will be a whole bunch of fun for a lot of people who are not quite as bright as Einstein, but still very bright.

    • Peter Roe Reply

      December 31, 2011 at 10:17 am

      That’s right. The universal adoption of ‘cold fusion’ is a political challenge, but not much of an engineering challenge.

      Apart from the control electronics, until an efficient means is found of converting heat energy directly to electricity, the implementation will just require the recycling of old, well understood technologies.

  6. Al Potenza Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 12:26 am

    Dear Mr. Goldes,

    I have followed your colorful history over many years. What you write would be much more interesting had you ever marketed a single invention you claimed was either “fait accompli” or just around the corner.

    As it is, you have failed to get independent tests of any of your claims for new technology — not for the free energy magnetic motors, not for the room temperature semi-conductors.

    Why should anyone pay attention to you after more than twenty years of lapsed deadlines, millions of investor dollars totally wasted, empty promises, and failed technology claims, and not one single, solitary device or technique on the market?

    A. P.

    • admin Reply

      December 31, 2011 at 12:47 am

      Al,

      I have deleted MG’s comments as thinly disguised ads. I have no idea of his honesty or otherwise but the arena we are working in is murky enough without adding to it.

      Paul

      • Mark Goldes Reply

        December 31, 2011 at 1:56 am

        Paul,

        The development of LENR has been held back by just the sort of comments that Al has made.

        You have noted that in the case of Mary Yugo.

        Please review my website and see if you feel there might be dishonesty. I try to provide a perspective that includes developments that seem to be urgent and suggest reasons that work such as Rossi’s is of great urgency. Neither I nor my firm has any connection to most of what is on the Aesop website.

        If you feel there should be no link I will be glad to omit any.

        But, as you must have noticed in my reply to Al there has been real progress which is not widely recognized.

        As is true of almost every firm working with out-of-the-box technologies, funding has been extremely difficult. Fortunately, one very positive effect of the Rossi work is the beginning of change in that regard.

        I do not know if you are familiar with Harold Puthoff and Earthtech. Hal and I go back many years.

        In the UK, Cyril Smith has been an associate for some years. Perhaps you know of his perceptive and open minded remarks about the Steorn work.

        I greatly admire what you are doing but would like to find away to make my very rare comments when I believe I can contribute.

        Best wishes for the New Year.

        Mark

  7. Bob Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 1:24 am

    I hope he wins, it would be a good thing to have people in Congress with this kind of knowledge.

  8. Tony Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 1:52 am

    Rossi did claim copper which would have led to a belief in fusion. Unfortunately, his core sample showed copper at exactly the same istopic ratio as it exists in nature which leads one to believe he simply took some Ni powder and swished in a bit of Cu to prove his “fusion” theory.

    Childish, really. I haven’t been here for a while. I guess AR now has some new e-cat with more power; less input; and lower cost than even he could have imagined before? Amazing! Scientific strides that dwarf the Manhattan project all done by one convicted fraudster and two Italian bozo scientists with nary a significant contribution to science between them

    I haven’t seen the DGT device for sale yet. I suppose they are working on GEN 2 while never showing GEN 1.

    Tony2

    • Peter Roe Reply

      December 31, 2011 at 10:22 am

      I assume you meant this post sarcastically, but I think it is probably more or less a fair statement of the facts, apart from the name-calling.

    • timycelyn Reply

      December 31, 2011 at 10:38 am

      @Tony2. Some advice from Mark Twain you might care to ponder on:

      “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

      If I were you I’d save your contributions for the likes of Molehill where you might find kindred spirits…

  9. georgehants Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 9:29 am

    Like to wish everybody a wonderful 2012.
    The chance like every year is there for enlightenment, if people choose to take it.
    Will be interesting I think where things will be on New Years eve next year.

  10. Ivy Matt Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    Interesting that Hekman is another supporter of the Widom-Larsen hypothesis. Also interesting that he mentions competition from scientists in China and India, but not, say, Italy or Japan.

    The good news (in the “any news is good news” sense) is that Hekman has at least until August 7th (the state primary election) to make his case. The bad news is that, for now at least, he’s way behind the favored nominee, Pete Hoekstra, in the polls. Unless he manages to close that gap somewhat, Hoekstra can afford to ignore him.

  11. Brad Arnold Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    As the current constraint upon our economy (cheap abundant energy) is eased, expect an explosion of growth.

    Although I disagree with Hekman, LENR for energy generation is a no-brainer – the real space race is really that, a race to establish productive colonies outside of our gravity well.

    “Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry.” –Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

  12. Paul Calvo Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    Its just Hours from 2012, would like to wish everyone a Happy new Year and this is the year of the Rossi Revolution ! Cheers

  13. Al Potenza Reply

    December 31, 2011 at 5:13 pm

    More on Mark Goldes and his previous “efforts” if anyone wants to read about it:

    A HREF=”http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Magnetic_Power_Inc”>http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Magnetic_Power_Inc

    And that is from a sympathetic source. I doubt that Earthtech would acknowledge any relationship whatever with Mr. Goldes.

  14. Rockyspoon Reply

    January 6, 2012 at 7:02 am

    What strikes me is this strange statement: “While nuclear, they involve neither fusion nor fission and require little shielding as they produce negligible radiation.”

    I don’t mean to be throwing cold water on their parade, but the most tenable definition of nuclear fusion is “the proces by which two or more atomic nuclei join together, or fuse to form a single heavier nucleus.” There’s also the associated release of large quantities of energy, and the term fusion is believed to work in active stars, the hydrogen bomb, and other devices such as the Tokamack. (This certainly isn’t nuclear fision, which splits atoms apart into subspecies).

    From what I’ve seen of experimental results, that’s what’s happening in various LENR procedures–for example, the transformation of nickel into copper; the formation of helium, the change of palladium into other metals, and the list goes on. Folks, that’s “Fusion” and I request an explanation why Widom and Larson say it isn’t. Since they admit the process is “nuclear”, what is their definition of “fusion” so we’ll be able to better judge whether they’re just playing with semantics or trying to evade the US Patent Office or trying to disassociate themselves with past research. From what I’ve read, I think they’re splitting hairs and just confusing the issue. Besides, I’d love to have Pons and Fleischman (and many other intrepid, hard-working researchers since) receive their just dues someday and have official apologies starting with the likes of the DOE, MIT, and many others who have acted unprofessionally and unethically toward these researchers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>