Energy Update: LENR Keeps Showing Up in the News – A Humbug or Real – Which is it?

Boy this technology better work considering all the press it’s getting. LENR stands for low energy nuclear reactor. A couple of weeks ago on this blog site we asked the question is cold fusion real and got lots of comments both for and against. Well the technology keeps on being hyped and if hype is a reflection of reality then we are looking at what could be an extraordinary new energy source. I, however, have my doubts.

In the latest posting, July 24, 2012, Andrea Rossi, the developer of the energy catalyzer cold fusion technology he calls E-Cat, claims he will deliver the first commercial 1 Megawatt e-Cat plant this year. He also indicated that a performance report showing that E-Cat is stable in temperatures over 1,000 Celsius will be released in a couple of months. This isn’t the first time that Rossi has promised delivery. Nor is it the first time that he has promised to release a report on the technology.

If you are unfamiliar with LENR and the E-Cat in particular, the technology relies on a chemical reaction that transmutes two elements into another releasing energy in the form of heat. In the case of E-Cat the elements are powdered nickel infused with hydrogen transmuting into copper. The amount of energy released is claimed to be 100 times the energy input. Rossi reports he can get enough heat from E-Cat cold fusion to power up steam turbines for electricity generation. Ultimately he hopes to directly generate energy from his E-Cats without a turbine. Well we’ll see!

Not to be outdone, a Rossi competitor, in fact a breakaway company called Defkalion is building its own LENR and joining up with a Swiss start up to deliver a car with a LENR on board. The first generation of iCar, the name the company has chosen, will use a Tesla Model S. The LENR is the Hyperion Series B. The developers of the technology claim the Hyperion will generate 10 to 45 Kilowatts of thermal energy. To produce 45 Kilowatts the LENR will consume only 300 watts. The iCar will have a single charge range of 36,000 kilometers (22,000 miles). The power storage of a Hyperion LENR is estimated to be 400 times the amount stored in conventional lithium-ion battery packs currently used by Tesla.

A Swiss company plans to put a LENR into a Tesla sedan providing a range of 36,000 kilometers from a single charge.                         Source:

After successfully demonstrating the first generation iCar, plans are in the works to launch a second generation vehicle with an on board LENR  capable of powering a car for 140,000 kilometers (87,000 miles) between recharges.

Again I ask the question, is all this hype going to actually produce something real? If so, then we will witness an energy revolution. If not, we can always remember P.T. Barnum’s quote, “The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.” And this is one humdinger of a story right now.



Len Rosen lives in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He is a researcher and writer who has a fascination with science and technology. He is married with a daughter who works in radio, and a miniature red poodle who is his daily companion on walks of discovery. More...


  • T Lee Buyea

    PLEASE just remember we have not seen proof positive of a single working most basic model of an E-€at. Much less a 1,000 C or car.

    • lenrosen4

      And until we see independent reports and a working model of E-Cat we won’t know whether we are being conned or not. You would think it was in the best interest of the inventors of this technology to make it accessible for peer review or provide open demonstrations that let industry leaders look inside the black box. But that has yet to happen. One can’t help thinking about the Wizard of Oz and the line “pay no attention to the man behind the green curtain.”

      • Niccolo5

        Len says: “You would think it was in the best interest of the inventors of this technology to make it accessible for peer review or provide open demonstrations that let industry leaders look inside the black box.”

        Would it be in their best interests if their promoted secret technology contraptions don’t actually produce significant amounts of “excess” heat? Why would promoters waste our time with a picture of an actual Tesla S Model car and insinuate the logically absurd notion that since the Tesla S car is actual, their suppositional secret technology must also be actual? For all logical purposes they might just as well have published a picture of a nuclear aircraft carrier, and proposed replacing the nuclear reactors with secret pie in the sky.

        All across the developed and developing world hundreds of billions of new debt are being invested each year into new power plant projects that won’t come on line for 4-5 years. Unborn generations will enter the world obligated to work to repay that debt through imposition of tax burden. If the astounding claims for commercialization of LENR were in fact true, the indebting of the unborn generations to pay for expensive, obsolete, and highly polluting, power plants is purely evil. Hence, I conclude that if the possessors of the secret truths about LENR know it actually works as claimed, they have an ethical duty to humanity in general to make decisive public demonstrations that settle the questions of commercial feasibility.

        The LENR promoters aren’t pure evil; they just can’t objectively prove their contraptions actually work. They are working on the traditional, “Fake it till you make it” principle that has characterized speculative new ventures since the invention of bronze and glass. So the world must ignore unproven pie in the sky suppositions/propositions, and continue on with construction of conventional power plants that implement tried and proven technology. When LENR promoters start melting substantial amounts of crushed ice with “excess heat” in objective public demonstrations the energy ministries of India and China will cease initiating new traditional power plant construction and pay billions to the inventors and promoters of LENR.

  • Why would you fail to mention work being done at
    NASA, and Brillouin Energy

    Your missing about 75% of the story. By focusing mostly on Rossi your missing the point.

    For a full summary of the situation look here:

    • lenrosen4

      I don’t think I’m missing the point at all Joel. The lack of a product is the point. There is a lot of promise but no delivery. And there is no full disclosure by any of the parties. The results MIT and NASA have gotten don’t match the 100X plus claims of Rossi or his derivatives. The physics is fuzzy and if this is an electrochemical reaction repeatability with consistency using the same experimental quantities and processes should yield equal results. But there is no evidence of that in any of the literature.

  • The lack of product is not the point. The existence of excess heat reported and reproduced up to Coefficient of performance of 1 in 10 out is the point. The phenomena is real. Thats a BIG deal. The fact that all of these various companies are now RACING to produce a PRODUCT after 20 years of study should also be the point. Another point is that its a NUCLEAR reaction started by a chemical reaction. Another point is WOW here is something about physics we don’t understand yet! I challenge anyone to produce a new and revolutionary product of this nature in into the market in under 5 years without it getting stolen from you. Thats what you are asking. Its simplistic to think, wow it works, why isn’t it on the market by tomorrow? This is the point you are making. If you take the time to really dive into history you will find it remarkable. Its not like this has been developing overnight. You are seeing the Beginnings of the breakout.
    Don’t believe me? Follow the money, it doesn’t lie.

    • lenrosen4

      I sincerely hope that this is real. I don’t quite buy the argument about keeping it under wraps to protect it from being stolen. If international and provisional patents have been filed then the intellectual property should be protected. The fact that patent applications have been rejected is problematic. But it will be a wonderful discovery to see this technology proven and commercialized. Its arrival will be a planet saver.

      • Your right to bring up the patent issue, have you looked into that? If you haven’t you should, its where you really start to understand whats going on.

        Check out this link:

        Rossi tried the paten office and got mucked up in it. Now he and everyone else (except NASA) is persuing what David French believes is the easiest way to a patent:

        Bottom line:

        David J. French / Reply
        “Why doesn’t proof of a working device win a patent application? ”

        It is my belief that proof of a working device will lead to the grant of a patent by the United States Patent Office.

  • stephen russell

    Show us some working LENR, E Cat models, make public or demo models. Produce if doable.
    No snake oil time please.