A fascinating drama will be playing out over the next few months as the latest claims of a new inexpensive energy source are tested in the marketplace.
You may recall that the original claims of "cold-fusion" by Pons and Fleishman in 1989 were roundly discounted and condemned to the same trash heap as perpetual motion machines. Condemnation was appropriate given that they could not reproduce their findings reliably and their theory was wrong. This is still the attitude of mainstream media and most establishment science. However, a small number of true-believers has continued to work on this problem since then and the idea is getting traction again. For example:
1. "60 Minutes" did a show called Cold Fusion is Hot Again
tinyurl.com/3bs5pjn in which they brought in an outside senior physicist to review the data. He concluded that something interesting was going on.
2. The US Navy has been funding research on this topic with promising results
tinyurl.com/ccj5rb.
3. A new theory has been proposed that may explain these findings without cold fusion (Widom-Larsen theory).
In this theory, low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) occur in the reverse of a known process called beta decay.
Now that the earthquake in Japan has everyone reassessing the safety of nuclear energy, it is a good time to look for alternatives. Fossil fuels cause thousands of premature deaths per year from air pollution and probably promote climate change. Solar will never account for more than a fraction of our total capacity unless inexpensive storage methods are found (disclaimer: I have a 4 KW solar roof). Wind is promising but has aesthetic issues and kills birds. Hydro damages riparian habitat and wave/tidal technology is unproven. There is a pressing need for something better.
Let's assume for the moment that there is a 10% chance that this approach could work in the real world. Shouldn't we be supporting it? Although granting agencies are starting to support this type of research, it is a pittance compared to the government support received by fossil fuel and nuclear industries.
Getting back to the drama: Two mainstream faculty of the University of Bologna, Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi, have been demonstrating a device that generates steam or hot water from a very small package
http://tinyurl.com/4vluzrt. They plan to have commercial units in production by late 2011. Why should we think this is anything more than another scam?
1. The modules have been examined by outside investigators who confirm that they work as stated. Most recently, the Chairman of the Swedish Skeptic's Society
http://tinyurl.com/3fbsxpg.
2. Rossi has made a number of changes in his demonstrations suggested by skeptics to prove there is no trickery involved
3. Rossi is building dozens of these units with his own money for an outside investor who will only pay for them if they work.
The original devices used expensive palladium. Rossi's devices use inexpensive nickel powder and are small enough to fit inside a home furnace or water heater. They do not release significant radiation or create toxic products.
While I acknowledge that the odds against success are long, I for one am going to follow this story very closely. The ramifications of an inexpensive, safe energy source would be immense.