Slashdot Mirror
DOE Report on Cold Fusion
thhamm writes "The DOE Report on Cold Fusion (mentioned here too) is out. Take a look at it on the DOE Website. Well, looks like there is nothing really new since Pons & Fleischmann in 1989, because "While significant progress has been made in the sophistication of calorimeters since the review of this subject in 1989, the conclusions reached by the reviewers today are similar to those found in the 1989 review.""
The "conclusion" is in this PDF document: Looks like it's a mixed bag. Apparently 1/3rd of the reviewers were very intrigued by the new results [and at least one reviewer was convinced].
Funding recommendations are similarly indecisive:
billionaire?
Add three more zeros at the end and you'd start to be in the right ballpark.
Charge Element 1: Examine and evaluate the experimental evidence for the occurrences of nuclear reactions in condensed matter at low energies (less that a few electron volts).
Two-thirds of the reviewers commenting on Charge Element 1 did not feel the evidence was conclusive for low energy nuclear reactions, one found the evidence convincing, and the remainder indicated they were somewhat convinced. Many reviewers noted that poor experiment design, documentation, background control and other similar issues hampered the understanding and interpretation of the results presented.
Charge Element 2: Determine whether the evidence is sufficiently conclusive to demonstrate that such nuclear reactions occur.
The preponderance of the reviewers' evaluations indicated that Charge Element 2, the occurrence of low energy nuclear reactions, is not conclusively demonstrated by the evidence presented. One reviewer believed that the occurrence was demonstrated, and several reviewers did not address the question.
Charge Element 3: Determine whether there is a scientific case for continued efforts in these studies and, if so, to identify the most promising areas to be pursued.
The nearly unanimous opinion of the reviewers was that funding agencies should entertain individual, well-designed proposals for experiments that address specific scientific issues relevant to the question of whether or not there is anomalous energy production in Pd/D systems, or whether or not D-D fusion reactions occur at energies on the order of a few eV. These proposals should meet accepted scientific standards, and undergo the rigors of peer review. No reviewer recommended a focused federally funded program for low energy nuclear reactions.
for basement mad scientists is that the attachment to the doc finally has a clear diagram for building a cold fusion cell. I know that when this all splashed fifteen years ago, the biggest gripe other scientists had was the lack of a clear experiment plan to replicate. Well, now we've got the diagrams and the electrolysis Palladium loading protocol. So if you really wanna find out for yourself, you can.
"Wow. Now THAT'S a lot of angry Indians." - Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer
Proven reserves of uranium ore (consisting of U3O8 in combination with varying other elements) are in the millions, possibly billions, of metric tons worldwide. Even at relatively low grades (~2% seems to be a common level), a billion tons of ore would result in some 20 million tons of U3O8, which could be separated and enriched enough to provide power for centuries, especially when combined with breeder reactors that allow existing low-grade material to be enriched which could extend the fuel's useful life to thousands of years. Uranium mining operations are at work at least in the US, China, Australia, and Canada, and I imagine in a number of other nations around the world.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Ummm... once fission was discovered, it was only a couple of years before the first working nuclear reactor was assembled. During that time, there really wasn't much doubt about what was going on or how much energy could potentially be released. Experiments showed clear evidence of fission reactions, and theoretical calculations matched the experimental data.
OTOH it's been well over a decade since this cold fusion story surfaced, and since then nobody has definitively demonstrated that anything at all is going on, nor is there any theory to back it up.
Even Pons admitted it. A few months into cold fusion's hayday in the 1989s, a scientist asked them to use regular water instead of heavy water, as a control. They did--and got the *exact same results*. Hydrogen will NOT fuse with hydrogen except under extreme circumstances--deuterium might. Of course Pons covered it up and cold fusion went from foolishness to fraud.
Ummm... once fission was discovered
The first fission experiments were conducted by Fermi in the early 30s. It took over a decade for fission to produce any practical application and during that time there were differences of opinion within the scientific community about whether it ever would.
I'm not trying to imply that cold fusion will ultimately have the same benefits, because it may not. I'm just saying that it often takes a while for science to realize the merit of new ideas.
In case you don't know, the EU commission is discussing right now the building site of a future test fussion reactor called ITER. It'll cost over 10bn euros and it will be a proof of concept. The most likely location is somewhere in France and the construction will start in a few years. But don't hold your breath. We're at least 50 years away from the first commercial one.
i l_europa&lng=1&option=9,europa
Lots of info with drawings and hard-science here: http://www.iter.org/
EuroNews: http://www.euronews.net/create_html.php?page=deta
That's ridiculous; it sounds like an urban legend to me.
Nope, not an urban legend. In fact that's how the term "sound barrier" first came into use. Some felt it was a barrier that could not be surpassed.
Bullets and other objects were well known to travel supersonically; they clearly didn't experience any "infinite drag" when passing through the sound barrier. Why, then, should a much more aerodynamic aircraft?
It's a different type of drag. There is more than one type. The predicted infinite drag was wave drag (this becomes significant for airfoils at supersonic speeds). A bullet experiences mostly pressure drag as it is a blunt object. Pressure drag and wave drag are not governed by the same equations.
With all due respect, that's my field too and I say horse hockey. Ernst Mach was measuring supersonic drag in 1877, and supersonic rifle ammunition was a consumer product before that century was out. The X-1 aircraft's fuselage, in fact, was modeled on the ogival shape of the .50 caliber Browning machine gun bullet because of its demonstrated ability to sustain supersonic flight for a long way downrange. Supersonic airplane flight was a stability and control problem.
That tale is one of those "Aren't we smarter than those self-important authorities" homilies that are as persistent as herpes. It's on a par with "19th century scientists opposed railroad development because they believed you couldn't breathe at 20 mph"...which is very popular among folks who've never been outside in a gale or ridden the animal I alluded to in the first sentence above.
rj
With all due respect, that's my field too and I say horse hockey.
Ok, if you need a more authoritative source how about John Anderson, Curator for Aerodynamics at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum? He discussed that very example in an aerospace textbook. His characterization was basically the same as what I wrote.
Look more closely at what I wrote: U3O8 -- three uranium atoms and eight oxygen atoms, or uranium oxide. That's the most commonly-cited form I've found in terms of ores (though there are various other molecules, I'm sure.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
I believe (from hearsay in the field) that the reason cold fusion has been investigated so long is that oil companies in the US are required to invest in alternative energy research.
Where better for them to put their money than in an area firmly believed by most nuclear pyhsicists to have a near zero chance of challenging oil.
VLC Remote for iPhone and Android
There were no scientists in the Middle Ages. The closest to being a scientist as such were priests and alchemists (often one and the same).
I don't know how that reads to you, but to me it sounds like they've been consistently observing this dramatic effect for 15 years and they can't explain it. I think this is exactly the right thing for scientists to muck around with. I'm not saying it's cold fusion, but it's something they can't explain. So they had better get cracking and explain it!