We have LENR energy.

“The Peak Oil Crisis: Cold Fusion Gets a U.S. Patent” Falls Church News, Idaho USA By Tom Whipple August 27, 2015


Sometimes our government moves very slowly. In the case of granting a patent to cold fusion technology, which just might replace fossil fuels, it took 26 years. The odyssey that started with a press conference at the University of Utah back in 1989 and has bumped along below the world’s radar screen ever since, seems to be coming to an end. The cold fusion phenomenon had a brief flurry of notoriety until it was “debunked” by many physicists, a couple of universities, and the U.S. Department of Energy panel. The science fell into disrepute, its discovers were disgraced and went into exile.

Fortunately for mankind, there were a handful of experimenters who were able to reproduce the original experiments which produced anomalous heat, thereby keeping the spark of cold fusion alive, but mostly in obscure laboratories out of the purview of the mainstream press. A decade or so ago some Italian physicists made a major breakthrough which led to devices producing commercial, not just test tube, amounts of heat. This effort culminated in a number of semi-public demonstrations of the technology, which were largely ignored or denounced as conventional wisdom held that “cold fusion” was impossible.

Circa two years ago the Italian cold fusion effort, led by entrepreneur Andrea Rossi, was moved to North Carolina, linked up with a venture capital firm, and well-financed developmental work began on building commercially viable cold fusion reactors. Last February the first prototype, a one-megawatt reactor system producing steam 24 hours a day, was installed for a one-year test in an undisclosed factory somewhere in the US. This device has now been successfully operating for over six months. If all goes well for the remainder of the trial period, a report is scheduled to be issued and heat producing devices will go on sale to the public.

At some point the mainstream media will cotton to the fact that we have been led badly astray as to the viability of this technology and there indeed is an alternative to producing large amounts of energy other than by burning fossil fuels, nuclear fission, hydro, solar and wind. Obviously a technology that can produce large amounts of heat continuously at low cost and without harmful emissions or hazardous waste will catch on quickly. If not in the U.S., then I am sure the Chinese will be happy to help advance the technology.

One of the reasons there has been so much skepticism about cold fusion and Rossi’s reactor in recent years was the secrecy surrounding the inner workings of the device. Much of this secrecy was due to the developer’s inability to obtain a valid international patent on his intellectual property. When the U.S. Department of Energy declared the whole technology a hoax 25 years ago and reaffirmed this decision in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary 10 years later, the U.S. Patent Office adopted the position that it would not patent any device claiming to be based on cold fusion or anything close.

In 2008, Rossi filed for a U.S. patent on his technology, only to have it finally rejected seven years later for lack of sufficient proof that he really had developed a technology that worked. Although Rossi was granted an Italian patent in 2011, nobody thought it offered much protection against copiers of a technology that could easily be worth trillions of dollars should it come to replace fossil fuels someday.

This time around Rossi, and his patent attorneys, took a new approach to gaining the first of what will likely be many patents relating to a technology which could easily turn out to be the most important of the century. Rather than claiming that the device was based on controversial nuclear reactions, the new patent is for a simple “Fluid Heater” that raises the temperature of water by subjecting a mixture of nickel, lithium, and lithium-aluminum-hydride powders to heat. The mixture warms to hundreds of degrees centigrade and begins to produce much more heat energy than is initially applied to the powder by the built-in electric heater. There is a no mention anywhere in the patent of “cold fusion,” nor any kind of nuclear reaction. The patent is silent as to what is causing the excess heat, only saying that it occurs, leaving it to the reader to conclude that so much heat is bring produced that there must be some kind of nuclear reaction taking place – known chemical reactions will not suffice.

The patent breaks new ground in our understanding of how Rossi’s reactor works for in order to obtain his patent protection, he had to reveal the inner workings of the reactor and the composition of the fuel that was inside. The revelation in the patent that there are three separate powders, the proportion of the powders, and that the nickel catalyst must be preheated to drive out any moisture and increase the porosity of the nickel should be of great help to anyone attempting to replicate Rossi’s device. Also revealed in the patent was that each fuel load should be able to run for six months before needing to be replaced. Rossi, however, recently stated that that a single fuel load may run for a year and that the reactor currently being tested can run for long periods of time without the need to turn on the heaters that are run with outside power.

In the past year, numerous replicators have attempted to produce excess heat from devices similar to Rossi’s. One the of these replicators, Alexander Parkhomov at the University of Moscow, has been successful in at least a dozen tests. Other replicators have been able to produce excess heat, but were unable to control their reactors which quickly melted down due to the massive amount of heat being generated. With this new information from the patent, we should soon be seeing many successful replications and put to rest assertions that the technology is a fraud.

For those of us who have been following this technology for over a quarter of a century, the granting of a U.S. patent marks a major milestone in the history of science for it offers the opportunity to get mankind beyond the age of carbon and nuclear fission fuels and all that they have wrought – rogue petro state governments, pollution, global warming, and dangerous radioactive wastes. For now, the major question is whether this or similar technologies can come into widespread use fast enough to slow and then halt the many adverse societal, economic and climatological trends with which we are currently beset. - end quote

We have divestment of oil holdings by oil producers.

”The End of the Fossil Fuel Age” By Ian Walker, Sifferkoll August 15, 2015


Big Oil, Saudi Arabia, the merchant banks and markets all think fossil fuel has had its day,a bold statement, where is the evidence for it?

If you had been taking any notice you would have seen Big Oil have been selling of their Oil Fields and getting out of the oil field asset ownership market since September 2011.

Is what I am writing true?

Why would they believe the Fossil Fuel Age has ended?

It is basic due diligence to find out what the big players are doing. So do a Google search for any oil company name and the phrase ”Oil field” and the words divest or sell.

You will see evidence. - end quote

We have drill baby drill.

“Senate Bill Would Give Oil Companies a Decade More to Drill in Arctic” By Jennifer A. Dlouhy, Houston Chronicle July 27, 2015


Shell and other oil companies with leases in U.S. Arctic waters could get an extra 10 years to develop them under a proposal advancing in the Senate.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, embedded the Arctic lease provisions in a broader bill that also would lift the U.S. crude export ban, expand offshore drilling and give coastal states a greater share of revenue from the activity.

The measure is slated for action in Murkowski’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee this week and next. If the panel approves the offshore drilling legislation, that would prime it for floor consideration after the Senate’s August recess and position it as a possible addition to a comprehensive energy package also moving through the committee.

The lease provision responds to the pleas of Shell, ConocoPhillips and Statoil for more time to develop their oil and gas leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas north of Alaska. Each firm has asked the Interior Department for a “suspension of operation” that would effectively stop the clock ticking on their 10-year leases.

While the Interior Department’s Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement is considering the requests from Shell and Statoil that were filed in July 2014; it previously rejected ConocoPhillips’ November 2013 bid for at least three more years. ConocoPhillips appealed the decision to an Interior Department appeals board, and settlement talks are now under way.

Current law gives the safety bureau limited authority to issue the requested suspensions, which are generally reserved for instances when they are needed to install safety equipment, conduct environmental analysis or comply with judicial decrees, when activities pose a threat of harm or damage or there have been “inordinate delays” in obtaining permits.

Murkowski’s offshore drilling and oil exports bill would empower the Interior secretary to extend the initial term of federal leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas to 20 years — effectively creating a longer-term alternative to the temporary suspensions of operation and production allowed in limited circumstances today.

Conservationists say the suspension requests from Shell, ConocoPhillips and Statoil — each advanced with separate rationales — do not meet the threshold.

Neither Statoil nor ConocoPhillips have launched exploratory drilling in the region, and neither firm has given the government a required blueprint for the activity. Shell drilled two wells in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas in 2012 and is set to begin work on a third within days. But legal delays, equipment failures and other obstacles prevented Shell’s drilling in other years.

Without action, the Beaufort and Chukchi sea leases would begin expiring in 2017 and 2018.

“Congressional action to authorize extension of leases would be a blatant giveaway to big oil companies at the expense of the American people and Arctic Ocean,” said Michael LeVine, Pacific senior counsel for the conservation group Oceana.

Any extension could mean forfeited revenue for the United States, which otherwise could try to resell the acreage again. Shell paid $2.1 billion for 275 Chukchi Sea leases in 2008.

“Companies bought the leases fully aware of their terms and of the remote and dangerous conditions in the Arctic Ocean,” LeVine said. “Congress has no business stepping in and trying to save big oil companies from poor investments and the lack of preparedness to operate in the Arctic Ocean.”

But the oil industry says it needs more time to set up complex operations in remote and forbidding Arctic waters, where exploratory drilling is confined to about three months a year and regulations have been evolving. Developing any successful discovery and bringing it into production could take even more time, they argue.

The National Petroleum Council, a federal advisory committee with heavy industry membership, advised the Energy Department in March that any significant offshore opportunity in the Arctic would take 10 to 30 years to develop.

Where U.S. law typically requires companies to move their outer continental shelf leases into commercial development within 10 years, other countries take a different approach. For instance, Canada formally divides the exploration and development phases, issuing 9-year licenses for exploratory drilling and new indefinite leases for commercial development after a discovery.

Shell’s executive vice president for the Arctic, Ann Pickard, argues that current timetables for the region are too tight.

“Having 10-year leases is simply not long enough,” she said in a speech to the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston. “The other Arctic countries have recognized this already and we’re looking forward to the U.S. recognizing this as well.”

Murkowski has been sympathetic, using her position atop the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to keep pressure on Obama administration officials deciding whether to give Shell more time. In March, ” target=”_blank”>Murkowski urged Interior Secretary Sally Jewell to swiftly make a decision on Shell’s suspension request, arguing that “there really aren’t enough drilling seasons (left) for Shell to complete more than a handful of exploration wells before (its) Chukchi Sea lease portfolio expires.”

This isn’t the first time Murkowski has pushed a policy change to support Arctic drilling.

In 2012, after Shell ran into repeated problems securing air permits for planned Chukchi and Beaufort sea drilling, Murkowski slipped a provision into a government spending bill that exempted Arctic drilling operations from federal ambient air quality standards, moving the permitting power from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Interior Department.

In Murkowski’s home state of Alaska, oil revenue is a critical source of funding, but it is threatened by declining North Slope production and lower crude prices. Arctic production could send more dollars to state coffers, if lawmakers expand an existing offshore revenue sharing program now limited to four Gulf states.

Murkowski’s bill would make that change, giving Alaska and other coastal states a share of offshore royalties that otherwise flow to the federal government.

The measure also would mandate at least three lease sales every five years in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, with annual sales in the Cook Inlet and near-shore Beaufort waters. - end quote


We have climate change and other environmental concerns.

“Obama to Offer Aid to Alaskans Affected by Climate Change” By Ed Adamczyk, UPI Sept. 2, 2015


President Barack Obama is expected to pledge aid to areas of Alaska hit hard by climate change during his visit Wednesday to the remote town of Kotzebue.

His three-day visit to Alaska is meant to dramatize the effects of global climate change and the actions of his administration to deal with it.

During the first trip north of the Arctic Circle by a sitting president, Obama is expected to observe first-hand the effects of warming temperatures and their effect on shorelines and community infrastructures. The White House said he will announcefederal grants to deal with coastal erosion in areas such as northwestern Alaska, which could include relocation in extreme cases.

The assistance package will include grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency for water. It would also create waste projects in vulnerable areas, and projects to help residents, including Native American tribes, reduce their dependence on fossil fuels.

The Denali Commision, a federal agency charged with coordinating resources in rural Alaska, plans more than $15 million in grants to construct bulk fuel tanks where cold weather and reduced infrastructure are responsible for high heating costs.

Alaska is also an experimental ground for clean energy projects. A competition organized by the Department of Energy is expected to lead to ideas to bring $6 million of clean energy projects to Native American lands, and the U.S. government is partnering with private enterprise to make Kodiak Island nearly entirely powered by clean energy.

Kotzebue, on an inlet of the Bering Sea, built a sea wall in 2012 to confront storm surges typically suppressed by now-gone sea ice. Nearby communities have observed significant soil erosion caused by the disappearance of permafrost.

The trip to Kotzebue will end Obama’s three-day visit to Alaska, designed to highlight the effects of global climate change in one of the United States’ most ecologically vulnerable areas. Tuesday he visited Kenai Fjords National Park in southern Alaska, where a glacier has receded more than a mile in 200 years but has retreated visibly more quickly in recent years. - end quote


We have energetic irony.

“Shell May Get Federal Permits for Alaska” By Daniel J. Graeber, UPI Aug. 12, 2015


Shell may soon get the permits necessary to start drilling into potential oil basins in an exploration well off the coast of Alaska, a federal regulator said.

The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement granted permission to Shell in July to drill two wells in the arctic waters off the Alaskan coast. BSEE said the permits excluded drilling into oil-bearing zones because Shell lacks a capping stack, a critical piece of safety equipment, positioned near drilling sites to continue beyond the exploratory phase.

Shell’s early efforts off the coast of Alaska were plagued by equipment issues. Shell last month discovered a small breach in the hull of MV Fennica, chartered to carry the safety equipment to the Chukchi Sea. A drill ship slated for offshore Alaska, Noble Discoverer, suffered a series of setbacks during a 2012 campaign off the coast of Alaska.

After vessel repairs in Oregon, the vessel is on its way back to Shell’s drilling grounds in a region dubbed the Burger prospect. With that, the BSEE was quoted by energy news website Argus as saying Shell could receive the necessary permits to drill into oil-bearing zones in the “very near future.”

Shell’s campaign has been a source of frustration for environmental groups and some U.S. lawmakers. When the federal government gave limited consent to Shell to start drilling operations off the coast of Alaska earlier this month, Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, said Shell’s campaign was “fruitless.” - end quote