The usual BS from C&EN

CHEMICAL & ENGINEERING NEWS
April 23, 2007
Volume 85, Number 17
p. 42

Cold Fusion Makes Its Case In Chicago

ACS Meeting News: After 18 years on the fringe, the field is still 
trying to gain respect

Steve Ritter

IN A MEETING ROOM tucked away in a far corner of Chicago's mammoth 
McCormick Place Convention Center, a small band of faithful cold fusion 
researchers and advocates gathered on March 29, the final day of the 
American Chemical Society national meeting, for a symposium to showcase 
evidence in support of the original cold fusion findings that were 
announced at a press conference 18 years ago.

This time, the speakers conceded that the massive amount of cheap, 
pollution-free energy once hoped for by fusing deuterium nuclei at room 
temperature was not likely to be achieved anytime soon, if ever.

Back in 1989, electrochemists Martin Fleischmann of the University of 
Southampton, in England, and B. Stanley Pons of the University of Utah 
made the stunning announcement that they had achieved sustained fusion 
of deuterium atoms that diffused into the palladium cathode of an 
electrochemical cell containing heavy water (deuterium oxide). Dozens of 
research labs worldwide immediately began trying to repeat the 
experiments. There were a few scattered confirmations of excess heat or 
telltale signs of fusion in the form of helium, tritium, and other 
by-products, but the results could not be reproduced on demand.

Many researchers ascribed the unpredictable effects to artifacts or 
sloppy lab work. Fusion fever quickly abated, and most scientists 
dismissed cold fusion as an embarrassing mistake.

Although the field has been relegated to the fringes of science, a band 
of reputable researchers quietly continue to study "low-energy nuclear 
reactions," as cold fusion is now called. The researchers are not really 
expecting to prove deuterium fusion is occurring, but they are looking 
into the possibility of nonfusion nuclear reactions, including 
transmutation of heavy elements into other elements. In Chicago, some of 
these scientists got a rare opportunity to report their research in a 
major forum, although few came to listen.

"Even though cold fusion is considered controversial, the scientific 
process demands of us to keep an open mind and examine new results," 
commented Gopal Coimbatore, a researcher in the Institute of 
Environmental & Human Health at Texas Tech University. Coimbatore served 
as the Chicago program chair for the Division of Environmental 
Chemistry, which sponsored the symposium. With a potential global energy 
crisis looming, "it behooves the scientific community to look at all 
options available," Coimbatore told C&EN.

Steven B. Krivit, editor of the online magazine New Energy Times, led 
off the symposium with an overview of the history of cold fusion from 
its inception to the present. Krivit explained that Fleischmann and Pons 
made some mistakes in their early experiments and in how they announced 
their initial findings and later interacted with the scientific 
community and the media. But some aspects of the original findings have 
held up to scrutiny, Krivit believes. Significant data, he claimed, now 
show that the observed excess heat produced during the experiments and 
the formation of by-products, primarily helium and tritium, are real. 
And the reproducibility of experiments has gotten much better, he noted.

"It might be fusion, or maybe it's not," Krivit observed. "But
something 
interesting is going on." Still, with the field's reputation "in the
doghouse" for the past 18 years, Krivit said, he doesn't expect the new
results to be embraced overnight.

One of the original criticisms of the Fleischmann-Pons research was 
alleged errors in measuring excess heat generated during the 
experiments. In Chicago, longtime cold fusion researcher Melvin H. 
Miles, now a chemistry professor at the University of La Verne, in 
California, presented a thorough analysis of live and blank cold fusion 
calorimetry experiments dating back to the 1990s. He showed that the 
precision of the measurements left only one conclusion: The excess heat 
observed must be the result of nuclear events because the energy 
released is greater than can be explained by any known chemical reaction.

The study was carried out with Fleischmann, now 80, who was listed as a 
coauthor on the abstract, although he was unable to travel from England 
to the ACS meeting.

"OUR WORK shows that cold fusion effects are real, but we cannot assess 
if the excess heat can become useful," Miles said. "Much more research
is needed to answer such a question."

In another presentation, covering what is considered some of the most 
promising current research, analytical chemist Pamela A. Mosier-Boss of 
the Navy's Space & Naval Warfare Systems Center, in San Diego, described
work carried out over many years to form deuterium-laced palladium 
electrodes. In this technique, palladium and deuterium are codeposited 
on a cathode by passing a current through a solution of palladium 
chloride in deuterium oxide. Nuclear reactions appear to take place 
during the deposition, she said, as evidenced by the generation of 
excess heat and the detection of high-energy particles, such as protons 
and alpha particles, as well as other nuclear emissions.

Physicist Robert L. Park of the University of Maryland, an outspoken 
critic of cold fusion, was reserved when asked to comment on the ACS 
symposium and the latest results. "What's new is that the faithful 
researchers have decided to stop sulking and rejoin the community of 
scientists," Park said. He takes this as "a positive sign," and the
results "look interesting." But so far "there's not much to show
for 
it," he added.

Like other interested scientists, Park is waiting for additional results 
to emerge and independent verification of the experiments. Thus, it 
doesn't look like the fusion fever of '89 is about to make a comeback.

Chemical & Engineering News
ISSN 0009-2347
Copyright C 2007 American Chemical Society


Reply via email to