Copyright © 2015 by Dauphin Publications. Second Edition.

All rights reserved

worldwide. No part of this publication may be replicated, redistributed, or given
away in any form without the prior written consent of the author/publisher or
the terms relayed to you herein.
Table of Contents
Copyright
Preface
Chapter 1 Background to the New Energy Revolution
Chapter 2 Revival of Cold Fusion
Chapter 3 The Situation in Early 1999
Chapter 4 Initial Economic Effects
Chapter 5 Timing
Chapter 6 Opportunity
Chapter 7 Conclusions
References
 Preface
An extraordinary and unexpected event is almost upon us . . . the reality of free energy.

You don ’ t know about this because of the irresponsible behavior of important
elements in society. Those that claim to serve you.
The U.S. Department of Energy is either hopelessly incompetent or protecting the
interest of present energy sources at the expense of society as a whole.
The press, including the so-called scientific press, has a blackout on news. The famous
investigative journalists suddenly have cold feet.

The political establishment is either silent (the White House) or making half-hearted
efforts to investigate (Congress). By contrast, this is by far the most important event in
the history of the United States...you need to know and should know.
This report is an introduction to hidden events that will shape your life in coming
decades.
Antony C. Sutton, D.Sc.

California,
December 26, 1997
Revised July 1999
 Chapter 1
Background to the New Energy Revolution
Unknown to almost everyone in the United States, the world is on the
verge of a revolutionary technological change in the way we acquire and
use energy.
In March 1989 two electro-chemists, Martin Fleischmann of the
University of Southampton in England and Martin Pons of the University of
Utah (Fleischmann ’ s one-time graduate student), announced an electro-
chemical process which appeared to be a low energy nuclear reaction. The
reaction supposedly released a form of nuclear energy. They called it cold
fusion.
Without heat and pressure, by use of simple electrolysis, they could
generate over unity . . . get more power out of the device than needed to run
it. This is counter to orthodox theory that states that one needs massive
pressure and high temperature to achieve so-called hot fusion, to release the
power of the atom.
The physics establishment had just spent 50 years and maybe $20
billion to achieve this end, and had not achieved over unity. Now they were
told it could be done on a kitchen table with a cheap apparatus known to
every freshman chemistry major.
The immediate overwhelming scientific response was “ impossible."
Most scientists were secure in the assumption that they already knew
everything about physics and proclaimed cold fusion a “ fraud." Instead of
dispassionate examination of the claim, almost without exception prominent
scientists shouted down the discovery. Pons and Fleischmann fled to
France. Science influence with the media was used to ridicule the discovery
. . .and science reporters lapped it up, without a second thought.
The fact that this reaction was essentially self-serving justification for a
bountiful flow of federal funds went largely unnoticed. Thousands of
physicists depended on federal funding in the hot fusion and high energy
physics programs. Cold fusion threatened the flow of funds. The media
reaction was unbelievable . . .instant dismissal, and unthinking ridicule:
 • NEW YORK TIMES (April 30, 1989): “ . . .in one word, it ’ s garbage.
”
• NBC TV Reporter Bazell: “ I know what is possible and what is not . .
.I think it ’ s a bunch of junk. ”
• NATURE Editor John Maddox: “ . . .a milestone in the history of
entertainment. ”
• NATURE Editor David Lindley: “ Pigs don ’ t have wings. ”
• TIME : “ I don ’ t think that data is worth anything. ”
The negative lockstep reaction of the media can be traced to the “
prominent scientists ” working on government research funds. News
sources, specifically science reporters, have neither the wisdom nor the
fortitude to question these self-appointed experts. These are some of the
comments made by physicists before they had time to repeat the
experiments (i.e., knee-jerk emotional reactions):
• Steven Koonin, Cal Tech: “ . . .a mistake... they found something that
didn ’ t exist. ”
• Robert Park, American Physical Society: “ . . .a s é ance of true
believers. ”
• Herman Fesbach, MIT: “ I don't want to see any more evidence. I
think it ’ s a bunch of junk. ”
The Department of Energy appointed a Cold Fusion Panel from its
Energy Research Advisory Board with Professor John Huizenga of
University of Rochester as co-chairman. In November 1989 the panel
issued a report which was anything but impartial. The panel could find no
convincing evidence of excess heat and claimed that the process is “
contrary to all understanding gained of nuclear reactions in the last half of
the 20th century. ” The panel recommended against any specific follow-up
and recommended channeling any work “ within the present funding system
” (a good way to kill off further work).
 The immediacy and intensity of hostility suggests cold fusion hit a
sensitive nerve. The world view of physics had been shaken. If cold fusion
was right, the theoretical structure of physics was in error — big-time error.
Since 1989 high-energy physicists have fallen over themselves to
declare cold fusion “ impossible, ” a “ delusion, ” a “ fraud, ” “ bad science,
” and everything disreputable under the sun. They particularly point to the
1989 DOE report and the initial large number of unsuccessful duplications.
Notably they always cite the work of 1989 to 1991 when there were
difficulties in duplication. In particular the platinum-palladium electrodes
were troublesome — some grades worked well, others did not. There were
problems with surface defects.
This negative approach was largely confined to the U.S. and Britain. In
Japan in 1991 about 2 percent of the hot fusion budget was devoted to cold
fusion. In the U.S. — none. In India, a broadly based cold fusion program
was continued under the Indian Atomic board. In Russia, in spite of
troubled times, about 15 million rubles were allocated to twenty
laboratories in the four years between 1991 and 1995 for cold fusion
research.
The error made by high energy physics was to attempt suppression. This
drove research into the private sector where they lost opportunity to control.
If they had financed the work through government funding they could have
attempted classification and suppression through the government DOE
apparatus and so bury for all time . . . at least inside the U.S. Their haste to
protect 100 percent of hot fusion funding forced development into the
private sector.
 Chapter 2
Revival of Cold Fusion
The assault was nearly successful. Cold fusion was almost killed off.
Pons and Fleischmann were driven from the U.S. to France to a Japanese
funded laboratory. Physicist after physicist claimed fraud and the media
followed suit, down to the present day. Lack of funding and peer pressure
combined to keep many scientists in ignorance, and even today success is
not widely known. Around the world independent researchers took a second
look. If they had no fund, they cannibalized other projects. A handful of
researchers looked beyond the official screen and a few low-circulation
journals, including FTIR (see last page), emerged and tracked the new
work.
Even within the U.S. government, questions remained and small-scale
work continued at the U.S. Navy in China Lake, California, NASA,
Cleveland, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and elsewhere.
Very slowly, the new work paid off but remained unpublicized. The
official DOE position remained the same. DOE officially refused to finance
any workers who were even interested in cold fusion. The Patent Office will
not grant patents on cold fusion but recently has granted patents where “
over unity effect ” is in the description.
The first studies were unsuccessful but gradually came enough positive
results to keep the work alive. It was found that the surface characteristics
of electrodes were significant — electrodes had to be pure with no surface
defects.
Then, gradually, the truth emerged. Major laboratories duplicated the
Pons-Fleischmann method; others looked at solid state devices and different
electrode materials. Over unity was confirmed. Also, ‘‘ life after death ”
(the cells continued working after the power was switched off) and the
output-input ratios became extraordinary . . .one Japanese group reported
the level to be 70,000:1.
Cold fusion developed variants, was repeatable, and was capable of
generating excess heat which could be converted to low-voltage electricity.
The fuel was water. Sometimes a compound like potassium carbonate was
added to the electrolyte to improve conductivity. That ’ s it. Simplicity
itself.
After 1994 came key confirmations one after the other. The most
significant of these announcements was by a U.S. Navy official in 1995 . .
.significant because the U.S. Navy has an excellent reputation for vanguard
research.
David Nagel, Superintendent of the Condensed Matter and Radiation
Science Laboratory at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington,
D.C., presented a lecture at the long established Philosophical Society in
Washington, D.C.
Said Nagel on October 20th 1995:
“ Cold fusion is now ignored, disdained and even mocked by scientists
and the public. This is due to a variety of mistakes by scientists and the
Government and the unwillingness of journal, magazine and newspaper
editors to pay attention to this topic. ’’
The government made mistakes. But they made mistakes because they
trusted their advisers. We don ’ t blame government, we blame the self-
serving, closed-minded advisers. Hopefully, the government will learn a
lesson and choose its advisers more carefully. The Office of Naval Research
has for years been in the vanguard of research. Dr. Edmund Storms at Los
Alamos National Laboratory has extensively investigated cold fusion. Yet
the government relies on advisers who have never conducted a single
experiment nor admittedly witnessed or reviewed any experiment.
Other significant positive confirmations include:
• SHELL OIL: Dufour of Shell Research in France presented a paper
(#604) at the fifth ICCF. Detected up to seven watts of excess heat.
• AMOCO PRODUCTION CO.: Issued Report T-90-E-02 (90081 ART
0082, 19 March 1990). Several experiments “ yielded 30 percent energy
gain over the life of the experiment (two months). ” Was repeated. Second
group of experiments also yielded 30 percent energy gain.
 • BECHTEL CORP.: B. Klein of Bechtel Corp. has explored the
economics of cold fusion and concludes that generator units operating at
10-20kw will encourage power users to gradually unplug from the power
networks. (Development at this time is entirely on units greater than 10kw).
• (CEREM) FRENCH ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION: Lonchampt
et al 150 percent excess heat using the Pons-Fleischmann method.
• LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY: Dr. Edmund Storms
has worked extensively on cold fusion especially electrode surfaces.
Numerous over unity results.
• EPRI (Electronic Power Research Institute): Report No. TR -104195.
Excess power ranging from a few percent to 350 percent observed (6
August 1996).
• NASA (Lewis Research Center, Cleveland): Technical Memorandum
#107167. Excess heat 6 to 68 percent.
• U.S. NAVY (China Lake Air Warfare Center): Evidence for excess
heat, particularly clear when Johnson Mathey palladium used for cathodes
(seven of eight cells produced 30 percent excess power).
These results turned the tide. Government and those who stayed with
cold fusion realized that cold fusion was real. That didn ’ t stop the skeptics,
notably Dr. Huizenga, who still today travels around the country preaching
the gospel of “ cold fusion is a fraud. ” Dr. Huizenga reportedly has actually
witnessed over unity at California Polytechnic Laboratory and STILL
cannot accept the facts. Pathological denial is the applicable phrase.
These positive results came to the attention of credible authorities.
The famed futurist Arthur C. Clarke (of 2001fame), in an interview with
Discover (May 1997), was unequivocal in support. Several years before,
Clarke, in a speech to the Pacific Area Senior Officer Logistics Seminar
(March 1993), had briefed senior allied officers on the potential:
“ It is beyond serious dispute any more that anomalous amounts of
energy are being produced from hydrogen by some unknown reaction . . . ”
 Later in 1998, Gerald Celente, founder of the well-known Trends
Research Institute, published Trends 2000 (Warner Books, New York,
1998). Celente was also unequivocal — he designated the new energy
revolution based on cold fusion as “ the single biggest investment
opportunity of the 21st century . . .for those in the know a financial
windfall. ”
Celente parallels the statements we have made in this report without the
details, although he is obviously aware of the technical detail. On page 304,
under the heading “ Infinite Energy, ” Celente identifies the new fuel to
energize the economy as “ water . . . and air . . . and sun, ” adding:
“ To tap into energy in the new millennium did not require huge utilities
to provide it or a complex infrastructure to mine, drill, refine, process,
deliver and store . . .the promise of free energy, held out by visionaries over
the last decades of the twentieth century was made good in the first decades
of the twenty-first. ” (page 305)
“ The most promising of these [technologies] was cold fusion, or new
hydrogen energy, discovered in 1989. It was a relatively simple process, but
it had scientists baffled. ”
Celente commented that even while the U.S. critics were bellowing “
fraud, ” actual commercial heating units were being produced in Eastern
Europe by using a process clearly related to the original discovery (page
306).
The Celente conclusion?
“ The energy revolution will be the single biggest investment
opportunity of the twenty-first century. Its ramifications will extend to
practically every aspect of human and planetary life. To profit from the
trend investors should begin familiarizing themselves with the field
thoroughly and immediately and keep abreast of developments before they
become official. ”
This last point ‘ before they become official ’ is important. There is
absolutely no question the US government has “ secrecy ” stamps all over
its work on cold fusion. Below we argue that this is highly counter-
productive for national security and national welfare. If one lesson stands
out from the 20th century it is . . . GOVERNMENTS CANNOT
INNOVATE.
 Chapter 3
The Situation in Early 1999
Cold fusion in several variants is a confirmed repeatable process. One of
these variants does not require electrodes at all, simply immersion of
palladium metal (perhaps other metals) in deuterium gas, (the Case catalytic
process). The most important effect is over-unity (i.e., more power is
generated by the unit than is needed to operate it, output/input ratio of 3:1
are routine today). There are reports of devices generating much more, e.g.,
several thousand to one. Our sense is that within a decade the higher ratios
will be common.
The most important cold fusion effect is over unity in the form of excess
heat. The excess heat generated has to be converted to electricity. Work is
now concentrated on devices to utilize low energy heat and its conversion.
Heating devices are now at the industrial engineering stage. For example,
Japanese researcher Mizuno considers excess heat to the biggest laboratory
hurdle yet to overcome. In his book, Mizuno cites the case of a runaway
cell in his laboratory, which he had to dump in a bucket of water for ten
days to cool down.
Thermacore of Pennsylvania with a $75,000 Pentagon contract has built
a device the size of a vacuum flask to heat a house without fuel, reportedly
for 1000 years.
We anticipate several engineering routes possible and probable for this
engineering task.
Home heaters and water heaters are now in development (reportedly
already developed in Eastern Europe, although we cannot yet confirm this
report). This will have an immediate and substantial effect on the heating
oil industry.
The new standard is therefore over-unity, i.e. over 100% efficiency.
Fossil fuels cannot meet this standard. Their efficiencies are in the 15-20%
range.
 The gasoline fuel cells promoted by the Department of Energy and
developed by Arthur Little Company are about 65% efficient. They appear
to be aimed at slowing down the shift away from petroleum fuels. DOE
could have gone straight to over unity cold fusion (except that it has already
committed itself to the “ impossible ” position). Coal is about 32 percent
efficient. The new standard is set by cold fusion. The market will accept
these technologies and reject those that do not meet this standard.
There is no way this can be stopped. What we don ’ t know is the time
frame.
The chance of extremely low cost heating, virtually no cost, will be so
powerful that it will sweep away any opposition. The burden of heating cost
in the North Eastern U.S. is so great that any opposition is unlikely.
This is a non-polluting technology. The entire pollution prevention
industry is unnecessary. Regulations and restrictions can be removed . . .
there is no pollution to regulate. Incidentally, one of the great mysteries is
why the environmental groups, including Sierra Club, have not recognized
the non-polluting potential of cold fusion. We brought this to the attention
of the Sierra Club four years ago . . . without any response. The only
conclusion we can formulate is that without pollution there is no anti-
pollution movement, and pollution free energy will remove one of the
pillars that supports the environmental industry. In other words the
environmental movement is an industry like coal and oil.
 Chapter 4
Initial Economic Effects
Only one study of the economic effects of cold fusion is known. It is
available in German or English from Dr Josef Gruber of University of
Hagen in Germany.
Today ’ s economists have an extraordinary weakness. The field of
economics assumes technology as a "given", as a fixed parameter in a static
world . . . about as far from reality as one can get. And like physics, modern
economists have tried to convert economics into mathematical symbolism
based on fixed assumptions.
On the other hand one great contribution of modern economics has been
the understanding and promotion of market forces for efficient distribution
of resources. The mid-century fascination with economic planning
("planned chaos") has been abandoned in favor of a recognition of market
forces.
The Gruber study overcomes the first limitation and explores cold
fusion in the structure of an enterprise society. A similar study has been
undertaken by Bectel Corporation to estimate movement off the grid
system.
Because of inadequate response by the Government, it is probable that
several industries which would be initially affected are not aware of the
coming transformation. Because of this gap in information they have not
conducted necessary studies. This is one of the reasons why we state
emphatically that Department of Energy incompetence has significant
national security impact. This is a Department that doesn't understand
market economics and neither does it understand the technology of cold
fusion.
The initial impact, as Bechtel has foreseen, will be on the electricity
grid. But in addition to withdrawal from the grid system there will be
wrenching change for the heating and cooling industries., These latter will
be impacted probably before the grid system because space heating units
can be developed before heat to electricity conversion units. Because of
weakness in the official academic-government structure, this aspect has
been entirely ignored.
The "wild ride" foreseen by a senior Federal Reserve Bank official (see
FTIR January 1999, in bibliography) can be smoothed by withdrawing
funds from coal, oil and atomic technical research and devoting funds to
cold fusion research. Today Government policy is exaggerating the
complexity and impact of changeover. Policy is designed to keep us in the
19th and 20th centuries, while the market, reflecting citizen ability and
demand, is urging us into the 21st.
The efficiency differences are so astounding that Government retreat
from science funding is an elementary first step. Today we have the
equivalent of financing stage coach research as the automobile enters
production in 1900. DOE denies cold fusion research funds while funding
coal, oil and atomic research. This is what we call "planned chaos", after the
late, great Ludwig van Mises who foresaw these absurdities in a different
context.
Another step is to alert initial impact industries of likely future changes.
Not only the electricity grids, heating and cooling industries, but more
obscure groups. Even the travel industry will be effected, real estate in
isolated areas, the pipeline network and steel pipe mills. Coal mining and
coal mining machinery, coal transportation, petroleum exploration and
development and many others will receive some initial impact.
In particular the strategic balance will be changed. The requirement to
defend the Middle East is reduced. In fact the quickest way to bring peace
to the Middle East is to push cold fusion research. Without Iraqi oil exports
there is no Iraqi armament industry.
This reduction in some industries is offset by rapid, very rapid,
expansion in light manufacturing and metal working industries which can
manufacture cold fusion devices on a gigantic scale. There will be
expansion in chemical catalyst industries, although it is not yet certain that
palladium is the cheapest usable catalyst. Obviously deuterium gas will be a
winner. In brief, wrenching changes in the structure of industry. Losses for
the slow moving. Profit for the alert. Disaster for those who listen to the
self-promoting talking heads in Washington, major Universities, and a
senile daily press.
The greatest danger is political. That politicians will dump the financial
load onto citizens whereas in an enterprise society the enterprise bears the
weight of losses as well as advantages of profit.
 Chapter 5
Timing
This is the tough question: when? When will reality hit the market
place? How suddenly and over what period of time? Will it be panic free-
fall or slow erosion of prices?
Censorship will not stop these new energy technologies. Censorship will
delay public awareness . . . markets will take longer to discount the news.
That ’ s about it.
Former Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger ’ s comment that
Government is concerned about speed of events makes sense. This is the
way governments think . . . but even governments are helpless against
markets. The Soviet Union discovered this truism. Sensible governments
like sensible investors don ’ t try to fight market trends.
Moreover, Weinberger ’ s comment is reinforced from an unusual
source — a radio interview from Gordon Novel (one-time intelligence
operative now in a federal jail) by Don Weideman (printed in Freedom
Forum , October 1996). Novel had links to the CIA and was on a friendly
basis with former CIA Director Bill Colby.
This interview refers accurately to physicist Hal Puthoffs research on
zero point energy and states “ the government knows that energy is free ”
and “ the motive of the New World Order is to stop technologies that
eliminate oil, gas, coal and nuclear energy that make it possible for people
to get energy for nothing. ” Novel concluded, “ They ’ re petrified at the
advent of these technologies, which is right around the corner. ”
To continue, the potential in new energy technology is so extraordinary
that if held back and then released suddenly it can bring about the very
panic that government is reportedly trying to prevent. Release of pressure
over time is safer than sudden release. Government has reason to be “
petrified. ” The magnitude of the change is above anything we have
experienced, including World War II.
 More likely the government is attempting to delay market awareness to
enable its corporate friends to restructure their market position . . . this “
policy actions in exchange for political contributions ” stance is endemic in
the Clinton Administration.
Imagine the horror of the pension funds, the mutual funds and other
investment vehicles to find that their key investment targets are about to
become worthless. They have paid their dues in the form of campaign
contributions and they want something back (as we saw in the Larry
Lawrence-Arlington National Cemetery affair). The pressure of the status
quo vested interest on the White House is enormous.
In the long run, of course, such political games are useless — a waste of
time and money. They can delay but not remove. They may aid the favored
political few but to the disadvantage of the many. What happens is, change
in the mix of winners and losers. The most sensible procedure for society
and the economy as a whole is to allow free markets and free flow of
information.
This is unlikely in the case of new energy technology because presently
influential groups (Novel says New World Order) are desperately fixed on
keeping their financial and intellectual investments intact.
For a moment imagine yourself a board director of Shell or AMOCO
and your research director has a report from your own laboratories that
concludes the cold fusion process is valid and has achieved over unity.
(This is actual fact for Shell and AMOCO). The elementary fact is that oil,
gas, and coal are maybe 15 to 20 percent efficient and you are looking at a
verifiable 100 percent competitor.
What we can say with certainty is that the new technology will be
dominant by the end of the 21st century, probably before 2050.
This is also futurist Arthur C. Clarke's view and his track record is
excellent. A similar view, but less forthright, is held by Gerald Celente,
president of the well-known Trend Research Institute.
Celente says new energy technology will be the “ single biggest
investment opportunity of the 21st century. ”
 The decades of equipment changeover from now to 2050 will be
overflowing with opportunity but also will create extraordinary losses for
the uninformed or the slow and tardy who operate on denial rather than
analysis. This is heads up time for energy investors.
Government and utilities are already pressing for legislation to pass
losses onto the consumer. California is scheduled to vote on a $7 billion
bond issue to retire utility debt. This is to remove the burden form
stockholders onto the public. It will, however, even if passed, be
insufficient. The Los Angeles Department of Water & Power debt alone is
about $7 billion.
At some point the cat is out of the bag. The unknown factor is when the
information in this report will become general public knowledge. It is
conceivable, but unlikely, that the government can delay for decades if the
news media continues unresponsive to any evidence of new energy
technology. This is unlikely.
Our sense is that the period 2000 to 2005, maybe 2010 will see financial
panic and wholesale dumping of any financial asset related to fossil and
atomic energy. This could spill over onto the house of cards built on
derivatives and junk bonds. The precise time depends on public awareness.
This suggests immediate pruning of investments. There is definite potential
for panic and free fall in stock prices.
Oracle lost 30% in one day and Oracle has a more favorable future than
many energy stocks. Balance against this the increasing world demand for
energy which acts as a cushion to some extent.
Timing? It is better to be safe than sorry, so move with deliberate speed.
Historically, our analyses tend to be way ahead of the pack (i.e., on Soviet
technology we were 20 years ahead of CIA, according to William Casey).
But remember that Zapata Offshore, owned by the Bush family with
excellent intelligence resources, got out of oil and gas completely some
years ago. You still have time to think, check and evaluate. You do not have
time to admire the scenery.
 We see strong probability that the market will begin to discount the
energy revolution in 1998-1999. We are first to warn but we have limited
circulation. We don ’ t affect the market. If Kiplinger or Barrons prints
these facts . . . watch out.
Announcements from firms now in pre-commercialization of new
energy devices look to 1998, and have done so for some years. Slippage in
introducing new technologies is common. On the other hand there are no
extraordinary engineering problems left to be solved. FTIR at one time
considered the low energy heat to be a barrier but conversion of low energy
heat to electricity has been looked at carefully with polymers as one
solution. These devices should be available shortly after the turn of the
century. The media blackout cannot continue once devices are in general
use and will collapse quickly. Generally, be skeptical about reporting in the
general media. It will not give you the full story.
Briefly, this is the first call. You have time. Above all, be prepared for
sudden moves in the energy market. But don ’ t get caught with the
investing herd looking for the exit.
If you need reinforcement or want a second opinion, because you are
highly risk averse, take a look at Infinite Energy , edited by Dr. Eugene
Mallove (see Reference section).
 Chapter 6
Opportunity

From the economic viewpoint new energy technologies are different to

fossil fuels where fortunes are made by monopolies or resource scarcity.
New energy is structurally more competitive and adapted to small
engineering firms in a competitive marketplace where the best product wins
out.

There are many reasons for this view (elaborated in The View From 4-
Space ). Essentially, the fuel is space or water universally available. The
device is not complex in itself. Technical expertise is the key to success and
is the core input. Not only are monopolistic elements absent but there is —
even this early in development — a range of competitive processes.
The rewards for a successful device are unbelievable, even without any
monopoly elements. Martin Fleischmann once calculated that the first
commercial device will be worth about $300 trillion. But he assumed
monopoly. In fact, even at this early stage competitive systems are
emerging . . . different engineering to the same end.
The market is global, vast beyond imagination, and will be divided
among several or many competing systems. For once in human history we
have the opportunity to eliminate scarcity, the basis of economics. We are
looking at the impossible: what is the demand for an almost free good, a
necessity worldwide in an almost free market? While supply cannot be
monopolized, there are virtually no costs (only device engineering) and no
economies of scale.

For a product with these properties the word “ risk ” takes on a different
meaning. When this penetrates the financial community the pioneers will
have trouble turning away the investment capital offered. The single major
problem will probably be the flood of scams. We have already seen with the
Dennis Lee free energy cross country tour . . . investors actually handed
over funds without sight of the device. In fact, Dennis Lee had no device,
just a car load of promises . . .and a rap sheet for fraud.
 The rewards are more than monetary. And the losses more than financial.
There is the psychological reward that these technologies will solve many
of the world ’ s nagging problems. Energy becomes almost a free good like
air and water. Non-polluting, non-political, non-monopolizing. With these
possibilities risk becomes secondary. The sociological and political spill
over is heavy. The world of pork bellies and derivatives become trivial, and
a competitive structure ensures that monopoly profit is not available for
political objectives as New World Order and political influence. Today there
are a dozen genuine ground floor opportunities and more in startup (where
we have no track record).

Lack of U.S. government support has forced R&D into the private sector.
This is tough on individual developers but in the long run will speed
development and benefit society. We are skeptical about government
involvement, it turns development into a political football. And the same
tired old revolving door specialists will attempt to use government access to
gain control. The private approach is fairer, much faster, more practical and
has more benefits to society, although pioneers like Pons and Fleischmann
have carried a heavy personal burden. In the long run this is the beneficial
road for society as a whole.

Above all this is technology with no monopoly controlled inputs, there is

no argument for government regulation. The only input apart from technical
know-how is space or water. Even the electrodes cannot be monopolized.
To be sure there is scarcity of platinum and palladium but titanium, nickel
and silver have also been used as well as solid state devices. In brief, the
barriers to entry are low, being mainly technical expertise.

The technology is now available through licensing to any entrepreneur

with technical ability, some capital and market knowledge. The problem
today is not reproducibility of the over unity effect but to reproduce the
conditions necessary to achieve the effect (i.e., electrode surfaces). This
simple point is vital and has been overlooked by science orthodoxy and the
media community. This is why technical expertise is vital.
The urgent factors for technology are those associated with mass
production and automated processes in materials science.
 We list below companies today developing components or systems in
cold fusion technology. At the time of this writing (December 1997) some
of these firms are interested in discussing partnerships or investment.
We cannot of course predict who will succeed but we are satisfied with
the technical ability of each firm cited. These firms already have technical
efficiency. They are now ready for the marketplace to test their efficiency
against each other. These are not Dennis Lee scam operations. These are
run by technically competent pioneers with years working on the
technology of cold fusion.

For more substantial investors who want to spread their risk under
capable management and who can qualify as “ accredited investors ” there is
a partnership proposal available with a minimum investment of $250,000:

--------------------------------------
NEW ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P., Greenwich, Connecticut, Managing
Partner: Daniel J. Cavicchio Jr.

Cavicchio is a known business executive (Marquis Who ’ s Who) with an

excellent track record. First with the consulting firm McKinsey &
Company, later with American Can as director, business development, and
since 1984 founder of Greenwich Venture Partners Inc., specializing in
turnaround situations. Contact: Daniel J. Cavicchio Jr., New Energy
Partners, 8 Sound Shore Drive, Suite 100, Greenwich, CT 06830.

--------------------------------------
TRENERGY INC.
President, Hal Fox

Major asset: license rights to the plasma injected transmutation

technology (a variant of cold fusion). Stock registered for sale only in Utah
and Nevada at this time (October 1997). Applied for sale of 500,000
common stock at $2.00 a share. Contact Tom or David Morrison in Salt
Lake City, 1-800-891-7779.
 --------------------------------------

PACE (Planetary Association for Clean Energy).

Dr. A. Michrowski, President. 100 Bronson Avenue, #1001, Ottawa,
Canada KIR 6G8.

PACE was founded in 1977 on the initiative of Hon. Chesley W. Carter,

chairman of the Canadian Senate Standing Committee on Health, Welfare
and Science. PACE has the North American license rights for Browns gas
(with unique capacity to reduce radiation in atomic waste). U.S. Dept. of
Energy is suppressing data. PACE is reputable organization and has more
credibility than Department of Energy. Looking for research partners.
Already used worldwide for high temperature welding (6,000 degrees).
Same principle as cold fusion — low temperature nuclear reaction.
--------------------------------------
JET ENERGY TECHNOLOGY INC.

President, Dr. Mitchell Swartz. Phone: (617) 237-3625 (voice/ fax)

Sells research kits — over unity guaranteed — for research only. (Note:
these demand strong technical ability).
--------------------------------------
BLACK LIGHT POWER Inc.

Malvern, Pennsylvania
Dr. Randall Mills started with the Pons-Fleischmann discovery using
light water, potassium carbonate electrolyte and nickel electrodes. More
recent work has used high temperature hydrogen gas and achieved high
output/input ratios. The Oregon-based Pacific Corporation has invested $1
million in Black Light Power along with local Pennsylvania investors.

It is reported that Reading Energy and Atlantic Energy have investments

under construction. The financial adviser is Dr. Shelby Brewer, former
assistant secretary for energy in the Reagan Administration. Black Light
Power Inc., Great Valley Corporate Center, 41 Great Valley Parkway,
Malvern, PA 19355; Fax: (610) 651-4940.
--------------------------------------

NOVA RESOURCES GROUP INC.

1553 Platte Street, Suite 301, Denver, Colorado 80202
Contact: Chip Ransford, (303) 433-5582

Manufactures electrochemical equipment for cold fusion work, including

IE system, a desktop cold fusion lab with dual or single
calorimeter/stoichiometer. $4,000-$6,000.

--------------------------------------
CLEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY INC (CETI)

One Lincoln Centre, 54000, LBJ Freeway, Suite 950, Dallas, Texas,
75240
Actively seeking qualified research and development partners. Has
Patterson coated beads system and U.S. patents. Research kits over unity
guaranteed with a one year license.
--------------------------------------

MAGNETIC POWER INC.

Box 880, Sebastopol, California, 95473; Fax: (707) 829-1002 Contact:
Mark Goldes

Works on devices to convert low temperature heat to electricity,

developed polymers, with low heat thermoelectric modules for cooling and
heating. Of interest to cold fusion technology. Not limited to cold fusion.
Voice: (707) 829-9391

--------------------------------------
HYDRO DYNAMICS INC.
 Rome, Georgia

Contact: James Griggs; Voice: (706) 234-4111

--------------------------------------

ENECO
University of Utah Research Park, 391-B Chipate Way, Salt Lake City,
Utah, 84108

Contact: Fred Jaeger

Patent licensing, joint ventures, co-operative research in low energy

nuclear reactions in solids.

--------------------------------------

THE BOELERWORKS
Diamondhead, Mississippi Contact: Evan Ragland

Manufactures the TRC series of cold fusion test reactors. These are
designed for university or company laboratory under a performance
guarantee of 3:1 output/input ratio.

--------------------------------------

KINETIC HEATING SYSTEMS INC.

Cumming, Georgia, 30130; Phone: (770) 889-8642, 1-800-496-4332;
Fax: (770) 889-2740

The Pope-Perkins Kinetic Furnace Commercial prototype now in testing.

Water fueled. Routinely achieves over unity ratios of 1.2:7.

--------------------------------------

CASE CATALYTIC FUSION PROCESS

Fusion Power Inc., Newfields, New Hampshire; Contact: Dr. L.C. Case
 Uses off-the-shelf catalysts (activated carbon loaded with palladium).
Positive test reports. Case now exploring commercialization for domestic
heat and power generation. Case has several degrees from MIT in Chemical
Engineering. Looking for joint ventures with power companies.

In brief, there is an emerging ferment of development activity, including

private cooperative arrangements between individual designers using
various systems and product developers. This is a healthy free enterprise,
more productive route than the Big Science/Big Government hot fusion
route using taxpayer funds. For example, in this cooperative arrangement if
a specific design does not meet performance standards it will be junked,
whereas in the Big Government mode the developers will try to continue to
keep funds rolling.

The precise marketing point reached by each firm is an in-house secret.

However, it can be assumed that water heaters and space heaters are in
development. These will be non-polluting, standalone units (there are no
economies of scale) not linked to the grid and with low maintenance. The
capital cost of generating electricity, relatively small, will be met by the end
user. The concept of “ utilities ” is antiquated. We know prototypes exist.
The questions today are production engineering and marketing strategy.
Movement Out of Oil and Gas

Sooner or later will come the rush to the exit for utilities. Some are
already creeping stealthily in that direction.
Without access to boardroom discussions it is almost impossible to
determine WHY a company has sold oil and gas assets . . .Trading assets
and properties is common in oil and gas. Further, in some countries there
can be regulatory pressure to sell assets. But here are three interesting cases:

Zapata Corporation

Zapata Offshore Co. was founded in 1954 by former President George

Bush, and partners to develop oil and gas properties. By the 1980s, Zapata
developed into a sizable company. Also during this time, George Bush
became first director of the CIA, then vice president, and finally president
of the United States. We know that CIA collects data on new energy
technologies. By the early 1990s Zapata had sold ALL its oil and gas
properties and the Bush family sold Zapata to Malcolm Glazer who has
taken the company into the fish protein business.
Calculated disinvestment of lucky chance?

UNOCAL Sales

On February 21, 1996, the New York Times reported the following:

“ In a continuing trend by major oil companies to sell off domestic assets

to finance exploration overseas UNOCAL said yesterday that it was
selling its oil and gas fields in California for $500 million . . . ”
Properties are being moved from majors to independents who then cut
costs and contract out operations.

Calculated dis-investment or lucky chance?

Update at July 1, 1998

In the last few months new discoveries and advances have been made.
The most significant is the emergence of work by chemical engineer Dr.
Leslie Case. In May, Case, formerly unknown, announced that he had been
working for six years on catalytic cold fusion and was awaiting grant of the
patent. The Case catalytic cell is a tested, reliable generator of excess heat,
simple and cheap.

The process is deceptively simple: heat palladium, activate carbon in

deuterium (heavy hydrogen) gas. No electrolysis. Generates reliable excess
heat at temperatures higher than P-F cold fusion (>150 ° C, up to 250 ° C).

From the industrial engineering viewpoint, the Case process has the
advantage of extreme simplicity. We anticipate numerous workers will
follow up with demonstration units. All the equipment is available off the
shelf and ideal for university laboratory work. The catalyst is commercially
available and deuterium gas is cheap and plentiful. (International Patent No.
WO 97743768, published Nov. 20, 1997).
 The Case catalytic cell appears to be far and away the most useful cold
fusion device yet . . . and Case has made full disclosure of the technology.

This is what the cold fusion phenomenon needed — the input of an

experienced chemical engineer to convert the laboratory phenomenon of “
cold fusion ” into an industrial engineered product. Cold fusion has now
bridged this gap by using catalytic reaction instead of electrical. For details,
read the patent (cited above) and Infinite Energy (Vol. 4, Nov. 19, 1998).

Combined with the enthusiasm and technical skills of Eugene Mallove,

the Case catalytic fusion device is the demonstration device that could
break the irrational barrier of “ official science. ” For more information,
contact Cold Fusion Technology, Inc., P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302.
Phone: (603) 228-4516.

British Petroleum

BP is the world ’ s third largest oil company. BP has a subsidiary, British

Solar, which has three plants in California, India, and Spain, manufacturing
thin film very efficient solar cells.

BP has sold its oil properties in Colombia and replaced this operation
with an office to sell solar technology and equipment.
 Chapter 7
Conclusions

We are looking at the impossible. What is the demand for an almost free
good, a global necessity in an almost free market?

While supply cannot be monopolized there are virtually no resource

costs, only device engineering and production costs and no economies of
scale.
For a product with these properties the word "risk" takes on a different
meaning. Sooner or later a potential entrepreneur with substantial capital
and drive will visualize the opportunities and put together a package of
capital and skills to bring the possibility to reality. Sooner or later this will
happen, it is only a question of "when".

When this event penetrates the financial world, the pioneers will have
trouble turning away the flood of capital offered. One problem will be the
usual scams, and we've already had examples of this phenomenon.

Rewards are more than monetary. As Methernitha has insisted, there are
sociological and spiritual aspects. And the losses are more than financial.
These technologies will solve many of the world ’ s intractable problems,
without Big Government intervention. This is an almost risk free device
with the attributes of a free good like water and air. Non-polluting, non-
political, non-monopolizing.

The developers will be more powerful than Governments and for this
reason the Methernitha Community has up to recently declined publicity for
their electrostatic over-unity device. It is difficult to comment on this
approach. We are all young in understanding this new technology which is
more than just cold fusion and over unity.

Yet in spite of this awe inspiring importance, the basic research is still
restricted to the backwoods of New Hampshire and a damp cold
underground laboratory in Hokkaido Japan, not in the lavish taxpayer
funded laboratories in California and Boston. A planet with such screwed
up priorities needs to take a good look at itself.
 The world of pork bellies and derivative becomes trivial. The
competitive nature of the cold fusion structure ensures that monopoly profit
is not available for political objectives and influence peddling. In fact much
of the vast governmental apparatus can be dissolved as unnecessary.
Without the need for oil there is no Middle East vital interest. Without
pollution, the pollution industry, and its powerful lobby disappears.

US Government opposition, stemming from the 1989 Bush-Seaborg

meeting forced cold fusion R&D essentially into the private sector although
some individual government scientists continue to do excellent individual
work and of course came under harassment for their dedication.

This peer opposition is tough on individual researchers, especially in the

early stages, but in the long run will speed development and benefit society.
Consequently we are skeptical about the need for government involvement
beyond funding basic research (as suggested by David Nagel of U.S. Navy)
and provision of seed money. Bring in Government and cold fusion
development becomes a political football, distorts the resource allocation
mechanism and enables the same tired old revolving door operators to use
Government access for influence and control. To replace an entrepreneur
using his own capital with a technocrat using taxpayer funds is the height of
folly. We should have learned that lesson by this time.

The private sector approach is fairer, faster, practical and beneficial to

society. To be sure the pioneers carry a heavy personal burden, but this they
know and recognize.
This is not monopoly technology. There is no argument for Government
intervention. The technology is available by licensing to any entrepreneur
with access to technical ability, capital and market knowledge. A start-up
entrepreneur doesn't need friends in high places or even lobbying assets.
There is nothing the politicians need to do for this technology, except vote
some seed money and keep out of the way. The technical problem today is
not duplication of a cold fusion process but the more limited challenges of
scale up, process control, electrode surfaces and creating the conditions for
reproducibility. There are unknowns but these are normal at this stage of
any new technology.
 References

For a quick authoritative overview get a copy of Infinite Energy , a bi-

monthly journal edited by Dr. Eugene Mallove, former Press Officer at
MIT. Address: P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302.

Compare this journal to the skimpy and negative comments in New York
Times, Wall Street Journal , and your local Big City newspaper.

More technical detail in:

New Energy News , P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158.

Cold Fusion Times , P.O. Box 81135, Wellesly Hills, MA 02181.

Future Technology Intelligence Report , P.O. Box 2903, Sacramento,

CA 95812. Monthly since 1990. Subscription: $65.00 per year.

Safe Aktuell (in German), published by Schweizerische

Arbeitgemeinschaft fur freie Energie. SAFE, Postfach 10, CH- 5704.
Egliswill, Switzerland. (This is the Swiss Association for Free Energy).

Confirming Reports from U.S. Government and Independent Sources

1.) NASA (Lewis Research Center, Cleveland). Memorandum No.

107167. Use Mills light water-potassium carbonate-nickel electrodes.
Excess heat power gains 1.06 to 1.68.

2.) EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto). Report, “

Development of Advanced Concepts for Nuclear Processes in Deuterated
Metals. ” All cells yielded excess heat from a few percent to 350 percent.
Used Pons-Fleischmann system. (a free copy available at
dauphinpublications.com)
 3.) U.S. Navy (Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China
Lake, California). Report # NAWCWPNS TP 8302, September 1996. “
Compelling evidence that the anomalous effects in deuterated systems are
real. ” Up to 30 percent excess heat.

4.) Los Alamos National Laboratory (Los Alamos, New Mexico).

Books

Mallove, Eugene, Fire From Ice . Wiley, 1991.

Manning, Jeane, The Coming Energy Revolution . Avery, 1991.

Celente, Gerald, Trends 2000 . Warner Books, 1998.

Antony Sutton, The View From 4-Space, Dauphin Publications 2015.

The Status of Cold Fusion, By Dr. David J. Nagel (Naval Research Lab)
Balanced, comprehensive introduction to cold fusion.

Movies

The Saint (on cold fusion). Released April 1997, Hollywood, California.

Free Energy: The Race to Zero Point . Video 110 minutes, $39.95, from
Cold Fusion Technology Inc., P.O. Box 2816, Concord, NH 03302.

Official Science Eliminates its Competition

There are at least half a dozen books by official scientists from MIT,
CalTech, and the University of California that purport to explain why cold
fusion cannot work.
 Unfortunately, these authors forget that one can never prove the
negative case in science. What these books prove is that science has lost its
way and apparently most scientists (in 1998) prefer their theoretical
assumptions over observable fact.

Their genius lies in funding, not science. This official group has conned
the politicians into funding only their science...and the innocent taxpayer
ends up paying their bills. Meanwhile, the honest pioneers have to fund
their own research.