A library of papers about cold fusion
The 26th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF26) was held at the Aiina Center in Morioka, Iwate, Japan in May 26 – 30, 2025.
Videos of the lectures are now available here: https://www.youtube.com/@SolidStateFusion.org-/videos
The International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ISCMNS) in collaboration with the Société Française de la Science Nucléaire dans la Matière Condensée (SFSNMC) will host the 16th International Workshop of Anomalies in Hydrogen Loaded Metals (IWAHLM-16) beginning Sunday evening September 1 through Wednesday September 4, 2024 in Strasbourg, France and online.
After the IWALHM-16 Workshop, participants are invited to attend a CleanHME Conference on Thursday, September 5th in the European Union Parliament building.
https://iscmns.org/workshops/iwahlm-16
Here is a video showing how Dr. Edmund Storms makes palladium samples that produce cold fusion reliably with a high success rate. The method results in finely divided, inert calcium oxide particles distributed throughout the palladium metal. Storms believes these particles are essential to producing the cold fusion effect. Storms explains the role of the calcium oxide particles here:
https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/
The International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science ICCF-25 was held on 27-31 August 2023, Radisson Blu Hotel, Szczecin, Poland.
The Book of Abstracts with the program is here:
https://iccf25.com/conf-data/iccf-25/files/ICCF25-book-of-abstracts_final.pdf
The live schedule, with links to Zoom meeting is here:
https://iccf25.com/live-schedule
How to participate virtually:
https://iccf25.com/conf-data/iccf-25/files/GUIDELINES%20FOR%20PARTICIPANTS%20virtual.pdf
U.S. Department of Energy Announces $10 Million in Funding to Projects Studying Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions
ARPA-E Selects 8 Projects to Apply Scientific and Rigorous Approach Focused on Specific Type of Nuclear Energy
02/17/2023
More details:
Recipients include:
Amphionic (Dexter, MI
Energetics Technology Center (Indian Head, MD)
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley, CA)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA)
Stanford University (Redwood City, CA)
Texas Tech University (Lubbock, TX)
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI)
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI)
Some cold fusion researchers feel that these eight projects were poorly chosen. The goals are framed as if cold fusion is the same as plasma fusion. People made this mistake in 1989. For example, several projects focus on neutrons. The first one says, “University of Michigan will provide capability to measure hypothetical neutron, gamma, and ion emissions from LENR experiments.” Some cold fusion experiments have produced neutrons, but most do not. It seems likely that neutrons are a secondary effect with a prosaic cause such as fractofusion, rather than being a primary signature of the reaction. Excess heat correlated with helium, or tritium production, can occur without neutrons, so looking for neutrons is not a fruitful way to detect or analyze a cold fusion reaction.
Here is the DoE ARPA-E list of 39 Teeming Partners who are working on cold fusion. The heading on this list says:
“By enabling and publishing the Teaming Partner List, ARPA-E is not endorsing, sponsoring, or otherwise evaluating the qualifications of the individuals and organizations that are self-identifying themselves for placement on this Teaming Partner List.”
https://arpa-e-foa.energy.gov/TeamingPartners.aspx?foaid=818bc746-84d3-4afc-bd17-bc7a7f05fb2f
Here is an announcement from The Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS), which is the European Commission’s primary source of results from the projects funded by the EU’s framework programmes for research and innovation. This is a report from 16 major laboratories at universities and corporations in Europe working on cold fusion. As noted below, the U.S. Army, Navy and NASA are also working this. Even the DoE is participating, albeit with only $10 million. See:
https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/951974/reporting
QUOTE:
Indications of nuclear events, typically weak neutron emissions and strong anomalous exothermic reactions have been detected during experiments based on Ni/C, Ni/Cu, Ni/Al, and other catalyzing elements both under hydrogen or deuterium atmosphere. Several potentially active materials have been designed and are being tested in different laboratories of our consortium. During a significant number of successful experiments, strong AHEs have been measured, thus demonstrating the effectiveness of the applied reaction activating procedures.Detected AHEs produced commercially promising COPs even if the most powerful exothermic reactions still last for relatively short periods. The power density achieved, however, is extremely promising. Bigger reactors will be tested next year. The cooperation between WP3 (Gas loading experiments) and WP4 partners (Materials preparation) has proven to be synergic and fruitful.
The gas-loading experiments have been combined with the accelerator experiments in which some chosen pure metallic targets and different alloys have been investigated to understand the enhancement process of nuclear reactions by means of the electron screening effect. . . .
The progress made so far is very impressive, although further experiments are still needed. During the first year, we have already developed new materials and activation processes which showed extremely promising results in terms of strong AHEs. It is very likely that at the end of the project we will be able to have a demonstration unit capable of producing large amounts of energy with a high Coefficient Of Performance.
[T]he total absence of climate affecting emissions from the HME generators could give a real, effective contribution to the containment of ongoing climate changes. . . .
This paper includes an extensive database of cold fusion literature, in an Excel spreadsheet: Freire, L.O. and D.A. de Andrade, Preliminary survey on cold fusion: It’s not pathological science and may require revision of nuclear theory. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 2021. 903: p. 115871.
The database is available at the publisher’s website. Click here to download it:
https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1572665721008973-mmc1.xlsx
A copy is here at LENR-CANR.org. Click to download:
In 1989 the Department of Energy decided not to fund cold fusion. The question was revised in 2004. A panel of experts recommended funding, but the Department did not follow the recommendation. There has been some low level research by DARPA, the Army and NASA over the years. This year, support for research has increased dramatically.
At the ICCF-24 conference in July 2022, ARPA-E announced that it will open funding opportunities for cold fusion starting in Augusts 2022. Researchers at NASA announced improved results. The Army and Navy both announced projects with 10 or 20 people, which is huge by the standards of cold fusion. The Navy program is being done in cooperation with other U.S. laboratories at NIST, industry and academia. Some of the slides from NASA, the Army and Navy presentations are shown below.
Here is Theresa Benyo of NASA:
https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-gtj93-12c6da2
In this podcast interview with Dr. Al Scott, Dr. Edmund Storms describes his latest results, in these papers:
Storms, E. The Nature of Cold Fusion (Cold Fusion Made Simple). in ICCF24 Solid-state Energy Summit. 2022. Mountain View, CA.
Storms, E. The Nature of the D+D Fusion Reaction in Palladium and Nickel (preprint). in ICCF-23. 2021. Xiamen, China.
In the podcast and paper, he describes his model that he believes explains the reaction, and shows how to make better materials. His recent materials have produced heat more reliably in a higher power level than earlier materials, but they have still not reached useful levels of power or enough reliability for commercial applications.
Storms reminisces about the early history of cold fusion at Los Alamos, where hundreds of people were interested in the results. The Department of Energy later rejected cold fusion and closed down research at Los Alamos.
. . .Los Alamos became really excited. I mean, the entire laboratory got involved. Numerous people attempted to replicate what Pons and Fleischmann had done. Meetings held weekly, attended by hundreds of scientists. Great enthusiasm was shown. So, I naturally got interested because I have access to equipment and knowledge that made it possible for me to replicate what they were doing. . . . So I set up to measure tritium. The group I was in studied tritium for the hot fusion program. And so we had available to us the world’s experts on tritium measurement and tritium behavior. . . .So this was the ideal situation for me, because we had . . . We knew tritium; we knew how to deal with it. . . . And at that time, we did not really understand that it is entirely different, wholly unusual mechanism was operating in these materials, having no relationship whatsoever to hot fusion. But luckily for us, that mechanism also made tritium.
He describes the difference between plasma fusion and cold fusion:
We know that Pons and Fleischmann were absolutely right. Their discovery was in fact valid, and it demonstrated a new mechanism for causing a nuclear reaction. In this case it only happens with a material having certain characteristics. . . . The problem is that in order for fusion to happen the two nuclei have to get close enough together that their energy states can interact. . . . The hot fusion program does this by applying kinetic energy to the nuclei, so they come together, smack into each other, by brute force. And that high kinetic energy overcomes the Coulomb barrier. . . . The problem is getting the rate high enough that it makes useful power. . . . Cold fusion, on the other hand, has a different problem. It has to also overcome the Coulomb barrier, but it does that by neutralizing the barrier as a result of electron charge. And in order to accumulate electrons in a state, in a relationship to the nucleus, that is nonchemical — ordinary electrons have a relationship to the nucleus in the chemical context; we understand that relationship very, very well — they have to acquire a different relationship now, to the nucleus, that is not understood and has not been seen before in nature. But, apparently, nature has a way of causing this structure to occur under certain conditions. When it occurs, the Coulomb barrier is neutralized, the two nuclei come together, and they result in fusion. That fusion produces various nuclear products. Those nuclear products now are slowly being identified. But because this is so unusual, and happens within a material rather than a plasma, it is very difficult to study, and it is also very difficult to understand.
A press release from the DoE ARPA-E announces $10 million to study low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR, or cold fusion) See:
ARPA-E Will Apply Scientific and Rigorous Approach to New Exploratory Topic Focused on Specific Type of Nuclear Energy
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced up to $10 million in funding to establish clear practices to determine whether low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) could be the basis for a potentially transformative carbon-free energy source. The funding is part of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) LENR Exploratory Topic, which aims to break the stalemate of research in this space.
“ARPA-E is all about risk and exploring where others cannot go, which is why we’ve set out with this LENR Exploratory Topic to conclusively answer the question ‘should this field move forward, or does it not show promise?’” said ARPA-E Acting Director and Deputy Director for Technology Dr. Jenny Gerbi. “We look forward to seeing the intrepid teams that come forward to approach this field of study with new perspectives and state-of-the-art scientific and technical capabilities.”
LENR Exploratory Topic awardees will pursue hypotheses-driven approaches toward producing publishable evidence of LENR in top-tier scientific journals by testing/confirming specific hypotheses (rather than focusing only on replication), identifying and verifying control of experimental variables and triggers, supporting more comprehensive diagnostics and analysis, and improving access to broader expertise and capabilities on research teams.
You can access more information on ARPA-E eXCHANGE.