Chemical & Engineering News Fails to Address Errors in Reporter’s “Cold Fusion” Article
Stephen Ritter, Chemical & Engineering News journalist
Dec. 2, 2016 – By Steven B. Krivit –
On Nov. 7, 2016, Chemical & Engineering News, the magazine of the American Chemical Society, published a deeply flawed cover story by Stephen Ritter about low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR). The article contained four major errors.
The same day, I sent a letter to Bibiana Campos-Seijo, the editor-in-chief of C&EN. The magazine’s word-count limitation policy on letters to the editor permitted me to address only one error. Campos-Seijo published my letter on Nov. 28.
I have known Stephen Ritter for a decade. He has repeatedly failed to distinguish between “cold fusion,” the erroneous idea that deuterium nuclei can overcome the Coulomb barrier at room temperature, and LENRs, which do not make such a presumption. I explained the terminology problem to Ritter in 2012.
In August 2016, I sent him an advance copy of my book Hacking the Atom. In September, soon after I told him that it was on sale, Ritter told me that he was writing a new article on LENR. Given what he wrote in C&EN, Ritter apparently read nothing in the book and missed its most important points.
Four days after his Nov. 7 article published, I began asking Ritter questions about his sources and his data. In the course of 10 e-mails between us, I explained to Ritter that his facts seemed very wrong, and I told him I would provide him with corrections. On Nov. 15, on New Energy Times, I published “Correcting the LENR Record (Chemical & Engineering News),” addressing the other three errors:
- 1. Ritter wrote that electrochemical LENR systems can produce more than 25 times as much power as they draw. In fact, typical results of those systems produce excess heat at an average peak of only 1.38 times the electrical input power.
- 2. Ritter wrote that nickel-hydrogen LENR systems can produce more than 400 times as much power as they use. In fact, the best credible results of those systems have produced excess heat at an average peak of 1.3 times the electrical input power.
- 3. Ritter wrote that Andrea Rossi has developed working versions of industrial 1-MW thermal power plants. In fact, Rossi has been convicted of fraud in a previous business venture, and all evidence indicates that he has nothing but smoke and mirrors now and has probably perpetrated a fraud in his current power-plant claims.
On Nov. 15, I sent the link to my article to Ritter. Ritter did not respond. I also sent the link to his editor, Campos-Seijo. She wrote, “I was very interested to read it.”
Because neither Ritter nor Campos-Seijo gave any indication that they would correct the errors in the C&EN article, I sent an e-mail to Donna J. Nelson, the president of the American Chemical Society and a professor of chemistry at the University of Oklahoma. Two hours later, Nelson replied.
Steven, thanks for your email. My research area is not even close to this science. However, I do understand how important it is to have science rigorously correct in publications, including in C&E News. From your email, it appears that there could be misstatements in the story, and if so, a correction would be needed. If a correction is needed, the sooner the better. If there are errors, the story could inappropriately influence other scientists’ research, grant proposals, career decisions, etc. When scientists disagree, there are rules for sorting that out, which as I recall are time-consuming. However, here the goal is merely to determine the validity of a news story. It seems to me this could be done more simply. Therefore, may I make a suggestion? Have the science in this story evaluated by an impartial and knowledgeable person or group, such as ACS NUCL member(s). I suggest getting in touch with Paul Benny, NUCL chair, (bennyp@wsu.edu) in order to see if he is willing. Then, if a correction is needed, C&E News can do it rapidly. I hope this is helpful.
I sent Nelson a summary of the errors in Ritter’s C&EN article. I also wrote, “If requested, I will gladly participate in and support a review of Ritter’s article by an impartial scientist or group. However, I am satisfied with the facts in my publication record on this matter. It is not incumbent on me to initiate such a review.”
In fact, on Nov. 16, the wheels of justice began closing in on Rossi. The fraud lawsuit against him, filed earlier this summer in Florida federal district court by North Carolina company Industrial Heat, has moved forward. Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga denied Rossi’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Furthermore, her description of Rossi’s actions includes “complete fabrications … using fatally flawed methodologies.” The likelihood that Rossi’s claims were fraudulent was high, as I reported five years ago.
Several people have posted comments to Ritter’s article on the C&EN Web site, informing readers of Ritter’s errors. The only response Ritter provided was this one, on Nov. 23:
Rather than directly addressing any aspect of his errors in the deeply flawed C&EN cover story, Ritter directed his readers to a “cold fusion” promotion Web site that hosts a chat list. The message linked to by Ritter does not address any of the serious errors in his C&EN article, nor does it identify factual errors in my critique of his article. Instead, the message that he offered as an answer to my substantive criticism of his cover story was an erroneous personal attack on my character. That message was not flattering to Ritter, either: it read, “The Ritter article was shallow and misleading in many ways.”
On Nov. 28, Scientific American, a premiere popular science magazine, without knowing any of this detail, published a reprint of Ritter’s article on its Web site. I will send Scientific American a copy of my critique on the C&EN article.
The American Chemical Society (ACS) has an outstanding reputation and long history of respectable science. I will also send a copy of this article to Donna J. Nelson, the ACS president, and ask whether the C&EN article and Ritter’s behavior reflect the journalistic and scientific professionalism of the ACS.
Questions? Comments? Submit a Letter to the Editor.
To the Editor:
I was associated with NiH experiments conducted by Thermacore Corp working with Randall Mills in 1993-1996. They measued long term excess power otputs as high as 97 watts.
Chuck Haldeman from MIT Lincoln Laboratory replicated the Thermacore work in 1995 and got significant excess heat production. Unfortunately, Chuck was unable to scale the exceed power beyond 10 watts.
Chuck retired from Lincoln and I too left government service and had no further contact with Thermacore. Only recently, we learned that Thermacore made one final experiment in late 1996 to assess the role of Nickel surface area and reaction temperature.
They loaded 5 pounds of nickel powder together with 1/2 pound of K2CO3 mixed together. They used K2CO3 powder as a means of introducing the potassium catalytic activity. They introduced hydrogen gas at 30 psi instead of generating hydrogen with electrolysis This allowed them to increase the temperature of the reaction vessel.
This experiment experienced a massive runaway reaction that melted the 50 pound, stainless steel reaction vessel. This heat release exceeded any potential chemical energy by more than a factor of ten.
We are currently setting up to replicate this runaway reaction with the guidance of Thermacore personnel associated with the 1996 runaway experiment.
A repeat of the heat release has the potential to open up the LENR field and allow for experiments that will elucidate the underlying reasons for the energy.
Brian Ahern, Acton, MA
Dec. 4, 2016
To the Editor:
The references and accusations about to Dr. Andrea Rossi accusing him of “possible fraud” are outrageous and third class journalism. His Italian fraud conviction was overturned. To site this without stating the facts is simply character assassination.
Bernard Koppenhofer, Fort Collins, CO
Dec. 4, 2016
Dear Mr. Koppenhofer,
This story is very old and sometimes we forget to mention the citations for the benefit of new readers. The idea that Rossi’s fraud conviction was overturned comes from Rossi himself, for whatever that’s worth. Keep in mind that even some of Rossi’s supporters admit that he lies, according to Paul Burns, the publisher of the former ecatnews.com.
As for citations, here are 105 citations of Rossi’s Italian financial and environmental criminal history.
I would encourage you to read the summary of the Rossi story, at this link. If you still feel we have unfairly mischaracterized Mr. Rossi, please get back to us. On the other hand, if you appreciate the efforts we are making to inform readers about LENR, we would love to hear back from you as well.
Warm regards,
Steven B. Krivit
