About Steven B. Krivit and New Energy Times
Citations to Krivit’s Books, Publications, and Conference Presentations
Citations of Krivit and New Energy Times in the News Media
Recognizing Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) and Debunking “Cold Fusion”
Steven B. Krivit is an author, editor, publisher, filmmaker, and international speaker who has specialized in low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) research since 2000. He has written extensively on the subject in four books, numerous peer-reviewed articles in mainstream science journals, and chapters for mainstream science encyclopedias. He is an editor of three technical reference books on nuclear energy research and has written more than 1,000 news articles on nuclear science research.
Summary of the 1989 “Cold Fusion” Conflict
The LENR field evolved from a controversial 1989 discovery by electrochemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons. They claimed to have observed a benchtop experiment that produced a then-inexplicable amount of energy, which Fleischmann and Pons initially attributed to a supposed room-temperature fusion process.
As further analysis provided better insight, along with the work of other scientists who followed them, fusion looked less likely as an explanation for the observed heating effect. Fleischmann and Pons appropriately shifted their hypothesis to a “hitherto unknown nuclear process,” but this shift went largely unnoticed. They were criticized for their initial hypothesis, and their experimental evidence of a new, energy-releasing phenomenon was attacked unscientifically by members of the scientific community along two primary approaches. First, critics argued that their experimental results did not match known fusion theory. This contradicted the scientific method that prioritizes experimental evidence over theoretical expectations.
The second approach was a widely publicized false allegation in 1989 by a rival chemist that Fleischmann and Pons had incorrectly measured heat production in their experiments. This false charge contributed to the scientific community’s rejection of the new science — and possible new source of energy — until the facts were uncovered in 2023. The “cold fusion” conflict remains one of the most bitter and divisive science controversies in modern history.
Debunking the Persistent Belief of a “Cold Fusion” Process
By 2008, Krivit had identified eight experimental facts that contradicted the theory of “cold fusion.” He presented his findings on Aug. 20, 2008, at the American Chemical Society national meeting. The nuclear products observed in LENRs, along with their pairings, energies, and probabilities, did not match those observed in thermonuclear fusion. Despite this, experimental evidence confirmed that some nuclear reactions were taking place in LENRs. In 2000, the belief in a “cold fusion” explanation regained popularity in the field. A decade later, in 2010, Krivit discovered and documented that the claimed new experimental proof of LENRs as “cold fusion” had been fabricated. Regardless, some people involved in the field continue to believe in an imagined “cold fusion” mechanism.
Recognizing the Widom-Larsen Theory
Starting in 2005, Krivit began looking at new an idea proposed by theorists Allan Widom and Lewis Larsen. The Widom-Larsen theory proposes a mechanism for LENRs that is based on electroweak interactions, which are a part of the Standard Model of physics. On Nov. 10, 2005, Krivit was the first person to report on the Widom-Larsen ultra-low-momentum neutron-catalyzed theory of low-energy nuclear reactions. This theory provides the first and only viable explanation for the nuclear phenomena observed in LENRs, suggesting that ultra-low momentum neutrons are the key.
In 1951, Albert Einstein intuited part of the concept elucidated 54 years later by Widom and Larsen. Despite rejection by proponents of the “cold fusion” hypothesis, the Widom Larsen theory (WLT) has gained recognition from independent parties including Boeing, DTRA, NASA, SPAWAR, and Johns Hopkins University.
Establishing LENRs
The term LENR was introduced by first-generation LENR scientists George Miley and John O’Mara Bockris in 1995. However, most of their peers continued to use the term “cold fusion,” partly out of habit and partly to assert their belief in room-temperature fusion.
From 2008 to 2016, Krivit led efforts to identify the field and research as low-energy nuclear reactions rather than “cold fusion.” By 2020, the term LENR had gained broader acceptance, allowing for various interpretations of the underlying process or processes without invoking the dubious room-temperature fusion hypothesis.
In 2015, Krivit collaborated with the U.S. Library of Congress to develop distinct library subject-matter headings: a refinement of the one for “cold fusion” and a new one for LENRs. In 2016, Krivit published the first U.S. books under the new LENR cataloguing heading.
Publications and Encyclopedias
Link to Steven B. Krivit’s Books, Publications, and Conference Presentations
Krivit is the owner and publisher of the New Energy Times news service. New Energy Times maintains a separate LENR Reference Site, consisting of more than 700 Web pages and 2,000 PDF documents about LENRs including basic information, scientific references, investigation reports, historical references, and archives.
Krivit is the leading author of review articles, encyclopedia chapters, and books about LENRs. He was invited to write and edit for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Elsevier, and John Wiley & Sons. He was an editor for the American Chemical Society 2008 and 2009 technical reference books on LENRs, as well as the editor-in-chief for the 2011 Wiley Nuclear Energy Encyclopedia. His most recent books are the highly acclaimed three-volume Explorations in Nuclear Science series: Hacking the Atom (Vol. 1), Fusion Fiasco (Vol. 2), and Lost History (Vol. 3).
In the Media
Link to Citations of Steven B. Krivit and New Energy Times in the News Media
Krivit and New Energy Times have been quoted or cited on LENRs in the U.S. and internationally, and Krivit has appeared on television and radio discussing LENR research. Although enthusiastic about LENR research, Krivit has also conducted investigations that uncovered significant misleading claims, including those made by Russ George, Andrea Rossi, Michael McKubre, and George Miley.
Lost History of Transmutation Research
While performing research for his book Hacking the Atom, Krivit uncovered an entire body of atomic research that had been forgotten and omitted from history and science books. In the 1910s and 1920s, years before scientists had developed an understanding of the nuclear structure of the atom, many low-energy-input experiments were reported under the term transmutation. It was, in fact, a prequel to the modern era of LENR research.
At the time, this transmutation research was known by scientists and by the general public. It was reported in popular newspapers and magazines, such as the New York Times and Scientific American. Papers were published in the top scientific journals of the day, including Physical Review, Science, and Nature. Prominent scientists in the U.S., Europe, and Japan and even Nobel Prize recipients participated in this research. They reported anomalous production of noble gases and increases in the abundances of rare metals.
However, the experimental results could not be explained by any scientific theory or principle. The results were difficult to replicate and generally were assumed to be the result of experimental error. By the 1930s, it was all dismissed as error. In his book Lost History, Steven Krivit is the first person to have critically examined and reviewed the early 20th century transmutation research. Krivit credits a man named Robert A. Nelson and his book Adept Alchemy for leaving behind the bread crumbs that helped Krivit find this long-forgotten history.
Rutherford Nitrogen-to-Oxygen Transmutation Myth
While conducting research for his book Lost History, Krivit stumbled on a 70-year myth that credited physicist Ernest Rutherford with the discovery of the first artificial transmutation. The credit belonged, instead, to a research fellow working in Rutherford’s laboratory named Patrick Blackett. The myth started with Rutherford, who, in 1932, began claiming the discovery for himself.
In January 2017, Krivit contacted prominent scientific and academic institutions in an effort to correct the recorded history. Scholars at the American Institute of Physics, Atomic Heritage Society, Cambridge University, Imperial College London, the Institute of Physics Digital Education, the Nobel Foundation, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Royal Society, University of California Santa Barbara, the University of Manchester, and the U.S. Department of Energy concurred with Krivit. Although the Nobel Foundation removed the discovery credit from Rutherford’s biography page, it was the only institution to refuse to reassign the credit to Blackett.
Krivit is directly acknowledged on the American Institute of Physics Web site and the Chemistry Views Web site. He was invited to contribute a letter to the Proceedings of the Royal Society A and cited by the U.S. Department of Energy. Krivit was credited by the following representatives: David Surman, the interim chair of the AIP Board of Directors; Malcolm Longair, the director of Development of the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge; Tom Whelton, dean of the Faculty of Natural Sciences at Imperial College London; Martin Schröder, vice president and dean, University of Manchester; and Eric Boyle, chief historian, Office of History and Heritage Resources, U.S. Department of Energy.
Fusion Reactor Power Myths
While conducting research for his book Fusion Fiasco, Krivit stumbled on a widespread misunderstanding about the most powerful fusion reactor result. This record-setting result occurred in the Joint European Torus (JET) reactor. This led Krivit to realize that a similar misunderstanding had developed about the projected result for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). The claims about these reactors are the subject of Krivit’s 2011 film “ITER, The Grand Illusion: A Forensic Investigation of Power Claims,” released on April 11, 2021, on Vimeo and YouTube.
JET had been widely reported to have produced thermal power from fusion at a rate of 67 percent of the input electrical power the reactor consumed. Krivit found that that rate was actually only one percent. ITER had been widely reported as designed to produce thermal power from fusion at a rate 10 times greater than the input power the reactor is designed to consume. From 50 megawatts of input power, proponents of ITER claimed the reactor would produce 500 megawatts of thermal power from fusion.
Krivit explained that the 50-megawatt value applied only to the injected heating power used to heat the fuel. Krivit located a dozen sources that revealed that the actual input power for the overall reactor would be 500 megawatts to initiate the reaction and at least 300 megawatts (more likely 440 MW) throughout the reaction. Krivit’s investigation shows that, accounting for conversion losses, and normalizing input and output values for an apples-to-apples comparison, the ITER reactor, if it works correctly, will be equivalent to a zero net-power reactor. Krivit published this information on Oct. 6, 2017, and in the following months and years, major international organizations involved in fusion research corrected their public statements.
An investigation produced by radio journalist Grant Hill aired on the Philadelphia PBS affiliate WHYY on May 7, 2021, and was the first mainstream news outlet to release a follow-up story. Krivit was featured on the radio program along with former ITER scientist Mark Henderson. Hill found that, despite Henderson’s recognition of the need to communicate accurately to public audiences, Henderson had also made misleading public claims about ITER.
National Ignition Facility
On August 29, 2021, Krivit was the first to report the real input energy, 400 MJ, required to operate the lasers at the National Ignition Facility. Many news organizations, deceived by the lab managment’s propaganda, reported that the NIF experiments consumed only 2 MJ.
Fusion Reactor Fuel Illusion
For at least 50 years, fusion scientists had been telling the public that the fuel for nuclear fusion is “abundant, virtually inexhaustible, and equally accessible to everyone, everywhere.” They had been saying that there was enough fuel in ocean water to provide power for humanity for billions of years. The investigations of Mr. Steven B. Krivit, publisher of New Energy Times, exposed and shifted this false narrative.
New Energy Times published a preliminary analysis on the tritium fuel issues on July 1, 2021, in slides 67 through 83 of this presentation. On Oct. 10, 2021, we broke the story that there were insufficient quantities of tritium to run promised nuclear fusion demonstration reactors. Wired magazine was the first mainstream news media organization to publish a follow-up story; Science magazine was the second. On Jan. 8, 2022, we broke the story that there is no environmentally acceptable and approved method of enriching lithium for the lithium-6 that would be needed to artificially make tritium. As of November 2024, no mainstream news media organization had published a follow-up story on the lithium problems.
Rather than “abundant, virtually inexhaustible, and equally accessible to everyone, everywhere,” the fuel that would be required for commercial fusion reactors, both the tritium and the enriched lithium, does not exist. According to a 2020 peer-reviewed paper we located by a group of internationally recognized fusion fuel experts, no known science or technology can produce the fuel needed for future fusion power plants.
Donate
Make a tax-deductible donation to New Energy Times via our fiscal sponsor Media Alliance, a federally designated 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.