• Bookmark this page

The Best Guide for the LA9 Area

LA9 news, reviews and local events in LA9 areas including Kendal, Oxenholme, Natland, and communities in LA9. Are these places the most relevant to this postcode? Let us know!

Calendar of
Upcoming Events
Scenes from around our area


"The site is looking good and you have obviously worked hard. It is interesting and informative. I hope you get the local support you need to keep this going."
- M Dodding

Easy Access

Councillor campaigns for Alternative Energy trials

Published: 4th October 2009 13:19

Blacklight PowerLocal Heald Green (Stockport) Councillor Derek Whitehead MBE MSc is trying to find a reputable scientific centre, which is academically brave enough to conduct trials about a new process - Blacklight Power involving hydrogen atoms which, under certain conditions, can produce substantial quantities of heat - without the problems of nuclear power. If this process of extracting energy from water can be verified and subsequently can be harnessed, it may provide a way to curtail production of carbon dioxide, reduce the global warming problem, substantially reduce the cost of electrical energy, and perhaps even be a major benefit to the world -see video


These trials would be a repeat of successful American trials by Professor Jansson (currently a Visiting Fellow at the University of Cambridge) , who put an American Scientist - Dr Randell Mills' Power Generation Process theory to the test and has demonstrated the production of a large amount of thermal energy.

Such trials would be able to verify his results (or otherwise) and a discussion with Professor Jansson indicates that the costs of such repeat trials would be a modest number of tens of thousands of pounds.

Cllr Derek Whitehead has written to Members of Parliament and has got the full backing of the Stockport Council chamber. He says "The standard of living in the Western World is dependent on the availability of moderately priced hydrocarbon fuels for heating and mechanical power, for the generation of more than 40% of our electricity, for transport and aviation, for the production of a huge range of synthetic chemicals, and last but not least, for the production of food, in that hydrocarbons provide the power for tractors and agricultural machinery and also provide the feedstock for pesticides and chemical fertilisers

With this level of activity, we are using gas and oil at a prodigious rate, and like North Sea oil, it will eventually run out. This will result in ever increasing prices for oil and may even result in the countries with an oil reserve deciding to keep it for themselves to maintain their standard of living, rather than sell it for astronomic levels of paper currency. This may lead to the potential collapse of the standard of living in countries without oil reserves. This social collapse, which may even become a war, will not happen in our lifetime, but it may happen in our grandchildren's lifetime.

"Although wind farms and wave power will help, they will not solve our energy problems - and though nuclear power will be very important, we will end up with waste products that we may have to store safely for thousands of years".

Dr. Randell Mills, an American scientist, has produced a new theory about hydrogen, and in this theory he predicts a transition to a lower electron energy level in the hydrogen atom, which under certain conditions can release substantial quantities of heat, positioned between chemical combustion and nuclear power - without the problems of nuclear power.

He calculates that, the new process can release 200 times as much energy as that required to get the hydrogen from water (or sea water) by electrolysis

The problem that we have is that most scientists will not accept Dr Mill's theory in entirety and because they will not accept it in entirety, they reject it in entirety - and this is the hall mark of a closed mind.

Professor Peter Jansson, assisted by some colleagues in the Chemistry Department, at the Rowan University in the USA, has conducted numerous relatively simple tests which successfully evaluated Dr Mills Power Generation Process and has demonstrated the production of a large amount of thermal energy, subsequently issuing technical papers which described these tests in detail. They have also requested other laboratories to attempt to reproduce their academic work, and ultimately to look into the processes which seems to be generating significant amounts of energy

"As a part of this benefit, it is interesting to consider a mental picture of a large container ship speeding across an ocean, using no fuel, other than a small amount of the sea water through which it is travelling."
IF we can obtain energy from water, this must be seen as the power engineer's Holy Grail and the scheme in this video looks promising, to say the least.

If the process works, the waste products of this process are energy depleted hydrogen atoms, which have been called hydrinos, which do not burn in air, and so the hydrinos may have to be released to the air if no other use is found for them. If this process were to replace one greenhouse gas by another, then the benefits would be limited. But it seems unlikely that the hydrinos would have any greenhouse effect.

Although hydrogen is, by far, the main constituent of the universe, the proportion of hydrogen in the earth's atmosphere is about 0.5 parts per million, whereas carbon dioxide is about 400 parts per million - nearly 1,000 times as much. The reason for this low proportion is that hydrogen is a very light gas and the individual molecules travel up through the atmosphere to heights in excess of 100 km, where the solar wind carries them into deep space.

Remembering that the mass of the earth's atmosphere is about 5,000 million million tons, we are going to have to produce a lot of depleted hydrogen to have much effect.

So in summary, if this process of extracting energy from water can be verified and subsequently can be harnessed, it may provide a way to curtail production of carbon dioxide, reduce the global warming problem, substantially reduce the cost of electrical energy, and perhaps even be a major benefit to the world - and, as a part of this benefit, it is interesting to consider a mental picture of a large container ship speeding across an ocean, using no fuel, other than a small amount of the sea water through which it is travelling."

The purpose of this article is to make the public aware that there are other potential energy sources available and there needs to be the political will for the government to back a reputable UK scientific organisation to repeat Professor Jansson's trials and verify them, or otherwise.  Stockport Council voted in favour at the latest Council Meeting to encourage policy makers at all levels to carry out research into new forms of environmentally friendly energy. Should you be interested in supporting Councillor Whitehead's campaign please forward this article to your local MP.



Bookmark and Share

Report this article as inappropriate


At 01:14 on 5th October 2009, Eirezion commented:
"Remembering that the mass of the earth's atmosphere is about 5,000 million million tons, we are going to have to produce a lot of depleted hydrogen to have much effect."

Since the reaction is an atomic level reaction (as opposed to an oxidation reaction) heat is produced at quantum levels compared to ordinary combustion. For equivalent BTUs produced via the BlackLight approach compared to combustion of hydrocarbon fuel, the amount of "hydrino" byproduct theoretically is approximately 200 times less than hydrocarbon byproduct and significantly less toxic.
At 16:46 on 8th October 2009, Derek commented:
I completely agree with this comment
To a first approximation, the number of hydrino molecules generated is about 1% of the number of carbon dioxide molecules generated, for the same amount of output energy
Even ignoring the effect of the hydrinos being carried into deep space, this is a massive step in the right direction
At 07:11 on 11th October 2009, dobermanmacleod commented:
First, it is (in my opinion) very likely that this new energy technology (using "fractional hydrogen" using a "Casimir cavity") is legitimate (the whole science department at Rowan has endorsed it in writing). Second, I would describe the resistance I've encountered spreading word of this too-good-to-be-true energy technology as cynicism, not skepticism. Finally, while it seems beyond the ability of most people to subscribe to the validity of this revolutionary technology, much much worse is the apparent indifference the few people who do understand that this is legitimate to fully understand the implications:

It means that hundreds of trillions of dollars in current energy infrastructure is badly overvalued. When it dawns on the herd that their investments are bad, it will lead an economic crisis the likes of which make the current economic crisis look like a picnic. While I fully endorse the introduction of this new high disruptive energy to the market place, the failure to fully think out the ramification is catastrophic.

dobermanmacleod@gmail.com (I've got much more to relate to the rare individual that understands this situation).
At 22:47 on 18th October 2009, RobertMStahl commented:
The effect of this technology is as important as anything, but like anything, must be taken in context. Looking at the very real work of James Lovelock, a UK scientist and environmentalist, there is significant evidence that this technology needs to be introduced, but only at a significantly measured rate over time. The reason is that the earth has, probably, already entered into an alternate transient state, like a person has when they have caught the flu, but haven't got the fever (and is capable of going to work...). The bottom line is that particles formed by the current industrial standards of utilizing the burning of hydrocarbons actually contribute as much as 3-4 degrees centigrade to the effect of global COOLING. The fever the planet is in the midst of already, which would eradicate 80 percent of the agricultural environment if, and when the temperature capitulates, would be launched almost immediately if the particles dropped out of the atmosphere, which only need about two weeks.
At 14:25 on 30th October 2009, SHolmes commented:
No scientific bravery is needed in the centre; merely medieval levels of ignorance combined with Emperor's-new-clothes levels of gullibility.

The alchemy of the middle ages looks like hard science by comparison to these so-called hydrinos; at least gold is commonly accepted to have come from lower elements, albeit in conditions you would not like to create on earth.

Creating energy from water may have had enough spin to raise several million $ for the medically trained Mr. Mills and his company. Not 5p of public funds should go there. What is the point of public education, if people lack the ability to go to Wikipedia and read the easy to understand reasons why Blacklight power will not work?
At 01:05 on 31st October 2009, Eirezion commented:
..exactly, forget Oxford, Cambridge or MIT, Wikepedia is the end all of scientific knowlege and a government mandate should be issued immediately that anything to the contrary is heresy, ...the only question is shall it be an executable offense?
Not five pence for this lot, what shall we do without an oil based economy, who needs free energy when the world is flat, I dare say Victoria! No, the bankers cabal deserve our trillions and the undying servitude of the pauper class through the centuries without question.
Let Columbus go seek Isabella.
At 01:07 on 31st October 2009, Eirezion commented:
- or as Bono said, "...with or without you".
At 15:37 on 31st October 2009, Derek commented:
The process in question employs a source of hydrogen, a non-chemical catalyst and other ingredients - notably molecules which supply a large surface area for the reaction to take place. The reaction is initiated by application of a small amount of heat. Several combinations of chemicals have been tested by Blacklight Power Inc. and most of these tests repeated independently by Rowan University in New Jersey.

The heat generated in the single-shot tests so far made public is in excess of the energy which might have been generated by any known chemical reaction, by a factor of up to 6.5.

Although details of a possible continuous, industrial process have not yet been made public, we understand that one or more engineering companies are working on this aspect, and that regeneration of the catalyst does not require significant energy.

So where might the energy come from? Dr. R. Mills of Blacklight Power claims that energy is extracted from the hydrogen atom by placing the electron in a closer orbit. Such energy can be around 200 times the energy which might be produced by burning hydrogen, i.e. re-combining with oxygen. In other words, far greater than the energy required to generate hydrogen from water molecules. This explanation runs counter to much of presently accepted quantum theory, and is regarded as nonsense by most of the physics community.

We are not at this time asking anyone to support these theoretical ideas, but we have met Professor Jannsen jansson@rowan.edu who directed the main replication work at Rowan University, and believe him to be honest and competent, (he is currently a Visiting Fellow at Clare Hall, the academic staff centre at Clare College, in Cambridge University). So we are keen to have the experiments replicated by other, highly reputable and independent laboratories, as a step towards investigating the detailed physical processes and evaluating all possible explanations. The cost will be very small as compared with investments now being made in various forms of research and development of clean energy technologies.
At 18:36 on 1st November 2009, Eirezion commented:
To the Global warming camp, be aware that Carbon Credits, Cap and Trade is a SCAM of the HIGHEST MAGNITUDE. For a rational discussion of facts I would refer the objective and rational person to:


And ask why Fleischmann and Pons have not received the Nobel Prize - clue; because it's objectives are political rather than scientific.

The obfuscation of knowlege appears to be the only growth industry.

Also for a more relativistic explanation of the theory see:

Alternate THEORY for Hydrino based on Relativity

At 02:02 on 2nd November 2009, RobertMStahl commented:
To the Psychological camp, be aware that all civilizations end in stereotype... Furthermore, the definition of gestalt is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. What has been the task of any elegant advancement in science (and, similarly, non-linear advancements in pure math), but to go after a new whole? What is the mindset for such a leap? Ask why the 'objective and rational person' would want to submit to such a finished whole as you suggest by your Fleischmann and Pons preponderence, especially when it is so obvious that nowhere near all the parts are being summed up by the analogy? Plus, it is highly unpoetically motivated, where I think such a discovery as Mills makes in GUT-CP, is terribly poetic related to such issues of a middle spectrum of energy, 5 equations mirroring the 5 kingdoms in biology, Mawell's equations of electrical distribution being the operative set to apply, the central equation analogous to our corpus colossum, (a Jacob's ladder?), and the introduction of the mathematical approach not only being based on physical phenomena entirely, but being terribly consistent with Bertrand Russel's hierarchical structures in math, like the fractal-like analogy of prime numbers when graphed indicating actual physical phenomena explained in Mills' physics.

None-the-less, I am largely interested in the Alex Jones piece, and article on the solely relativistic interpretation of the hydrino. Only, I feel fairly secure that the body of work of Lindisfarne will, ultimately, swallow up Jones work in the end, and the body of work of Mills will swallow up Froarty's too (if that is the author..., hard to tell).
At 03:12 on 2nd November 2009, Eirezion commented:
It may be that more was read into what I was trying to say than was intended. The general idea being; ...when we have potential breakthroughs in a new energy source, nonpolluting, cheap, a fundamental game changer in the world economy - then why are we getting the full court press from an environmental perspective (or whatever the media spin) to give up national sovereignty to be part of the carbon tax credit ponzi scheme.
There has been careful orchestration (according to Jones) of mass psychology; ...obfuscation of fact through pop culture or outright lies perpertrated by mainstream media.
Empires rise and fall, but so far it remains a fair and defensable assertion that we have inherent inaleinable rights, which is a basic truth expounded by Alex Jones, although he was obviously not the one to invent the idea, nor were Jefferson or the signers of the Declaration of Independence. Like the mathmatics used in Maxwells equations or to prove relativity, the words outline fundamental laws that govern the physical "temporal" and spiritual world, regardless of the misguided nature of a political elite. Basic truths that have existed only to be (re) discovered. The words are not the end all, it is the ideas they convey, as is the mathe used to grapple with a complex problem. I didn't catch the reference to Lindsfarne, and perhaps he stands to add another page (for lack of a better metaphor) to the body of knowlege.
I wasn't sure how to interpret "...all civilisations end in stereotype" - more people have died at the hands of their own government than in all wars combined, so do more people end by civilisation - if so the total would be less than the sum of it's parts, no? very strange how this gestalt stuff works. For an interesting take on how civilizations begin, read "The Earth Chronicles", by Zecchaiah Sitchin.
Fleischmann Pons made a potentially greater contribution to society than Albert Einstein - it was swept under the rug.
At 05:42 on 2nd November 2009, dobermanmacleod commented:
Frankly, I find the mention of Alex Jones combined with citation of Dr Randel Mills work to be obscene. How can you cite a member of the John Birch Society in the same breath as a scientific genius like Mills? While it is certainly true that vested interests will fight the introduction of such a revolutionary energy technology, the primary resistance now is coming from the scientific community that is fighting tooth and nail to preserve the current scientific paradigm that denies the existence of hydrinos (i.e. hydrogen in a lower quantum state).

By the way, I watched the first hour of Alex Jones new movie "Fall of the Republic", and you have to be nuts to believe the conspiracy theories spun in that ode to conservatism. Next thing you'll believe is that the BlackLight Process came from aliens. Get real people, Dr Mills and BlackLight Power has developed a revolutionary clean cheap energy production technology that will replace expensive and environmentally damaging fossil fuels.
At 08:46 on 2nd November 2009, SHolmes commented:
First off, it is Mr. Mills in a scientific context (as it would be disconcerting to be treated in an ER by a physics PhD who figured he could call himself "Doctor"). He came up with an idea 18 years ago. Whoopee. Lots of fairly savvy financial types, some in the same firms that brought us the dot com bubble, have invested in him and need at some point to get out. So the quest is on for a bigger fool. It would be enormously valuable to them, and of harm to whoever they push their shares onto, if they could get any kind of link to Cambridge or Oxford whatsoever. Rowan University is all well and good, but their institutional strength is in special education, not chemistry and certainly not physics. Cambridge and Oxford are about open reproducible science, so they should on that basis alone steer clear.

BPL has tons of money. They have had tons of time. Make a product already. At some point, which has perhaps already been passed, continuing can only be construed as fraud. The people who have invested in it should eat their losses rather than pushing them onto somebody else.

Science is about developing hypothesis and testing them. Without hydrinos, some unexplained heat generation is entirely uninteresting. Heat is tricky to measure, anyone who has ever sat down at a lab bench and tried to measure heat has some unexplained thermal results. Probably lots of them.

Pons and Fleischmann: perhaps their lack of a Nobel prize is related to the fact that I am not driving around in a cold-fusion powered car. In fact, nowhere on this planet, despite many very smart people and labs trying to reproduce their results, is there even a tiny little working cold fusion battery available. The Nobel prize is awarded for scientific achievement. Which means a documented hypothesis and consistent verified results, which they do not have.

Science is a social activity. Much of it, even in mainstream science, involves shooting down theories and experiments which are not up to snuff. It can really stroke the ego to say "this-and-this explains the universe", it is fun to make grand statements. But if they aren't willing to go through the scientific process, it is not science. What's left is somebody talking to himself, a cult, a faith or just a scam. None of which will power your car next year.
At 09:36 on 2nd November 2009, dobermanmacleod commented:
What nonsense. BlackLight Power has a working 50 kilowatt generator (see it in this CNN clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1iqa0dSJO0 ). Your reaction that a Harvard medical doctor can't be qualified to discover a new form of energy, and that Rowan isn't qualified to independently verify this new energy technology, is bigoted and close minded.

Yeah, measuring heat is "tricky," and science is a "social activity" (that's the ticket). It is attitudes like yours that made Mills go commercial:

As I noted in May, it would be odd, if Blacklight were a complete sham, for Mills to place himself in an end game in which he would be definitively proven wrong within just a year or two. So there does seem to be something deeper here. Physicists will deny the hydrino theory, and they may be right; perhaps that’s why there was a distinct note of smugness in Mills’ voice as he said, “The controversy and academic debate won’t stop commercialization.” --"Blacklight Power bolsters its impossible claims of a new renewable energy source," New York Times, 10-21-08

"In 2005, leaders at Greenpeace asked Randy Booker, chair of the physics department at the University of North Carolina at Asheville, to fly to New Jersey to investigate BlackLight's claims. Booker says he was skeptical at the outset, but during his visit, "I found that they really were producing a great deal of excess energy with hydrogen," he says. "Some people may disagree with the theory, but the experiments work." Booker believes that commercialization could lead more independent laboratories to validate BlackLight's claims. He now performs paid research work for the company.

Critics such as Park say the high-profile CEOs on BlackLight's board are following each other over a cliff. He could be right: Both Jordan and Jim Lenehan - a BlackLight investor, senior consultant at hedge fund Cerberus, and former president of Johnson and Johnson (JNJ, Fortune 500) - say they were led to the business by friends. But Lenehan, who does not sit on BlackLight's board, says, "It's no longer a high-risk part of my portfolio. It now has the ability to make a huge difference in the world of power."

Jordan, who earned science degrees from Yale and Princeton, expresses a similar sentiment.

"In the beginning, I thought it was worth putting money into because it was going to be a huge flop or a huge success." he says. "But when they made the breakthrough last fall, I saw the results."

That logic could explain BlackLight's success in garnering investors, despite its lack of scientific approval: While the academic community stresses theoretical backing for a new discovery, the business world is more concerned with practical applications.

Lenehan says, "My point of view is, just do it - generate power. In terms of influencing investors, it's about results."

Jordan agrees: "Theoretically, the bumble bee can't fly - but no one told the bumble bee. Now they're saying this can't be done, but it's happening."

While the company's followers already extol the high-energy, green, and thrifty virtues of BlackLight's technology, the rest of the world will have to wait for evidence until the fall of 2009, when the business promises to install its cells in power plants. Whether or not Mills' team meets that deadline will likely determine how BlackLight goes down in history - as a revolutionary startup or a flop 19-years in the making." --"BlackLight's physics-defying promise: Cheap power from water," CNN Money, 7-1-08
At 15:07 on 2nd November 2009, RobertMStahl commented:
You rock, dobermanmcleod...!
Anna T
At 08:00 on 1st July 2011, Anna T commented:
Has anyone heard any more on this project - is it still happening?

You need to log in before you can do that! It's only a quick registration process to join the AMA network and completely free.

Sign in or join now to post a comment
Find a Local Business
Back to Top
© Copyright 2005-2018 AboutMyArea

AboutMyArea Privacy Policy

LA9: LA9 Home | News | Community | Business Directory | Contact Us
AboutMyArea: Home | Site Map | Contact AboutMyArea | Terms & Conditions | Community Guidelines | Business Opportunity | Help

About Cookies