Sveinn did a radio interview
Sveinbjörn, made a translation - it is here:https://goo.gl/RT71Sa
Q: What is cold fusion?
A: Conventional release of hydrogen power, such as in hydrogen powered cars is a chemical reaction between oxygen and hydrogen that results in the formation of water and release of chemical energy. Cold fusion releases energy in a similar way as happens in the sun by binding of hydrogen nucleus to form helium. This is therefore nuclear energy but not chemical.
Q: OK, is this dangerous process, sounds like dangerous? Nuclear power, hydrogen...?
A: Yes, this is a dangerous process as it happens in the sun and if you try to replicate the sun you will have a very dangerous and highly radioactive process. Since 25 years ago when cold fusion surfaced the main argument of the skeptics has indeed been that the scientists originally demonstrating the effect did survive the experiment.
Therefore, what they experienced could not have been a fusion process but something else. However, the cold fusion experiments that have
been conducted until now have shown extremely low radiation values.
Q: We all know bad nuclear accidents, such as Chernobyl and Fukushima, do we need to show precaution if we would start harvesting cold fusion as energy source?
A: Yes, precaution is necessary. So far no signs of radiation have been observed but with additional research we will know for sure if the process is always and absolutely free of radioactivity. It is too early to tell at this point in time.
Q: Ok, if it is possible to harvest this type of energy, how complicated is it to build the necessary power stations and how much energy could we expect to be able to generate?
A: Well, it seems to be possible to run the process with a relatively simple equipment, for research purposes we have equipment that easily fits into a corner of a normal room. Even a 1MW power generator fits into a relatively small space. Compared with our geothermal power stations where the energy-source comes from a deep drill-hole, the generating energy-source will be much smaller in size.
Q: Can this technology be used anywhere in the world?
A: Yes, you could say that this technology will revolve the energy market, but we are not there yet, this publication supports the numerous previous publications demonstrating excess heat under circumstances were such energy release should not occur. It provides an understanding of what could be happening, thereby hopefully focusing future research effort on a more focused pathway that will eventually accelerate the progress.
Q: This looks promising and at this time where the leaders of the world are trying to find a way out of using hydro-carbonates as the main energy source, this could be the answer they are looking for?
A: Yes, but the current task is to convince other scientists that this whole thing is not nonsense and that they should spend time and effort into this research field.
Q: Do you then believe that this energy source will totally eliminate the use of hydro-carbonates as energy source?
A: Yes, as long as we can reach sufficiently high reaction rate. There are already a number of groups, public and underground, that claim to have already reach this or that level of power but science has not given this the attention needed to explain what is actually happening.
Q: I assume that this is not embraced by all, there is a large oil industry out there?
A: Yes, but it is not the only business in the world and the rest should be satisfied.
Q: Have you experienced criticism or pressure to withdraw from the research?
A: No. There is probably only around thousand people around the world following the field and making experiments that are leading to excess heat generation. Our publication should be looked at as a step to explain why many of those other experiments are providing seemingly randomly excess heat.
Q: Can you predict how long it will take science to complete the groundwork?
A: Well, no, the resources being spent on this field are very thin so it is hard to predict how long that would take. However if significant science resources would be focused on this field, we cold reach that point of understanding in 1, 2, 5 or 10 years. Hard to say.
Q: Should the Icelandic authorities increase the funding to this field especially?
A: Well, my group will just submit for national research grants like any other scientists here does were the submissions will be classified and rated through a
peer-reviewed process. The Icelandic government is increasing significantly funding for research so there is no need for any other involvement from the state. However the energy companies should most likely spend some of their funding on this field as this is a dynamic world that we live in. At some point in time the energy companies will need to make the decision to change their policies due to changes in technology and face the facts that as energy supplier, they can no longer do things as they are used to.
Q: There has been a loud debate here in Iceland regarding building of new hydropower stations due to environmental concerns, how will this affect that debate?
A: Well, you can in general say that the better that the performance of this technology will get, more and more conventional technologies used for energy generation will become obsolete. The most expensive technologies will be the first to go, probably starting with solar and wind but then carry-on down the ladder. If developers manage to create really high performance solutions, it will eventually kill hydropower as well.
Q: This is exciting and obviously a field starting to pick up speed, but you scientist are now asking for stronger financial support?
A: Well, first we need the scientific acknowledgement that this is actually real science providing real results that should not be taken lightly. There are already significant funding spent on all types of research but not necessarily on the most important fields.