According to a report in the new technology journal Infinite Energy (Issue 41, 2002), the U.S. Patent Office has approved a cold fusion patent. Although the details behind the patent are being withheld for proprietary reasons, according to Infinite Energy Editor-in-Chief Eugene F. Mallove, U.S. Patent #6,248,221 for "Electrolysis Apparatus and Electrodes and Electrode Material Therefor," issued to Randolph R. Davis and Thomas F. McGraw, is definitely a patent for a form of cold fusion technology. The Davis and McGraw patent cites several cold fusion papers, including Pons and Fleishmann's 1989 article "Electrochemically Induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium".

Mallove, a Harvard Ph.D. with a Master of Science Degree in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering from MIT, called the USPTO's decision to issue the patent a "landmark" decision. To those familiar with the evolution of cold fusion, it is clear why Mallove characterized the development in breakthrough terms. The USPTO has a long history of disdain toward cold fusion, and routinely rejects patents solely on the premise that cold fusion is a form of "perpetual motion," and thus impossible.

Why the Davis and McGraw patent was allowed to slip by the usual cold fusion censors remains a mystery, but while it is certain Patent #6,248,221 represents a breakthrough, it is not the first time a cold fusion patent has fallen through the cracks at the USPTO. A cold fusion device invented by physical chemist James Patterson is patented under U.S. Patents #4,943,355 and #5,036,031. According to Mallove, the most recent Patterson patent was granted by accident in 1994: "[This is the] first U.S. patent granted in the cold fusion field," he reports, "the DOE [Department of Energy] made a mistake and didn't squash [the patent] as they did to several hundred others. They tried to stop it many times but failed."

It is not likely that the USPTO has changed its decade-old anti-cold fusion stance, but the existence of these patents insures that more are likely to slip by, gradually paving the way for commercialization of cold fusion technologies already shown to be viable in laboratories around the world.

Davis and McGraw, in a paper presented at the American Nuclear Society's 33rd Intersociety Engineering Conference on Energy Conversion ("Critical Factors in Transitioning from Fuel Cell to Cold Fusion Technology"), explain why more patents are likely to be issued, even by the perennially biased U.S. Patent Office:

Many scientists, engineers, and investors have given cold fusion serious attention since Pons and Fleischmann discovered it in the mid-to-late 1980s. The New Energy Partners venture captial firm, for example, has supported companies with working prototypes, and several prototypes are being tested to determine heat output levels and reaction rates. Approximately 1500 papers from technical journals and conferences have reported some degree of replication of the cold fusion effect (800 in U.S.); 300 related patent applications have been developed in the U.S.; and 100 patents have been granted in Japan.

According to Mallove, Davis and McGraw predict the advent of cold fusion based 10kW electricity generating home units in the foreseeable future. Mallove estimates the ultimate cost of the electricity generated by the devices to be far less than one cent per kilowatt-hour. This is compared to the 1999 national average of over six cents per kilowatt-hour, as estimated by Public Citizen (www.citizen.org).

Even if technology promising a 80-90% reduction in energy costs does not compel the USPTO to adopt a more open-minded stance toward cold fusion, it is certain that the newest cold fusion patent, and the bold predictions of new energy researchers, will serve to bring more scientists back into the cold fusion fray.

David Jinks -- February 2, 2001

 

To contact InfoSource Research, write: PMB 210, 4820 Yelm Hwy SE, Suite B, Lacey, WA 98503 E-mail: contact@InfoSourceResearch.com