From: Integrity Research Institute []
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 7:50 PM
Subject: Future Energy eNews

Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Red
IRI Banner

MARCH 2012


Dear Subscriber,


Our story #1 is so spectacular that it is being submitted to New Scientist magazine in the hopes that it is sufficiently newsworthy to their readership as well. We had two breakthroughs presented at SPESIF 2012 which also directly relate to available IRI publications. The first was the presentation by Dr. Moddel proving zero-point energy emission from gases in Casimir cavities. (See related story #4 showing light emission from zero-point energy dynamic Casimir cavities from New Scientist). The second was the breakthrough announcement from Mike Gamble that Boeing has been using inertial propulsion for moving satellites for years, which confirms our long-term IRI advocacy (with multiple inertial propulsion reports) when no other school or institution in the country recognized its value!

It is a direct impact on the energy costs for space to have private industry find a less expensive fee for access to space low earth orbit (LEO). That is story #2 on SpaceX courtesy of Dr. Paul Werbos from NSF, who also graciously gave SPESIF 2012 a wonderful remote presentation through webcast (see for online video).

IRI could not have written a better story #3 than to report a discovery of something exceeding 100% efficiency in energy. Thanks to a heads-up from one of our readers, this summary of a Physical Review Letters journal article is the real thing we hope for to signal a new energy source emergence. Though apologies are given in the article for the low level of light that seems to be related to the anomaly, still the nature of the energy source that provides the boost needs to be considered for such a 2X energy output vs. input. Of course, based on our concurrent stories (#1 and #4), it is likely that there is a quantum vacuum explanation. 

With story #5 presenting the latest ARPA-E call for transformational energy technologies, it may be a good place for cavitation fusion or sonofusion inventors to seek funding. IRI attempted to arrange a second cavitation fusion presentation for next month but was cancelled by the scheduled presenter after all the arrangements were made. We hope our IRI members who responded are not too inconvenienced by the change of plans. Instead, you can see a short interview with our first cavitation fusion interview with one of the world's experts from SPESIF 2011, Dr. Max Formichev-Zamilov from Penn State University on the new IRI release DVD, "Breakthrough Developments in Energy and Propulsion" (see ad at bottom of FE eNews), along with four other amazing scientist interviews from the same SPESIF conference, thanks to reporter Matt Baird.


Thomas Valone, PhD,PE   





IRI website QR Code



1) Breakthrough Energy Technologies Presented at SPESIF 2012


Integrity Research Institute, Press Release, March 26, 2012,

The recent Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF) held at the University of Maryland's Riggs Alumni Center on February 29 - March 2, 2012 had amazing breakthrough technologies presented. 

The opening night featured two presentations on low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), including Dr. David Nagel from George Washington University on the science and business of LENR. The follow-up presentation remotely by Sterling Allan from New Energy Congress was proof that a breakthrough has occurred in this hotly contested field. Referring to his recent trip to Greece, Sterling reported on the Defkalion company's progress in producing a sustained heat output in the kilowatt range with a proprietary catalyst. The webcasted presentations are also online at in an Adobe Connect format which launches automatically. There was some trouble with the March 1st presentations since a Mac was used for the first few of them but most of them over the three days include the PowerPoint slideshow and concurrent audio and video.

The best presentations of a true breakthrough the next day consisted of Dr. Garret Moddel from the University of Colorado and also Mike Gamble from Boeing. Garret discussed his experimental investigation into the zero-point energy emission from noble gases flowing through Casimir cavities, which is a test of his patent #7,379,286, coinvented with Dr. Bernard Haisch from Calphysics Institute. To their surprise, Helium had a more robust output of radiation in the microwatt range than the heavier Xenon, measured with a pyrometer. Their unusual theory of constricting a gas atom quantum mechanically and then looking for a release of energy actually worked, showing that zero-point energy can be utilized to produce energy!


            Of course the reabsorption of the lost energy from the quantum vacuum completes the engine cycle according to the patent disclosure, which also resembles the Josef Papp engine (patent #4,428,193) in many ways. Our institute expects a resurgence in the orders for the next edition of our book, Zero Point Energy: the Fuel of the Future, as a result of Dr. Moddel's experimental confirmation of a zero-point energy emission from a Casimir cavity.

IRI website QR Code
Boeing's Inertial Propulsion device used for years on their Satellites. 

Mike Gamble's presentation was more tangible with an analysis of the Dean Drive style of inertial (mechanical) propulsion converted to electromagnetic equivalence. However, the breakthrough announcement came at the end as to the reason for his investigation: Boeing has been using a "scissoring gyroscope" style of inertial propulsion for satellite maneuvering for years! This confirmation of a controversial method of force production is a first for any major corporation. (IRI recommends our "Inertial Propulsion Patent Collection" and other related reports for those unacquainted with this simple but effective way to produce a unidirectional force.) Mike also mentioned that it was so old by now that Boeing didn't mind if he mentioned it to the public. He even let me photograph his pictures of the company's test model, which is quite large. It is now clear from Gamble's presentation that the physics and mechanical engineering textbooks need to be rewritten to include this amazing breakthrough, which has quietly ushered in an alternate method for force production, even in space, that can be solar-powered and electrically driven. 


Several of the presentations included local talent as well: University of  Maryland researchers Prof. Cui, Chiang, and Prof. Pomerantseva, a National Science Foundation senior scientist. Dr. Paul Werbos, a former FDA research scientist, Judy Kosovich,  a US DOE senior scientist Dave Goodwin, who was also the recipient of the "2012 Integrity In Research Award" for his unique contributions to emerging energy science. The keynote address was by Dr. George Miley who has just completed his amazing autobiography which will be published by IRI in the fall.  Outstanding presentations were also done by Osamu Ide, Don Reed, Charles Lundquist, Anthony Fresco, James Putnam, Clive Woods,  Philip Bouchard, Hamilton Carter, and Robert DeBiase. All these presentations  were recorded and webcasted  and are available at free of charge to all. 


We want to again thank our sponsors for generously supporting our conference: Arcos Cielos Research Center, Global Gateway Foundation, Ivan Kruglak and Marc Plotkin. We also want to thank all  our volunteers:  Elaine Chen,  Craig Fatzinger, Gerard VandenBerg and Hamilton Smith!  Your help is invaluable to us.  And last but not least, Thanks to all who attended and made this year SPESIF a great success!


 back to table of contents
2) American Innovation: Race to Space

From: global-energy-

On Behalf Of Paul Werbos
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 9:21 AM
To: Global Energy Network


I highly recommend watching this relatively short 60 Minutes segment in full:


SpaceX: Entrepreneur's race to space 



The Administration deserves a lot of credit for a policy that is sparking this type of private sector innovation.


IRI President at SPACEX exhibit on the National Mall.


I have many friends who believe  that SpaceX will reduce the cost of access to space down to the $400/kg-LEO point where it seems likely that we can get energy from space at about the same generating cost per kwh as we can get form wind and solar, if we do the best we can with all three. This is very important, since the electric power market (worth about $2 trillion per year, if we assume 10 cents per kwh) is made up of many market segments, some of which are best served by the steady 24-hour power we can get from space, some of which are best served by the reliable day-time power we can get from solar farms sited in areas of reliable sun.

Elon Musk, the guy behind SpaceX, is also behind Tesla, which has an interesting plan for an all-electric SUV at a price some might find interesting ($60,000 but saving about $2000 per year on fuel in the US compares not so badly with some other SUVs), and which mastered engines using zero rare earths before all its main competitors. So I hope they are right, but....


I agree strongly with the Administration policy to encourage COTS. The primary credit (but certainly not all the credit) should go to Lori Garver at NASA, and to the relationship between Lori and Obama (the details of which I certainly do not know about). Lori was once Executive Director of the National Space Society, and I had a little bit of contact (all pleasant) with her in those old days. NSS was one of the groups which played an important role in advancing COTS, but there are other groups like the Space Frontier Foundation which I think are far more focused advocates specifically for that issue. 

As I happen to be on the governing board of NSS this year, having known some of the key people for many decades, I have looked into this issue in great detail. (By the way, when I worked in Specter's office, I took the initiative to get a SpaceX briefing in the Senator's main conference room.)



there are really intense debates at times between the "new space COTS" movement" and the big stakeholder 

Boeing/ Lockheed/etc group. Even within NSS. In my view, it is a microcosm of US politics in general. One group in power represents a positive psychology, a big step upwards from the past... but just not quite good enough for us to survive at all, unless certain changes are made. (By the way, I mean "survival" literally here.)  But the other group has often let itself be overwhelmed by negative and reactionary psychology, to the point where it can be even worse.  

Having studied a bit of technical psychology (see my current paper in Neural Networks, a follow-on to my 2009 paper on the brain which won me the Hebb Award), I tend to think of this as kind of bipolar disorder, with one group suffering from too much traumatic negativity and another equally aberrated by euphoria and group spirit. But this year... I see some signs of some hope of mental recovery, as the new talking points of the Space Exploration Alliance (the big umbrealla group) seem more balanced and realistic than they were last year. But... it may or may not be good enough.


The fact is -- for all his positive spirit and enthusiasm and innovation... enthusiasm alone cannot keep a reusable rocket from melting as it comes back through the atmosphere.


SpaceX can beat today's Russian competition on price and quality when it comes to getting astronauts 

to the International Space Station with expendable rockets. But to get to $400/kg-LEO, Musk knows one needs reusability. But right now, it looks a lot more likely that the Russians will get there than that we will.. ever. The problem is that we are at risk of losing crucial technology needed to get there, which is partly a matter of materials technology and partly a matter of hypersonics systems design technology. The issue of retirements in the aerospace  industry (and of other critical engineering sectors) is far more serious than most people understand.  

So if we have lots of enthusiasm but can't actually build anything... we end up dead.

I have learned a lot about the current status of all this. I recently found out that while NASA 

was throwing away so much money on heavy lift vehicle development designed to NOT use or

upgrade the key structural technologies, and while the AF X37B activity got hijacked by stakeholder politics,


DARPA quietly planned a kind of $300 million 10,000 pound global reach vehicle which would have


really plugged the hole, stopped the bleeding and put us even ahead of the past. (Except for maybe a few systems aspects that would be far less expensive, probably easy to fit in if people wanted to.) But... I guess

 it was the outgoing director of DARPA... it sounded so threatening to some people, so was quietly

shifted to 100 pounds.


Nice and quiet, just like  how we lost our most advanced missile interception technology just over the past few months.


Best of Luck, 




back to table of contents 


3) LED's Exceed 100% Efficiency

March 5, 2012 by Lisa Zyga,


An LED's power conversion (wall-plug) efficiency varies inversely with its optical output power. Wall-plug efficiency can exceed 100%, the unity efficiency, at low applied voltages and high temperatures. Image credit: Santhanam, et al. ©2012 American Physical Society.

IRI website QR Code


( -- For the first time, researchers have demonstrated that an LED can emit more optical power than the electrical power it consumes. Although scientifically intriguing, the results won't immediately result in ultra-efficient commercial LEDs since the demonstration works only for LEDs with very low input power that produce very small amounts of light.The efficiency is around 230% according to calculations - Ed. Note


The researchers, Parthiban Santhanam and coauthors from MIT, have published their study in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters. 

As the researchers explain in their study, the key to achieving a power conversionefficiency above 100%, i.e., "unity efficiency," is to greatly decrease the applied voltage. According to their calculations, as the voltage is halved, the input power is decreased by a factor of 4, while the emitted light power scales linearly with voltage so that it's also only halved. In other words, an LED's efficiency increases as its output power decreases. (The inverse of this relationship - that LED efficiency decreases as its output power increases - is one of the bigest hurdles in designing bright, efficient LED lights.) 

In their experiments, the researchers reduced the LED's input power to just 30 picowatts and measured an output of 69 picowatts of light - an efficiency of 230%. The physical mechanisms worked the same as with any LED: when excited by the applied voltage, electrons and holes have a certain probability of generating photons. The researchers didn't try to increase this probability, as some previous research has focused on, but instead took advantage of small amounts of excess heat to emit more power than consumed. This heat arises from vibrations in the device's atomic lattice, which occur due to entropy. 

This light-emitting process cools the LED slightly, making it operate similar to a thermoelectric cooler. Although the cooling is insufficient to provide practical cooling at room temperature, it could potentially be used for designing lights that don't generate heat. When used as a heat pump, the device might be useful for solid-state cooling applications or even power generation.

Theoretically, this low-voltage strategy allows for an arbitrarily efficient generation of photons at low voltages. For this reason, the researchers hope that the technique could offer a new way to test the limits of energy-efficiency electromagnetic communication.


More information: Parthiban Santhanam, et al. "Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes Operating above Unity Efficiency." Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 09740  (2012).  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.097403 

Physics Synopsis

4) Harnessing the Quantum Power of Empty Space

 by David Harris, New Scientist, February 20, 2012

 See introductory "What is Empty Space?" (3 minute video)


The elusive Casimir effect suggests we could use vacuum energy to move objects and make stuff - but can something really come from nothing?


NOTHING will come of nothing." Shakespeare's epithet seems the kind of self-evident statement that only poets and philosophers would argue over. And physicists like Chris Wilson.       


Last year, Wilson and his team at the Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg,Sweden, provided what seems a particularly egregious case of something for nothing. They claimed to have conjured up light from nowhere simply by squeezing down empty space (New Scientist, 19 November 2011, p 16). That would be the latest manifestation of a quantum quirk known as the Casimir effect: the notion that a perfect vacuum, the very definition of nothingness in the physical world, contains a latent power that can be harnessed to move objects and make stuff.

Casimir effects 

Sightings of this vacuum action have been mounting over the past decade or so, leading some physicists to propose a new generation of nanoscale machines to take advantage of it, and others even to suggest a leading role for vacuum energy in determining the origin and fate of the cosmos. Others remain to be convinced. So what's the true story? 

The idea that a vacuum is a seething sea of something can be traced back to the early decades of quantum physics. In the late 1920s, the German physicist Werner Heisenberg came up with his famous uncertainty principle, which says that some pairs of measurable quantities are intimately connected: the more you know about the one, the less you know about the other.  

Energy and time are one such pair. That means you cannot measure the energy of a physical system with perfect precision unless time itself is completely imprecisely defined - that is, you take infinite time to perform your measurement. It follows that the zero-energy nothingness of the vacuum can never be pinned down precisely. According to quantum theory, even a perfect vacuum is filled with wave-like fields that fluctuate constantly, producing a legion of ephemeral particles that continually pop up out of nowhere only to disappear again, filling the vacuum with a distinct, non-zero "zero-point energy".   

This recasting of the vacuum gave fresh impetus to the centuries-old debate about the nature of nothingness

 (New Scientist, 19 November 2011, p 50). But evidence also began to accumulate that the newly lively vacuum had practical effects. Observe atoms carefully enough and you see a tiny effect known as the Lamb shift, in which vacuum fluctuations jostle an orbiting electron, subtly altering its energy. Something similar can be invoked to explain how electrons sometimes spontaneously jump between two atomic energy states, giving off photons of light.  

But Hendrik Casimir's suggestion was the most eye-catching. In 1948, together with his colleague Dirk Polder, the Dutch physicist was trying to understand how colloids exist in a stable equilibrium. Colloids are mixtures in which one type of substance is dispersed through another, like fat globules in the watery solution of milk. Forces between the molecules in such a medium drop off more quickly with distance than basic calculations using the classical electromagnetic van der Waals force allow. It is as if something is pulling the constituent molecules closer together, giving the mixture extra stability.  

Following a tip-off from the Danish quantum doyen Niels Bohr, Casimir calculated that this something could be vacuum action. Working out the effects of vacuum fluctuations in a colloid's complex molecular brew was impossibly involved. So Casimir considered a simple model system of two parallel metallic plates, and showed that the fluctuations could produce just the right enhanced attraction between them. His explanation was that the two plates limit the wavelength of vacuum fluctuations in the space between. Outside those confines, the fluctuations can have any wavelength they choose. With more waves outside than in, a pressure pushes inward on the plates (see diagram).  

The effect is tiny: two plates 10 nanometres apart feel a force comparable to the gentle burden of the atmosphere on our heads. Such a minuscule contribution is easily washed out by a legion of other effects, such as residual electrostatic attractions between charges on the plates' surfaces. That makes confirming its existence extremely tough. "You need to know that you're really measuring the Casimir force," says experimentalist Hong Tang of YaleUniversity. What's more, it is not easy to align plates to be perfectly parallel, while calculating the expected effect for other, more complex geometries takes some sophisticated mathematics. 

It was only in 1996 that Steven Lamoreaux, a physicist then at the University of Washingtonin Seattle, made a breakthrough. Taking elaborate precautions to exclude all other effects, he found a tiny residual force pulling a metal plate and a spherical lens together (Physical Review Letters, vol 78, p 5). The Casimir effect, it seemed, was not a theorist's pipe dream: vacuum action was a real effect.  

Since then, a steady trickle of results has confirmed other long-standing theoretical predictions. Soviet physicist Evgeny Lifshitz proposed in 1955 that the size of vacuum fluctuations would grow with rising temperature, resulting in a force that is more potent over longer distances. In February 2011, Lamoreaux, now at Yale University, and his team confirmed that this is indeed the case (Nature Physics, vol 7, p 230)  

Nanoscale kick 

As for the work of Wilson's team, their results, published last November, support a four-decade-old prediction that turns the logic of the original Casimir effect on its head. Rather than using the vacuum's pop-up particles to shift their surroundings, if you move a vacuum's surroundings fast enough, you can make real photons of light. In some quarters, this idea is controversial - but it is the most dramatic putative demonstration of the vacuum's powers to date (see "Light from speeding mirrors") 

As sightings of such effects have multiplied, so have thoughts that we might harness them for our own devices. A popular proposal is to use the vacuum's energy to give nanoscale machines an additional kick. That requires something a little different from the original Casimir force, whose attractive effects are more likely to gum up the components of any mini-machine - a phenomenon referred to as static friction or "stiction"

 By tweaking the geometries or material properties of the structures used to confine the vacuum, however, it should be possible to reverse the direction of the Casimir effect, creating an outward pressure to push two objects apart. In 2008, Steven Johnson and his colleagues at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology calculated that by adding a series of interleaving metal brackets, zipper-style, to the faces of the two metal plates you could in theory make the net force between them repulsive. A more recent study by Stanislav Maslovski and Mário Silveirinha of the University of Coimbra, Portugal, has indicated a similar effect using nanoscale metallic rods to create areas of repulsive force that can levitate a nanoscale metal bar (Physical Review A, vol 83, p 022508). 

These forces could help nanoscale components such as switches, gears, bearings or motor parts to operate without jamming. Putting such devices into practice might not be easy, though. For a start, it would require components with atomic-scale polishing: look on a small enough scale - a thousand atoms or so - and metal surfaces usually thought of as smooth have patchy, crystal-like structures that would confine vacuum fluctuations in different ways, affecting the size of the Casimir force. For moving objects, things become even trickier.

  Such complications are surmountable: in 2009 Federico Capasso and group at Harvard University measured what appeared to be repulsive Casimir forces in a gold cantilever suspended in bromobenzene liquid above a silicon surface (Nature, vol 457, p 170). The forces generated were mere tens of piconewtons - but when you are trying to move nanoscale particles, a piconewton goes a long way. Nevertheless, there are still hurdles to be overcome before Casimir devices are everyday reality, says Johnson. "It is an experimental question - can we make devices this small and sensitive?" he says. "And it is also a theoretical question of whether we can design interesting uses for the Casimir force once the experimental capabilities arrive. There is a more fundamental objection, however. The litany of theoretical predictions gradually being turned into experimental reality invites a simple conclusion: vacuum fluctuations are real, and they are what is responsible for what we call Casimir effects. But not all physicists buy that.  

Their unease lies in calculations done by Casimir and Polder even before they settled on vacuum fluctuations as the explanation for the weakened van der Waals force. These showed that much the same weakening could be achieved simply by taking into account the finite time the force takes to be transmitted over large enough distances, such as between two plates separated by tens or hundreds of nanometres. That idea was revived and bolstered by calculations in the 1970s by the Nobel-prizewinning physicist Julian Schwinger. He never believed in the reality of vacuum fluctuations and developed a version of quantum field theory, which he called source theory, to do away with them. In this picture, the Casimir effect pops out just by taking into account the quantum interaction of charged matter, with no vacuum action at all  

Robert Jaffe, a particle theorist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, suggests the only reason the vacuum interpretation has gained such currency is because its mathematics happens to be a lot simpler. "There is a flippant way people refer to the Casimir effect as evidence for real vacuum fluctuations," he says. "But there is no evidence that the vacuum fluctuations exist in the absence of matter". Similarly, other effects invoked as proof of their reality - the Lamb shift and the spontaneous emission of photons from atoms - can be described purely as the result of charge interactions  

If this is so, it could have repercussions for more than our attempts to fine-tune the workings of nanomachines. The realisation in the past couple of decades that the universe's expansion is accelerating - a phenomenon ascribed to a mysterious "dark energy" - has fuelled a new interest in the power of the vacuum. At the moment, our best calculations of the vacuum's hidden energy come up with a figure some 120 orders of magnitude larger than the amount needed to bring about the cosmic acceleration, a mismatch that counts perhaps as the worst-ever prediction in physics. Yet observations of the Casimir effect are still eagerly seen as evidence for a power that might determine our cosmic fate. 

Schwinger's original calculations were part of a wider attempt, ultimately unsuccessful, to banish vacuum fluctuations from quantum field theory. The truth may well lie uncomfortably in the middle: we might never be able to convince ourselves of the reality of vacuum energy, because any attempt to do so brings some form of matter into the equation. As philosophers of science Svend Rugh and Henrik Zinkernagel wrote in 2001, "It seems impossible to decide whether the effects result from the vacuum 'in itself'... or are generated by the introduction of the measurement arrangement." 

Wilson hopes that the photons emerging from his apparatus in Sweden, if confirmed by other groups, will provide the final illumination to prove the reality of vacuum fluctuations. Equally, as our ability to construct filigree nanomachines and so test the Casimir effect increases over the coming years, perhaps some deviation from the predictions will give us a definitive handle on where the effects come from. Can nothing truly come of nothing? We might still have cause to speak again. 

Light from speeding MIRRORS 

In 1970, American physicist Gerald Moore proposed reversing the logic of the Casimir effect. He envisaged rapidly accelerating mirrors that would squeeze the vacuum fluctuations in the space between them so violently that they would give up some of their energy in the form of photons (Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol 11, p 2679).

In practice it is not possible to accelerate even a small macroscopic mirror fast enough to produce this "dynamical" Casimir effect, so last year Chris Wilson and his team from the Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden, used rapidly varying electrical currents to simulate the effect of mirrors accelerating to something like a quarter of the speed of light. The result was the simultaneous production of pairs of photons from the vacuum, exactly as Moore had predicted (Nature, vol 479, p 376) 

Wilson thinks there could be some exciting applications. During the era of inflation thought to have taken place right after the big bang, the boundary of the universe itself would have expanded at near the speed of light, leading to the creation of photons through the dynamical Casimir effect. "It is rather difficult to create your own big bang in the lab," says Wilson. "Our set-up or a similar one might be used to simulate these effects, essentially doing table-top cosmology. 

Just as the original Casimir effect is disputed, however (see main story), not everyone is convinced that this interpretation of the experiment is right. One physicist, who preferred not to be named, says that as nothing in the experiment actually moves, it does not demonstrate the dynamical Casimir effect at all. Instead, it is just another "solid and interesting" example of a well-known effect in which some of a quantum circuit's electrical energy is emitted as light. The mathematical description of the two effects is very similar, he says, but "one should never mistake mathematics for reality". 

Since the preliminary version of their paper was circulated, Wilson's team has carried out additional tests that Wilson thinks defuse such criticisms, although he acknowledges there are still dissenting voices.

"We did a number of sanity checks ruling out various spurious effects that could have masqueraded as the effect, including showing that we were starting from the vacuum state," he says. "But for some people, the dynamical Casimir effect will never be anything but a literal moving mirror."

 David Harris is a writer based in Palo Alto, California


5) ARPA-E Issues Open Call for Transformational Technologies 

US DOE Press Release, March 2, 2012 - 2:31pm


DOE's Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) issued a $150 million funding opportunity on March 2 that is open to all transformational energy technologies. This Open Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is a call to scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to propose early-stage research projects that would not otherwise be able to attract private investment. Such projects could lead to breakthrough energy technologies. This is the second Open FOA released under ARPA-E.

The open call includes electricity generation by renewable means; electricity transmission, storage, and distribution; energy efficiency for buildings, manufacturing and commerce, and personal use; and all aspects of transportation, including the production and distribution of renewable fuels, electrification, and energy efficiency in transportation. Individual awards under the Open FOA will range between $250,000 and $10 million. See the DOE press release (below) and the FOA announcement online.


Washington, D.C. - Today, the Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) issued a $150 million funding opportunity open to all transformational energy technologies to support the Obama Administration's all-of-the-above approach to solving our nation's most pressing energy challenges. This Open Funding Opportunity Announcement is a call to our country's brightest scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs to propose early-stage research projects that would not otherwise be able to attract private investment, but could lead to breakthrough energy technologies. This is the second open funding opportunity released under ARPA-E.  The first was in 2009.

"Today we are calling on our nation's best and brightest to catalyze energy breakthroughs in all areas imaginable through this Open Funding Opportunity Announcement, which illustrates the true purpose of ARPA-E," said Director  Majumdar.  "Innovation is our nation's sweet spot, and it is critically important that we look at every possible energy solution in order to ensure America's future prosperity and security."

This Open Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) joins ARPA-E's other recently issued FOA - Methane Opportunities for Vehicular Energy (MOVE) - which will make $30 million available to find ways to harness our abundant supplies of domestic natural gas for vehicles and was announced by President Obama last week at the University of Miami.

More details on all of ARPA-E's Funding Opportunities and Requests For Information are available HERE. Individual awards under the Open FOA will range between $250,000 and $10 million.

President Obama launched the Energy Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) in 2009 to seek out transformational, breakthrough technologies that are too risky for private sector investment but have the potential to translate science into quantum leaps in energy technology, form the foundation for entirely new industries, and in the future have large commercial impact.

Including its most recent round of selections, ARPA-E has funded a total of more than 180 projects, for $521.7 million in awards across 12 program areas. Demonstrating the success ARPA-E has already seen, the Agency announced last year that eleven of its projects that received $40 million from ARPA-E for innovative research, were able to use this funding to demonstrate results, which allowed these teams to secure more than $200 million in outside private capital investment.

ARPA-E's third annual Energy Innovation Summit featured 107 speakers, including: President Bill Clinton; Microsoft Founder and Chairman, Bill Gates; Xerox CEO, Ursula Burns; FedEx CEO, Fred Smith; BDT Capital Chairman, Lee Scott; Deputy Secretary of Defense, Ashton Carter; MIT President, Susan Hockfield; U.S. Energy Secretary, Steven Chu; and ARPA-E Director, Arun Majumdar.  The Summit attracted 2,440 attendees from 49 states and 26 countries and featured a Technology Showcase displaying over 240 breakthrough energy developments from ARPA-E's awardees, finalists and other teams.

 News Media Contact:  202-586-4940
About Integrity Research Institute
Future Energy eNews
 is provided as a public service from Integrity Research Institute, a Non-Profit dedicated to educating the public on eco-friendly emerging energy technologies.
FREE copy of the 30 minute DVD "Progress in Future Energy" is available by sending an email with "Free DVD" in subject and mailing address in body.  

Your generous support is welcome by making a tax deductible donation on our secure websitemember
Save 10%  On SPESIF 2011 DVD. Use code:  spesif11 in comment 
IRI website QR Code
  • Scott Kelsey, Missouri State, explaining Rejuvamatrix, Pulsed EMF therapy to increase the length of DNA telomeres, which directly affect our lifespan.
  • Max Formitchev-Zamilov, Penn State,  discussing Cavitation Induced Fusion, that will soon provide power generation and heat production.
  • Christopher Provaditis, from Greece, explaining Inertial Propulsion and who teamed up recently with Boeing for their space satellites.
  • PJ Piper of QM Power, discussing the motor invented by Charles Flynn, with a revolutionary parallel path that gives double and triple efficiency. 
  • Dr Thorsten Ludwig  from Germany (GASE) discussing the mysterious Hans Coler motor that WWII British Intelligence researched.
This email was sent to by |  
Integrity Research Institute | 5020 Sunnyside Ave | Suite 209 | Beltsville | MD | 20705