Free energy or cold turkey?

“Cold Fusion: Fire from Water” is a rather dragging documentary about cold fusion, from the perspective of those who believe in the reality of this controversial phenomenon. (Main-stream science rejects the existence of cold fusion.) While the program claims to be scientific, it very explicitly appeals to science fiction, perhaps revealing its intended target audience? The documentary starts off with a quote from Jules Verne, the narrator James Doohan is explicitly introduced as “Star Trek's Scotty”, and Arthur C Clarke is both quoted and interviewed.

As I said, I found “Fire from Water” to be both boring and dragging, but a few interesting things are revealed. One tenured professor who did research on the subject was persecuted by his peers in a Kafkaesque manner. It's also interesting to note that while the U.S. government (officially, at least) doesn't fund cold fusion research, many multinational corporations do. While this doesn't prove the phenomenon is real, it certainly means somebody somewhere hopes it might be, and is intrigued by some of the experimental results.

If true, cold fusion would be *the* major scientific breakthrough ever. It would also be comparatively cheap and easy. At present, governments are pouring ludicrous amounts of resources into attempts to build a hot fusion reactor, attempts that have hitherto completely failed. Apparently, main-line scientists claim that CERN can save the world by 2020 if the European Union just coughs up a trillion dollars or so, one last time. Now, *that's* hard to believe! Especially in a period of rapidly dwindling energy resources (and government budgets), cold fusion research is probably bound to continue (for good or for worse), no matter how much official science scorns the idea.

“Fire from Water” takes a cornucopian angle on the problem, promising that we can avoid a new Dark Age, keep our present standard of living and yet avoid pollution, if only cold fusion gets the research grants it needs. Star Trek's Scotty and the interviewees even suggest that cold fusion could be used to transmute base metals into more useful ones, a process similar to, ahem, alchemy. Call me a pessimist, but this sounds too good to be true. Indeed, even if cold fusion energy turns out to be real and can be tapped by humanity, what makes its proponents believe that it will end environmental destruction? The more energy we have, the more havoc we can create! Cold fusion believers seem to think that their form of neo-energy is somehow intrinsically morally good, just because it would be cheap and abundant. I don't think that necessarily follows at all…

Even if cold fusion eventually just turns out to be a highly exotic but “normal” form of chemical reaction, it might be interesting in its own right. However, I think it's painfully obvious that this line of alternative research is ultimately driven by cornucopian dreams and “the myth of progress”. Ironically, the same dreams fuel the fusion reactors. I strongly suspect that both main-stream and fringe fusion research will ultimately prove to be dead ends, and that we would be better off giving all that inflated money to save the bees or grow organic bean-stalks! We might all need a “cold turkey” rather than cold fusion…