Not a dazzling light but a colossal blunder: an example where the dream of finding a simple solution to the problem of sustainability turns out to be… just a dream. From which to draw, however, an important lesson; a very concrete one.
A world whereenergy is so abundant and cheap that it is practically free for everyone. Goodbye high energy bills, goodbye energy crises, goodbye oil wars. With infinite energy at our fingertips, transport can run without polluting emissions, water can be desalinated in abundance to solve the global water crisis, and every corner of the planet can be lit up like Spaccanapoli on New Year’s Eve. We are talking about a dream: the dream of an economic and social revolution that would make the Industrial Revolution pale.
Nuclear fusion has the potential to realise this dream: to replicate on Earth the process that powers the Sun, offering clean and virtually unlimited energy.
For more than 70 years, the most famous academies and research centres around the world have been working on it – very seriously. Towards the end of the last century, it seemed that a shortcut had appeared, a very simple one, which did not require the gigantic investments that had been made up to that point. A dream. But, as is often the case with dreams that seem too good to be true, even that of so-called cold fusion turned out to be more of a nightmare than a sweet reality.
A revolutionary discovery
On 13 March 1989, Tim Berners-Lee published the World Wide Web summary, the founding document of the Internet; but few listened to him. This is also because, exactly 10 days later, two electrochemists from the University of Utah, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons, announce that they have made an extraordinary discovery: nuclear fusion at room temperature, known as ‘cold fusion’. Rather than an esoteric protocol with the brainy acronym ‘WWW’, this is one of those pieces of news that doesn’t just go round the world, but does so two and a half times before breakfast.
Pons and Fleischmann claim to have generated more energy from a simple experiment in the lab than it took them to start it. For a moment, they seem to have discovered the key to an unlimited, clean and safe source of energy.
Their experiment involves the use of palladium (a rare metal) immersed in heavy water, a form of water enriched with deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen. Fleischmann and Pons claim that by applying an electric current to palladium, it captures the deuterium nuclei, triggering a fusion reaction that releases more energy than is consumed. In practice, they suggest that they have created a mini-sun in a jar, with an energy that far exceeds the energy put into it: a discovery that, if true, would rewrite the physics textbooks and make all traditional and nuclear energy projects obsolete. All it takes is a tub of palladium and some heavy water, and we can retire all nuclear power plants and oil wells.
Euphoria and chaos: everyone chasing cold fusion
But here’s where the trouble starts. The scientific community, taken by surprise, frantically tries to replicate the experiment. The excitement is palpable: imagine physicists from all over the world rushing to their laboratories, some with their lab coats still stained with coffee, ready to save the planet before others do. However, despite the best efforts, the results do not come. Some labs see the slightest increase in heat, others nothing at all.
Renowned physicist Richard Garwin calls the whole thing “an error at the instrumental level”, suggesting that the two scientists saw what they wanted to see, perhaps driven by enthusiasm and the pressure to make a revolutionary discovery.
Euphoria is beginning to give way to scepticism. Prominent nuclear physicists, such as Caltech’s Steven Koonin, speak at crowded conferences, describing the cold fusion announcement as ‘scientifically incorrect’. Indeed, the American Physical Society conference in Baltimore became famous for its almost courtroom atmosphere, with scientists ready to publicly challenge Fleischmann and Pons.
Where is the helium? Where are the neutrons?
One of the most memorable moments comes when a participant asks, “If this is fusion, where is the helium? Where are the neutrons?” The questions are pointed because a nuclear fusion should release helium and neutrons as by-products, but these particles were not detected in Pons and Fleischmann’s experiments.
Meanwhile, laboratories at MIT and Caltech decide to ‘race’ to see who can first achieve Pons and Fleischmann’s results. Researchers at both institutions set up experiments with state-of-the-art equipment and rigorous measurement standards, but the result is a resounding flop: no excess heat, no sign of fusion. Well, the scientific method says that this too is a result: Pons and Fleischmann’s theory has been scientifically falsified. So it can be discarded.
John Huizenga of Los Alamos National Laboratory, an expert in nuclear chemistry, spares no criticism and, after conducting a detailed review, states that cold fusion is “the biggest mistake in 20th century physics”. Huizenga notes that the experiments lacked fundamental evidence such as the production of detectable subatomic particles, making it impossible to consider the claimed results as real.
As the pressure mounts, Pons and Fleischmann begin to withdraw from the spotlight, declining interviews and delaying the presentation of complete data. The climate becomes increasingly tense. At the height of the debate, during a session at the American Chemical Society conference, someone hands out T-shirts that read ‘Fusion Confusion’, a play on words that reflects the general state of confusion and frustration. Science collides with public enthusiasm and increasing media pressure, turning the event into a textbook case on how scientific discoveries should NOT be announced.
Cold Confusion
By mid-1989, the scientific community is divided. Pons, Fleischmann and a handful of supporters insist that their results are correct, but most scientists struggle to take their claims seriously. There is no helium, there are no neutrons and there is no consensus. The initial enthusiasm quickly fades. Cold fusion has gone from potential energy breakthrough to academic joke.
Meanwhile, the two scientists, still hoping to gain support for their research, move to France, where Technova (a Toyota-funded research company) attempts a last ditch effort and finances their work for a limited period. But also this time without concrete results.
But illusions die hard. There remain the last fanatics, who continue the research even today using acronyms such as CMNS (Condensed Matter Nuclear Science) or LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions), which are much more cryptic but avoid the use of the now unpresentable term invented by Pons and Fleishmann. Even Google funded with ten million dollars an attempt to replicate the original experiment, with no useful results apart from an honest account of the failure, published in Nature on 27 May 2019.
True fusion: that at hundreds of millions of degrees
While cold fusion is relegated to the footnotes of textbooks, research into ‘hot’ nuclear fusion – that which mimics the extreme conditions at the heart of the Sun – continues with determination. Flagship projects such as ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) represent the concrete hope of achieving a safe, abundant and sustainable energy source. Unlike cold fusion, these efforts require enormous equipment, temperatures of millions of degrees and billions of euros, but the promise of solving the energy trilemma and contributing to sustainable development goals is too great to ignore.
Fusion energy could become a game changer, an inexhaustible source that would allow us to meet global energy challenges without compromising the environment. Although there is still a long way to go, research continues with the hope that one day we will finally harness the power of the stars here on Earth. Until then, let us remember the lesson of Pons and Fleischmann: science advances in small steps, not big leaps, and each step must rest on a solid foundation.