Dr Philip Thomas responds to a letter claiming that cold fusion could be a viable alternative to fossil fuels
I was disappointed to see a letter promoting a pseudo-scientific fringe theory (Cold fusion may be a viable energy alternative to end reliance on fossil fuels, Letters, 28 January). Many scientists have tried and failed to reproduce Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons’s initial report of cold fusion. After years of intense scrutiny, the mainstream scientific community overwhelmingly concluded by the early 1990s that cold fusion was not a credible idea supported by experimental evidence – a conclusion that stands after three decades of research.
The authors of the letter to the Guardian suggest that cold fusion research is now being suppressed from publication. In reality, credible, rigorous studies continue to be published in reputable journals (such as a 2019 study in Nature), but none of them has successfully observed cold fusion. The letter claims that companies have “been able to make these reactions work quite reliably”, but do not provide any evidence to support this.
About Author
More Stories
Virologist Wendy Barclay: ‘Wild avian viruses are mixing up their genetics all the time. It’s like viral sex on steroids’
From the Beatles to biologics – how Liverpool became a life science hotspot
UK scientist wins prize for invention that could help avert ‘phosphogeddon’