A discussion of the import of the "cold fusion" process discovered by Fleischmann and Pons, if it can be made available to all peoples as an unlimited source of fuel.
On 23 March 1989 an Anglo-American scientific team made known the discovery of a revolutionary new process of nuclear fusion using heavy water at room temperature.
This "cold fusion process", as it is frequently described, is so new and unexpected that even leaders in the field of fusion research were taken by surprise. Until now, it was assumed that nuclear fusion could only be achieved at extremely high temperatures — millions of degrees.
However, this discovery did not take everyone by surprise, for it corroborates information given in a forecast published in 1979:
"The fusion process is the method for the immediate future. It will use a form of nuclear energy derived from a single isotope of water. It is safe and superabundant in the waters of the oceans and rivers of the world. This nuclear fusion uses not heat, but a cold process, and will be used relatively very soon; not immediately, but in the coming five to 10 years." (Benjamin Crème)
The scientific world’s reaction to the discovery was excited but restrained. Excited, because such a process — nuclear fusion — would tap a potential source of very cheap, unlimited, clean energy. Restrained, because it is still far from being irrefutably proved that the discovery by electrochemists M. Fleischmann and S. Pons is indeed the key to that process.
Both are realistic responses, given the fact that discoveries in such a complex field usually have a comparatively long way to go from conception to application on a large scale. This case is no exception: according to information received from Benjamin Crème’s Master, the process at present being tested may be seen as a great step in the right direction; however, it is only an "intermediate phase" and not the ultimate form that the Hierarchy has in mind.
Even so, it is not too early to begin considering the many consequences of an appropriate nuclear fusion process for humanity. First of all, it would mean that we could rid ourselves (and not a day too soon) of the current practice of generating energy by atomic fission. Whatever vested interests may claim, nuclear plants are extremely disaster-prone, while our ability to deal with inherent dangers and the safe disposal of atomic waste is very limited. Accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Sellafield, to mention but a few alarming cases, have gradually awakened us to this fact, so much so that the lobby in flavor of building new atomic reactors is increasingly being put on the defensive. Hopefully, the prospect alone of generating energy in the near future by atomic fusion will be enough to accelerate the end of the present generation of nuclear power plants.
Quite apart from these considerations, the socio-economic implications of readily available, reliable and cheap fusion-generated energy are immense. At the moment, energy is scarce and powerful political and financial interests are tied up with its possession and control. It is not difficult to imagine how deeply present structures would be affected if energy could be fairly easily obtained from the limitless supply of water on our planet. All power relationships will be turned upside down if a cheap source of energy becomes available for the machine that our modern society has become: for transport, industrial production, heating and lighting.
This would, of course, also provide us with a golden opportunity to pay up our "development arrears", and to end the dependence of poor, energy-deficient nations. The general availability of such energy would bring a quick and urgently-needed end to unchecked deforestation (and consequent desertification) and other forms of ecological destruction. In one of its many effects on daily life, it could free women and children in many countries from the exhausting and time-consuming task of searching ever further afield for fuel.
The successful implementation of this process, which holds great promise for humanity, depends on our readiness to make it available to all. Under present circumstances, representatives of vested interests might be tempted to protect their positions by taking over the new energy source and keeping it under their exclusive control.
It is therefore a reassuring thought, and, what’s more, no mere coincidence, that the Fleischmann and Pons discovery will only come to full maturity — to judge by all appearances — when humanity has had some opportunity to profit from Maitreya’s advice, and deliberately choose a new course.
If we take His recommendations to heart, the new energy can become, in many respects, the social lubricant of a new society. Symbolically speaking, it is not without significance, just as we are moving into a new age, that the science of fusion is superseding the older technique of fission. Atomic fission — the highpoint of technology we have developed in the age now closing — is typical of the way in which we still deal with nature in all its aspects: disruptively and destructively.
In our new approach we will not be going against nature but working with it: fusing, blending and creating. Today we behave like nature’s enemies; tomorrow we shall become its guardians.
