February 19, 1998 Thomas' Question at
DoE's CNES Hearing

I'm William Thomas, with the Proposition One Committee, and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this forum.

Proposition One is a grassroots lobbying organization whose basic goals precisely mirror those of the CNES ("Comprehensive National Energy Strategy") draft, specifically:

I. Improve the efficiency of the energy system.
II. Ensure against energy disruptions.
III. Promote energy production to reflect human health & environment values.
IV. Pursue continued progress in science & technology to provide clean and inexpensive energy sources.
V. Cooperate internationally on global issues.

Unlike the previous speakers, I have no suggestions. Rather I am here only to ask one, or perhaps two, questions.

Beginning in about 1984, I started seeing newspaper articles, videotapes and hearing rumors, all to the effect that in the summer of 1979 DOE representatives went to Santa Barbara, California, where they witnessed one of the first quantitative tests of an entirely new "free" energy technology developed by former Polaroid Corporation Senior Scientist, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology teacher, the late Bruce DePalma. Supposedly this was a fuel-less super-efficient electricity generator which DePalma called the "n-machine."

Based on my information this device apparently extracts electricity directly from what is lately called the "zero point vacuum fluctuation energy field."

Allegedly this new genre of "zero point energy" technology needs no fuel, is freely available & is free of pollution. Assuming this is true, obviously, this technology could entirely replace fossil & nuclear power, and form the foundation of the optimal national, even international, energy policy.

More recently the newspaper articles, videotapes and rumors which sparked my initial interest in this topic, have been supplemented by numerous "zero point energy" internet web sites. I will not now trouble you with the specifics of my informational sources, but, unless my question is resolved this afternoon, I will submit my informational sources in forthcoming written comment before the end of the public comment period.

Perhaps my first question would best be directed to Ms. Monlyn, because, assuming my information is correct, she has some familiarity with the subject. On this point, I wonder whether the DOE has fully investigated this alleged "zero point technology," and, if so, where are the results of this investigation available.

Secondly, if the DOE has not fully debunked the "zero point technology," I would like to ask Secretary Pena why a comprehensive examination of "zero point technology" has not been concluded?

Mr. Gee and Ms. Monlyn whispered to one another in a brief, inaudible exchange.

"Thank you Mr. Thomas." Secretary Pena responded. "Let's see if there's anyone here who can answer your question." Mr. Pena glanced around the room, paused for about five and less than ten seconds, and continued. "No there's no one here at the moment. WWe'll get back to you by mail on that, Mr. Thomas."