Experimental evidence consistently demonstrates that nuclear-scale energy, in the form of heat, is being generated without harmful radiation, greenhouse gasses or nuclear waste.
You forgot a key word there, as in 'disputed' experimental evidence consistently demonstrates...
Scientific American throws some cold water on the Cold Fusion debate
here with a discussion of the findings of a DOE review panel. Most people in the panel don't seem to be sold("two thirds of reviewers found the evidence unconvincing").
Actually I found this
article to be fairly interesting. The author makes a rather telling point that even if Cold Fusion works, it doesn't seem to generate enough energy to be interesting (as in it is less cost effective than wind or solar, which we know are already laughable).
Well, like I said above, I am somewhat skeptical. For sure, I’m not gonna invest a months salary in it.
What they need to do now has two parts:
1) Absolutely, positively, undeniably verify that there is excess energy being produced
2) Come up with some sound, provable, peer-reviewed theoretical basis for exactly what in hallelujah is going on.
For all we know, some of the successes might happen at places that use fluorescent lights while the failures happen at places using incandescents.
Could be some hidden, previously unseen quantum effect.
We just don’t know yet.
But I think there is enough evidence to warrant continued testing.