Can cars run on water?

by Jon Rappoport

March 12, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Lately, I’ve been writing about the technocrats’ plan to radically lower energy production and use, worldwide. [1]

This program, hidden behind all sorts of propaganda about energy-sharing, environmental justice, and climate change, is a method for visiting destruction on humanity.

Aside from oil, gas, coal, and nuclear, alternatives exist. The technocrats’ preference for solar and wind power—two methods that are presently incapable of replacing traditional energy sources—shouldn’t make people think those are the only options.

In my previous article, I described John F Kennedy’s vision for ocean-water turbines [2] [2a] [2b]—the huge Passamaquoddy Project—which he advanced and championed up to his death in 1963.

Here, I ask the question, can cars run on water?

I present answers from various sources.

Popular Mechanics (2008): “There is energy in water. Chemically, it’s locked up in the atomic bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. When the hydrogen and oxygen combine, whether it’s in a fuel cell, internal combustion engine running on hydrogen, or a jury-rigged pickup truck with an electrolysis cell in the bed, there’s energy left over in the form of heat or electrons. That’s converted to mechanical energy by the pistons and crankshaft or electrical motors to move the vehicle.”

“Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics haven’t changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and you’re losing energy, not gaining it–period.”

From (2019): “Can you make fuel from water that you can use in your car? Yes. Will the conversion increase your fuel efficiency and save you money? Maybe. If you know what you are doing, probably yes.”

MIT School of Engineering (2018): “A water molecule contains three atoms: an oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms, which bond together like magnets. According to Wai Cheng, a professor of mechanical engineering and director of the Sloan Automotive Lab (where he does research on engine performance and emissions, combustion science, and energy conversion), breaking those bonds will always take more energy than you get back.”

“Let’s say you wanted to build this car. It would need equipment to split a water molecule apart and separate its oxygen and hydrogen. Then it would need to isolate each of them in separate tanks. Then you would need a combustion system that could mix and ignite them, or a fuel cell that could recombine them to make electricity. The released energy could then drive a piston or run a motor and move the car.”

“Here’s the problem, Cheng says: ‘A water molecule is very stable.’ The energy needed to separate the atoms is greater than what you get back — this process actually soaks up energy instead of giving it out.”

“Plus there’s a more volatile problem: hydrogen is dangerously flammable. Without the right safety measures, a fender-bender could turn into an explosion worthy of an Avengers movie.” (2020): “[Stanley] Meyer’s invention promised a revolution in the automotive industry. It worked through an electric water fuel cell, which divided any kind of water — including salt water — into its fundamental elements of hydrogen and oxygen, by utilizing a process far simpler than the electrolysis method.”

“Despite skepticism about the legitimacy of a car that runs on water, Meyer was able to patent his invention under Section 101 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Index…”

“Meyer’s water-powered engine was the result of 20 years of research and dedication, and he claimed it was capable of converting tap water into enough hydrogen fuel to drive his car from one end of the country to the other. His invention was mind-boggling and promised a future of non-polluting vehicles that could be refueled with a garden hose.”

“On March 21, 1998, Meyer was having lunch at a Cracker Barrel with his brother and two potential Belgian investors. The four clinked their glasses to toast their commitment to uplifting the world, but after taking a sip of his cranberry juice, Meyer clutched his throat, sprang to his feet, and ran outside. Rushing after him, his brother Stephen found him down on his knees, vomiting violently. He quickly muttered his last words, ‘They poisoned me’.”

“Meyer’s death was investigated for three months, though it was eventually written on the coroner’s report that he died of a cerebral aneurysm.”

The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch, July 8, 2007, “The car that ran on water,” [3] by Dean Narciso:

“After more than 20 years of research and tinkering, it was time to celebrate.”

“Stanley Allen Meyer, his brother and two Belgian investors raised glasses in the Grove City Cracker Barrel on March 20, 1998.”

“Meyer said his invention could do what physicists say is impossible — turn water into hydrogen fuel efficiently enough to drive his dune buggy cross-country on 20 gallons straight from the tap.”

“He took a sip of cranberry juice. Then he grabbed his neck, bolted out the door, dropped to his knees and vomited violently.”

“’I ran outside and asked him, ‘What’s wrong?’ his brother, Stephen Meyer, recalled. ‘He said, ‘They poisoned me.’ That was his dying declaration’.”

“Stanley Meyer’s bizarre death at age 57 ended work that, if proved valid, could have ended reliance on fossil fuels.”

“People who knew him say his work drew worldwide attention: mysterious visitors from overseas, government spying and lucrative buyout offers.”

“His death sparked a three-month investigation that consumed and fascinated Grove City police.”

“’Meyer’s death was laced with all sorts of stories of conspiracy, cloak-and-dagger stories,’ said Grove City Police Lt. Steve Robinette, lead detective on the case.”

“If Stephen Meyer was shocked at his twin brother’s collapse and death, he was equally amazed at the Belgians’ response the next day.”

“’I told them that Stan had died and they never said a word,’ he recalled, ‘absolutely nothing, no condolences, no questions’.”

“’I never, ever had a trust of those two men ever again’.”

“Today, Stanley Meyer is featured on numerous Internet sites. A significant portion of the 1995 documentary It Runs on Water, narrated by science-fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and aired on the BBC, focuses on his ‘water fuel cell’ invention.” [4] [4a]

“James Robey wants a permanent place for Meyer in his Kentucky Water Fuel Museum.”

“’He was ignored, called a fraud and died without his small hometown even remembering him with so much as a plaque,’ Robey wrote in his self-published book Water Car.”

“Meyer had euphoric highs and humiliating defeats. He was kind and generous yet paranoid and suspicious. He would be hailed as a visionary and a genius. He also would be sued and declared a fraud.”

“The basis for Meyer’s research, electrolysis, is taught in middle-school science labs.”

“Electricity flows through water, cracking the molecules and filling test tubes with oxygen and hydrogen bubbles. A match is lighted. The volatile gases explode to prove that water has separated into its components.”

“Meyer said his invention did so using much less electricity than physicists say is possible. Videos show his contraptions turning water into a frothy mix within seconds.”

“’It takes so much energy to separate the H2 from the O,’ said Ohio State University professor emeritus Neville Reay, a physicist for more than 41 years. ‘That energy has pretty much not changed with time. It’s a fixed amount, and nothing changes that’.”

“Meyer’s work defies the Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.”

“’Basically, it says you can’t get something for nothing,’ Reay said.”

“’He may have had a nice way to store the hydrogen and use it to make a very effective motor, but there is no way to do something fancy and separate hydrogen with less energy’.”

“…Nevertheless, Meyer attracted believers, investors and, eventually, legal trouble.”

“’I was a sucker for some of this stuff at the time,’ William E. Brooks said from his home in Anchorage, Alaska.”

“Brooks invested more than $300,000 in Meyer’s technology. He hoped to find applications for his aviation business.”

“Today, he and his wife, Lorraine, laugh about the ordeal, made easier because their money was returned in a 1994 settlement in Franklin County Common Pleas Court.”

“Two years later, a Fayette County judge found ‘gross and egregious fraud’ in Meyer’s contract negotiation with two businessmen. Their money was returned.”

“…Belief in Meyer continues today. So does suspicion about plots to silence him.”

“Stephen Meyer recalled a phone call to his brother’s home in the 1980s.”

“’He turned to me and said, ‘They just offered me $800 million. Should I take it?’”

“I said, ‘Hell yes. How much money do you want?’”

“’He got very quiet. When he got into that thinking process, I just let him alone,’ Stephen recalled.”

“Charlie Hughes, now 36, vividly recalls the strangers who visited his parents’ home in the late 1970s.” [Stanley Meyer was living in the Hughes house at the time.]

“He had been playing outside when the driveway suddenly filled with limousines. Men in turbans stepped out. In ‘stern, thick accents,’ they asked for Meyer. ‘I remember, because I was not allowed in my own house that day’.”

“They left briskly. Charlie was about to go inside when the driveway filled again, this time with military vehicles. ‘Army brass,’ he recalled.”

“At dinner that night, Meyer told them: ‘The Arabs wanted to offer me $250 million to stop today. You and this lovely family can live in peace and prosperity the rest of your days’.”

“The Army officials, meanwhile, had questioned Meyer about what the foreigners wanted, thinking that a deal might have been struck, Charlie recalled Meyer telling the family.”

“Meyer discusses the offers in the Clarke documentary.”

“’Many times over the last decade, I have been offered enormous amounts of money simply to sell out or sit on it … The Arabs have offered me a total of a billion dollars total pay simply to sit on it and do nothing with it’.”

“The Grove City police investigation of Meyer’s death included taped interviews of more than a dozen witnesses.”

“Absent, however, were audiotapes of the two Belgians, Phillippe Vandemoortele and Marc Vancraeyenest.”

“The men had agreed to purchase 56 acres along Seeds Road in Grove City. The city had approved a research campus there two months before Meyer’s death.”

“Lt. Steve Robinette said it’s possible the men’s interviews were not taped.”

“Calls and e-mails to Vandemoortele and Vancraeyenest for this story were not returned.”

“The Franklin County coroner ruled that Meyer, who had high blood pressure, died of a brain aneurysm. Absent any proof of foul play, the police went with the coroner’s report.”

“The only detectable drugs were the pain reliever lidocaine and phenytoin, which is used to treat seizures.”

“And what became of the dune buggy that captivated a community for at least a few years?”

“A longtime friend of Meyer’s, who doesn’t want to be named because he fears that people will bother him about the invention, led a reporter to the basement of a property south of Columbus recently.”

“’I really shouldn’t be showing you this,’ he said.”

“After passing through several darkened rooms scattered with computers and electrical equipment, he opened a door. In the far corner of a garage sat the buggy, its leather seats cracked, its engine partially covered with a cloth.”

“A decal on the bright red paint declares: ‘Jesus Christ is Lord’.”

“Then the man quickly led the way out. Lights went dark. Doors clicked shut.”

“In his front yard, he sat on a lawn chair and sipped fruit punch. He watched the cars and trucks drive by on the road, burning gasoline.”









The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

47 comments on “Can cars run on water?

  1. Yacov Ezra says:

    Nikola Motors, Toyota, Daimler and other companies have demonstrated the feasibility of running vehicles like cars, jeeps, trucks, buses and trains on hydrogen. The tsunami hit Japanese city of Fukushima have plans to switch to hydrogen fuel for domestic purposes, street lighting and transportation by 2025. Toyota planned to operate a fleet of hydrogens powered buses to transport athletes, officials and spectators during the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. Trevor Milton of Nikola Motors has plans to set up 1000 hydrogen rigs across the US using electrolysis to split tap water into hydrogen and oxygen. Safety and hydrogen cell weight issues are rapidly getting sorted out. Experts say that hydrogen can power planes and heavy machinery as well. Even if the output energy of hydrogen is lesser than the input energy, it’s not unique because machines run on efficiency less than 1 (< 100 %) since no machine is ideal and energy is lost in heating and as frictional heat. Similarly, extracting calorific output from conventional fuels is cost prohibitive, has an efficiency less than 100 % and in case of fossil fuels is polluting. The problem with hydrogen is the high specific heat capacity of water vapor that's the product of combustion. Water vapor ranks among the worst green house gases and so even as water vapor is not polluting unlike carbon dioxide, oxides of sulfur, oxides of nitrogen etc yet it is bad news for global warming and climate change. A combination of hydrogen, hydroelectricity, wind, geothermal, solar, helium 3 and tidal energies is the answer to meeting our energy requirements, while minimal use of fossil fuels and nuclear power should be made.

    • David Engle says:

      General motors ran a pilot project with hydrogen powered SUVs in Hawaii a few years back. Making hydrogen using solar and wind power is available now and many internal combustion engines will operate on it. DARPA and the Navy is interested. Details here:

    • Jim S Smith says:

      Our gasoline-based engines only actually use about fifty percent of the gas we pay for any way! – This is by design. The combustion engine could have easily been improved upon, but the big oil industries had their way – and even are allowed to water-down our fuels by adding all kinds of “additives” which make it easier to add more water to the fuel – and still at least operate our cars.

      There is a huge reason why we have various “grades” of gas at the pump. – It’s all a HUGE SCAM! ! !

      This is why so many people who think they are saving at the pump, by buying the cheaper – lower-grade, gasoline – are really costing themselves much more later – in mechanical and efficiency problems – all due to using the very watered-down “cheap” gas!

      This why I always tell my friends that they should NOT be using anything less than about 90 Octane for their cars, unless the manufacturer states to on their technical recommendations. – This is also why “Gas-o-hol” was a total market flop! – Most automotive engines are not designed to use gas-alcohol mixture for fuel! – You really screw up your engine, injectors, and ignition systems by using gas-alcohol mixture fuel – if that car was NOT designed for it!

    • john says:

      interesting info Yacov but Carbon Dioxide is NOT a
      pollutant but essential for plant life.
      Present levels are very low about 400 parts per million.
      And global warming; what global warming?
      Maybe a bit more water vapor would be a good thing.

      • Yacov Ezra says:

        CO2 is classified as a pollutant and a greenhouse gas. Excess of it creates health and environmental problems. The carbon biogeochemical cycle is essential for photosynthesis when green plants trap solar insolation in their chlorophyll cells and use the trapped solar energy to convert carbon dioxide and water to starch and glucose, while releasing oxygen to the atmosphere. At night, a reverse process called respiration occurs when green plants give off carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and take in oxygen. Excess of carbon dioxide in the air creates greenhouse effect and at the same time when living creatures inhale carbon dioxide along with oxygen, the binding capacity of oxygen to blood haemoglobin is reduced as some of the inhaled carbon dioxide molecules attach themselves to haemoglobin that could reduce living tissue efficiency and damage the respiratory tract and impair neurons leading to neurological diseases. Excess carbon dioxide in the blood lowers blood pH turning it acidic (pH < 7) while normal blood pH is slightly alkaline (~ 7.4). Acidic blood creates acidic saliva that in turn attacks teeth enamel and provides a favourable liquid environment for certain bacteria that attack teeth and gums. Acid rain that forms when carbon dioxide, oxides of sulfur and nitrogen oxides dissolve in rain water damages standing crops in fields, turns soil acidic and aids in corrosion of metal surfaces.

      • Yacov Ezra says:

        A bit more water vapor? More carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor and other gaseous oxides in the atmosphere will hasten global warming as all are heat trapping gases with water vapor ranked as one of the worst greenhouse gases.

    • Bluesky says:

      I understand that Meyer didn’t use electrolysis to split water he used resonance frequency. The story I heard is Stan worked on radar and noticed that rain didn’t fall on the radar dishes. He then used radio waves to split the water and the water wasn’t split until it went into his injector. That’s the story I heard so I don’t know if it’s true or not. There was a couple of videos on YouTube about it but I haven’t looked lately

    • Bluesky says:

      Water can be split with resonance frequency using microwaves and plasma. Meyers car used resonance frequency to split water from what I understand

      • Nick says:

        Yes you are correct. I know someone who spent a decade reproducing Stan’s technology and was reasonably successful. He was able to crack water much more efficiently than using electrolysis.

        Water is paramagnetic so it ill essentially ear itself apart if placed in a correctly configured electromagnetic field.

  2. Dreams of an alternate reality where nothing is corrupted and flowers grow from our poop.

    Beside each and ever human on this planet, at the time of their death after some three score and ten, is a great big pile of garbage, a mountain of garbage, a mountain of waste from the desires met according to one’s position in life.

    Some mountains are higher than others, some smaller than the average. Some so small and organic they are insignificant to the whole mess.

    A tribes man from a jungle who lives a honorable life eating and living in what surrounds him is the only life worthy of this planet. Leave him alone I say, and fuck your curiosity to know about him.

    If you are not growing your own food, or going and getting from the bush?
    You don’t deserve a thing.

    An all of the rest of us deserve nothing, and should get nothing, and should die from the shear weight of our excesses.

    You think it is your right to run all that electrical gadgetry and piss and moan because the demand for energy is greater than what is actually available.

    Get on a bike and ride, you fat jerk, and spin the generator that charges your battery.

    The process of man is corruption, in the flesh and in the environment. We are teaching what is around us to survive us when we finally exit our time hear, and every thing has its time. And everything its purpose, our is to corrupt.

    Wind mills make noise and kill birds, solar panels reflex light and blind and pollute the view. Tidal dams kill fishing and stop the natural ecology of a tide and create dead zones.

    Can cars run on water?

    I prefer the question “Can humans learn to be human again?”

    Strange how people who oppose technocracy still want phones and cars and planes and gadgets…its like being a part time alcoholic.

    • Greg C. says:

      Rural Chinese farmers collect their own poop to help grow their food. Perception is shaped by modern conveniences. If we had water-powered cars like we now have water-powered latrines, we probably would feel disgust at riding in a gas-powered car.

    • Kika says:

      I doubt cars will ever run on water. Besides, we don’t need even more cars! The mining, transport, manufacture, processing, maintenance and repair of cars use huge amounts of fossil fuel, so even if they did run on water, they would still be extremely polluting.

      Cars also need the building and maintenance of roads, traffic lights, bridges, etc. etc. More pollution.

      However, car-sharing is a great idea and very easy to organise. And building local self-sufficiency reduces the need to travel. More public transport, etc. Lots of good ideas but please, not more cars!

      • Jim S Smith says:

        Spoken like a truly mis-educated “neo-liberal”!

        You must really hate freedom and individual liberty, because the automotive age was to be an extension of the freedom to travel, and travel farther.

      • Yacov Ezra says:

        Hydrogen powered cars/public transport (buses, trains, planes, hyperloop..) should be ideal. Mining, ore refining, manufacturing etc can be done by non-fossil sources of energy like hydroelectricity, fusion reactors using helium 3/light elements or limited use of nuclear power. There’s no bar to switching to non-fossil fuels. At the same time, fossil fuels are finite and could run low in decades.

        • Jim S Smith says:


          You are off on the wrong path anyway.

          They are NOT “fossil fuels”! They are by-products of decaying organic matter. One could even produce their own fuels from wastes and refuse, but the “greenies” put a stop to any effort to actually reclaim our refuse for use as fuel for electrical power!

          All of our various oil-based lubricants could have easily been made from such oils from Peanuts, Rape Seed (misnamed “Canola Oil”), Grape Seed, and other natural – RENEWABLE sources. The big Petro-chemical companies squashed every effort to do so, because then – such endeavors would have actually further liberated humanity from the monopolistic business practices of the big companies!

          Then Pres. Jimmy E. Carter could have made BILLIONS from his Peanut farms – if he were to have invested in the technology and industry which could convert Peanut Oils into commercially-usable lubricants, fuels, and other very useful (and BIO-DEGRADABLE) resources.

          • Yacov Ezra says:

            Coal, crude oil, and natural gas are all considered FOSSIL FUELS because they were formed from the fossilized, buried remains of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago. The compactification of biomass under dense layers of soil, sand, water and rock created extreme pressure and heat that initiated a chemical reaction converting the biomass into organic fuels.
            Because of their biological origins, fossil fuels have a high carbon content.

    • Jim S Smith says:

      But yet YOU are on a computer, powered by this “dirty electricity”.

      Using the Internet, powered by yet MORE “dirty electricity”.

      Using machines that were produced by extracting from the Earth you hold so “sacred”, and manufactured at a facility that uses HUGE amounts of “dirty electricity”.

      Using products of all sorts that were delivered by MORE “dirty energy-consuming” vehicles, which themselves – were produced using LOTS of “dirty energy” AND MORE extracted materials from the beloved Earth.

      Only to have folks, like YOU, carping on others who are wanting to live their lives as they are most familiar with – without the interference of some self-appointed “authorities” on how human beings should “be allowed to live”.

      Really makes one wonder, don’t ya think? ? ?

      I mean, REALLY ? ? ?

      If you are so ashamed of the current technological life style of humanity, today – then WHY are you still participating in it, by using the very same technology that you are so shaming of others’ use of? ? ?

      Perhaps it is time you actually practiced what you preach? ? ?

    • john says:

      A great rant Michael but how many would hear it in
      a forest clearing somewhere in a perfect uncorrupted
      world of God’s creation.

    • WD says:

      What you are eloquently pointing out about living a more natural earth-friendly life lines up with life’s creator’s basic principles for being care-takers and not exploiters or earth’s resources, which included NOT crowding into cities.

  3. Serge Stone says:

    Even if they could make cars running on water, that would not have ended reliance on fossil fuels, simply because all those cars would still have to be made out of metals and, even worse, plastic, which in itself a form of oil. The metals are produced by metallurgic industry, which runs on oil and coal (you can not produce metals without coal) and electricity. Plants making cars are themselves built out of metals and plastics, use metal and plastic equipment, manufactured by other plants (also using metal and plastic equipment) and also require a lot of electricity, which is generated mostly by fossil fuels (other forms of electric generation are simply not enough for the current needs of this human civilization). So a water fuel cell in a car engine cannot end our dependence on fossil fuels, which are used not just for automobiles, but constitute the lifeblood of our civilization. If you want to change that, you need to change the whole civilization completely, which is an empty dream.

    “Modern industrial society is composed of a triad of fossil fuels, metals, and electricity. The three are intricately connected. Electricity, for example, can be generated on a global scale only with fossil fuels. The same dependence on fossil fuels is true of metals; in fact the better types of ore are now becoming depleted, while those that remain can be processed only with modern machinery and require more fossil fuels for smelting. In turn, without metals and electricity there will be no means of extracting and processing fossil fuels. Of the three members of the triad, electricity is the most fragile, and its failure will serve as an early warning of trouble with the other two.

    Often the interactions of this triad are hiding in plain sight. Global production of steel, for example, requires 420 million tonnes of coke (from coal) annually, as well as other fossil fuels adding up to an equivalent of another 100 million tonnes. [Smil] To maintain industrial society, the production of steel cannot be curtailed: there are no “green” materials for the construction of skyscrapers, large bridges, automobiles, machinery, or tools.

    But the interconnections among fossil fuels, metals, and electricity are innumerable. As each of the three members of the triad threatens to break down, we are looking at a society that is far more primitive than the one to which we have been accustomed.

    The entire world’s economy is ultimately based on oil and other hydrocarbons. These provide fuel, fertilizer, pesticides, lubricants, plastic, paint, synthetic fabrics, asphalt, pharmaceuticals, and many other things. On a more abstract level, we are dependent on hydrocarbons for manufacturing, for transportation, for agriculture, for mining, and for electricity.

    Oil is the lifeblood of our civilization. Even a bicycle, that ultimate symbol of an “alternate lifestyle,” requires oil for lubrication, for paint, and for plastic components. The vehicle that delivers the bicycle runs on oil, over asphalt that is a form of oil. “Rubber” tires are often made of oil.

    Oil is everything: that is to say, everything in the modern world is dependent on oil. As the oil disappears, our entire industrial society will go with it. There will be no means of supporting the billions of people who now live on this planet. Above all, there will be insufficient food, and the result will be terrible famine.”

    • Hyden says:

      Nikola tesla proved you don’t need wires everywhere. Thus limiting use reliance on oil. we do not need to rely on oil but it can still be used for some applications, Also the patent office basically stops inventions becoming reality.

    • Opie Poik says:

      An anonymous oil exec, quoted at the defunct (but archived) industry site, The Oil Drum, said, “Considering the many productive uses of petroleum, burning it for fuel is like burning a Picasso for heat.”

      Give us thorium salt reactors, already, and save the petroleum for petrochemical use. And steer R&D toward solving real problems, instead of napalm and bombers and robodogs and disinfo algos. Whole new paradigms in chemistry and manufacture would arise. What if plastic spacers and bushings and clips were replaced by suspension fields, for example? Same with roads?

      Imagination is everything for us sentient stardust-remixer engineers. Who knows what is possible? The lightbulb was alarming; now, you forget to add it to the shopping list. Humanity is still largely a quivering cargo cult.

      “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” ~ Arthur C. Clarke

    • Hyden says:

      There would be no famine if everyone had a tesla power generator in there homes, people would mass leave the city’s and start new life’s as the reliance on electric oil grid would be limited.
      share marketers run the oil scam(they got money to make) they have there funding in bullshit green tech and the oil business, preparing themselves for the green wealth transfer scams.

    • Hyden says:

      Supposedly the secret black op government has metals and technology that would change the world, but they keep it hidden preparing for a new world order in there image.

    • Greg C. says:

      If a car could run on water, then the motors that make the car could also run on water. Electrical generators could run on water. You can always scale up – scaling down is the challenge. That’s why we don’t have nuclear powered cars.

      • Jim S Smith says:

        * * That’s why we don’t have nuclear powered cars. * *


        We don’t have them because the “industries” AND government don’t want us to have them. They would not be profitable to the big oil interests – AND – it’s more control by dependency.

        Scaling down is NOT the problem! The problem is too many greedy control-freaks who hate ANY form of competition to their high profit margins.

    • Yacov Ezra says:

      Hydrocarbons can be synthesised in the lab from atmospheric elements sans prospecting, drilling, refining etc. Yet, the polluting byproducts of hydrocarbon combustion remain the problem.

    • Mac says:

      Though have always wanted to do something besides gas, the issue with water is it’s limited. We think of water and oceans come to mind, so seems endless, but is mistake. Desalinating is intensive, and oceans diminished now as to life in them. There’s only a tiny amount of fresh water aquifiers, lakes etc on earth, and they’re lowering. Water is not being recycled to the natural system anymore. Someday oceans will be same, lowering.

      Another thing, cars should last a hundred years. Should only replace tires, brakes, few moving parts, rebuild etc. No excuse whole new car, or ‘tech’, spyware. Think original volkswagon, orig volvo. Anyway other thing is can’t believe billion people bought ‘new’ cars last twenty years, poison inside, can’t even breathe so toxic. The word ‘new’, generally not good now. As aside, wonder who labeled people chattering in plastic tv boxes or radios as –new-z. What if it was re labeled perpaganda by most people, would the leftover watchers still watch or be peer pressured away. There are a lot of things we would be better off without.

  4. Opie Poik says:

    Around ’92, the satirical Journal of Irreproducible Results carried a short column suggesting that the principles claimed for homeopathy might be applied to internal combustion engines; to wit: “vanishingly small amounts of gasoline” suspended in water in a car’s fuel tank. Like Monty Python’s “very small rocks” which could be expected to float as a witch might.

    The jury’s out on whether this story is true or not. Was the inventor a scammer, or were the investors assassins? Energy cannot be created nor dissipated, sayeth the ivory tower wizards, but competing claims about the nature of our observable reality propagate like kudzu.

    • Jim S Smith says:

      * * Energy cannot be created nor dissipated * *

      Should read (from the “Law of Conservation of Energy”):

      Energy can NOT be created NOR destroyed.

      Energy is “dissipated” all the time! Anytime you have a circuit that experiences a certain amount of energy losses (because there is NO SUCH THING AS A LOSSLESS CIRCUIT), that part of energy loss, which could be in the form of heat, static discharge, magnetic discharge, etc – is where part of the energy “lost” – is what was converted to another form (IE: “heat” that is dissipated).

      • Opie Poik says:

        Sorry about that, old boy. I know what those laws say, but it looks like I may have been typing while dissipated. Shoulda been moving around outdoors instead of cyborging around like a lump in front of the updated boob tube.


        • Jim S Smith says:

          No sweat!

          Glad to help. 😉

          Energy can be converted or “transformed” into any other form of energy. It is all energy of some form, regardless.

          BTW: Even physical “matter” is a form of energy (some would say “compressed” or “condensed” energy). This would also go for the oppositely-polarized “anti-matter”.

          So “matter” CAN be created and destroyed, but not energy – because energy already pre-existed matter. – Sounds almost like similar aspects from some of the ancient “spiritual writings”? ? ?

          • Yacov Ezra says:

            “Energy can neither be created nor destroyed in an ISOLATED SYSTEM” – first law of thermodynamics. The first law is derived from the principle of conservation of energy. By the way, energy does not exist by itself but is a function of mass, momentum, position. Thus we have energy of rest, motion energy (kinetic energy) & position energy (gravitational potential energy, elastic potential energy..).

  5. Ricardo D. says:

    Years ago I read of similar innovations w/ big-block gas-powered cars that could get upwards of 200, 500, even 1000mi to the gallon, with either buyouts, suppressed & stolen patents, &/or suspicious deaths. Even Donald Trump’s uncle was part of operation to bury Tesla’s tech & notes on behalf of the FBI

  6. Hyden says:

    Pity that people think this is all conspiracy theory’s. I have read that the pyramid shaped UFO that the secret state owns is run on quantum zero point energy. Nikola Tesla was silence too.

    world could be such a beautiful place, all looking after each other lessen the suffering , enough suffering as it is.
    Koko gorilla last message to humanity

  7. Jim S Smith says:

    The water-electrolysis problem has to do with the length of the “duty cycle” of the pulsed energy used to split the water molecules.

    I was going to build the test circuit that was featured on Ken Adachi’s “” website. I was looking to alter the design to use a variable-frequency pulsed system, and a voltage-multiplier bridge. Unfortunately, one of those constant problems of “life’s interruptions” happening, repeatedly – has taken much of my time and opportunity away!

    If one is very good (and imaginative) with electronics theory and applications, one could find the proverbial “sweet-spot” that would reduce the amount of power you would need to put into the system, and probably retrieve quite a bit more from the result.

    I understand that Platinum has been experimented with its application in the old carburetors and ignition systems. After all, Platinum is used in the catalytic converters to burn the “left-over” gas vapors that aren’t burned within the engine. (You actually burn less than fifty percent [ %50 ] of your gasoline in the engine! ! !) Platinum is also used by the petroleum industry in their fractional distillation and “cracking” operations.

    • Bluesky says:

      I understand that Meyer didn’t use electrolysis to split water he used resonance frequency. The story I heard is Stan worked on radar and noticed that rain didn’t fall on the radar dishes. He then used radio waves to split the water and the water wasn’t split until it went into his injector. That’s the story I heard so I don’t know if it’s true or not. There was a couple of videos on YouTube about it but I haven’t looked lately

  8. john says:

    Hyden: Do you mean theories or theorys, which is apparently an alternative.

    No apostrophe needed.

    Yes I am a bit of a pedant but there is a big difference
    between a writing style and plain mistakes.

  9. Serge Stone says:

    The problem with cars is not even so much exhaust emissions as tyre wear pollution:

    “Oxford, 6th March 2020: Pollution from tyre wear can be 1,000 times worse than what comes out of a car’s exhaust, Emissions Analytics has found.”

    So even a water-based engine will not solve the problem with cars. The problem can only be solved by eliminating this kind of transportation completely. It goes without saying that it should go hand in hand with people stopping to travel long distances to work or for pleasure and living and working only in their own region, which should be small enough to enable everyone to get anywhere you need on foot (like it was in the early Roman republic that consisted of peasants). This would have reduced overall consumption and pollution dramatically.

    But, of course, it’s not going to happen, is it? We are totally stuck in our destructive ways and cannot turn away from the precipice looming already large on the horizon. “I want this, I need that, it’s for our kids” etc. – that’s all. What about needs and kids of other species? In the time that we’ve had these comments a couple of hundred species have entered the fossil record. And mind you, the life-forms being annihilated are working parts of life-support systems on which our own civilization depends. This annihilation of life is driven by our over-consumption (of course, many people around the world are not responsible for over-consuming; they live life on its margins, with barely enough to eat let alone thrive. And this reflects inequities built into a global economic system that prioritizes profit for the few, not resources for living for all.)

    Ralph Waldo Emerson once noted that ‘The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.’

    “Capitalism, war and destruction of the biosphere are, fundamentally, outcomes of our dysfunctional parenting and education of children, which distorts their intellectual and emotional capacities, destroys their conscience and courage, and actively teaches them to over-consume as compensation for having vital emotional needs denied.”

    “As is overwhelmingly demonstrated by any consideration of the historical evidence in relation to human behavior, fear will prevent the vast bulk of human beings considering the evidence offered above as well as that cited. Moreover, even among those who do consider it, few will have the capacity to act sensibly and powerfully in response, particularly given the comprehensive range of strategies in so many different contexts that are now necessary.

    Hence, absent the intellectual and emotional capacities necessary to respond strategically to this complex and multifaceted crisis, human extinction will occur imminently.”

  10. billy hill says:

    look up the fish carburator,
    or the 1950’s union 66 preheating gasoline test.

    Weird how all the water that was here before humans is still here. It changes form but is still around.

    • Jim S Smith says:

      I’m still interested in the “Pond’s and Fleishman experiments”.

      These two folks were hounded practically out of existence, and their experiments deliberately sabotaged.

  11. Jim S Smith says:

    As one very astute mechanic once told me,

    IF one were to “lean out” the fuel-to-air mixture – to a level of 17 to 1 (17 parts air – to – one part atomized fuel [or fuel vapor] ) – one could boost fuel mileage considerably – with the right design of carburetor.

  12. Bill says:

    Viktor Schauberg studied water like no other before him. He understood the potential energy and possibilities. Also found that implosion tech has way more energy than explosion tech. Of course his ideas and research got shut down. He’s now considered a pseudo scientist by wiki. Shame
    There are still good documentaries about him out there

  13. Bluesky says:

    From what I understand he didn’t use electrolysis to split water he used resonance frequency. Plasma will also split water too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *