The h2 powered catamaran sure looks great, but its hard to get real info about it. Is it really h2 powered or is it another multi million dollar scam?  My money is that its another scam. You may wonder why as it does sound like a plausible project. Well , unless its powered by luquified hydrogen, produced in Iceland, the project is not going to work all that well.  The boat seems to make power from the sun and convert extra energy into making hydrogen from sea water, which can be used at night as a power source, that's what I think it pretends to do. Well for a start, assuming it has enough solar panels to propel itself and make some hydrogen, it seems that hydrogen is not the best way to store electrical power. Batteries are superior from what I've read on the subject. But the real problem is that they claim to make hydrogen from sea water. In that case, instead of getting pure oxygen as the byproduct, they will get a lot of nasty chlorine gas as well. About as environmentally friendly as mustard gas.  There are a lot of nasty characters out there pretending to be nice and saving the world, keep an eye on these innovators for sure as they sure smell fishy.
Same goes for Peter Painter, burning methanol in a testube and saying it was hydrogen.

I too wonder about these people but one thing I do know to be true is Meyer did all of the dirty work for us. Anyone that gets his technology up and running doesn't have to go through any scientific peer review panels nor will they have to ask for permission from any local governments as Meyer held world patents which are all now in the public domain. I have been waging a battle in trying to get people to fully understand just what is good for Open Source and what is not good for Open Source. Most people haven't the guts to ask and answer the real questions I put on the table nor do they seem to wish to talk about it at all. Nope, they seem to prefer the head in the sand approach acting like the rules of the markets simply don't apply to them. I put the truth or reality if you will of just what we have to do in order to get where it is we need to go. Some have tried in the past to toss in some dream-like ideas wrapped in words that make them sound like the truth but almost none wish to talk about actual reality.


I understand a little about what Peter Painter has done but I also know that he has already messed up in letting what he has done out before he has all the patents. rights, and all else that goes with it in a complete and legal manor so therefore he can, and more than likely will, be blocked. Meyer didn't make that mistake. As for that boat around the world thing it's true that it would work better with storage batteries as without Meyer's technology the use of hydrogen will always give a loss in efficiency. Meyer's technology is a energy generator and in that it has the power to replace all other forms and methods of energy generation. But it wouldn't be wise to just do away with other clean sources of power generation like solar and battery energy storage systems.


It has taken me a long time to get this far with my understanding of just how Meyer's technology actually works and I made sure to pass on the true science behind the patents. It wasn't easy for me to figure out an entirely new way that mother nature has been doing years before we humans ever even knew what electricity was. In fact in forums like these those whom tell lies about this technology have steered people so far away from the truth of how this technology actually works that the truth seems like a lie. When I tell people that it works exactly like a thunderstorm I get a lot of laughs from people as that is not what the so-called leaders of this movement say about this technology. I remember being laughed out of the room when I talked about how a plant actually breaks the bonds of the water molecules and how Meyer's technology was doing practically the same thing, IE, taking away the electrons from the atoms that make up the water molecules as that is the final mechanism in photosynthesis before the water molecules are broken down into their component atoms. I showed this to everyone and as I said was laughed out the room as it would seem no one truly understands real science and in a lot of these forums there has been a push to do away with sound scientific practices due to the greed and corruption of the scientific community. Some have even told me to take my scientific method, as if I was the one whom created it, and put it where the sun doesn't shine. But I just push all that aside as I understand that the way people have been programmed by their TV's is strong and anything that bucks the scientific norm it taught by the TV's programming to be a scam.


But the powers that be also sent in people to these forums to add doubt in the minds of the masses so that true science or progress for that matter is completely ignored. In 2013 I showed for the very first time ever in a provable way that high voltage can be applied to the excitor array using Meyer's VIC transformer and you should have seen the mountain of negative comments I received for being the first one to do such a thing. What has shocked me since that time is almost no one has had the guts to follow what I did to reach those high voltages as to the best of my knowledge no one has ever reached the 4.2kv I showed I was applying directly to the water bath in the excitor array yet. What was even more shocking was the so-called leaders all banded together to tell everyone I was heading in the wrong direction when I started to make improvements in the amount of voltage I was able to apply to the excitor array. Some even went as far to say that high voltage wasn't the way to go which made Meyer and all of his video lectures out to be totally bogus as that is all he ever talked about, IE, restricting the flow of amps and allowing voltage to take over. I will admit I have been stuck at 9.4kv for a while now but I feel I finally got it and with the next transformer should reach Meyer's stated minimum voltage required to get this technology working which is 1kv per resonant cavity. In the forums when I would show progress all it did in the end was to get me kicked out of those forums. I got a lot of hate for sharing my work and I think that's all due to some paid personnel planted by the power elite in forums like these so that they could keep things the way they are.


People will remember these times especially those whom stood in the way of progress. People have aired hour long shows about how I am misleading people and some have even written books about it. The one thing I do know, though an am not very found of it, is I am the leader in this hydrogen revolution when it comes to Meyer's technology. I am the one whom took the time to build things correctly, I am the one whom spent his dimes on getting the necessary measuring equipment to accurately read and view this technology, and I am the one whom took after the core science behind this technology. Now to be honest I don't like this role, but now that I have a more complete understanding of just how Open Source works I'm glad it turned out to be me as someone else might have gotten it wrong. Sure it's true I don't have all the answers yet but I do know where it is I am heading so I am able to troubleshoot problems in the right direction.


When I look at this "Energy Observer" I think of how things would need to be changed when making use of this method of water separation. First of all they wouldn't need anywhere near that many solar panels and they wouldn't need any hydrogen storage tanks, well, not as many as I think just one will do the trick to act as a buffer to keep the hydrogen flowing at the proper rate for the hydrogen full cell and all water that was created by the hydrogen fuel cell would be recaptured and sent back to the water tank to be reused. It's entire layout would be totally different if this technology was put to use in that vessel as this technology is an energy generator where we have the power of a thunderstorm in the palm of our hands, to steal a phase from Spider Man. One of the drawbacks of using an excitor array is it needs to be kept clean and if sea water was used it would have to be flushed quite often as all the particulates in the water would remain in the cell and begin to build up over time while the exciter array is in use. But to get around that as I stated before all the water created by the hydrogen fuel cell would be captured and put back in the water tank for reuse. So it can start off on pure sea water but over time it would be using water that was generated by the hydrogen fuel cell which would be free of any particulates that would mess up the way the exciter array works. Most people that I talk to about this technology have no idea that this is a drawback in making use of the excitor array, but was something that was solved when making use of the water fuel injectors for an internal combustion engine. Something else people don't understand about this technology is it is carbon negative in that any engine that is converted to run on this technology would run about cleaning the air as the engine was operated as the air would come out of the tailpipe cleaner than the air that was drawn into the intake system. All in all this technology's use would really change the layout plans of that vessel they are using. Plus you are right in that they are planning to make use of that garbage electrolysis method which is a total waste of energy and would spit out all of those nasty gases you mentioned so it's really a bad idea as they haven't the right technology to break the bonds of the water molecules yet.


Now everyone can see that there are three methods of breaking the bonds of the water molecules and who knows there might be more but one must make use of the scientific method and start asking and answering questions with real world experiments to find out if there are any more methods out there that will break the bonds of the water molecules in a manor that is far more efficient that Dr. Faraday's electrolysis method. I looked to nature and our creator for answers in how to go about breaking the water molecules down in a far more efficient manor than Dr. Faraday's electrolysis method and I give all the glory to our creator.

Well, keep up the hard work and hopefully one day you will have some results to give us, particularly power in vs hydrogen production. I'm also interested in the temperature of the water, it should cool down dramatically. Tinman has kept quiet with his electrolysis experiments, so its hard to know if he succeeded in wiping the floor with Faraday's corpse.

If you were to follow what I put out in a pdf file entitled, "The Voltage Dissociation of Water" you will already have what it takes to not have the water heat up. I go over the science and tell why the water doesn't heat up in that pdf file. But like Tinman I too don't share all that much and perhaps a whole lot less than he does at the moment. I will tell you that I have run my setup for over 24 hours straight taking temperature readings every 30 minutes and noted that the water temps follow the temperature rises and falls of the day. I find it pointless to share when I know already that no one can afford to build these things for they will all hit the "One Off" prices I have been talking about, so what's the point in sharing? The price for the transformer cores is $358.40 plus shipping charges for each pair. The cost to have the bobbins made will set you back another $3000 and you still have no wire to put into it or a properly built excitor array to hook it up too. I know people can't afford these things so again why bother sharing my experiments when I know no one will be able to duplicate my work? I posted the science behind all of this and not a soul has even tried to duplicate the waveform shown in the pdf file. The only thing I can do to make a difference is to get the technology to the market place in working order so that people can have a chance to buy it already fully working and ready to go.


Now if the people will not rally behind me then this technology will once again go into the trash bin of history as without support no technology can survive. So, when the time comes I hope people step up to the plate and support this technology.

Well, keep up the hard work and hopefully one day you will have some results to give us, particularly power in vs hydrogen production. I'm also interested in the temperature of the water, it should cool down dramatically. Tinman has kept quiet with his electrolysis experiments, so its hard to know if he succeeded in wiping the floor with Faraday's corpse.

Wont be to long,and we will know if we have a system with a COP>1.

The PlazArc reactor is almost complete--testing will start very soon--by this weekend at latest.

Brad

Ed, don't you already have what you need? I know you are saying that you need to have more volts to get that certain voltage between each resonant cavity, and you need a better transformer, but surely you can achieve this high V by not having so many cavities in series. You have quite a few in series by the look of your videos. Why not just have 2 or three in series instead. The trannie voltage will then split by 2 or 3 instead of 6 or more.


Good one Tinman! You have been busy. Quite a different setup to the original experiments I see!


Beware of using carbon electrodes for under water arcs. You will be making 'water gas' (see wiki ) which is full of carbon monoxide, very poisonous!

The gas produced is COH2,and when burnt,the waste is Co2 and water.

Brad

And to Tinman (Brad) if what you are doing now is putting co2 into our atmosphere then you might as well have found an oil deposit in your backyard for you will have become part of the problem I am trying to get rid of in cleaning up the mess we have made to our atmosphere with the use of fossil fuels. You have a consumable product now and I will not so how do you expect to compete with this technology in the open markets? Anyway I best stop posting on your thread as I know from experience just how annoying that can be.
Take care and best of luck to you.

From what Ive studied, more co2 is causing a greening in plant growth. The more we tear down the treas and plants is far worse than Brad generating co2. They tend to concentrate on reducing co2 in the ways we hear but seem to ignore the processes necessary to keep co2 in check naturally.

I think we will see bigger issues than co2 claims like what is going on at Fukoshima Japan.  Look at the strange happenings with sharks, whales, and more strange appearances of deep see creatures on beaches.  In a recent news article Tepco plans a complete dump of the radioactive water into the ocean. Its been being drained into the ocean for years now. Even the winds carry the radioactive air toward the US and Canada. Not much talk about that. Russia and China dont seem to be complaining as its not going their way. There has been a quiet rise in thyroid cancers in Japan.  Im a bit worried about eating tuna as it mostly comes from the pacific. Its time to get personal radiation detectors. If you dig in on the subject, you will see what I see.

If some are getting so good at separating water into H and O, why not figure out a way to separate the C and the O from CO2?

Mags

Okay since you want to get on world events then what about this ice shelf that just broke off into the ocean that is larger than Delaware? How do you suppose that is going to effect the ocean's currents dumping all of that fresh water into the ocean? My basic argument is why worry about something that is out of your control?


So, in this context I don't actually understand your argument other than being posted just for the sake of arguing as you pointed to things that are out of our control and we can really do nothing about. Sure co2 is good for plants but we live in balance with these plants as we put out co2 and plants put out o2, however plants don't like co, or any NOx gases and that is something we can work towards solving with this technology.

Well we look at different data. The ice is going to melt. That is the time line in history.  The elitists want to cash in on it saying we can make the difference. Its going to happen no matter what we do. There are many more dire problems they should be dealing with like what to do about all the nuke plants that are out of date and how to really get rid of the waste materials.

If you look into indoor growing, in japan they pull 1000 heads of lettuce a day off of indoor spiral farming. And the pot industry, they use co2 tanks to get the plants to grow at much faster rates than in the outdoors. So I cant agree that we are near a point that outdoor co2 is bad for plants. But those plants are converting that co2 to make oxygen.

Mags

"It
is possible that this technology also holds the key to
turning radioactive waste into a nonreactive
substance"

Ina flash yes

Here is a quick first run of the reactor.
It is consuming the small rods quite fast,but i believe that the rods are of poor quality.

This is running on an AC- around 11 amps at 34-36 volts.
It is producing about 3LPM of raw gas-not dried-so an MMW of 8.02 

The new,larger reactor is already under construction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWCFNt3Tu_I


Brad