60minutes tonight (tv3)! (17 October 2005)

**marty** · 18th October 2005, 14:22

Originally Posted by Slingshot

From the website:

Everyone stop breathing, we can't be seen to be adding to the worst of all harmful bi products, CO2.

This guy is full to the brim with crap.

Chances are the tank already had petrol in it, he poured a little water into the tank which would have floated on top of the petrol, then he started the bike and rode away.

actually, water sinks in petrol (or any hydrocarbon fuel) as the SG of all hydrocarbon fuels is less than (ie lighter than) water.

**Lou Girardin** · 18th October 2005, 14:22

Originally Posted by Slingshot

From the website:

Everyone stop breathing, we can't be seen to be adding to the worst of all harmful bi products, CO2.
.

I'd say there's a few worse ones,
carbon monoxide, sulphuric acid, diesel particulates, to name a few.

**Marmoot** · 18th October 2005, 14:26

I remember James Watt made an engine that ran on water as well. It was a while ago though....I think in late 1800s.
He got quite a bit of horsepower from that water-fuelled engine.

**hazard02** · 18th October 2005, 14:27

i think a lot of us have missed the point. if this guy has indeed built an engine that runs on modified water, it still emits levels of CO2 etc just the same as a regular fuel (even if it is just mixing with the lubricant).
he might have solved the issue of cheap fuel, but we'd still be stuck with the pressing issue of global warming. cheap fuel would just encourage people to use more of it = more greenhouse gasses = less low lying pacific nations.

**James Deuce** · 18th October 2005, 14:28

Originally Posted by Marmoot

.....Watt....

Watt's on second.

Who's on first

Exactly

**Bartman10** · 18th October 2005, 16:01

Originally Posted by hazard02

i think a lot of us have missed the point. if this guy has indeed built an engine that runs on modified water, it still emits levels of CO2 etc just the same as a regular fuel (even if it is just mixing with the lubricant).
he might have solved the issue of cheap fuel, but we'd still be stuck with the pressing issue of global warming. cheap fuel would just encourage people to use more of it = more greenhouse gasses = less low lying pacific nations.

He hasn't solved any problem. He's a con. The only thing he's doing is giving people false hope that they'll get cheap fuel in the future.

When it's been confirmed that he's a con all he'll do is detract funding and research effort from genuine renewable or energy efficiency projects, because of bad media publicity, which reflects badly on science and the government. This pisses me off.

The problem is we trust the media too much, especially TV. TV3 are suckers and they've been taken for a ride, along with the some of the public.

The real solution to energy a lot of energy problems is a series of micro-networks of localised power generation capability, not some crack pot con who's only after publicity.

**notme** · 18th October 2005, 16:57

Originally Posted by Bartman10

.............The real solution to energy a lot of energy problems is a series of micro-networks of localised power generation capability, not some crack pot con who's only after publicity.

Originally Posted by SlashWylde

I know a few people who work in this feild, some green-minded people who have developed a simple but efficient micro-hydro or wind generation system and others who have defied accepted wisdom and developed highly efficient power-dense inverter systems.

When young dumb glamour seekers, like this guy appears to be, come along and get a spot on the TV it casts a shadow of doubt over the whole concept of sustainable energy, and the public at large develop a heightened sense of scepticisim to such concepts - "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" springs to mind.

Ok, I'm not (intentionally) glamour seeking myself here, but think about this:

I AM one of the people SlashWylde mentions above - my company has developed power electronics systems that are essential to utilise the localised energy generation capacity that Bartman10 talks about, with the source being the "clean" micro-hydro, wind, solar etc that SlashWylde talks about.

Now here's the bit to think about. We have gone thru almost 10 years of trying to get funding to develop this technology further, and been stymied at every attempt. Oh sure we get little bits here and there from TBG schemes and stuff....but given as little as $500k, we could develop this technology to a point where NZ is a world leader in sustainable energy technology.

Wanna know what we have been doing recently instead?

The biggest market for the technology so far has been China. They have bought approx $1.5million worth of our product, thru government sponsored initiatives, and are bringing in a frickin LAW (just found that out this morning!) that says every new structure that meets certain criteria built in the Jiang-Su province MUST have our little boxes installed.

NZ wants to be clean and green, and yet there is bugger all money for people like us who can help with that, and i mean HELP in an immediate, real way - not with snake oil and hype.

So when I see people like this guy being given publicity, money (was probly paid to be on TV with his "invention") etc it just PISSES ME OFF.

End of rant....sorry!

**Marmoot** · 18th October 2005, 17:27

Originally Posted by Jim2

Watt's on second.

Who's on first

Exactly

What? Watt?

**Marmoot** · 18th October 2005, 17:29

come to think of it, running vehicle on water is actually really possible.

All you need to do is stir the water enough.
once it is stirred enough, the kinetic energy inside the water can be used to generate electricity, which can be used to generate motion. And, to preserve the motion, the water just need to be stirred more with the....uh.....electricity

**hazard02** · 18th October 2005, 18:15

cant believe i didnt figure it out straight away.
those supposed modifications to the carb were just to throw us off. he actually replaced it with a flux capacitor. this esentially turns the fuel tank into a localised time machine that transports the water through time until it decomposes into hydrogen and oxygen. that little box just irradiates the water til it builds up enough jiggawatts of charge to power the device.
elementary...

**pyrocam** · 18th October 2005, 18:50

Originally Posted by hazard02

cant believe i didnt figure it out straight away.
those supposed modifications to the carb were just to throw us off. he actually replaced it with a flux capacitor. this esentially turns the fuel tank into a localised time machine that transports the water through time until it decomposes into hydrogen and oxygen. that little box just irradiates the water til it builds up enough jiggawatts of charge to power the device.
elementary...

fucking hell.

quick. try and get the patent before that fuck does.

or go back in time with one and patent it 5 years ago

**WINJA** · 18th October 2005, 19:30

Originally Posted by hazard02

cant believe i didnt figure it out straight away.
those supposed modifications to the carb were just to throw us off. he actually replaced it with a flux capacitor. this esentially turns the fuel tank into a localised time machine that transports the water through time until it decomposes into hydrogen and oxygen. that little box just irradiates the water til it builds up enough jiggawatts of charge to power the device.
elementary...

PITY YOUR BIKE DONT RUN ON BULLSHIT CAUSE YOU COULD SAVE A LOT OF SQUIDS