Project – BOOK 5 – HYDROGEN REVOLUTION November 30, 2014

Subject – Chapter by Kent Bingham Page 45 of 46



Chapter by Kent Bingham

My history

Russ Voorhees and I share the dream of the “paradigm City of the Future”. Russ calls it Chayah. I call it EPCOT. I was Chief Structural Engineer for Walt Disney’s EPCOT from 1977 thru 1983. See . Russ contacted Disney’s Chief Architect, George Rester looking for a team to design and build Chayah. George told Russ that he needed Kent Bingham on the team, so that is how this collaboration on CHAYAH, energy, and hydrogen began.

EPCOT provided a lens that focused my life before Disney and gave it meaning, and provides the basis for moving forward now in 2014.


I started working in engineering offices when I was in high school, and continued non-stop thru my graduation from UC Berkeley as a Civil/Structural engineer. I rose rapidly into my role as “Chief Structural Engineer” (CSE) with firms such as:

In between, there was structural work on many public works projects involving flood control, water treatment, coasts and harbors, hospitals, and many buildings at USC.


I was recruited for the position of CSE at WED Enterprises in Glendale, California where I began work on the EPCOT project October 31, 1977. This position continued till October 1983, 6 of the most remarkable years in my life. Walt had died in 1965, but all of the great talent that had worked with him were still at WED. I participated in The evolution of EPCOT, from many concepts for each pavilion and country.

In “World Showcase” the focus was technology, with pavilions themed on:

In “World Showcase”, we gave participating nations an opportunity to showcase their culture, their national heritage, and give their young people an opportunity to live and work in Disney World for a year.  Participants included:

It took about two years to complete the creative evolution of these pavilions, followed by 2 more years of design. At WED, we developed construction standards and preliminary designs which we transferred to the Architectural and Engineering (A&E) teams which would complete the design. During the final 2 years WED supervised the design and construction of all of the facilities and infrastructure, while internally we designed and built all of the show and ride systems. EPCOT opened October 1, 1982. I stayed on at WED for one more year after opening.

I left Disney with 2 major objectives:

It was this project that eventually brought me to develop Energy and Transportation systems that ultimately demanded the use of HYDROGEN.


Several of my friends also left Disney about this time and started to work for Universal Studios. Universal started slowly to develop attractions for their studio tour, starting with “2010 Space Odyssey”. That went well, so “King Kong” was produced the next year, followed closely by “Earthquake”. This is where I began to establish a new role for myself doing stress analysis on show and ride mechanical system. Things went so well, that for Earthquake, Universal handed me the responsibility for managing the complete building system and all A&E work, in addition to QC review for all show and ride systems.

The Western Stunt Show in Hollywood followed Earthquake. It had a falling wall and a slide for life. Relatively modest by comparison with Earthquake, but popular enough that it was later repeated in Florida.

By this time I was director of operations for John A. Martin Associates (JAMA), a leading structural engineering firm in LA. Earthquake was a great success, increasing attendance at Universal Studios by 30 percent for several years after opening. With this success, Universal decided it was time to move forward with their plans to develop their park in Orlando, Florida. They awarded JAMA 5 major pavilions for structural engineering:

On this basis, JAMA opened a new division headed by me. We called it Entertainment Engineering (EEI), and opened an office in Burbank. This office was open for 20 years, from 1987 thru the end of 2007.

3RD PARTY REVIEW – is now standard operating procedure for developing one of a kind devices that have little or no precedent. Prior to the development of 3PR, a specialty team would go from concept to completion, with no one providing engineering reviewing their work. EEI simply added an independent QC review team to the development process, and significantly improved the safety and reliability of the finished product.

Universal made a major blunder in Florida that cost them hundreds of millions. They decided to not award us a contract for QC review of Show and Ride systems in the park. Then, instead of duplicating Earthquake, King Kong, and Jaws in Florida, they decided to produce totally new and different versions of these shows, and without any design review. The new management team that they had assembled for the Florida project felt that their contracts with the Show and Ride developers were strong enough that if there were any problem, the vendor would keep working on the project till everything was working smoothly.

The rest is history. It was such a disaster that major management changes were made at Universal, and even though we had no authority or responsibility for the many mechanical problems, we and many others became scapegoats. That ended our work with Universal.


EEI had the great honor of participating as structural engineers in the total remodeling of the old MGM studio in Culver City, California, which was owned by Sony Pictures. We had three primary objectives:

Gensler Architects from Santa Monica were in charge of this project.

We had recently completed the Earthquake show at Universal when a major earthquake hit LA on October 1, 1987 @ 7:42am. A 5.9M quake located in the Whittier Narrows region that lasted about 20 seconds and was centered near the intersection of Rosemead Blvd. and San Gabriel Blvd.  Much of the damage occurred in the older Uptown Whittier area, but there was major damage throughout the Los Angeles Basin, especially in the cities of Pasadena, Alhambra, and San Gabriel.

After major events like this, damage to older buildings becomes the focus for improving building codes. We were about to work on 90 existing structures of all sizes and functions at the movie studio, and would need building permits. Several unreinforced masonry buildings needed to be demolished, others were reinforced, leaving the majority to be improved for greater safety. Not full code compliance, but improved strength.

We finished this project in 1993, just in time for the next major earthquake to hit LA on January 17, 1994 @ 4:30 am. A 6.7M quake located one mile south- southwest of Northridge and 20 miles west-northwest of Los Angeles. The earthquake produced the strongest ground motions ever instrumentally recorded in an urban setting in North America. Damage was wide-spread, sections of major freeways collapsed, parking structures and office buildings collapsed, and numerous apartment buildings suffered irreparable damage.

My home was located about 20 miles north of the epicenter, and took one hell of a ride. My head was still spinning as I woke up to the aftermath, when I received the call to go to Sony and do an inspection for damage there. Well, there was no significant damage. I took a bigger hit to my home. Everyone was happy, and we continued to work on sound stages and on movies for several years afterwards. All’s well that ends well.


The tremendous talent pool that had produced WDW, EPCOT, USH, and USF was now available for other projects. Universal repaired its damages, and started to make money, so that in 3 or 4 years, they launched their “Islands of Adventure” in Florida. EEI did structural engineering for the Lost Continent part of that project under Gruen Architects. However, we never did any more show and ride systems for Universal.

EEI’s involvement in Asia was minor. We did some small projects in Korea for John Kim, and some work for Gary Goddard. In Japan we produced a show at the “ISE-SHIMA Spanish Village” (with Eric Van Dijk and Larry Nelson) based on Earthquake, but with a restricted budget. We never did any work in China. We were far too busy in Las Vegas.

Our first major project in LV was the Treasure Island Pirate Show. The LV office of JAMA were structural engineers for the TI hotel and the pool in front of the hotel. Technifex developed the preliminary design for this show, but lost the final contract to Showtech from NY owned by Bill and Pete Mensching, Bob Gurr was the chief designer for show systems, and we were overall QC reviewers, and signed for this project as the Engineer of Record (EOR).

The show was a great success in every way. This made our reputation in LV and led to our being involved in the following additional projects as EOR:


We had been strong advocates for many years for reliable people mover systems. We did a major study in Denver with our JAMA office located in Denver, looking at alternative ways to get skiers from Denver safely out to all of the ski resorts along Interstate 70. This launched our website where we partnered with Lloyd Goff to offer APMs to the world.

After all of our many successes with mechanical show and ride system, our friends in the industry began to regard us as the go to guys for people movers.

In 2000 we were given a contract to design the Farmers Market Trolley by Rick Caruso. George McGinnis, Disney Art Director, did a fantastic job of creating the world’s most magnificent trolley. It was battery powered and inductively charged. It was built by our friends in Las Vegas by Joe Schenk and his Scenic Technologies team from New York, who we had worked with on Treasure Island. They could not have done a better job.

In 2002 we were awarded a contract by the San Diego Zoo to redevelop their Wild Animal Park in Escondido, and to design and built a new fleet of electric vehicles for the tour of the park. In 2007 this contract was terminated after we had completed the prototypes for a 50 passenger tour bus and a 9 passenger APM. Both vehicles were battery powered and could be operated both automatically or manually driven. They were wire guided and designed to be inductively charged. We completed the construction of the rebuild of the Park, and in the process were paid more than any other A&E team who had worked for the SD Zoo.

We also designed the buses as series hybrid EVs powered by hydrogen as fuel for motor generator sets at the rear of the bus. The two prototype vehicles that were built for the WAP are still in our possession.


We formed a new company for manufacturing our continuing work on trolleys and any other people movers. We called it TIG-m to signify that it was the manufacturing division of TIG. Alvaro Villa had done an excellent job building our electric vehicles for the Zoo, and began to get contracts for more battery powered trolleys. Brad Reed who was my principal engineer at EEI transferred over to TIG-m and is now its president and Alvaro Villa is its CEO. I am the majority stock holder, but not actively engaged in operations.


TIG-m has been in continuous operation in Chatsworth, California since we formed that division in 2007. It has completed several trolleys, and has been marketing worldwide. We signed a contract with Dubai for a fleet of trolleys just prior to their financial crash. That contract was never completed, but has led to our continuing marketing efforts in Doha, Los Angeles, Cabo San Lucas, New York City, San Antonio, and most recently Aruba.

The power supply for our trolleys has continued to evolve. At the Farmers Market, we used inductive power and direct plug in power to recharge the batteries. Next we put a small gasoline powered motor-generator on the trolleys to provide continuous recharge. This was a true series hybrid in the classic sense. Our latest trolleys for Aruba are powered by hydrogen. The hydrogen is obtained by splitting water by electrolysis in a trackside unit. The hydrogen is transferred as a high pressure gas into a tank on board the trolley, where it can keep the batteries charged for 2 days by use of an on-board fuel cell. You can learn more about our trolleys at our website, or see our Aruba videos at

Our streetcar system for Downtown Oranjestad in Aruba is a zero-emission system using hydrogen fuel cells and lithium batteries. The first of its kind. We provide the entire system including on-site hydrogen production and dispensing. We also have a video for our solar electric streetcar in San Antonio. See .

My involvement with hydrogen

Russ and I have been discussing ways to use hydrogen as fuel since I was developing the Zoo vehicles. I wanted to find a totally non-polluting fuel, and settled on hydrogen. Russ agreed, developed the concept of “the hydrogen corridor” from Los Angeles to Denver, and working with Roy McAlister and others, produced a fleet of Ford Crown Victorias operating in Phoenix.

My needs were much simpler. I could start out my vehicles on battery power, just as used on our trolleys, and turn them into series hybrids at some later time as we began to evolve our vehicle performance. Instead of trying to offer a hydrogen alternative to the public, mine was a private system, with hydrogen stored only at the Wild Animal Park. So I tabled my hydrogen power development at that time, and focused on completion of my 2 Zoo vehicles.

I did not get back into hydrogen until 2008. At that time, the price of gasoline was up to about $4.00 per gallon. So we decided to find a gasoline alternative in the form of “free” energy devices. We formed a Nevada based LLC and name it GREEN ENERGY MACHINES, LLC, or GEMs. The following is an excerpt from a paper I wrote 10/10/2008:

There are three new technologies that we have the ability to implement at this time. The energy producing systems presented here are totally non-polluting, and require no fossil fuels or external power inputs to operate. They are based upon the following:

1- Water modified to produce a combustible gas

2- Magnetism in the form of permanent magnets

3- Earth’s electro-magnetic Energy Fields

My associates developed a “Forever Battery” following Tesla concepts, and together we produced several prototypes of auto running permanent magnet motors. Two of them became working prototypes, but could not develop sufficient torque to be anything but toys.

I personally began research on WATER ENERGY, which continues to this day. The following information is what I know today about water energy, which is based on HYDROGEN.

Hydrogen as the fuel-of-the-future

As you begin the study of water energy, you will encounter some of the following information:


The most amazing feature of water which we drink, bathe in, cook with, and use to put out fires, is that WATER BURNS. It is the most amazing source of energy in the universe. In order to access this energy, you must first get to the HYDROGEN contained in water. The processes for burning water are as follows:

  1. Transform H2O into a mixture of Hydrogen and Oxygen gases using the resonant frequency of the water molecule which is reported to be 42,800 Hz.  This process was discovered by John Worrell Keely in 1866. 

  2. Transform H2O into a mixture of Hydrogen and Oxygen gases using electrolysis.  This was originally done by William A. Rhodes in 1961, and was known as COMMON DUCT ATOMIC ELECTROLYTIC OXYHYDROGEN. Yul Brown also claimed this invention as his own, and did important development work in this area. Daniel Nocera at MIT is continuing this work and is developing ways to make it more efficient by the use of several catalysts.

  3. When water mist is injected into a high voltage AC plasma field (as in a lightning bolt or a spark plug), the water in contact with the arc ignites like a flame thrower.

For videos of water burning when it comes I contact with an electric arc, see the following:

The items noted above are the 3 main systems for burning water; however, there are others that need to be considered.

  1. COLD FUSION was vigorously attacked by the oil industry.  It was thoroughly reviewed in a recent video . After reviewing this video, I am of the opinion that Cold Fusion is correct science.  The reason that the results could not be replicated every time the experiment was run, is that water can be imprinted or modified by the mind of the experimenter.  (See ).

  2. John Kanzius developed a machine to cure cancer using radio waves.  When a test tube filled with salt water is placed in the energized field, it burn like lamp oil.  See and .


Many people, armed with the information that HYDROGEN derived from water was an excellent fuel, had tried to develop products and start businesses. Those that ignored warnings and tried to inform the public were murdered. Many had their labs and workshops raided by military or law enforcement. Many had their patents declared state secrets.

Our objective was based on EPCOT, on trying to create a City of The Future, and wanting to showcase those technologies that we were capable of building now, the world needed now, but were blocked by “the Cabal”. We developed the concepts for the following systems, presented them to those that might provide funding, and got nowhere:

We looked for ways to get past the blockade based on humanitarian needs, based on overriding human needs such as water, food, fuel, energy, etc. So far, we have been unable to get past the blockade, and obtain the funding needed to build these systems. Therefore, we have developed a new strategy.

Plans for the City

atmospheric water generation

BUSINESS PLAN for Las vegas November 30, 2014

To : Chuck Sprague

From : Kent Bingham

Project : Rivers In The Sky in Las Vegas

Subject : 2nd Phase Business Plan Concepts

This letter follows our phone conference earlier today. We have agreed to form a company in Las Vegas that will open up vast new water resources for that community. The source of this water is the water vapor present in the atmosphere, as defined in the presentation sent to you last week concerning Atmospheric Water Generation (AWG).


The atmosphere contains an unlimited supply of fresh water in the form of water vapor. In the past, mankind waited for this water vapor to condense as rain. Today, the AWG business uses refrigeration processes to cause water to condense onto cold surfaces.

The water is collected and processed for human consumption. The AWG business plan is based on sale of equipment to accomplish this. The cost to the consumer includes the initial cost of the equipment, plus the cost of the electric power to operate it.

The AWG units are functionally identical to air conditioners, dehumidifiers, freezers, etc. These other systems that condense water vapor typically waste the collected water. The AWG process adds a post processing unit to a typical air conditioner to produce a clean water made acceptable for human consumption.

The AWG process is much better than other forms of producing potable water such as rivers, lakes, wells, processed sea water, etc. The cost of producing AWG water eliminates the need for very expensive water treatment plants, and eliminates problems caused by chemical and biological contaminants by starting with water that has never touched the ground.


Our plan is to produce AWG quality water, but at a much reduced cost by eliminating the following cost factors:

  1. Eliminate the cost of acquiring new air conditioning or other refrigerated machinery.

  2. Eliminate the cost of power to produce the refrigeration.

How can this be accomplished? Simply by harvesting the condensed water from large commercial refrigeration systems that are presently operating for other reasons such as air conditioning, refrigeration, freezing food and water, etc.


Condensate water from an air conditioner contains airborne contaminants such as dust, pollen, and other items that get through their filter systems. When you buy water from a dispensing machine in front of your local supermarket, you are buying local tap water that has a POST PROCESSOR UNIT inside it. Here is a picture of a Glacier water dispensing machine, with a close-up of what its post processor does.

The POST PROCESSOR functions are:

  1. Activated Carbon Filter for chlorine and odors.

  2. Micron Filter for dirt, rust, and other particles.

  3. Reverse osmosis for salts and other impurities.

  4. Post Carbon Filter improves taste of water.

  5. Ultraviolet Light to ensure safe, high quality water.

The POST PROCESSOR described above is appropriate for processing chlorinated tap water from the Municipal Water Treatment Plant. For AWG water, the needs are slightly different. One of the largest AWG firms describes their POST PROCESSOR below.


Air2Water products are best described as atmospheric water generators (AWG). Air2Water AWG units use technology (developed and patented by Worldwide Water, Inc.) that extracts clean drinking water from the air.

  1. The unit first pulls air through an electrostatic filter removing 93% of all air borne particles.

  2. As it collects, water drops into a collection tray and immediately passes into Ultraviolet (UV) light, where the water stays in contact with UV rays killing germs and bacteria in the water.

  3. The water is then pumped through a sediment screen into a water pump and through a series of solid carbon block, UF or no waste R/O water filters.

  4. The water is then re-circulated through UV or treated by ozonation.

  5. It is then circulated back into the dispensing tanks.

  6. Finally, the water is chilled or heated and dispensed to the consumer.


Any location that has a large number of refrigeration devices presently operating would be a good location to establish an office with the following functions:

  1. Sell RIS concept to owners of refrigeration systems, or better to create legislation requiring owners of refrigeration equipment to provide condensate holding tanks, and forbid them to dump condensate into the sewer system (if they are producing more than 1000 gallons per day).

  2. Install holding tanks to collect the condensate water.

  3. Collect and process the water at the central plant.

  4. Bottle and distribute the water to local merchants.


We need to offer to business owners who operate large refrigeration units a way to recoup some of the money that they are presently paying for electric power to operate their machines. Also to get a pay back on the refrigeration equipment that they own. With the cost of bottled water in excess of the cost of gasoline, we can define a revenue sharing arrangement with the business owner who will sell us his water.

When we have a contract to buy the water from the owner, we will collect raw, untreated water from each refrigeration unit, and process it at our bottling plant. We will need the following plant and equipment in each city:

  1. A combined warehouse and office.

  2. Water holding tanks at each location where we are buying water.

  3. Service vehicles to collect the water from the holding tanks and transport it back to the plant.

  4. A POST PROCESSOR unit in the plant.

  5. Equipment for bottling, storage, and distribution of the Water.

In comparison, our competitors will need the following:

  1. A combined warehouse and office.

  2. Purchase AWG units.

  3. Pay for the power to run the AWG units.

  4. Equipment for bottling, storage, and distribution of the Water.

Water Collection ideas

Instead of wasting the condensate into sewers, re-route it to a holding tank, accessible to a collection truck. The truck empties the holding tank by gravity drainage or pumping. If the holding tank overflows, allow the overflow water to run into rain gutters. The owner of the holding tank will be paid by the number of truck loads of water collected per month.

The benefit to the community is:

The amount of water dumped into the sewers is reduced.

The amount of potable water available is increased.

The cost of potable water could be reduced, while still making a profit.


State law would require that wherever condensate water produced by the owners of refrigeration equipment exceeds a volume of 1000 gallons per day, that this water cannot be disposed of in rain gutters or sewers, but shall be placed in a holding tank on their property that is accessible by a water collection truck.

The owner of this refrigeration equipment shall have the right to process this water for their own consumption, or to sell it to RIS, LLC at the rate of $0.10 per gallon, measured by meter on the water collection trucks. For example, 1000 gallons collected by RIS would pay $100. to the owner for the raw condensate water.

In the event that production of water fills the tank to overflowing before it can be harvested by the owner or RIS, the overflow water shall be conducted into rainwater gutters.

RIS, LLC shall operate under a state license as (an extension of the Las Vegas Water Department) or (as a private contractor). RIS shall operate as a private for profit company. The license shall be renewed in perpetuity every 5 years, and shall not be revoked except when RIS is no longer in business, at the option of RIS.

Funding & Use of funds

This company shall obtain startup funding. RIS can mobilize immediately upon receipt of $500,000 to cover startup and operations for the first 6 months.

During this time, we will operate out of offices in Las Vegas. The functions of the principals shall be as follows:


General manager

Sales person

2 in plant processing and shipping

2 out of plant collecting raw water

These individuals shall draw a salary TBD. The primary objectives are as follows:

  1. Master plan the plant and operations of the RIS when in full production.

  2. Start the legislative process to obtain the objectives noted above.

  3. Design and build the prototype POST PROCESSING unit, that will be used for demonstration purposed related to obtaining Phase 2 funding, and establishing legal and legislative programs.

  4. Operate test dehumidifiers to determine the amount of water to be produced. Also, survey and determine the total tonnage of refrigeration equipment available for this program, and estimate the volume of water to be produced, and determine a revenues estimate.

  5. Prepare conceptual plans and specifications to be used for procurement of prototype equipment and materials.

  6. Negotiate contracts with qualified design/build contractors for the prototype equipment, and the finished plant.

  7. Identify all materials and equipment to be used in Phase 2, develop a budget, and write procurement specifications.

  8. Identify architect, engineers, and contractors to implement the completion of the RIS plant in Las Vegas. I suggest that we operate as owner/builder wherever possible.

Compensation & budget recommendations:

The authority and responsibility of each member of the team as identified above is to be determined by the board. The tasks noted above need to be assigned. Administrative and technical staff assignments need to be identified and procured as needed to do the work. The minimum compensation for each team member noted above shall be $5,000 per month for the Phase 1 (the first 6 months). This will amount to a fixed cost of 6 people x 6 months x $5,000 = $180,000. This leaves $320,000 to be budgeted to accomplish the objectives. When the several tasks are assigned to the team, and their extra costs are determined, then the compensation shall be increased as needed. This will establish the operational budget and compensation for each team member, and their task force. This budget needs to be established and approved by the board. In addition, a 30% contingency fund is recommended. This means that 70% x 320,000 will be available to complete Phase 1, and 30% x 320,000 will be held in reserve as a contingency.


NOTE: This plan was initiated with a team of 6 in Las Vegas. Due to their failure to perform their defined responsibilities, Kent Bingham, as the originator of this plan, is now moving forward toward its implementation, with a new team of participants.


Summary of the Water Cycle


Impact on global warming

Some studies suggest that water vapor in the atmosphere contributes to global warming. Therefore, AWG removes water vapor from the atmosphere, and reduces global warming concerns. and


The purpose of showing you the following websites is to demonstrate the ever expanding interest in the business of Atmospheric Water Generation (AWG). Also, to acquaint you with their basic estimate of the amount of water available to be harvested. However, we believe that instead of investing in acquiring this AWG equipment, and paying for the electric energy needed to drive it, that existing refrigeration equipment be used to produce water at a much reduced price.


The Consortium of Global H2O (Water) Manufacturers Main Laboratory for Atmospheric Water Generator Technology.


This group has pretty well tied up the world with patents regarding AWG equipment. It will be interesting to find out if they believe that their patents cover existing refrigeration equipment, dehumidifiers, air conditioners, etc. During Phase 1 of our project, we need to review these patents and determine if there is a conflict. I seriously doubt that they can patent these existing technologies, or dictate how to handle the condensate that they produce.

Planet Water

This group sells the large AWG unit shown on the last page of this document.


Their filtration system

Slide Show

Air Wells, Fog Fences & Dew Ponds

Methods for Recovery of Atmospheric Humidity

Atmospheric Moisture

Atmospheric humidity

Understanding humidity

phase 2 planning

As we move into Phase 2 of our plan, we will need to buy large AWG units such as the one shown on the following page. Our market strategy is to allow these units to operate in remote areas without the need for external fuel or power. The power units needed to operate these units are now being developed by our Green Energy Machines (GEMs) division. We will then transform non-arable lands into farmlands and forests. The opportunity for real estate development on low cost wastelands is of inestimable value, but huge beyond belief. This would provide food, water, shelter, jobs, etc. for millions of people and eliminate concerns for over population.

Arable land

This map shows the average percentage of arable land in each nation.



Tropospheric Rivers:

( "Tropospheric Rivers" appear as bright white bands )

Approximately 3,100 cubic miles of water is in the atmosphere at any said time, 98% in the form of vapor, 2% in clouds. About 280 cubic miles of water evaporate or transpire into the atmosphere each day. A cubic mile of water contains over one trillion gallons. The continental USA receives about 4 cubic miles of rainfall daily. More than 2,000,000 cubic miles of fresh water is stored in underground aquifers; about 60,000 cubic miles of fresh water are stored in lakes, inland seas, and rivers. About 7,000,000 cubic miles of water are contained in glaciers and polar icecaps, and in Greenland. The world’s reserves of fresh water are estimated at approximately 35 million cubic kilometers, including glaciers, ground water, wells, rivers, lakes, and precipitation as rain and snow. Yet it is inadequate for the ever-increasing, largely unrestrained demands of human civilization, so that alternative sources are desperately needed. While desalination of seawater is an obvious option, as yet the total quantity produced in this way amounts to about 10 km3, which is only a very small percentage of the 3000 cubic km3 consumed annually.

This is a large commercial AWG machine that we will need for our Phase 2 work when we want to generate enough water to make the desert bloom.

NOTE: Ignore the price shown above. This unit is nothing more than a commercial air conditioning unit which costs less than $500,000.


Season 1 Ep. 6: Cold Fusion: Fire From Water

After an introduction implying that water energy involves some form of PARANORMAL TECHNOLOGY, that fusion (hot or cold) is somehow involved, it displays this really great introduction:

I applaud this statement. I would only add that water
will also be the oil and gas of the future, replacing all fossil
carbon based fuels. CO2 emissions will no longer be of any
concern. “Cap and Trade legislation” and “The Copenhagen
Accord” will be laughed at for the political fairytales that
they truly are.


FLEISCHMANN & PONS COLD FUSION presented. Heavy water or deuterium is used, with a palladium cathode, to generate intense heat, an over unity process. F&P never claimed that some form of fusion was involved.

SCOTTY from Star Trek talks about hot fusion, electrolysis, F&P debunked (falsely).

DR. FLEISCHMANN interview (13:30)
DR. JOHN HUIZENGA interview (14:10)
JOHN MADDOX Editor, Nature Magazine (14:30) debunks CF.

Dr. Fleischmann’s response: “We didn’t call if fusion at all. It was a term that was wished on us, but we never called it that. We felt the processes had to be nuclear to account for the high levels of energy per atom.”

DR. EDMUND STORMS, Los Alamos National Lab, retired (16:09) “Cold fusion violates most of what I was taught in nuclear chemistry. …evidence was not persuasive”.

PROF. ROBERT T. BUSH Physicist, Cal Poly Pomona (16:45) The bad nuclear premise caused the reality of the thermal reaction to be discounted.

DR. MICHAEL McKUBRE, SRI International (17:50) Verified the F&P thermal observations, sees the nuclear arguments against the F&P phenomenon to be irrelevant.

DR. JOHN O’M. BOCKRIS Prof. Chemistry, Texas A&M, retired (18:40) The first thing was tritium which is a sub-form of hydrogen, which should not be found except in very small quantities. We found that using these cells of F&P that we could produce very large quantities of tritium, much more than should be there (10,000 times more). At best, 1 time in 3 we were able to obtain these results, which is the first clear proof of the phenomenon.

DR. MAHADEVA SRINIVASAN, Bhabha Atomic Research Center, India (19:50) provided confirmation of heat and tritium findings of Bockris.

DR. BOCKRIS (20:20) commentary on attempts to revoke his tenure. Claims against by Bockris by Gary Todd of Science Magazine falsely accused Bockris of spiking his sample with tritium. (Todd apparently a hired gun to debunk F&P findings.)

DR. KEITH JOHNSON, MIT Professor (21:50) Tenure depends on doing “main stream” research and not doing fringe area research like cold fusion. Once you’re tenured, you can investigate any field you like. However, the power of money can make your life difficult if you investigate any of those areas.

DR. BOCKRIS (22:35) completely exonerated. Found guilty by the press without due process. Bockris had done work which was against the paradigm. “What the heck are you doing, trying to upset the laws of nuclear physics. That’s exactly what we were doing, and succeeding”.

US DOE funding withheld (23:45) even though positive results were still coming in. F&P moved to France to carry on private research funded by the Toyota Corp.

DR. FLEISCHMANN interview (24:10) by 1992 we had video recordings of intense energy release, By 1994 we demonstrated sustained energy release. If you want to produce a device, you needed more research, which we hoped to complete by 2000. If the resources had been available, we would have gotten there. But it did not happen.

The only way of finding limits of the possible is by going beyond them into the impossible.” (25:05) Arthur C. Clark

Cold Fusion research continued, despite the critics. (25:20) By 1999, 8 major international conferences had been held. Thousands of papers mount up against the solitary DOE report.

In the us the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) spent over $10M investigation the claims of F&P. They concluded that the F&P findings of heat and nuclear reactions were definitely valid.

DR. THOMAS PASSELL, EPRI, retired (26:05) Search for research money takes precedence over pure truth.

DR. N. ASAMI & K. MATSUI, New Hydrogen Energy Program (27:22) Govt of Japan in mid ‘90s funded this program. Many companies are secretly continuing to do research with CF, as are Italy, France, and many US companies, being careful to avoid using the term “Cold Fusion”.

SIR ARTHUR C. CLARK (28:05) has studied the controversy for years. After some doubts, Clark is 99% sure that CF is valid. “The evidence is overwhelming”.

SCOTTY (29:10) Many labs are validating the P&F findings, so why is there still a debate?

DR. DOUGLAS MORRISON, Physicist, CERN Lab (29:30) If it’s valid, then every test should yield the same results. [Not so! Ref Pauwel’s “The Morning of the Magicians” that reported that the experimenter can influence the outcome of the experiment by his thoughts, also Masaru Emoto’s observations on your being able to radically affect the formation of water crystals by your thoughts. Dr. Morrison appears to be totally ignorant of these effects.]

ED WALL, Engineer, New Energy Research Lab (30:10)

SCOTTY narration:

MISC INTERVIEWS in support of CF. (33:95)

PROF. JEAN PAUL VIGIER, Nuclear Physicist, Paris (36:50) There is something new coming up. Professors who teach physics hate to change their courses, and generally they do not appreciate monster which pop up which cannot be explained within the framework of the present knowledge.

When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right.

When he states that something is impossible he is very probably wrong.” (37:20) Arthur C. Clark

Ancient knowledge: A certain amount of fuel always produces a certain amount of energy, whether burning wood, coal, or oil. The process is a simple chemical reaction. Then in 1896, Henri Becquerel discovered radioactivity. (37:35) Later Eve Currie discovered that certain materials like radium produce heat for centuries. Radioactive materials produce heat, but never consume the fuel.

(38:50) If a cold fusion cathode were a typical chemical reaction, it would get hot, and within a few minutes it would be consumed. The reaction would stop. In fact, there are no known chemical fuels in the cell. It contains mostly water which is chemically inert. Water cannot burn (except when you ignite it with a plasma arc) , yet in experiments, CF heat has continued for days, sometimes weeks. The only thing modern science knows is consistent with this is a nuclear reaction. However, it is conceivable that there may be a process even more powerful than nuclear reaction, that physics does not understand. That is the mystery of cold fusion.

Many different opinions regarding the CF process. It produces heat with no radiation.

(42:00) Critics would say that the problem with cold fusion is that there is no theory to describe it. The real problem is that there are far too many theories to describe the same set of observations, yet no more than one of these theories can be correct.

ROGER STRINGHAM, First Gate Energies (43:40) The lack of a theoretical framework does not deter those who see the potential for commercial devices.

DR. JOHN BOCKRIS (43:55) So far, all the energy we can produce by CF is about 10 watts, which is not very useful. If we could produce 100 watts and reproduce it, then we would have a source that would be better than any nuclear energy that we have had so far, also of course, completely clean. It produces helium which is completely harmless.

Fuel cell developed by co. in Florida that does not use palladium. Also, plain water used instead of deuterium.

DR. EDMUND STORMS (46:50) Electrolytic technique more difficult than the ultrasonic loading technique.

(47:30) RANDALL MILLS of BLACKLIGHT POWER in New Jersey. has in 1999 produced a new hydrogen compound called hydrino hydride. Avoiding the label CF, they have attracted large funding.

ROBERT SHAUBACH, Thermacore Inc. (48:25) Some of our experiment have produced 1000% excess heat. If we put 1 watt into the cell, we get 10 watts out.

(49:35) SCOTTY narration – Several successful new developments with the CF process.

Helium-4 production. Alternative catalysts.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Magic” (55:44) Arthur C. Clark

(56:00) Alchemy requires an enormous amount of energy to transmute lead into gold. [Apparently these folks never heard of David Hudson’s alchemy. They really seem to have a difficult time dealing with new things they are outside of their existing knowledge or belief foundation.]

(56:30) Transmutation processes observed. New metals and isotopes are being formed in the CF process.

TADAYOSHI OMURI & TADAHIKO MIZUNO at Hokaido University (57:30) The Omuri cell using a tungsten cathode has consistently produced excess energy along with measurable amounts of transmuted metals.

(57:40) SCOTTY narration – Once considered heresy, scientists are discovering that even heavy elements may be transmuted, opening a whole new world of possibilities.

(58:15) ARTHUR C. CLARK – If these new sources of energy turn out to be real, and there appears to be many different varieties, what effect will this have on our future? The future is unlimited. It could be the end of the fossil fuel age. It could be the end of oil and coal, and the end of our worries about global warming.

(59:05) DR. XING ZHONG LI, Physicist, Tsinghua University, China – Right now, 2/3 of our cities have problems with pollution, and 1/3 of the land of my country is damaged by acid rain. 80% of the power comes from coal. This is a big problem.

Right now we have 1.2 billion people, and we anticipate it will be ½ billion more by the end of this century. Right now, we consume one ton of coal per capita. If we increase our power consumption by a factor of 3, we will burn about 5 billion tons of coal annually by the middle of this century.

That’s why I made a decision to do the CF research. It’s a big risk for me, but I think it’s worthwhile to do it.

DR. MAHADEVA SRINIVASAN, Bhabha Atomic, India (1:00:15) What I like about cold fusion, it is different from thermal power, hydraulic power, nuclear fission power, because it is potentially small, and the investment required is much smaller. This completely changes the entire concept of power generation, distribution, consumption.

Ballard producing fuel cells.

CF devices can produce 1 kw per cubic cm. Transmutation phenomena. Helium-4 production. CF is here to stay, but scientific community absolutely deaf to all of this evidence.

The only way that CF will be triumphant will be in the commercialization. The electric power grid will absolutely wither away. All forms of transportation will use this new energy source. The writing is on the wall – the fossil fuel age is about to end.

ARTHUR C. CLARK (1:04:40) As a curious parallel, back at the beginning of the 20th century, the Wright Brothers first flew in 1903. No newspaper covered any of the flights because the press was convinced that heavier than air flight was totally impossible. All the top scientist said “This is nonsense”. Editors would not even bother to send photographers or journalist to interview the Wrights or take picture of them flying in full public view. It took 5 years for them to finally concede that heavier than air flight is possible.

SCOTTY (1:05:30) Will cold fusion remain an intriguing curiosity, woefully underfunded and eclipsed by other exotic alternative energy processes, or is there a long range position for us within a diverse spectrum of 21sr century non-polluting technology that will make living in the 3rd millennium more of a Utopian dream once envisioned by far thinking science fiction writers like Jules Verne and Arthur C. Clark. How much courage our scientific and business leaders summon today may very well determine how the human experiment on planet earth will fare. Think about that the next time you drink a glass of water. A Free Spirit Production

footnote to an excellent video

A few facts about water are worth noting here:

  1. In addition to cold fusion, there are 3 other method for using water as a source of alternative energy.

  1. Electrolysis – not an over unity process; however, it can be used to improve gas mileage in your car. This is because hydrogen when used as fuel is so much more powerful than gasoline by a factor of over 5 times. Therefore, why not use nothing but hydrogen extracted from water to power your car? Ref Browns gas.

  2. Resonant frequency water splitter as discovered by Keely and perfected by Stanley Meyer. Ref Stanley Meyer’s water fuel cell.

  3. SIMPLY STATED, WATER EXPLODES SPONTAEOUSLY WHEN IT COMES IN CONTACT WITH AN ELECTRIC ARC. The best example is a lightning bolt going through a cloud. This same effect can be used in an internal combustion engine, by using a spark plug with water channels built into it. Ref “High Temperature Water Splitting”.

There are many other energy producing devices:

  1. There are many groups dedicated to the commercialization of free energy systems. If you look into what is possible, you will find many devices that have been developed, patented, prototyped, and suppressed:

  1. Panacea-BOCAF research -


  3. TESLA

  4. Pure Energy Systems = PESWiki

  1. Permanent magnet free energy devices:

  1. Flying Dutchman Projects



Season 1 Ep. 6: Cold Fusion: Fire From Water

(59:05) DR. XING ZHONG LI, Physicist, Tsinghua University, China – Right now, 2/3 of our cities have problems with pollution, and 1/3 of the land of my country is damaged by acid rain. 80% of the power comes from coal. This is a big problem.

Right now we have 1.2 billion people, and we anticipate it will be ½ billion more by the end of this century. Right now, we consume one ton of coal per capita. If we increase our power consumption by a factor of 3, we will burn about 5 billion tons of coal annually by the middle of this century.

That’s why I made a decision to do the CF research. It’s a big risk for me, but I think it’s worthwhile to do it.

email discussions between Voorhees and bingham

From: []
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2014 10:31 AM


            ---- I realize we are discussing something that will resolve itself, but, static electricity (St. Elmo's fire  --the same stuff that caused the Hindenburg to go down) creates the spark, that separates pressurized air; -- it's coming back together, from the created vacuum,  makes the big bang of thunder.....


No Russ, you’re repeating the common misperception of what causes a thunderclap.  As I stated in my email of 2/13 11:57 AM:

In a thunder storm, the noise is produced by water exploding.  On a lab bench, when you produce a continuous arc in a spark plug, and drop water into the arc a drop at a time, each drop sounds like a pistol shot as it explodes.  If you learn to accept water as a combustible fuel, as the enclosure shows, then the entire process becomes clearer.


Electric arc is the spark....--yes "smart plugs" are the best way of introducing water / hydrogen into cylinders of combustion engines. 


Yes, there are 3 major contributors to water sparkplug technology:

Stanley Meyer held the Canadian patent. See

Andrej Puharich held the US patent.

A Canadian company is presently offering a “water spark plug”.  See


Enclosed are 3 papers on these patents for water sparkplugs.


Another high power sparkplug is the  “Krupa Firestorm sparkplug”  See


NOTE:  I found some very interesting websites while looking for Puharich’s sparkplug.


From what I can determine, this technology was not new with either McAlister or, not (validly) patentable; we can ignore patents - only need to assemble best science to create the "common-denominator" combustion engine, and conversion techniques / equipment, -- as we need to "convert" some 15-20% of existing 150,000,000 vehicles on the road to run on hydrogen, before we will get the new-car companies to get serious (and we will have to have hydrogen corridors, where people can get blended cng /propane and hydrogen, for convenient refills of converted cars, and many of the new cars on the drawing boards around the world..)  I see "Pep Boys" or some other national repair / product sales chain as leading the way in conversions  --they can convert all makes and models of cars...   We will try to get one of them involved in investment, once we get started...


Theory is wonderful.  Realizing we are fighting trillions of dollars of lobbying and politician 'buying' is the big element.  Hydrogen corridors will give us the understandability, visibility and belief in alternate fuels...... (A Denver-Las Vegas-Los Angeles corridor makes an awfully big advertising sign - for the public to see, understand  and believe in.) 


And, the more I read and research, the more I am convinced we are closer to cold fusion (or a variation thereof) than we realize.  That will be the ultimate "H-bomb" for use in making fuel for cars, planes, trains, and trucks.   But, again, rather than 'fighting' the oil companies, it seems best to me that we take a half-step and talk about blending with cng - before moving into a full hydrogen fuel....They can see some profit and use for their product; thus, reducing their incentives to fight alternate energy.......In 20 years, cng will likely be obsolete for vehicle fueling -- we will worry about that then, when we are both beginning to age.....


---And, gasoline will 'drown' your is the fumes (methane/hydrogen/ alcohol) that burn....the water doesn' only 'implodes' after the hydrogen and oxygen are separated by the ignition.....such is the case in all water-burning, but with near immediate reassembly of the HH with the O - that then creates the rest of the implosion....  But, all of this is near simultaneous, so sort of irrelevant, except to understand what steps have to take place..---- 


There are 2 separate and totally different phenomena when you burn water:

1-      When you burn HHO gas, it implodes as the gas returns to a water form.  The relative volumetric ratio is one volume of water creates 1860 volumes of gas when expanded to HHO.  If you ignite HHO gas in a closed container, the implosion will create a near perfect vacuum. 

2-     When you ignite liquid water by use of a plasma arc, there is obviously an expansion reaction, which can be observed as a load bang as noted above.  When you ignite a spray of water into an arc as shown in previously referenced videos, you will hear a lot of popping and cracking sounds like fire crackers.


There are many opportunities for further research for water fuel.  For instance, using the Keely method of splitting water by acoustic resonant frequencies, if you expanded water in a closed container, does this create high pressure, or does the pressure suppress the expansion.  Could this pressure on expansion, and vacuum on ignition be used like steam in a motor to do work. 


-----As to the 'fakes' in cold fusion;  "boiling off the water bath" is really what is done with the Hydrogen bomb.  Oversimplified, hydrogen collects in 'clusters-of-molecules' from the water, after which there is no longer any water bath  -- just hydrogen, oxygen and minute particles of other elements.  THEN, COMES THE BIG BANG.....  So, what's the difference?  


-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Bingham <>
To: rlvoorhees <>
Sent: Thu, Feb 13, 2014 11:57 am



Here is an enclosure that further explains the process of “burning water” in a plasma arc.  Spraying water or water vapor into the plasma arc is demonstrated.  In the COLD FUSION demos that you will see on YouTube videos, they have to be fakes.  The temperatures that are generated in this process would very rapidly boil off the water bath.  Also, in trash incineration, water in trash is a good thing, and can be supplemented by additional water piped in as needed to complete the burn. 


In our last discussion, you were concerned about the molecular processes when water is burned.  Do you also have the same concerns when gasoline is burned?  Does the water instantly change to HHO and then burn?  Well, I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter.  In a thunder storm, the noise is produced by water exploding.  On a lab bench, when you produce a continuous arc in a spark plug, and drop water into the arc a drop at a time, each drop sounds like a pistol shot as it explodes.  If you learn to accept water as a combustible fuel, as the enclosure shows, then the entire process becomes clearer.


Another way to look at is a comparison.  You ignite gasoline with a match.  It will burn, and if you are not careful, it will explode.  When you ignite water, the plasma arc is your match.  Depending on how you do it, the water will either burn or explode.  The important difference in comparing these 2 fuels, is that for equal volumes of each fuel, water releases hundreds of time more energy than gasoline when it burns.


From: []
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 7:43 AM




        Aside from the energy-for-transportation, and methods for its dissemination (i.e., hydrogen corridors & demo projects at the city) - I foresee a great interest in a demo project for the waste-water -- garbage facilities in the model city.   As I have written in one of the books, we will "make blocks" of biodegradable waste product, and end up with only clean water for recycling at the "garbage dump".  A recycling facility for a city of 50,000 is quite understandable, and can be the model for small facilities throughout the entire country (especially, smaller facilities for smaller areas of major metropolitan areas - and for smaller communities.  -- we can design and build a 'model' facility, as a part of our "city-of-tomorrow" plans.) 


The "blocks" of biodegradable product will be used for a lot of industries, from paper, to plastics, to building materials. Chauncey Starr was working with General Atomic back the  '90's on these technologies, when I first heard him 'espouse' the waste product reduction ideas I have laid out in another book.....  If I believe what I read and hear, MIT is now the leader in this stuff --although it may be Purdue or the U of Wisconsin....but, I will find out from General Atomic and Stanford....  My big question (and probably an almost irrelevant one) is do we end up with "glass" or carbon blocks?  Either way, they will be 'broken-down' to other elements for use in manufacturing of other products.  ((And, it was Dr. Starr who gave me the idea to do the "clean" waste facility - back in about 2005.))


ANSWER TO BIG QUESTION – Temperatures are high enough in this process that all organics and carbon are vaporized back to CO2, leaving only a clinker of glass and metals that can all be harvested and re-used.  There are no residual pollutants, and no matter what Al Gore has to say, CO2 is plant food, a good thing!


BTW, when Disneyworld opened, it had several related projects:

1.      Trash was collected by a Swedish vacuum system that was later abandoned as the collector ducts got to be coated with “gunk” that could not be cleaned out and no doubt began to create strange odors and strange insects and no doubt lots of fungi.

2.     A solar collector unit in the form of a parabolic trough that followed the sun was built and made operational.

3.     The sewage treatment plant had tertiary treatment ponds using algae and water hyacinth.  Those greens cleaned up the water to the point it was fit for human consumption, fish loved it, and the greens grew prolifically and could be harvested and turned into energy.

4.     Trash was incinerated in what was called a “pyrolysis” unit.  I believe that it was a plasma process.  By the time I left Disney in 1983, I believe that unit was no longer operating.

Whoever designed these waste treatment systems really knew how to do it right.  We would do well to use similar systems in Chayah, all that is except the vacuum system.



As to fusion and related technologies, the new M.I.T. grants and initiative is probably the most advanced, aside from General Atomics (the Blue brothers who own it are friends of a banker friend ......I will find out what they are doing, when the time comes --used to talk to them quite a bit....General Atomic is probably well along also, as they seem to be able get billions from the Federal Government.....I suspect a "new generation" is now running the operation now...but, will find out, when the time comes...


Yes, I like your approach to the proposed additions to your chapter, as it relates to plasma and cold fusion.   Whether it is 'cold-fusion' or some other chemical process that arrives at the same result, it seems to me, is not really that important.  But, yes, I have read up on it quite a bit.....Am somewhat confused myself, but see the 'end-result' as being effectively the same.  We are about to have a 'new-method' of creating stored energy - that will be very efficient, and 'mimic' the action of the sun in creating energy and mass from nothing more than hydrogen and a self-induced heat source - coupled with chemical / ambient energy reaction.  Taking the approach you appear to be taking in your write-up on the subjects of plasma / fusion seems to get the idea across. ------- Just letting the proposed additions you plan to include, "speak-for-themselves" is probably a good place to leave these technologies, until we gain a much bigger audience; then we will pursue the technologies in greater depth, and with specific applications.



-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Bingham <>
To: rlvoorhees <>
Sent: Thu, Feb 13, 2014 6:28 am



Enclosed is the paper that I am integrating into my chapter.  This whole process of water in contact with a plasma arc has tremendous potential.  Industrially, the trash incineration industry is using it, but they are facing a lot of opposition.  Since incineration is a destructive process, the power used to generate the arc and keep it running could be considered a loss.  However, when you compare that energy cost with the cost of other forms of energy needed to combust let’s say per ton of trash processed, I do believe that the plasma process would be the most cost effective.  The project in Oregon looks to me to provide the best info I been able to collect so far.  (( Yes, solar and by-product energy can be the source for the waste facility.))----but, it can use its own energy (i.e. 'shit' and other biodegradables.)---assembling hydrogen atoms in clusters, is the apparent 'product' of heat.....You can call it cold fusion, you can call it "plasma-arc", --or whatever....the result is the same....SO, "COLD FUSION" IT IS, unless someone wants to call it something sort of the way I figger it....




From pages 1 and 2 of the enclosure:


Dr. Fleischmann’s response:  “We didn’t call if fusion at all.  It was a term that was wished on us, but we never called it that.  We felt the processes had to be nuclear to account for the high levels of energy per atom.”

DR. EDMUND STORMS, Los Alamos National Lab, retired (16:09)  “Cold fusion violates most of what I was taught in nuclear chemistry.   …evidence was not persuasive”.

PROF. ROBERT T. BUSH Physicist, Cal Poly Pomona (16:45)  The bad nuclear premise caused the reality of the thermal reaction to be discounted.

DR. MICHAEL McKUBRE, SRI International (17:50)  Verified the F&P thermal observations, sees the nuclear arguments against the F&P phenomenon to be irrelevant.


The truth about “COLD FUSION” is that it is a simple demonstration of the fact that plasma burning water is an over-unity process.  Also, as the articles below show, a plasma arc in contact with water generates a tremendous amount of heat.  The comments by Fleischman and McKubre above indicate that the work of Pons and Fleischman at the University of Utah was never called COLD FUSION by them, and as McKubre says, the nuclear observations really don’t matter.


In other words, the arguments against the F&P phenomenon  (aka COLD FUSION) were a concocted fairytale by those intent on blocking its development.  It was total mis-direction away from the very high temperatures and the fact that more heat energy was produced than was put into the process.


Another factor to consider in this quest for the truth regarding COLD FUSION is the work of Denny Klein.  In his demonstration videos, he observes that the temperature of the HHO gas flame varies greatly and depends on what the flame comes in contact with.  To connect this phenomenon to COLD FUSION, I would suggest that if the plasma arc is considered to be the same as the flame of the torch, and the electrode used by F&P is equivalent to the material that Klein heated with his torch, then the high temperatures attained by F&P are easier to understand.


Further, I do believe that this process is the Achilles Heel of the oil industry.  This is their most important secret.  This is why there is so little information on the process that can be found on the internet.  However, there is renewed interest in this topic.  P&F reported their findings in 1989.  They were totally defeated at that time, but in 2012, 23 years later, the Discover Magazine is finally getting it right.  P&F got it right too, as the following excerpt from Wikipedia states:

Cold fusion gained attention after reports in 1989 by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, then one of the world's leading electrochemists,[1] that their apparatus had produced anomalous heat ("excess heat"), of a magnitude they asserted would defy explanation except in terms of nuclear processes. They further reported measuring small amounts of nuclear reaction byproducts, including neutrons and tritium.[2] The small tabletop experiment involved electrolysis of heavy water on the surface of a palladium (Pd) electrode.[3]


I have a few suggestions for building some prototypes of a COLD FUSION device.

1.      Heavy water is not needed, tap water will do just fine, or perhaps distilled water would be better.

2.      Palladium was used as the electrode by P&F.  I believe that different materials would produce different temperatures, just as Denny Klein observed in his videos.

3.      Who cares if different forms of hydrogen and helium are produced.  The objective is a cell that produces more energy than it consumes. 

4.      Transmutation of materials is an interesting topic that might be worth studying further.

5.      I believe that this process is capable of producing the most cost effective heat sources for industrial uses, such as the manufacture of steel and cement.  There would be many other applications in the process industry.  Prototypes should be built to demonstrate these possibilities.


The following research presents some of the additional information I was able to find, in addition to the enclosed paper.



SEARCH:  electric arc used in trash incineration

Here’s how it works: The household waste delivered into this hangar will get shredded, then travel via conveyer to the top of a large tank. From there it falls into a furnace that’s heated to 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit and mixes with oxygen and steam. The resulting chemical reaction vaporizes 75 to 85 percent of the waste, transforming it into a blend of gases known as syngas (so called because they can be used to create synthetic natural gas). The syngas is piped out of the system and segregated. The remaining substances, still chemically intact, descend into a second vessel that’s roughly the size of a Volkswagen Beetle.

This cauldron makes the one above sound lukewarm by comparison. Inside, two electrodes aimed toward the middle of the vessel create an electric arc that, at 18,000 degrees, is almost as hot as lightning. This intense, sustained energy becomes so hot that it transforms materials into their constituent atomic elements. The reactions take place at more than 2,700 degrees, which means this isn’t incineration—this is emission-free molecular deconstruction. (The small amount of waste material that survives falls to the bottom of the chamber, where it’s trapped in molten glass that later hardens into inert blocks.)

The seemingly sci-fi transformation occurs because the trash is blasted apart by plasma—the forgotten-stepsister state of matter. Plasma is like gas in that you can’t grip or pour it. But because extreme heat ionizes some atoms (adding or subtracting electrons), causing conductivity, it behaves in ways that are distinct from gas.


Plasma arc gasification: a high-temperature pyrolysis process whereby the organics of waste solids (carbon-based materials) are converted to a synthesis gas while inorganic materials and minerals produce a rock-like glassy by-product, called vitrified slag. The synthesis gas (syngas) is created in an oxygen-deficient atmosphere and is predominantly carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2). The high temperature of this process is created by an electric arc in a torch whereby a gas is converted into plasma. The process containing a reactor with a plasma torch processing organics of waste solids (carbon-based materials) is called plasma arc gasification. The reactor for such a process typically operates at 4000°C - 7000°C (7200°F - 12,600°F).


On page 19 of 21 in the last submittal dated 2/10/14 (my chapter in BOOK 5), the article makes the following statements:

Plasma cutting's kryptonite is water. Obviously, you would think twice before using anything electronic around water, but what we are talking about is water/moisture in the compressed air.

Plasma HATES water, so keep it out.

Please note that water creates a problem with Plasma cutting. 


Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas

Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.

The device being tested, which is called the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat for short), was created by Andrea Rossi. Rossi has been claiming for the past two years that he had finally cracked cold fusion, but much to the chagrin of the scientific community he hasn’t allowed anyone to independently analyze the device — until now. While it sounds like the scientists had a fairly free rein while testing the E-Cat, we should stress that they still don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the sealed steel cylinder reactor. Still, the seven scientists, all from good European universities, obviously felt confident enough with their findings to publish the research paper.


As for what’s happening inside the cold fusion reactor, Andrea Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi have previously said their device works by infusing hydrogen into nickel, transmuting the nickel into copper and releasing a large amount of heat. While Rossi hasn’t provided much in the way of details — he’s a very secretive man, it seems — we can infer some knowledge from NASA’s own research into cold fusion. Basically, hydrogen ions (single protons) are sucked into a nickel lattice (pictured right); the nickel’s electrons are forced into the hydrogen to produce neutrons; the nickel nuclei absorb these neutrons; the neutrons are stripped of their electrons to become protons; and thus the nickel goes up in atomic number from 28 to 29, becoming copper.

This process, like the “conventional” fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium, produces a lot of heat. (See: 500MW from half a gram of hydrogen: The hunt for fusion power heats up.) The main difference, though, is that the cold fusion process (also known as LENR, or low energy nuclear reaction) produces very slow moving neutrons which don’t create ionizing radiation or radioactive waste. Real fusion, on the other hand, produces fast neutrons that decimate everything in their path. In short, LENR is fairly safe — safe enough that NASA dreams of one day putting a cold fusion reactor in every home, car, and plane. Nickel and hydrogen, incidentally, are much cheaper and cleaner fuels than gasoline.

As far as we can tell, the main barrier to cold fusion — as with normal fusion — is producing more energy than you put in. In NASA’s tests, it takes a lot more energy to fuse the nickel and hydrogen than is produced by the reaction. Rossi, it would seem, has discovered a secret sauce that significantly reduces the amount of energy required to start the reaction.

As for what the secret sauce is, no one knows — in the research paper, the independent scientists simply refer to it as “unknown additives.” All told, the E-Cat seems to have a power density of 4.4×105 W/kg, and an energy density of 5.1×107 Wh/kg.

If Rossi and Focardi’s cold fusion technology turns out to be real — if the E-Cat really has 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline — then the world will change, very, very quickly. Stay tuned; we’ll let you know when — or if — the E-Cat passes peer review.



Big Idea: Bring Back the "Cold Fusion" Dream

A new theory may explain the notorious cold fusion experiment from two decades ago, reigniting hopes of a clean-energy breakthrough.

By Mark Anderson|Tuesday, October 23, 2012



Electrolysis cell schematic


In 1989 Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann made a sensational claim that would have changed the world—had it been true. They said they had achieved nuclear fusion at room temperature using a simple tabletop device, thus creating a revolutionary clean energy source they called “cold fusion.”

Unfortunately for the University of Utah chemists, multiple attempts to replicate their experiment over ensuing months failed. Cold fusion was considered debunked, and it has lived beyond the fringe of mainstream science ever since.

Yet quietly, more than 20 years later, two of the world’s largest mainstream scientific institutions—NASA and the European physics research center CERN—have revisited the controversial energy-generating experiment. A growing cadre of scientists now suspect that Pons and Fleischmann’s observations were the result not of fusion but of more plausible physical processes. Some are even cautiously optimistic that those processes could be exploited to generate abundant amounts of clean energy. “There’s enough evidence that says we need to look at this,” says Joseph Zawodny, a physicist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia.

The man most responsible for the change of thinking is a technology and energy consultant with a background in physics named Lewis Larsen. In 1989 he was paying attention when Pons and Fleischmann described how a set of palladium rods, connected to an electric current and immersed in lithium-enriched water, churned out more energy in the form of heat than it received in electricity. He followed along as subsequent experiments achieved mixed results. Some seemed to produce a lot of heat, others little or none. Yet a nagging question persisted: If the contraptions really were putting out more energy than they took in, what could be responsible?

Pons and Fleischmann’s infamous explanation was that hydrogen nuclei were fusing inside the metal rods. Larsen, along with virtually every physicist on the planet, knew that was implausible: Fusion requires enormous temperatures and pressures, which is why it occurs only in stars and bombs. But the heat seemed real, at least in some cases. So in 1997, when hedge fund executives asked Larsen to explore wild-card ideas for energy production, he decided to investigate the cold fusion mystery using only established physics.

Cold, Yes, But Not Fusion
Sifting through physics literature, Larsen considered other nuclear reactions that could subtly produce energy. One candidate was radioactive decay, which occurs when unstable atomic nuclei release energy in the form of radiation. Some elements found in nature, like radium, undergo this decay. Could something in the cold fusion apparatus be doing much the same? Larsen formulated a theory showing how that could happen, and in 2004 he recruited Northeastern University theoretical physicist Allan Widom to hone his ideas.

Their theory showed how a film of negatively charged electrons covering the palladium could combine with positively charged protons from the water’s hydrogen atoms to form neutrons. Those neutrons could then be gobbled up by nearby lithium nuclei, disturbing the delicate balance of protons and neutrons that keep the nuclei stable. The lithium nuclei would rapidly decay, first into beryllium and then into helium, and emit radiation. Finally, the film of electrons would absorb the radiation and reemit it as heat. Widom and Larsen called this chain of events a low-energy nuclear reaction, or LENR—a more accurate and palatable term than cold fusion. The European Physical Journal C published their theory in 2006.

The paper did not make a splash at first. By then, scores of wild-eyed papers had claimed to explain cold fusion. Yet Widom-Larsen theory had more going for it. For one, it had the authority of a respected theorist in Widom. It also had the ring of plausibility: It proposed a phenomenon permitted by the known laws of physics, no new science required. “Widom-Larsen theory is the best formulated explanation of what’s going on,” says Ephraim Fischbach, a Purdue University physicist who is not involved in LENR research.

In addition, Widom and Larsen theorized that the same neutron production process could happen in nature. Recently, scientists found one piece of supporting evidence for that. In March a study in Physical Review Letters described a large flux of neutrons during thunderstorms—perhaps, Larsen says, the result of LENRs in the atmosphere sparked by electricity from lightning.

As the Widom-Larsen theory gains traction, more physicists are emerging to put it to the test. In March, Yogendra Srivastava from the University of Perugia in Italy, who worked with Widom and Larsen on their theory, chaired a LENR-themed colloquium at CERN—the institution’s first official examination of “cold fusion” in more than two decades. Soon after, NASA released details on a $200,000-a-year research program on LENRs, led by Zawodny. “The theory made it past peer review in a real journal,” he says. “But I’m always skeptical. I only believe what I can prove.”

Game Changer or Dud?
Zawodny has designed a stamp-size array of metal tiles to test the theory. According to Larsen’s paper, the properties of some of the tiles should make it easier for electrons and protons to merge and form neutrons. If Zawodny observes evidence of neutron production, then he plans to do a follow-up experiment to see if those neutrons are fueling radioactive decay. Even if he gets the expected results, though, it would take several years and many corroborating experiments before LENRs could be considered confirmed.

Larsen, who formed the company Lattice Energy in 2001 as he was formulating his theory, has his eyes on the big prize: converting nuclear-generated heat into electricity, the unfulfilled original promise of cold fusion. He hopes to raise $25 million over the next few years to build prototype LENR generators.

So far, Larsen still has only a theory and some circumstantial evidence. But if LENRs could be proved and tamed—a very big if—the effect could be transformative. Dennis Bushnell, chief scientist at NASA Langley, wrote in an online article that LENRs could potentially satisfy the world’s energy needs at a quarter the cost of coal. Zawodny adds to that enthusiasm in an accompanying video. “If we were to have such a thing,” he says, “it would be the sort of technology that would fuel our future growth and expansion and have the ability to raise the standard of living of the entire world.”




Many people have been able to power their cars using water as fuel. We have selected hydrogen as the preferred energy system of the future because of the work of these dedicated pioneers. They have demonstrated that a car, a closed system, can get more energy out of the water fuel than it takes to produce that fuel, using water as the source of the hydrogen. Here is the story of Stanley Meyer, Denny Klein, and Bob Boyce. They persisted in their quest for this alternative, less polluting, more economical energy source. They were all harassed and later murdered by agents of the oil industry. There were others who survived and died a natural death because they agreed to keeping this knowledge a secret, and agreed to make no attempt to commercialize their knowledge. One such individual created a website . His name is Herman Anderson. I suggest you take a look at it.

Another survivor is Joe of “Joe Cell” fame. Joe invented a way to run his car on Orgone energy. The energy system developed by Wilhelm Reich. It is a valid system, but beyond the scope of this paper.

The information available on the internet would fill several very large books. Some of the information has been deleted for various reasons. Some of the information is excessively theoretical. We have excerpted out of this source material what we consider to be a brief summary of the most important details.


A description and analysis of the water splitter developed by Meyer is presented. Meyer developed a very efficient water splitter, operating at 12 volts, and very low amperage.

Boyce and Meyer units encounter a credibility gap among conventional scientists and academia because they appear to run counter to the long established human laws governing our interpretation of nature. Some people therefore reject these technologies because they appear to be unnatural and just two more spurious claims for perpetual motion. In fact, these phenomena are entirely natural. It merely demonstrates a new and revolutionary way of harnessing what nature has always had on offer. It does not infringe the two main laws of thermodynamics.

The First Law of Thermodynamics states that the total energy of a thermodynamic system remains constant although it may be transformed from one form to another. In the case of Boyce and Meyer, the system under consideration is global. The energy required to drive the engine comes from the ZPE contained in water, a virtually inexhaustible source. The exhaust from the engine is water vapor which returns to the atmosphere or can be redirected back into the units.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics as originally formulated by R. Clausius in 1865 states that the entropy of the world strives towards a maximum. As recently formulated by Prigogine and Stengers, this law contains two fundamental elements: (1) a negative one that expresses the impossibility of certain processes (e.g., heat flowing from a cold to a hot source) and (2) a positive, constructive one. It is the impossibility of certain processes that permits us to introduce a function, entropy, which increases uniformly and behaves as an attractor for isolated systems. It is at maximum when the system is in equilibrium. Nonequilibrium is the source of order and brings order out of chaos. Since Boyce and Meyer technologies postulate nonequilibrium, it can be said to be supported by the positive element of this law.


STANLEY MEYER - 4 of the best videos are available from . They can be viewed there.

PowerPedia:Water as fuel This is a link to

Open Source Project


VIDEO - Water Fuel Cell Parts Part 1

The Stanley Meyer equipment and all technical data is in the hands of “friendlys” who are demonstrating the equipment and are after funding to continue Meyer’s work.

For part 2 see

For part 3 see



This video is 2:39 by Fox News. It show demo of the Aquygen generator, torch applications, vehicle fuel economies, mentions running a vehicle on 100% water, and meetings with congress.

This is the same video, but is 2:52 in length.


The best website for the Denny Klein story is:

Dennis Klein’s Gas Engine Water additive

August 6, 2010

Aquygen, now Hydrogen Technology Applications, Inc., announces testing in Ford diesel trucks: Hydrogen Technology Applications, Inc. (HTA) has recently completed an initial round of testing with a Ford F250 (diesel) and on-board system producing Aquygen gas. HTA was able to show about a 21% increase in fuel economy for these initial tests.


Produces hydrogen & oxygen from water; HHO gas (Brown’s Gas) 50% (to 100% water) improved gas mileage

Most of us are unhappy about gas prices these days, but Denny Klein just turns on the Hybrid Hydrogen Oxygen System (HHOS) and smiles. With the HHOS Aquygen Hydrogen and oxygen Gas is generated on demand and used as a fuel additive in a standard gasoline or diesel engine. We have applied this breakthrough method in two prototype vehicles – a 1994 Ford Escort Wagon and a 1998 Ford Ranger pickup. The results:

Because the HHOS is evolutionary, not revolutionary (it utilizes the time-tested technology of the internal combustion engine and the existing refueling infrastructure). The HHOS could save billions of dollars in redesign and retooling costs compared to fuel cells.

The website for the company founded by Denny Klein is . Denny’s videos are no longer shown on that website, and the aggressive pursuit of powering vehicles on 100% Brown’s Gas is no longer mentioned.




Prerequisite knowledge

Electronic circuits

Browns gas generators

Stanley Meyers’ fuel cells (H2 generators)

556 timer chips

Oscilloscope operation

304 and 316 stainless properties

Potassium and sodium hydroxide in water

Plexiglas not lexan, lexan breaks down in hydroxides

ABS sheets OK

Basic knowledge of chemistry

AC and DC power interactions

Electro plating

Aluminum dissolves in hydroxide and produces H2 so do not use aluminum in this system.

TRANSCRIPT November 30, 2014 12:07 A11/P11

Chris Patton’s interview with Bob Boyce, 2006. New Energy Congress

I began with racing small boats (2 man mini-boats). I was looking for a high energy fuel for running marine engines. So I thought about H2 and tried it. Tank H2 worked really well, but the weight involved with the equipment (tanks, etc) was a problem. Also the availability. So I considered “free H2 on demand” using electrolysis. I knew it would take a lot of energy, but I didn’t care, as long as I could run a heat. I could always change out the battery between races. (01:46)

I did some experimenting on scaling up electrolysis cells. Much detail:

(06:40) It turned out a rectifier had shorted out within the alternator on the marine engine. One phase of the 3 was putting out an AC wave form which was superimposed on the DC. When it hit a certain RPM, the cells were reacting and creating more gas. It was over-powering the fuel input. It took a little while to find this and then to re-create it on the bench. I pretty well lost interest in racing and started to work on this. (07:20)

I monitored each of the 6 cells independently as they were not reacting the same at different frequencies. (07:42) BB observed that over a broad frequency range, the cell output varied. He then searched for a signal generator that would optimize the output of all of the cells. (08:21) I used signal generators and amplifiers and audio transformers and created my own little test cells and was able to reproduce this on demand by using electronic hardware to emulate the signals from the alternator. (08:42)

(09:50) After describing test results in detail, BB described research on “series cells” and found very little info.

Much experimentation with cell configuration, sealing, etc. Shift to Plexiglas cells allowed observation that bubble generation not only occurred on surface of plates, it also occurred between plates. BB did not know why, but speculated on some magnetic field effect. (11:35).

By testing and observing the amount of fuel consumed, BB observed:

Gas produced was run through 2 bubblers to scrub it of any contaminants (in addition to flash-back prevention), (15:08) and ran it through a desiccant container to get rid of water vapor, for testing, not needed when powering an ICE.

(15:30) Then I progressed. I wasn’t doing the boats any longer. I had built this nice 60 cell design. I had to farm out the cutting of the boxes and the metal work, I did all assembly work.


60 cell generator problems (just a test unit, not enough cells):

As these problems occurred, the gas generation system would stop, and need to be “re-tweaked” (the resonance) to get it re-started. (20:19)

Discussion about possible security leaks, 60 cell unit not rugged enough for marine use, gas storage volume, back flash preventers, pressures greater than 2 atmosphere will stop reaction, 3 frequencies will optimize production. (25:55)

42.8 kHz is best frequency. (26:20)


555 and 556 chips used.

Signal combining needed.

3 stage signal generator is best.

Opto isolator needed to protect unit with higher voltages.

3 phase toroid transformer, 3 phase primary and single phase on all the secondarys. (32:13)

Core material must be capable of accessing up to 50 kHz. (33:20)

GAS PRODUCTION anomalies as a function of signal phasing. (35:05)

2 ingredients needed to broadcast a radio signal:



2 ingredients needed for gas production:

Carrier is a DC bias voltage to provide electrons.

Modulation is the wave form. (37:59)

When the water molecule is split, the Hydrogen ion needs electrons to remain free. If those electrons are not readily available, it will combine with the Oxygen atom. The modulation does the work. The carrier supplements the reaction so it can continue. (38:06)

The 60 cell test unit would provide enough gas to run the 6 cylinder ICE, and still have gas to spare. (38:35) The inverter that was driving that was running at half power at 60 mph with the wheels off the ground. In actual use, it would take more. (38:51) You would be able to drive, but you wouldn’t have a great amount of power.

The original units had problems with stability and with electrolyte heating. Those problems have been eliminated. 12 Volt fuel boosters powering a single cell will cause the electrolyte to produce steam That is not the answer. (40:07)

Brute force electrolysis (12 V applied to a single cell) will work, but is not energy efficient. (40:33). This can be improved by use of a catalyst. As I added cells and divided the power between the cells, the heat generated dropped. (40:54). The reaction stabilized because, there is less cycling of the heat.

The last unit built had 70 cells, and produced 6 liters per minute using 4.65 amps and 144 volts. According to Faraday, this amount of gas production would require 9.6 amps. (42:33).


You’ve got to sand them right. (43:44). Don’t touch them, don’t get any oil on them from your hands, and rinse them with distilled water or electrolyte (no cleaning solutions), both sides. (44:33). Sand using cross hatch pattern, 60 or 80 grit paper, to create many sharp points.

Perforated plates do not work in a series cell. Use a weak solution for 3 day “burn in”. Get rid of iron oxide. 316 steel is better than 304. Use of distilled water recommended. (52:33)


Plexiglas is best, and works with both KOH and NaOH. Do not use Lexan with NaOH, as it is not compatible. (52:35) ABS works well. DO NOT USE ALUMINUM!!! Plate alignment and spacing are important factors. (56:15)

Tubular cells tried by BB, but did not work well for him. (56:24)

BUBBLER safety device (1:00:42)

Vent gas outside.

GAS DECAY (1:06:52)

Gases from resonant reaction will reform and lose energy. Your supply line should be short between generator and engine or burner. Gas storage will decay with time.

Hydrogen wants to be di-atomic. Mono-atomic hydrogen wants to recombine into di-atomic.

Q & A

Atmospheric water (rain or AWG) works best because of its higher energy content from the sun. (1:07:30).

Refill water needs to be added on the fly. The optimum point for gas generation is the point of maximum conductivity of the solution. For KOH, this is about 28% solution. Start on the wet side by about 2%, let the process go thru the optimum point, and when it gets about 2% on the dry side, change the solution. (1:10:54).

THE HEX CONTROLLER (1:10:00) thru (1:20:33)

This is a micro-processor controlled board. It can be programmed with a PC using ATMEL programming language, or simply using an ISP Programming cable available on line for under $10. (Reference )


Water fuel museum?



Go to and page down to this video:

The 3 minute video makes the clearest statement I have seen declaring that current developments in water splitting are clearly over unity processes. At 0:48-1:02 Faraday’s law is quoted:

It takes more energy to dissociate hydrogen and oxygen than can be returned when the hydrogen is burned.”

The video goe on to identify “rogue experimenters of today” as Stanley Meyer, Yul Brown, John Kanzius, Bob Boyce, Daniel Dingel, Paul Pantone, and Professor Kanarev, who report output from their water splitters exceeding Faraday’s limit many times over.


The stepping stones that are now laying a path before us:


While studying this topic, there are some very interesting ideas that are encountered, but the source is lost. Yet they stick in the mind as topics for further study, and questions to be answered:

PLASMA incineration



electrical effects of burning hydrogen

Battery and Energy Technologies

Hydrogen Fuelled Electricity Generation

Hydrogen is being promoted as the perfect environmentally friendly fuel of the future.

What many "Hydrogen economists" don't make clear is - Where will the energy come from to extract the hydrogen from the water?

Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source, so the energy it delivers would ultimately have to be provided by a conventional power plant.

This page considers some of the issues.

Fuel Cells

The fuel cell was invented in 1839 by Welsh lawyer Sir William Robert Grove. It takes in Hydrogen and Oxygen from the air and puts out electricity, heat, and water. It doesn't use fossil fuels and it doesn't produce greenhouse gases and so it should be the ideal solution to providing distributed or portable electrical power. Despite its obvious advantages it was not until the 1950s in response to the needs of the US space program that practical devices were developed. Even today, although there are many variants of fuel cells working in development labs throughout the world and small scale deployment of demonstration units in some countries, there is still no volume production. What is holding back the commercialization of fuel cells?


burning water with plasma arc

Plasma Cutting 101

Accurately cutting steel and other metals is typically a long, tedious process of sawing, grinding or some combination of the two. Unless you have a full-service metal shop with hydraulic shears and punches, the old by-hand method is the most commonly used way to cut metal. While chop saws, reciprocating saws and cut-off wheels have their place, the plasma cutter is the fastest method for making quick, accurate cuts in everything from thin sheet metal to 2" plate and tubing. Understanding how plasma torches work and what makes them not work is crucial for proper operation.

What is plasma?

Plasma arc cutting is similar to electric welding, except instead of joining, it separates. In the 1960s, engineers found that they could turn up the gas on the electronic welders in order to increase the speed of the welding operations, but they reached a point where the torch ceased welding and began cutting. This discovery led to plasma cutting torches. These cutting devices employ an electric arc with compressed air discharge at the tip of the cutting torch. The arc super-heats the compressed air, which then forms plasma. There are 4 forms of matter: Solid, Liquid, Gas and Plasma. When a gas is heated to extreme temperatures, the energy begins to break the gas molecules apart, splitting the atoms, which generates massive amounts of energy and incredible cutting power. Plasma is all around us; neon and fluorescent lights used cold plasma, while the sun is essentially a giant ball of plasma. Since plasma conducts electricity, it cuts very fast with very little effort.

Firing up the plasma for the first time can be exhilarating. Nothing cuts through metal faster with clean results. Whether you need to gut some rusty floor pans or create art, plasma cutters are the ticket.

To generate the plasma, you need a starting arc. This is what creates the initial burst of plasma at the tip. There are 2 common types of starting arcs: High-Frequency Contact and Pilot Arc. While both are certainly functional, there are certain concerns with both. HF arcing is perfectly suitable for most types of plasma operations, but the high frequencies generated by the machine can wreak havoc on nearby computers and other sensitive electronics, making them really bad choices for CNC plasma plotters. While that may sound like only an issue for industrial applications, there are affordable hobbyist CNC plasma tables. Should you purchase one at a later date, you would need to shield the computer from the HF noise. HF units also require that the tip be in contact with the substrate to be cut in order for the arc to trigger, which can lead to blown-out tips and can be tricky for use in CNC tables. "Pilot arc" units use an internal lower voltage arc that generates plasma inside the tip of the torch. This eliminates the need to touch the tip to the substrate, meaning the consumables last longer. Since the arc is generated internally, these units do not generate high-frequency noise, which makes them safe for CNC use.

The drawback of the pilot arc is that if you repeatedly trigger the unit without being in close proximity to the substrate, you can damage the internals of the unit. That said, the pilot arc design is becoming the leader in plasma torch designs.

Enemies of plasma

Plasma may be the meanest method of cutting, but sometimes the biggest dude on the block has a glass jaw. Plasma cutting's kryptonite is water. Obviously, you would think twice before using anything electronic around water, but what we are talking about is water/moisture in the compressed air. Most hobbyists employ a standard air compressor to generate the air needed in the plasma cutting operation. Compressed air typically has a lot of moisture in it, so you need to make sure that there is at least one water trap filter in the air line. A quick, easy way to dry the air is to use disposable air filters with a quick-release right at the connection to the plasma unit. You will know you have water in the line if the cutting operations are erratic, with lots of pops and sputtering. Plasma HATES water, so keep it out.

Misperceptions regarding water and HHO

Most perceptions about anything are based on the following:

There are many other ways to acquire your “knowledge”, your “beliefs”. How much of your supposed knowledge is really true, how much of it is a lie, and how much is just caught up in the mush of getting through life without really caring what is truth, what is fiction, and what really doesn’t matter, one way or the other.

When you must accomplish something, that’s when you must use your knowledge. If you have done something before, it’s easy to simply repeat the processes used to achieve the desired end result. If you want to start a fire, you could

With each step, lighting a fire becomes easier as your knowledge and “available technology” improves over time. However, you must understand that at one time the people who sold kindling did not want you to know about coal, gasoline, or methane or any other fuel than kindling.

Today, as we begin to emerge from the grip of the cabal keeps us buying fuel from them, that controls many aspect of our lives, we are beginning to learn that many other forms of energy are available to us, but all related information is heavily shrouded behind a fog of misinformation, misdirection, lies, and suppression of knowledge about such things.

The purpose of this book is to give you sufficient information about the energy in water, that you will be able to accomplish the following:

OVER UNITY PROCESSES are demonstrable by burning water. Any suggestion that certain laws of physics are violated is simply proof that we need to rethink our laws of physics, or do some honest testing and reporting on this issue. So far we know that this issue is of such extreme concern to the oil industry, so much so that there is no limit to the extremes that they will resort to to keep the public from learning the truth of this matter. They know that water fuel will very quickly put them out of business.

INPUT ENERGY required to initiate the water splitting process is not a problem. In an automobile, a storage battery is required to start it. With a dead battery, the car won’t start, whether it is burning gasoline or water. When the gasoline starts burning, it provides all the energy needed to power the car and recharge the battery. The same is true if you are burning water.

C:\xampp\htdocs\book205cx.html EEI/TIG