It’s been illegal in the US under national security directives since 1956 to improve mpg of the internal combustion engine by more then 80%. It’s exactly the kind of thing they bury in obscure unrelated legislation. All these free energy device claims don’t have to be 100% true to justify government oppression, nor do they have to be 100% bullshit and useless if they don’t achieve their exact claims. The average internal combustion engine runs approx 18% efficiency and wastes the rest in heat loss ect. So you can technically improve the average fuel mileage by more then 500% without breaking any laws of physics virtue signaling troglodytes like to shriek every time they come across anything like this. Even Mercedes last F1 engine ran an exhaust recirculating device to recombust waste energy that achieves high enough efficiency increases to be illegal in a production car.
I achieved approx a 20-30% mpg increase in a 06 mazda3 with one of those HHO cels. It took me 2 years to figure out how to build it to actually work because every site and video online I found on them was either bullshit or to incomplete to be useful to me. Imo the vaporizers you run in your exhaust to heat your fuel are the most promising. Like the GEET engine. But that guy was charged with fraud to like every inventor in American history that seriously attempted a disruptive technology. It doesn’t make him right or wrong, but I tested it myself and still chose to recommend it.
Arm services Patent advisory board “ASPAB” Patent security category review list
Prepared by ASPAB Sub committee chairman H.L Mourning, AMC
J.C Morris, AF Bert Convey, NAVY JAN 1971
Short title: PSCRL-1 Group XI, ITEM 9
“Item 9. Energy conversion systems with conversion efficiencies in excess of 70 to 80% (AP). (NAVY). (AMC)
It’s been illegal in the US under national security directives since 1956 to improve mpg of the internal combustion engine by more then 80%.
I wonder why they do this crap?
I understand why they suppress LENR and other types of super science. I may not entirely agree but I understand some the arguments might have a little bit of legitimacy.
if every Joe Schmo had something equivalent to a nuclear bazooka we'd all have a bad time
What is the point of stopping cars from having 100 MPG though? It just seems nasty and petty to me. Like they hate people and want them to be trapped in the rat race.
They're artificially adjusting the standard of living down for no legitimate purpose that I can discern.
Well I wouldn’t attempt to say it’s justified, but from their point of view with a priority on control, stopping a car from doing 100mpg makes perfect sense. If you take the cost of energy or fuel out of every product you buy, they’d all be discounted by 90%. And you would only need to work 5-10hrs/week instead of 40-50 in order to pay your bills. Societies priorities and interests would shift 180 overnight for better or worse (likely better).
Eg. If you took the total fuel and electricity cost out of oil exploration and refinery, gas would cost $0.10/gal and all food prices would drop by half or more.
It's hard to play devil's advocate looking at it in that light. They just seem irredeemably horrible.
(post is archived)