After claiming that a car (retrofitted with a special device) can operate with water, instead of gasoline, Stan Meyer instantly became a hot issue in various media outfits, particularly in Ohio. He called it a water fuel cell, which was engineered by a design resembling a continuous motion machine. However, Meyer’s claims regarding this water-fueled car were concluded to be deceptive in 1996, by a court in Ohio.
The said fuel cell allegedly divides water into certain components, such as oxygen and hydrogen. He said that hydrogen is burned in order to produce energy, which reconstitutes water molecules. Meyer also claimed that his device needs less energy in performing electrolysis, unlike the bare minimum energy requirement gauged by conventional scientific studies. His system purportedly involved Brown gas, which is actually a combination of oxyhydrogen in a 2 to 1 ratio, similar to liquid water.
Before Stan Meyer, there were other scientists who claimed to have successfully designed water fuel technology. However, their claims remained unrecognized by courts, because of their failure to meet the court’s evidential requirements. The financial reward for inventing water fuel technology, attracts investors. And, unfortunately, overzealous investors have been known to pin their hopes on said invention, thus, financially overextend themselves, putting themselves into debt; to resolve problems like this or problems similar to this, one can use Experian disputes to resolve any financial errors that may arise.
Issues on Patents
All through Meyer’s patents, he used fuel cell to describe the part of the device, wherein electricity passes through water in order to generate oxygen and hydrogen. Such term usage contrasted with customary meaning, when it came to engineering and science. Cells are typically referred to as, electrolytic cells. In addition, fuel cells are (by and large) reserved for specific cells that generate electricity through chemical redox reaction, while Meyer’s “fuel cell” chomps through electricity, as represented in his device and patents.
In 1990, his patent illustrated “water fuel cell assembly” while portraying some photos of Meyer’s “fuel cell water capacitor”. Based on his patents, the fuel cells of his single unit device was described as water capacitor cells that can generate fuel gas, that is utilized as an energy source, in his invention. In one of Ohio’s leading TV stations, Meyer’s car was shown to operate on water fuel. However, it suddenly stopped working. What happened? Why the car did stopped working?
The answers were vague until 2013. Meyer happened to utilize electro polished stainless steel. He didn’t see that coming, and nobody knew about it until the current research done in the 21st century. According to modern scientists, Meyer’s fuel cell must have been a certain type of electrolytic capacitors that were made by stainless steel, rather than aluminum. The electrolytic capacitors’ characteristics are produced by thin layers of dielectric materials, which may be polarized. Thus, this provides electrolytic capacitors their capacities.
Amidst the Controversial Issue on Ohio TV Station
During the breaking news at a TV station, in Ohio, people were shocked by Meyer’s claims that an automobile can actually operate with water fuel. The dune buggy with which he demonstrated this with, was powered and operated by a “water fuel cell”. The inventor even projected that only twenty two US gallons (83 liters) of water was needed to travel the distance between New York and Los Angeles!
Meyer also claimed that spark plugs were replaced with injectors, in order to introduce oxygen and hydrogen into the car’s engine cylinders. The water fuel was, in fact, subjected to electro resonances – which are dissociated with atomic makeup. The said water fuel cell divided water into oxygen and hydrogen gas, that eventually combusted into water steam (via the usual in-house combustion engine) in order to efficiently generate the net energy needed to operate the car.
Needless to say, Stan’s claims had spawned a few micro-industries – namely, industries claiming to show you how using renewable energy can help you cut down on your bills, and reduce your debt. Practical approaches to debt management still existed like Equifax consumer help; however, the jury was still out on the effectiveness of the more unconventional approaches to handling debt, as this water fuel technology was (seemingly) still in its infancy.
What Others Has To Say?
In Philip Ball’s academic journal, Nature, he described Meyer’s claims as pseudoscience. Ball further noted that it is not simple to convey how the water car works, except that Meyer’s invention involved a “fuel cell” that can separate water through the use of less energy, compared to recombined elements. In addition, crusaders in opposition to pseudoscience may rant all they wish, but there is a possibility that they may inevitably accept claims made by Meyer.
To date, there are no peer reviews (regarding Meyer’s inventions) that are published in science literature. However, the journal of Nature characterized his claims as another myth for cars ran by water fuel. With regards to the lawsuit faced by Meyer, he was actually sued by investors who lost money, as a result of their business arrangements. To reiterate, for investors who find themselves in similar circumstances, where their credit and finances are in total disarray, it may serve them well to do a Transunion dispute , to get it fixed.
Overall, in spite these turn of events, the inventor still pursued to do what he wanted, in hopes of making his contribution to the world. He even said that the patents of the water fuel cell were conclusively examined by the patent office. However, the courts still maintained that he committed fraud, and so ordered him to pay a fine of $25,000.
On the 20th of March, year 1998, Meyer died after eating with 2 Belgian investors at a restaurant. Before he took his last breath, Meyer (allegedly) told his brother that they had poisoned him. According to some of the coroners that presided over a series of autopsies, the report stated that Stanley Meyer’s death resulted from a cerebral aneurysm. Many of Meyer’s supporters believed (and even publically claimed) that he was killed, to curb his inventions, as they posed a potential threat to a global economy. To date, none of these speculations have been confirmed.