Johnny Punish is a global citizen activist, visionary, musician, artist, entertainer, businessman, investor, life coach, and syndicated columnist.

Educated at University of Nevada Las Vegas and California State University Fullerton, his articles appear in Veterans Today and his Johnny Punish Blog. His art music is promoted worldwide and played on net radio at, and more.

Resources: Store - Music - Videos - SoundCloud - Spotify - Itunes - Join Mailing List - Facebook - Twitter

Read Full Bio at >>>

View Latest Posts >>>

Technology to Reduce Dependence on Oil has Been Known For More Than 200 years

Among the more than 350 documents/videos concerning the energy scam you will find:

  • There is an abundant supply of oil in Alaska

  • 376-mpg technology was demonstrated in 1973

  • 72-mpg and 104-mpg automobiles were sold in Europe

  • The Japanese have two water fueled automobiles on the street

by Byron Wine,

This nation sent a probe more than 400-million miles, landed safely, sent back video and dug in the soil. Yet, we can’t duplicate, except on the space station, the Japanese water-fuel technology for automobiles. Does this make any sense?

In my opinion, the cause of the current energy dilemma is Congress. Will you please contact your members of congress and demand solutions, not showboat hearings with energy and automobile executives?


Energy Information


The Washington Post, Washington Times, Richmond Times Dispatch, New York Times (1), (2), The Oregonian, Potomac News/Manassas Journal Messenger, Washington Examiner and other print/radio/TV media outlets will not inform you of this information.  The post did respond to another letter.  After you read the following information, do you wonder why they won’t inform you?  To further illustrate how information is suppressed, during September 2004, email was sent to 119 Talk show host.  Neglecting automatic responses, one host responded. When I responded to that host, no response.  During 2004-2005 I sent more than 600 email and letters concerning Energy Information.  Most people did not respond including my Members of Congress.

(Someone is attempting to hack this page to prevent you from learning the information. If you find non-working links, please contact Byron so they can be restored.)

These, WTOP, WMAL, WOL/B (1) (2), WJLA (1) (2), WTTG (1) (2) (3), WUSA, NBC, CNN (1) (2) (3), CNN published an article “Gasoline: Painful, and getting worse“, the author and EIA staff member were contacted, they did not respond. These 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were attached to the email contacts. The Lou Dobbs Radio Show was contacted; they did not respond, these were attached 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, The Jim Bohannon show, Mike Regan show and many other TV/Radio media present gloom and doom stories concerning energy. Yet, they will not inform you of devices that could, if implemented, greatly reduce our reliance on oil. Do you wonder why?

“People in the news” Sir Richard Branson, Mr. Donald Trump and others have also been informed of existing energy technology, they make no public statements.

Do you wonder how long the media has manipulated you? Read the 2002 preface to a 1918 book “The Free Press” (ISBN 0-9714894-1-6).

Need further proof that information is suppressed? See this web site document.  You might find the 1980 letter, near the bottom, to an inventor from the (U.S). Commissioner of Patents of interesting. The letter prevents the inventor from proceeding with his invention on security grounds. Mr. Arthur Stopes, III, does not agree with the letter at the bottom of the page, his comments are here.

Some members of congress are attempting to obtain access to classified energy patents the information is here.

In the late 50’s, I met a retired college physics professor; he had a patent for a device to run an engine on water.  The government had classified his patent and this prevented him from developing the device.  For a suggested workaround for the Patent issue see.

Researcher, Gary Vesperman, has a very informative paper concerning energy suppression.

Patrick Kelly, has a very informative website. Information on this site is updated frequently. A September 2006 view is here

A review of the book “The Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity” by Dr. Patrick G. Bailey, President, Institute for New Energy is here.  (Use the functions in Adobe Acrobat to navigate the review.)

If you can, please help to distribute this information, send suggestions and comments to: byron.

(This article was on the Internet for several years then modified and documentation linked.)


So you think we have an energy problem?

No, we have a political problem.


I want to relate to you some facts concerning various suppressed energy devices and the difficulty in informing the public of these devices. I hope that you can add some additional information. Here is some additional web sites addressing these issues.

On October 1, 1990, I began to keep a list of people contacted concerning energy devices.  A 53 page list is here.  (The list is no longer updated.)  The list includes President Clinton and vice-president. 121 Members of Congress including George Allen (1) (2), Feinstein, Warner, McCain, Coburn and other politicians, 21 government and state agencies, 215 members of the print and electronic media, 62 environmental groups, the President of United Auto Workers and 14 other UAW officials, and the President of the American Automobile Association.  A recent correspondence exchange with AAA is here.  Many members of the clergy, including Mr. Pat Robertson and Christian Science Monitor.  Numerous “public interest“, including Public Citizen, groups. Most of the people contacted do not respond to communications.

Speaker of the House Pelosi will not respond to a letter concerning a water-fuel automobile. Evidently this is not an item worthy of consideration.

My then Congressman, Representative Frank Wolf, will not respond to a letter and 182 pages of documentation that I put in his hand on August 25, 1993.  I wonder just who does he respond to?  Could it be that money talks?

My current congressman, Tom Davis, also will not respond to previous letters .  Mr. Davis was evidently too busy chairing the congressional baseball investigation to be concerned with energy issues. Shawn, from his office, called concerning the source for a water-fueled car in Japan. During 10/07 a message was left for Sean concerning a DVD with examples of water-fueled automobiles, the call was not returned. On 10/24/07, using Representative Davis’s website, an email was sent offering the DVD. No response from Mr. Davis, guess he doesn’t want to know about technology that will greatly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. At a public meting in Prince William County earlier this year a DVD with 8 examples of water-fueled automobiles and other devices was put in his hand, no response after the meeting.

The Governor of Virginia critiqued the president’s recent, February/06, state of the union speech saying repeatedly, “There’s a better way.”  I commented on the critique;  apparently, the governor’s “There’s a better way” is to ignore comments from Virginia citizens. Recently another letter was sent to the governor, a response was received. Also VA state Senator Colgan and Delegate Marshall were sent similar letters, they did not respond..

The President, on 12/18/07, signs “Energy-Independence and Security-Act of 2007”
In a 11/19/07 Newsweek article, a Toyota representative says achieving 35-mpg “…is not technology achievable.”. Evidently this representative didn’t get the memo about the 104-mpg 2002 Toyota available in Europe.

On 11/11/07 communications were sent to every Democrat and Republican candidate for president offering a free computer disk with videos of six automobiles that burn only water for fuel. The office of one candidate, Edwards, responded, they did not respond to follow-up email. It appears that water is not a politically correct solution for energy independence. Multiple requests for funds were received.

Candidates contacted:

  1. Biden
  2. Clinton
  3. Dodd
  4. Edwards (1) (2)
  5. Giuliani
  6. Gravel
  7. Huckabee
  8. Hunter
  9. Keyes
  10. Kucinich
  11. McCain
  12. Obama
  13. Paul
  14. Richardson
  15. Romney
  16. Tancredo
  17. Thompson

In January 2007 Dominion Energy sent a “Doom and Gloom” letter to customers, I responded. The Dominion CEO did not respond and only one of the five Commonwealth of Virginia legislators receiving a copy responded. I wonder if the fact Dominion contributed, during 2006/2007, $723,419 to various legislators could have influenced 4 legislators not to respond. An email, with this attachment, was sent to the editor of the Dominion newsletter included with the bill, he did not respond.

In April/06 Secretary Rice testified before congress, one of her comments concerned relying on technology to resolve energy issues.  The Secretary did not respond to my letter.  Secretary of Transportation Mineta was asked to explain the wide difference between achieved mpg and the CAFÉ standards.  Secretary Mineta did not respond to my letter.

All House members of The Committee on Energy and Commerce were sent letters and a CD duplicating this web page (3/27/06 version). No response to letters.

All Senate members of Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee were sent letters and a CD duplicating this web page (3/27/06 version).  Two Senators, Allen and Feinstein responded. Do you wonder what our tax money is paying for in these committees?

Donna Wade has written a letter that should be sent to all Members of Congress.

This site,, list political candidates for office and major media for a particular state.  So far, all candidates for federal office with email, except for sitting members of congress, and where possible, also media in all states were contacted (2006).  Approximately 40 federal candidates and only 2 media responded. Does this tell you anything?

If you want to know the affect oil has on the world, I suggest you read “The Prize” (ISBN 0-671-79932-0)

Do I believe there is a conspiracy of silence concerning decades old and current energy technology? Yes, I have experienced this for more than 26-years.

On 10/16/07 certified mail was sent to local papers, Potomac News/Manassas Journal Messenger. The mail was not picked-up until 11/16/07. Previous to these two papers being combined they did publish some information about high mpg automobiles (1), (2), (3).

AAA World, in the November/December 2007 issue, published the article “Your car and U.S. Energy Policy- Things you Need to Know”. AAA World did not publish my response to that article. Previous attempts to respond to AAA World articles were also not published. . Another attempt was made, 3/03/08, to have AAA inform people of fuel saving technology, no response. These documents were attached to the email (1), (2), (3), (4).

Is it possible some publications are more concerned with advertising loss than informing their readers of the truth?

Here is the information. Please verify for yourself.

(Note: In several of the following references information is followed by a (?) symbol, or a statement that the original material was stolen from me in 1986. This is because in those cases I am working from very poor copies of the original material. In 1986, an intern reporter for the Washington Times visited me, he wanted to take my material back to the paper to make copies. What he did was steal my material and take it back to college with him. Had it not been for an Editor at the Washington Times and the Dean at this intern’s school, I would have lost a lot of my collection of energy material.)

(For those wanting to verify the patents. Go to, you will find information for viewing patents. Thanks to Cory for this alternate, and simpler, method of verifying patents )

1) Some folks at Shell Oil Co. wrote “Fuel Economy of the Gasoline Engine” (ISDN 0-470-99132-1);  it was published by John Wiley & Sons, New York, in 1977.  The Library of Congress (LOC), in September 1990, did not have a copy of this book.  It was missing from the files.  I bought a copy from Maryland Book Exchange around 1980 after a professor informed me that it was used as an engineering text at the University of West Virginia. On page 42 Shell Oil quotes the President of General Motors, he, in 1929, predicted 80 MPG by 1939.  Between pages 221 and 223 Shell writes of their achievements:  49.73 MPG around 1939;  149.95 MPG with a 1947 Studebaker in 1949;  244.35 MPG with a 1959 Fiat 600 in 1968;  376.59 MPG with a 1959 Opel in 1973 (Photographs of the Opel, taken in April/07 are here.) Note the insulation added to the engine, (1,2) heat helps vaporize gasoline.

2) Virginia Polytechnic Institute (VPI) published a paper, March 1979, concerning maximum achievable fuel economy.  This paper has several charts illustrating achievable and impossible fuel economy.  About 1980 the author was contacted concerning conflicts between the paper and documented achieved “impossible” mpg. The author said, “I will get back to you.” I am still waiting for his response.

3) The book “Secrets of the 200 MPG Carburetor” is by Allan Wallace and was available, about 198(?), from Premier Distributing, 1775 Broadway, NY, NY, 10019.  Page 18 has photocopies of three 1936 tests by the Ford Motor Co. (Canada) of the Pogue carburetor, U.S. Patent #2,026,798).  The worst case test achieved about 171 MP(US)G. In 1972, NASA was granted a patent for a similar functioning device.  I can not provide any other publishing information from this book.  It is among the material stolen from me in 1986.  My copy of page 18 is very poor.  (I am grateful to Lee Winslett for a copy of this book and the article from Colliers.) Collier’s magazine, in 1929, published an article “300 Miles to the gallon.  The 300-MPG statement is attributed to the president of General Motors. Thanks to Paul Andrew Mitchell, ( for additional material from Pea Research concerning Pogue and other devices.

4) Argosy Magazine, August 1977, has a five-page article (text copy here) about Tom Ogle and the media witnessed test of the “Oglemobile”.  Tom Ogle, on that test run, achieved more than 100 MPG in a 4,600 pound 1970 Ford Galaxie.  When I attempted to find a copy of that Argosy Magazine, it was missing from LOC files in 1980.  Argosy ceased publication, I was informed, a short time after the Ogle article was published. I could not find a copy of that Argosy issue at any library within 200 miles of my home. An editor with the company that purchased Argosy found and mailed a copy to me. While attempting to verify statements in the article, I spoke with Doug Lenzini (SP?) with the EL Paso Times.  Mr. Lenzini informed me that he knew Tom Ogle, and the Oglemobile achieved more than 200 MPG.  When I contacted the El Paso NBC affiliate that filmed the test run described in the Argosy article, I was informed that the person who had filmed the test had left the station and taken all the records.

A) The Ogle U.S. Patent, #4,177,779, has this statement:  “I have been able to obtain extremely high gas mileages with the system of the present invention installed on a V-8 engine of a conventional 1971 American made automobile.  In fact, mileage rates in excess of one hundred miles per gallon have been achieved with the present invention.” According to the Argosy article, a Shell Oil Co. representative asked Ogle what he would do if someone offered him $25 Million for the system. Ogle responded “I would not be interested” He later said, “I’ve always wanted to be rich, and I suspect I will be when this system gets into distribution. But I’m not going to have my system bought up and put on the shelf. I’m going to see this thing through—that I promise.” According to an article in The Washington Post Parade Magazine, March 4, 1984, Tom Ogle died of a drug and alcohol overdose in 1981. Other articles concerning Tom Ogle can be found in the El Paso Journal, January 16, 1980, and also, The Hamilton Spectator, June 24, 1978.

B) The Oglemobile, in simplification, ran on fumes extracted from a heated tank in the trunk (See the Ogle patent.) An article received from AAA has additional information.

C) A very simple method of extracting gasoline fumes is described in a book, published in 1900, “Gas Engine Construction”. This book was reprinted by Lindsay in 1986, ISBN 0-917914-46-5

D) The Wright Brothers, 1903 engine, also had a simple carburetor. The carburetor on display in the Kitty Hawk, N.C. facility some years ago was even simpler.

E) Thanks to Michael B. for this Shell Oil patent information

5) There are many U.S. Patents granted for vaporizing gasoline.  Some are: NASA Patent 3,640,256, General Electric Co. Patent #3,926,150, Robinson Patent #4,003,969, Harpman Patent #4,023,538, Butler Patent #4,068,638 and Totten Patent #4,106,457.

A. Pete “The Tree Man” was researching the Fish carburetor while staying in my home during the early 80’s.  He later sent a 6-page list with more than 240 U.S. Patent numbers for vaporizing gasoline, other fuels and water.

B. This article lists 500 patents for vaporizing gasoline.

C. Here are photographs of a production vaporizing carburetor.

D. Patent, #5,782,225 has a different approach.  The Patent owner was put in prison while trying to develop his device;  he moved to China for manufacturing, the story is here.

E. Another inventor, who has researched vaporizing carburetors for over 10 years, wrote a paper in 1992 (revised 2005).  The author writes using noms de plume Bart Simpson and Frieda Mind.  (The link will open an Acrobat .pdf file, you must use the functions in Acrobat to navigate the paper.)

F. Bill Caine has modified a 1970 Plymouth to run on gasoline vapor. A video is here. I have no mpg information on this vehicle.

G. Chevron Oil, 1986, offers to purchase large quantities of carburetors from a manufacturer.


H. West Virginia man, in 1990, achieves 58 mpg with an 8 cylinder 1968 Chrysler That previously got 12 mpg . His patent is here.

I. Another patent for a vaporizing carburetor. There are hundreds of patents for similar devices. You would think the automobile industry would utilize some of them to increase sales and reduce reliance on oil. Or is there some other reason devices of this type are not used?

6) During the mid 70’s, physicist Don Novak traveled all over the U.S. lecturing and teaching in his seminars how to achieve 100 MPG.  He also testified, October 15, 1979, before a Wichita, Kansas, Congressional Committee on “Reinventing the Automobile”.  I have known Don for many years.  Once he brought to my home, in the late 70’s, two carburetors;  one got more than 200 MPG and the other more than 100 MPG.  I contacted a local politician, who lives in my town, and was on the Virginia Energy Subcommittee;  I tried to have this politician meet Don and see the carburetors.  The politician was not interested.

7) In the London, England, Daily Telegraph, 10/20/83, on page 9, there is an advertisement for a production Peugeot Diesel that gets 52.3 MPG in urban driving.  The model 205 Diesel gets 72 mpg at 56 mph. In the Washington Post, 9/19/83, page 37(?) is the 1983 U.S. EPA fuel economy list of various vehicles. The Peugeot USA models get between 21 and 27 MPG.  The Washington Times, 8/9/91, published an article, “Gas saving engines hit streets in fall.”  This article is about two engines, the Mitsubishi MVV engine, and the Honda VTEC-E.  According to the company spokesmen, the Mitsubishi will get up to 50 MPG;  the Honda, up to 88 MPG.  I visited a local Honda dealer and got a brochure on the production automobile with the VTEC-E engine, the specified MPG, as I recall, was 53 MPG.  I know of no produced Honda that gets 88 MPG. I have no information on the production Mitsubishi MVV engine.  I wonder if there is something that happens to fuel economy when an automobile is transported to the USA.  Is it possible that these engines “un-tweak” themselves during transit?  In 2002 an English newspaper article reported a 104-mpg Toyota and 94-mpg VW/Audi vehicles.  In 2003 another English newspaper tested a 75-mpg Toyota diesel.  Do you wonder why these vehicles are not available in the USA?  You might ask your Member of Congress for an explanation.

8) The U.S. Government supported (Grant No. DTNH22-91-Z-06014) a study of automobile fuel economy by the National Academy of Sciences. This study, “Automotive Fuel Economy—How Far Should We Go?” (ISBN 0-309-04530-4), was used by the staff of my then Congressman George Allen, to refute documentation proving that an automobile had exceeded 376 MPG.  Nowhere in this “fuel economy study” is there any reference to the work of Shell Oil Co. or any other reference that could refute the conclusion of this report.  The report concluded, Page 4, a subcompact car might achieve between 39 and 44 MPG by model year 2006.  This is a difficult position to defend since Peugeot, in 1983, advertised a 72-mpg vehicle.  Many committee meetings were held from May 15, 1991 to December 14, 1991, prior to the April 1992 publication of this report.  Prior to publication of this report, I previously sent documentation to several participants of these meetings.  The documentation proved that automobile fuel economies of between 49 and 376 MPG were achieved.  None of the participants responded to my letters.  Documentation was sent to: Jerry R. Curry, Administrator, National Highway Safety Administration, on 3/16/91;  Senator Richard H. Bryan, on 3/7/91;  Congressman Philip R. Sharp, on 2/18/91;  Steve Plotkin, Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, on 4/4/91;  Charles Mendler, Energy Conservation Collation, on 11/2/90;  Fred Smith, Competitive Enterprise Institute, on 4/16/91;  Brian O’Neill, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, on 10/31/93;  Clarence Ditlow, Executive Director, Center for Auto Safety, on 1/6/92.  Previous documentation was also sent to members of organizations participating in these meetings, they are; John Koenig, Product planning Manager, Toyota Motor Co., on 3/18/91;  Peter Clausen, Union of Concerned Scientist, on 10/28/90;  John Morrill, American Council for Energy Efficiency, on 10/4/90.  None of these people responded to my letters.  I know that at least one of my letters was received.  The Union of Concerned Scientist keeps asking me to financially support their organization.

9) An article “Automakers Move Toward New Generation Of Greener Vehicles” was published in “Chemical & Engineering News”, August 1, 1994.  This article is about “The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles”, a partnership between the U.S. Government and the auto industry that has a goal of an 80 MPG automobile by 2002.  In 1992 a government-funded study concluded that a subcompact car might get between 39 and 44 MPG by model year 2006 (See #7 above).  In 1994 the goal is 80 MPG by 2002.  (Toyota and VW/Audi exceeded this goal in 2002.)  Is it possible that someone read the Shell Oil book?  Or could someone have actually read my February 13, 1992 letter, and 95 pages of documentation, sent to then Candidate Clinton.  I wrote, September 8, 1994, to Deborah L. Illman, the author of the article, and to the editor, Michael Heylin of Chemical & Engineering News, on September 11, 1994.  No response was received from them.  On September 11, 1994, I also wrote to Mary L. Good, Under Secretary for Technology, (USA) Department of Commerce.  I received a response from Ms. Good.  It was an undated, un-addressed, form letter.  I guess the fact that a vehicle could get 376 MPG or burn water for fuel would not be a politically correct finding.  How could someone explain to the American people that it was necessary to send more than 600,000 of our citizens to the Mid-east to defend oil wells if this information was public knowledge? Do you remember the 1963 Chrysler Turbine car? Here is another article and an email from someone who was in the car.

10) Hybrid Diesel/Electric automobiles (A Diesel/Electric locomotive uses the same principle.)  The Manassas Journal Messenger, April 4, 1981, has an article about a MG sports car converted by San Diego State University.  The car gets 110 MPG.  The Steven R. Reed Automobile Manufacturing Corp., Newport Beach, CA, issued a press release dated February 14, 1983.  This release announces the February 23, 1983 showing of the 200-MPG, two-passenger, II Millennium Cruiser at the Ambassador Hotel.  The press release also states that the company will file “… a major class-action lawsuit involving a considerable number of giant American corporations within the automotive and petroleum industries, plus numerous branches and agencies of the U.S. Government responsible for regulating these companies.”  Don Novak informed me that when none of the major news media attended the Millennium show, the company drove the car to CBS Television, Los Angeles, and parked it on the lawn.  No one came out of the building to inspect the car.  Don also stated that the president of the Steven R. Reed Corp. has been in hiding for some years..

11) Mother Earth News, November/December 1977, has an article “Can This Transmission Really Double Your Car’s Mileage?”  This article is about a Ford Granada modified by Vincent Carman of Portland, Oregon.  In simplification, Mr. Carman removed the transmission and drive shaft from the car and bolted a hydraulic motor to the differential.  He then bolted a hydraulic pump to the engine to pressurize a storage tank.  The storage tank is also pressurized when the car brakes or slows down.  The article states that the U.S. Post Office is interested in a whole fleet of vehicles using this principle.  In 1990, after reading an article in “Federal Times”, I contacted Mr. Robert St.Francis, U.S. Postal Service, who was searching for alternative fuels for use by the Post Office.  Mr. St.Francis said that he had never heard of Mr. Carman.  I wrote two letters, October 18 & 21, 1990, to Mr. St.Francis concerning Mr. Carman’s vehicle.  I received no response.  Another article in Mother Earth News, March/April 1978, titled “This Car Travels 75 Miles on a Single Gallon of Gas”, is about a project by the Minneapolis Minnesota’s Hennepin Vocational Technical Center that converted a Volkswagen to a system similar to that of Mr. Carman.  The idea for the conversion came from a 1920 magazine article.  The car, with a Bradley GT body and a 16-horsepower Tecumseh engine (The original VW engine was too powerful), achieved more than 75 MPG at 70 MPH.  Could we combine the technology of Tom Ogle, 200 MPG, and the hydraulic drive cars and have a 400 MPG 4,600 pound car?  See on-line Mother Earth News archives for Carman: and Hennepin:

12) The St. Paul Pioneer News, August 22, 1990, has an article about a group that 11 years previously modified a Dodge half-ton pickup furnished by a local dealer.  This modified truck got more than 35 MPG.  Test stopped on this modification when a member of the group was told that he would receive a pair of cement boots if testing continued.

  1. Hydrogen fuel. There are many U.S. and foreign patents for extracting hydrogen and oxygen gasses from water for use as a fuel. Some Patents are: July 2, 1935, Garrett, #2,006,676;  April 3, 1945, Klein, #2,373,032;  February 25, 1975, Chambrin, French Patent Request #75 06619;  July 6, 1976, Papineau, #3,967,589 (This is a Patent for an electrical power generator that burns water);  1976, Horvath, #3,980,053. This statement is on the Horvath patent, “This invention relates to internal combustion engines. More particularly it is concerned with a fuel supply apparatus by means of which an internal combustion engine can be run on a fuel comprised of hydrogen and oxygen gasses generated on demand by electrolysis of water”.;  June 28, 1983, Meyer, #4,389,981. Mr. Meyer has at least eight other patents relating to hydrogen and oxygen gasses extracted from water for fuel. Awake magazine 4/6/1980 has two small articles concerning Hydrogen fuel for aircraft. According to one article an optimistic date for this use is 1985.

(NOTE: The videos gathered in section V) are also in other sections)

A) Popular Science, about 1978,9(?), published an article “Hydrogen bus- could also heat its own garage“. This article is about the work of Dr. Helmut Buchner of Mercedes-Benz. He is quoted “We are ready now. We could save our city of Stuttgart over one million gallons of petroleum fuel a year by converting its fleet of 300 urban busses to run on hydrogen. Heating—and air conditioning—would be free spin-offs, consuming no extra energy.”

B) Popular Science, March 1978(?), published an article “Hydrogen -demonstrates fuel of the future”. This article is about the work of Dr. Billings, Billings Energy Corp., Provo, Utah. and others. The article states that a home, all the appliances, and vehicles, can be run on hydrogen. Dr. Billings converted a Cadillac Seville for duel fuel use. This Cadillac, burning hydrogen, was in President Carter’s inaugural parade. I had a photograph of Dr. Billings drinking the exhaust, water, from one of his engines.

C) A Japanese inventor, with more than 2000 prior patents, plans to run automobile engine on water. A Gulf Oil advertisement in Discover magazine, Feb.19??, concerning Hydrogen fuel. Note the statements concerning Hydrogen energy content by Gulf oil in the advertisement and an article in the same magazine issue. Ballard Power Systems has demonstrated Hydrogen fuel cell technology for vehicles since 1997. Patents for decomposing water into hydrogen and oxygen for use as fuel are not new. See the Boisen Patent 1,380,183 granted in 1921 and a 106-year old patent for another process to extract fuel gas from water.

D) Do you remember the NASA 1998 Moon probe that was looking for water? The plan was to separate some water into oxygen and hydrogen. The hydrogen would be used as fuel. Yet in 2004, the government is developing a fuel cell that will extract hydrogen from diesel fuel carried by navy ships. Does this make any sense when the ship is floating in a mixture of 66% hydrogen? Why not use the method that NASA was going to use to extract hydrogen from Moon water? You might ask your Member of Congress for an explanation. My members of Congress will not respond.

E) A company, AEC Technology, has developed a process to extract hydrogen from water that requires no input of power. This company has partnered with UTC Fuel Cell that will use this process to run devices. One device, per the web site, will have a reciprocating engine, similar to the one in your car, generating electricity for your home. UTC Fuel Cell has furnished fuel cells to NASA since the 60’s.

F) In the mid 80s a videotape was received from a company in Florida making Aquafuel from water. This tape, among other things, has an automobile and electric generator running on this water fuel. The video is here. Seems that this process could have reached the market within the last 20-years. A recent goggle search for Aquafuel returned 812 results.

G) The following is a link to a Quick Time movie about a Philippine inventor who has been running cars on the components of water since 1969 (A conversion to a Windows Media Player file is here) . Listen carefully to the reason given by the Philippine President for not being interested. The reason is an agreement with the World Bank. This is another “water car ” link:: A search will find more links of this nature. “They” say we are running out of oil, will “they” also say we are also running out of water for fuel?

H) Thanks to Ken Rasmussen for identifying my error in a previous version. This is a clip, received from Bruce McBurney (, taken from a Fox News program about a Florida inventor using the components of water for various purposes. He has modified a car to run on these components mixed with gasoline. Test results are here and here. The government asks the inventor to modify a military vehicle to run on this mixture. See for additional information. Screen shots from the proceeding site are here and here. This is a 5/23/06 clip concerning this application from WTTG Washington, D.C.

I) Bruce McBurney ( sent this link to a 16-minute video about the work of Stanley Meyer. A collection of videos, including the 16-minute clip is here. Meyer states he can modify a car to run on water for $1,500. Unfortunately, Stanley Meyer was murdered, 1998, before he could fully demonstrate another car running on the components of water. Meyer, in the video, states he was offered $1,000,000,000.00 in cash not to proceed with his inventions. Meyer also states our government has the right to use his patents in the interest of national security. In the Meyer video above, a former NASA scientist talks about the Meyer’s technology. Is it possible the technology NASA planned to use on the Moon, see “D” above, was the Meyer technology? has a large file on Meyer, a copy is here. Additional Meyer data is here, here and here.. Do you think the national debt could be reduced if our government used water in all the places gasoline and other fuels are used? Could your financial situation be improved if the Meyer technology was available to you?

J) Brown’s Gas. Making a fuel from water is not new. Here are a few patents for this process; 1918, 1988, 1993 and 2005. These videos are about “Water Gas” TV-2 1990, TV-26 this Korean company makes generators. There are patents for water-fueled heaters, some are; 1896, 1994, 2002 and 2004, next time you need fuel for your heater, think about these.

K) The gloom and doom our government is feeding us about the state of hydrogen technology approaches lunacy. Do they think we can’t read? There are many researchers demonstrating “Home Brew” hydrogen generators 1, 2, 3 and 4. This researcher used some very advanced material in construction, egg whisk, apple corer and cheese cutter. Seems that the White House would have these items in the kitchen if they cared to duplicate this device. Here are some links for further information.

L) This is a 2004 announcement for another car running on the components of water.

M) This month, 07/06, the NASA space shuttle delivered an oxygen generator to the space station. This generator will extract oxygen and hydrogen from water. Evidently this process won’t work on earth because the navy, with a ship floating in a mixture of 66% hydrogen, only knows how to extract hydrogen from Diesel fuel.

N) This webpage has plans for building a device to run an engine using the components of water. Do you wonder why no automobile manufacturer or electricity generating plant is using this technology? Keelynet has lots of very interesting information.

O) In 1807 an engine was run using a hydrogen/oxygen mixture. See page 4 of this article. Do you think this process could have perfected within the last 200 years?

P) An English inventor is running a motorcycle on water and a chemical he invented. A clip from is here, also a plan for your car is here

Q) A clip from a Japanese news broadcast about a vehicle fueled with water was available on 06/16/07 at: On 6/17/07 the clip would not download from that site. Another site, had a copy. Another copy is here.

R) A Japanese island is using excess electricity to manufacture Hydrogen. Honda is using this Hydrogen in an experimental vehicle. The story is here.

S) Bill Caine not only modified a 1970 Plymouth to run on gasoline vapor. He has also experimented with fueling an automobile with water components. An article is here and video here.

T) Bob Boyce was constructing hydrogen-fueled boats and cars. His shop was broken into several times and devices stolen. The story is here.

U) Thanks to Eileen F. for these clips about an inventor burning salt water. Would this process work in your furnace or other things needing heat for operation? How about replacing the nuclear-fueled steam generator with a saltwater fueled steam generator. No issue with storing spent fuel rods, there are no fuel rods if saltwater is used as the heat source.

V) These water-fuel videos are on this page:

  1. Stanley Meyer, two automobiles
  2. AquaFuel, automobile and electric generator
  3. Philippine, automobile
  4. Japan Mini-Van (This vehicle uses hydrogen gas and water. An English translation of the video is located
  5. Another Japan automobile video. Could the device in this automobile furnish electricity to your home? Thanks to Bruce McB for this link to the video
  6. Joe Cell, several automobiles
  7. Motorcycle
  8. Saltwater, burning for fuel
  9. Cold Fusion
  10. Additional videos of water fuel are located.

W. An article about water fuel, written before the Japanese water fuel cars appeared.

X) How many examples does our government need before realizing water fuel technology for consumers is not 20-years away? You might ask your member of congress why this technology is not being implemented for the general public.

14. Joe Cell. An Australian experimenter discovered this phenomena. (For an approximately 2 hour video showing “Joe” experimenting visit the video has several clips of an automobile running on this device. These are from two of many websites with information about the “Joe Cell”. The device does not conform to any known scientific “rules”. Basically it is a set of concentric tubes in a container with water. The device does not require an opening into the engine. Here are videos 1, 2, and 3 showing the device in operation on additional vehicles. These videos are from this website: Explanation of battery connection; water level effects; vapor generation; stages of a cell 1, 2, and 3. This 3/20/2006 video is believed related to #1 in this section. Another demonstration of automobile engines running on a Joe cell. Several researchers, and their families, have been threatened and made to stop experimenting. If this device is a sham, why are people being threatened? Here is a listing of some websites with information about the Joe Cell.

15. Completely sealed reciprocating engines. I visited the patent office years ago, when they still had the open stacks of “shoe boxes”. While there, I read the application files for the Papp patent, #3,670,494. Papp applied for a patent on his engine, and the patent office, after consultation with the old Atomic Energy Commission, refused to give him a patent because his device could not possibly work. Papp responded with test results, photographs and depositions from, I think, 16 people. Papp said that maybe the patent office didn’t know how his device worked, and that they also didn’t know how the atomic bomb worked, but used it anyway. This statement is on his patent “…2. To provide a two-cycle reciprocating engine which does not use fuel intake valves or exhaust valves, does not require an air supply and does not emit gasses. 3. To provide a precharged engine of the character stated in item 2 capable of generating power for a period of from 2,000 to over 10,000 hours continuously or until mechanical breakdown without the addition of fuel injection of air or discharge of gasses…”

    1. Papp has a similar Patent 4,428,193 granted in 1984.
    2. Britt, August 31, 1976, has a patent, # 3,977,191, for a similar sealed engine. In the patent application file, Britt accuses the Patent Office of deliberately delaying his application to give a major manufacturer time to file on top of him.

16. Permanent Magnet Motor. Howard Johnson was granted U.S. Patent # 4,151,431, for a motor that is powered only by permanent magnets. An interesting thing about the first page of this patent is the chart of a magnetic field VS electromechanical coupling. The chart is from U.S. Patent # 4,151,432 which has nothing to do with the Johnson patent. Science and Mechanics, Spring 1980, published an article ” Amazing Magnet-Powered Motor” about the Johnson patent. The article tells of his difficulties in having the device patented. The patent problem was solved when Johnson took working models of his device to the patent office. The magazine Science 83, May, published an article ridiculing perpetual motion machines, one of them was the Johnson motor. The Science article purports to quote from the prior Science and Mechanics article about Johnson. Because had both articles, I compared them, then called the author of the Science 83 article. When I stated that the information that he quoted was not in the prior article, he hung up saying “I will not be interrogated by you.” The editor of Science 83 also declined to speak with me. Others have informed me that there is three other permanent magnet motor patents. Japanese electrical generator, driven by a magnet assisted motor, has an efficiency of more than 300%. An Australian company, Lutec, offers to build to your specifications, an electric generator also more than 300% efficient. Do you think the electric power companies would be happy if these devices were common knowledge?

17. The Moray device. Tom Moray, in the late 20s, had a device that could sit on a kitchen table and produce 50,000 Watts of power from a field that surrounds the earth. Many people endorsed the operation of this device. Moray’s son, John, after the only copy of his father’s book was stolen, wrote a book “The Sea of Energy in which the Earth Floats”. Read the statement concerning a meeting between Moray and a Soviet Agent in General Electric office after closing hours. The book is about his father’s work, some portions of the book are here and here. has several articles, one is here. During the early 80s, I visited many congressional offices in an unsuccessful attempt to have any Member of Congress do something about the technology hidden from the American people. When I visited Congressman Ron Paul’s office, a staffer said to me “I have something that you should read, come to my residence on Saturday.” This staffer gave me a letter to Congressman Paul from Tom Bearden, and the 40-page document attached to the letter. The document is a book that Mr. Bearden has written. In this book, Mr. Bearden states that the Moray device could produce 1.5 megawatts of power. Also that the Russians had adapted the Moray device to power a weapon. The weapon statement is supported by a drawing from “Aviation Week and Space Technology“, July 28, 1980. Do you think that the local Power Company could justify a price increase if the power came from a field around the earth? This book was also missing from the LOC in 1990.] Tom Bearden, with others, obtained U.S. Patent 6,362,718 for an Electric generator with no moving parts, an article from is here. . Michael Faraday’s findings, in 1831, do not agree with current school teachings concerning generation of electricity. He found it is not necessary to rotate a magnet or wire against the other to generate electricity.

18. The Energy Machine of Joe Newman. I have spoken with Joe many times over several years. He has published the seventh edition of “The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman” (ISBN 0-9613855-7-7) The book is available from: Joseph Westly Newman, Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, Mississippi, 39452, Phone # (601)-947-7174. I have no doubts that his machine works as he describes it. To learn of the problems that this man has had with “The Establishment” read his book. Joe filed suit against the U.S. Patent office because they would not grant him a patent. According to Joe’s book, pages 274 to 279, the Court appointed a Special Master, Mr. William E. Schuyler, a former Commissioner of the U.S. Patent Office, to advise the Court. The findings of the Special Master were that Mr. Newman had invented a machine that had more output than input. The Court refused to accept the findings. I urge you to read this 471-page book. This machine is not “bogus” as stated by others. On February 5, 1996, I was one of several hundred people, in Mobile, AL, to see the Newman Energy Machine in operation. The machine was pumping water while running a power meter, similar to the one on your house, backwards. A low-resolution video clip from a Science Channel broadcast program is here.

19. For a truly remarkable video visit This device consists of two dissimilar rods that produce electricity. The Google site has two videos showing this device one is here.

20. Cold Fusion. Despite the rejection of some in the USA, cold fusion is a going operation in other places. The monthly magazine “New Energy News”, P.O. Box 58639, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-8639, has information on many successful results in cold fusion. The magazine also has information on “free energy devices”. A video is here.

21. This month, 2/06, the Secretary of Energy testified before Congress. One of the things he said was that an oil company was developing a process to extract oil from coal. We have, according to a USGS report, enough coal to last “…another few hundred years.” The Secretary of Energy did not inform Congress that a government employee developed a similar process in the 1920s or that prior to 1860 more than 50 plants were extracting oil and gasoline from coal. The secretary also did not inform Congress that Germany used coal for 75% of the oil needed during WW2.

  1. The Energy Non-Crisis” (ISBN 0-89051-068-7), published in 1980 by Worth Publishing Co., P.O. Box, 1243,Wheatridge, CO 80033, is written by Chaplain Lindsey Williams (This is only one of the books he has written). Chaplain Williams was on the Alaska Pipeline during the construction and got so fed-up with the deliberate lies of the media, he came back to tour the “lower 48”, and tell the truth. According to Chaplain Williams, Gull Island has a pool of oil as big as, and maybe bigger, than Purdhoe Bay. Our Government ordered ARCO (Page 178) “…to seal the documents, withdraw the rig, cap the well, and not release the information about the Gull Island find.” A video tape of a speech that Chaplain Williams gave to a group at Salt Lake City, about 1980, is possibly available from: The National Center For Constitutional Studies, 1-800-388-4512. Chaplain Williams stated, in a recent two-hour broadcast, there is enough oil in Alaska to last the U.S.A. 200-years. The broadcast is on the Republic Broadcasting Network site Additional book information is here. You can read parts of his book on this site His books and tapes may be ordered here: One videotape “The Energy Non-Crisis” is worth the approximate $136.00 cost of the complete set. If you want documented proof that “our” government has lied to us about oil availability, see the Williams material.
  1. A recent video by Lindsey Williams, author of “The Energy Non-Crisis” is here: Another video is here. I suggest you listen carefully to what Chaplain Williams says. This is a 28-second audio clip from a videotape quoting the Governor of Alaska on a March 18, 2005 TV show: “There is potentially enough crude oil on the north slope of Alaska to last the United States of America for 200 years“. Thanks to “Katman” for providing this copy of “The Energy Non Crisis” You might ask your members of congress why the United States is importing oil.
  2. Need more documentation that we have been scammed for decades concerning oil availability? See this recent 11-page email and this 1-page email.
  3. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) is teaching children that oil and natural gas are the result of decaying plants and animals. A recent NASA discovery is that natural gas was being created on Titian, one of Saturn’s barren moons. Is it possible that we have been deceived concerning oil and natural gas formation?
  4. On Washington post radio, 107.7, 4/30/06 there was a reporter for U.S. News and World Report talking (another viewpoint) about the 2-trillion barrel oil finding In the USA. I called and made a statement about the 200-year supply of oil announced by the governor of Alaska last year (See 22 above). The reporter tried to discredit the governor’s statement by referring to oil consumption before the Alaska pipeline was built. When attempting to explain the governor’s comment was made last year, I was cut-off. Is it possible this station is deliberately concealing information? The Department of Energy website states “…has been known for a century.” (The 2-trillon barrel oil). If this is true, why during the first Gulf War, were all the lives and money wasted defending “our oil” in the Mid-East?
  5. Thanks to Ron Durham for this information about “Peak Oil”. This link, is from If you follow the links in the article, too large to reproduce here, you will learn oil is being produced continuously deep within the earth. A search for “Peak Oil”, on, list 123 results. This link,, from also has information. The above provides proof that we are not going to run out of oil and “Peak Oil” is just a scam. You might ask your member of congress for comments concerning the above.
  6. Need more proof “Peak Oil ” is a scam, visit these Webpages:,,, , Still not convinced; read this 1999 Wall Street Journal article
  7. Need more proof; read the September 11, 2006 statements from an ExxonMobil chairman. Geologist G.H. Hamilton’s comments concerning these statements are here.
  8. USAF says synthetic fuel can be produced for a cost between $45-60/barrel. Do you wonder why we are paying, in May 2008, more than $130/barrel for oil.
  9. An opinion by “Garfield the cat” on the oil crisis. (source unknown)
  10. An American company says they can produce all the oil needed by America on an area 1/10 the size of New Mexico. The video is here. Thanks to Aaron B. for this link,, to the source.
  11. Another massive off shore oil find. I remember when the CIA (70s?) said we would run out of oil in 20-years. I believe Bush 1 was head of the CIA during that time.
  12. Another oil cartel?
  1. I sent a previous, 90s, Williams tape and a lot of other information to a former Secretary of Energy. The response received, after a second letter, was essentially, no response. I also wrote to Dr. Bodman, our current (2005) Secretary of Energy. A response was received, no response, except acknowledgement, was received for that email. If you wonder how your state legislators receive information see this document. I emailed the authors of the document, no response.
  2. Concerned when your electric supplier raises rates because of fuel cost? Consider this: Some Japanese homeowners are generating electricity with hydrogen/oxygen extracted from natural gas feeding a fuel cell. A Japanese electric car has a fuel cell, fueled with water, generating electricity. It is not too big a leap to have the car fuel-cell technology generating electricity for the home. So, the Japanese might soon generate electricity for the home with water for fuel. I doubt this application will cause joy with your electric power company. You might consider asking your members of congress why this technology is not available here.


I hope this information will raise questions as to why we are dependent on foreign oil. All our government has to do, to take more money from our pockets, is to have an energy crisis or raise the cost of energy. The only financial interest I have in any of above information is that of a concerned consumer who is tired of the deliberate lies and cover-ups.


Please do not ask for building plans for any of the above devices, I do not have any plans except those on this page. However, this site claims to have plans for over unity devices. Your research might locate the information you are seeking.


Byron Wine


Email byron with any questions or suggestions.

May 24, 1996. (Modified 07/21/08)

The following is not directly related to energy. However, you might be interested in findings concerning the Federal Reserve System (FED). The FED is not a part of the U.S. government. Your telephone book, as does a prior C&P telephone book, will list the FED in the business section, not the government section. For a legal opinion see Lewis v. United States. For information concerning the operation of the FED see Congressman McFadden’s 1934 remarks. Articles by Skousen, 1980, and Larson, 1982, provide further information. Please visit and watch this 47-minute video a copy is here. The video explains some of the fraud not explained to you by our government or the major media.. I urge you to visit This 1:49 video will explain the shill games, IRS, FED and voting fraud our employees, Members of Congress, are playing. After viewing the video do you wonder why major media won’t discuss these issues?

Do you wonder why the first President Bush said: “Yeah, Sarah, if people find out what we’ve done, they’ll chase us down the street and lynch us” to reporter Sarah McLendon? See

I am grateful for an email bringing to my attention the “Act of 1871“. This document requires very careful study.

An organization “Fund to Restore an Educated Electorate” (FREE) published a listing of congressional, military and corporate members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Trilateral Commission (TC). I wonder if it is possible the people, and corporate members, listed might be responsible for our “energy problem”.

Broadcaster Jack Lamb is circulating this information concerning the food additive MSG.


You have seen some, an internet search will find a lot more, documentation for technology that could, if implemented, greatly reduce our dependence on oil and the domination it brings. Will you demand that your members of congress address these issues?


I want to thank the following broadcasters, in broadcast date sequence, for allowing time on their programs; Jack Lamb, Rick Adams, with the Republic Broadcasting Network, Bill Boshears, WLW, and Mike Hagan, KPON Without their help information circulation as quickly would not have been possible.

There are several websites where my page is accessible, I don’t have a list of them and apologize for not knowing them. Websites I know follow:

My first hosting ISP,, this site is in New Zealand and allowed access that greatly exceeded the bandwidth allotment for the month. When I inquired of any additional cost they replied, “Don’t worry about it, it’s for a worthy cause”.

(This link is no longer working. A communication was sent to the previous webmaster, he did not respond) is one of several sites that mirrors my website. There is also an online community at where you can communicate with others concerning energy.

This community is for anyone who is tired of paying outrageous fuel prices and wants an alternative. If you are tired of the petroleum companies stealing from your wallet and you are tired of waiting for the government to do something about it, then this is the site for you. is now looking for scientists, inventors, tinkerers, etc. to join this forum and put their skills and ideas to work. From adding acetone, to building/modifying carburetors to people who want to have change and have it now, we NEED you! Let us know your skills and what you can contribute. The only way things will change is if we do it ourselves. Join today, it is FREE. has a link.

Another local site,, is hosted by This host had the site up and running in about two-hours.

Many thanks to Geraint Williams for mirroring my information on his site when bandwidth for the New Zealand site exceeded November 2006 allotment.


Related Posts:

  • No Related Posts

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on March 31, 2010, With 5813 Reads Filed under Of Interest. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

FaceBook Comments

11 Responses to "Technology to Reduce Dependence on Oil has Been Known For More Than 200 years"

  1. Mick  April 7, 2010 at 7:24 pm

    Not only that but Russia has come to the conclusion that oil fields replenish themselves by eventually filling up again from natural processes within the earth. They now deep drill and showed the Vietnamese how to do this.

    Tesla was killed and a lot of scientists afterwards because you just have to have that monopoly.

  2. carla brown  April 1, 2010 at 2:16 am

    Do you really think..we can have a better really cheap method of energy…like neuclear one for daily vehicles…

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

From Veterans Today Network