Interview with Christophe Martz part 2


Share this article with your friends:

Interview with Christophe Martz about the water doping. (2ième Party)

Read 1ère Party.

The full text of an interview with C.Martz about water doping conducted by Katia Lefebvre and contributed to the writing Pantone engine in Action Auto Moto

All facts and figures on this page are proven and real pity that the article in question was not discussed in more detail this interview.

You can use these questions to publications or future broadcasts (oral or written) conditionally to obtain my written agreement ( contact me ).

Continuation and end of the interview

KL: Still in the case of the car tested by TF1 (there is only water bubbler in, no water + fuel mixture), I do not quite understand the difference with the principle of Aquazol ...

In the absence (to my knowledge) relevant study on doping at the water via a heat exchanger pantone, I could not conclude. There are large differences in practice but the principle seems common: improved combustion by the presence of water and thus reduction of pollutants and consumption.

About Aquazol I quote ( see this page ):
"It is found, by measurements carried out on standardized cycles (...) for a fuel EEG compared with the diesel fuel entering the formulation of the EEG:
- A reduction in NOx emissions to 15 30%;
- A reduction of smoke and soot to 30 80%;
- A reduction in 10 particle emissions 80%.
(...)
Compared to the "diesel" base, there is a slight tendency to reduce the energy consumption of approximately 2%, which can be explained by a more complete combustion of hydrocarbons in the presence of water and thus leading to a slight improvement in yield. "

The differences lie in the fact that, in the case of doping, fuel and water are stored and injected independently. Technically, this has advantages (no problem of emulsion stability, no distribution network to set up ...) but also disadvantages (need for modification of the vehicle, double tank illegality ...).

Also, importantly, the results in terms of reduced consumption seem more interesting (in 20%) in our case than the Aquasole. Complementary technical studies are needed to accurately characterize the principle of water doping via Pantone reactor.

KL: The cracking of the water is a thermochemical process quite tricky to get, both in the heat of the pressure level. If as I thought understand the Internet, the difference between an ordinary water injection and Pantone lies in cracking the water, how is it that you do not find the presence of hydrogen in your experiences?

CM: Because there is no hydrogen leaving the "reactor" (or very little, 1 2%, measured in the case where gasoline vapors pass into the reactor). That's why I prefer to talk, in the case of water doping, exchanger (until it is proven that there is something other than a heat exchange). But, on the other hand, it must be known that the cracked water does not necessarily take the form of O2 and H2, there are other possibilities ... energetically more interesting than hydrogen form H2 ...

KL: I also read some things on the Internet that appeared to me frivolous, including references to terrestrial magnetism ... This one is low, I do not understand what that might bring. Whether to magnetize why not put strong magnets?

CM: Several experiments have shown that the placement of magnets or other devices to increase the magnetic field have not improved the operation of the "reactor".
Against by the establishment of an alternating field has shown interesting things (speed variation with the variation of the excitation frequency). Again, research lacking.

KL: Can you tell me if there is something serious?

CM: Yes and no, the magnetic component exists but it is not so flagrant and seems to be more a consequence (friction of the vapor in a restricted space) than a reason for a "reaction". This, like other aberrations that can read on the internet, is wrong system ... But it must be said that the first detractor is Pantone himself. For example, he claims that there would be a phenomenon of cold fusion and that we can treat nuclear waste via his reactor ... This is not very serious especially since he is not able to prove what he pretends.

KL: And finally, do you not think that the absence of serious figures and the presence of lax information esoteric limit harm to Pantone?

CM: Yes recess and I strongly deplore. But the fact is that engine manufacturers, only who could afford to do really serious things do not really seem interested (yet they are now introducing themselves many patent ssur injecting water or on the board reforming ...) but in any case, they do not work with independent of their BE processes. Public institutions that I contacted to ask for help simply have not answered me ...

KL: I asked Gérard Belot, PSA engineer on Pantone. It will not surprise you to read what he said: "If it worked there a long time that it exist!"
When I asked him how he would take to accept to address the issue he replied: "someone would have me make a proposal initially included patents and that m ' demonstrates the operation of the system, with expertise UTAC in support ... If this is the case, you look! "

CM: Argument classic detractor but irrelevant since PSA has obviously done internal research on the Pantone. Indeed; their old system requires them to do research with all systems that "drag" on the net or elsewhere. In fact, about twenty engineers and technicians from PSA went to see one of the tractors doped with water ... If that did not interest them, do you think they would have moved?



Another source, an external consulting engineer, would confirm their interest in the system. Finally, I have a reputation, in their services, "shit fucker" ...

Last but perhaps most relevant: many patents on the board reforming and water injection are currently filed by PSA or other engine manufacturers.

Now, back to their research, I obviously do not know how far they went. I do not know the results of their research. Maybe they are still ongoing? Maybe it had been quickly abandoned because the interest of the tendering system has quickly found its limits compared to other technologies? Perhaps there he good results but unusable for more obscure reasons? (Group of interest, reasons of state, psycologique look for the driver to put water in his car ...) or whatever I yet?

Nobody is fooled and everyone knows the strong colusions state Petrolier-Builder and the financial windfall on consomations energetic. Do you believe that coal mine operators and steam engines construteurs have helped the first thermal engine builders? Obviously not ...

Whatever one may say, the bottlenecks to innovation and development are in the field of energy probably the hardest to overcome ... The pitiful development of wind power in France is a good example ... Would not that, by chance, not related to the interest group of nuclear power?

KL: Do you have in your studies is an analysis of pollutants by UTAC? And what are your conclusions?

CM: No not by UTAC but in simple technical control center: all the results and conclusions are on this page and in my engineer's report

My conclusions? Process promising but far from the point, thus requiring serious further investigation ...

I launch the call for help but they seem futile ...


Feedback

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *