eco-scams.com

UKC endorse, award and invest in pseudo-science!
The University of Kent at Canterbury (my old university where I studies Physics for four years) and a whole load of Kent local government and other public bodies have been taken in by some pseudo-science so completely that they have endorsed it, awarded it £20,000 of public money and invested in the company!!

I still can’t believe it, but unfortunately it is true…

Oil-drum.co.uk / save-fuel.co.uk won the “Kent Innovation Challenge 2008” despite their being no proof whatsoever that the product they sell works (in fact it cannot work).

Oil Drum Limited were asked to give a two minute presentation and were the grilled by a Dragon’s Den style panel who were, I presume, looking for a product which was green, saved carbon, was innovative, used the phrase “renewable energy” in the presentation… Oil Drum Limited may have ticked all the boxes the panel were looking for but it would have been good if the panel had thought to check to see if the product actually worked while they were at it…

You can find out loads more about the prize, where the money came from, who the judges were and so on from the video made by the folks that gave the award, Sittingbourne Enterprise Hub. The £20,000 prize money came from the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) (so it is taxpayer’s money), SEEDA are part of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

What is your problem, Jon?
So what is my problem with this company? They make a product which saves up to 10% on your car’s fuel, that can’t be a bad thing surely? Well it would be a good thing if it were true, but sadly it is not.

Oil Drum’s “technology” appears to me to be identical to the HHO,” run your car on water”, hydrogen-hybrid scam which has been kicking about for decades and which has been shown many times to be nonsense.

Oil Drum’s publicity guy insisted to me that the Oil Drum product is completely different to the thousands of “run your car on water” scams on the Internet but I cannot see any difference whatsoever and they have refused to tell me in what way it differs.

The lack of evidence
There is no science to back up any of the Oil Drum’s claims, nothing. Why is there no evidence? Because it is not true! Every single claim on the oil-drum.co.uk / save-fuel.co.uk is unproven, unprovable, scientific gobbledegook.

The reason why research on this has never been conducted by a scientist or a university is because it is such obvious claptrap that no one with a science or engineering background is interested in touching it… unfortunately this seems to be not obvious to people who handing out business innovation awards.

The 10% savings Oil Drum claim are well within the margin of error given the sophistication of testing they claim to have done (non scientific testing, anecdotes only, no scientist or science lab in sight, on the road, “real world” testing which is full of inaccuracies and sources of error).

And besides this extra 10% energy, where does it come from exactly? You can’t magic extra energy out of nothing, it is such obvious claptrap! An engine in good working order will burn in around of 99% of its fuel leaving less than 1% unburned, so even if the Save Fuel unit made the engine 100% efficient the gain would be less then 1%, not the 10% these guys claim.

Renewable Energy
One of the name names or phrases Oil Drum seem to go by is “Renewable Energy On Demand”. As a renewable energy engineer myself I find this use of the phrase offensive. Even if this product worked, and it does not, the would still be nothing “renewable” about it, however claiming to be “renewable energy company” appears to be one of the reasons they were given the award.

Patented technology
Oil Drum Limited even managed a patent in the UK and another in America. Neither patent actually say anything much about what the product does or what it is for or what it is supposed to achieve, just that it makes gas for use in an internal combustion engine, very little about fuel or efficiency of emissions. I have registered a complaint with the Intellectual Property Office in the UK but there is little I can do now it has been granted.

£20,000
I am so outraged by the idea that these guys were awarded £20,000 that I fee l like I could explode! And it is public, taxpayer’s, money too. What would you do with that much money? I know what I’d do with it, somewhat ironically I’d pay back my Student Loan to UKC and complete the Masters Degree in renewable energy that I can’t afford to finish!

Price comparison
For comparison, using BP Ultimate or Shell VPower (which is properly tested, by actual real independent scientists, none of this “real world testing” nonsense) will cost you about 4% more and take you about 10% further than using the regular cheaper fuel. That is about £2 more per tank of fuel, compare that to the price of an Oil Drum fuel saving machine.

To put it another way; by using BP Ultimate or Shell VPower you should be able to travel 80,000 miles(*) extra for the same investment… what is more BP Ultimate and Shell VPower actually do what they say they do, unlike Oil Drum’s Fuel Saver.

Fallout
This enormous blunder is already being quoted and distorted by scammers on their various websites claiming that sceptics like me have been proven wrong by scientists at The University Of Kent at Canterbury (UKC)!

The endorsement of Oil Drum’s Fuel Saver by several UK Government departments and UKC is also being used to market the Fuel Saver around the World, innocent people are being lulled into a false sense of security by the involvement of such reputable institutions and are investing in a product which cannot possibly work.

Of course I have informed UKC, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, SEEDA and the Sittingbourne Enterprise Hub about their error and encouraged them to do something about it. Unfortunately they have all either stonewalled me or passed the buck.

In my most recent communication with Department for Business, Innovation and Skills they said it was SEEDA’s responsibility. In SEEDA’s most recent communication with me they address my complaint by saying that they acted properly and pass the buck on to the Sittingbourne Enterprise Hub. Sittingbourne Enterprise Hub are a private company and not obliged to respond to me in the way Government departments are, instead they choose to ignore me.

Seeing as they must all now must be aware of their error it must no longer be a mistake, it becomes a concious deception; and their choosing to not do anything about it must surely make them all answerable to anyone who looses money because of this.

Oona Muirhead from SEEDA also said:

If you are still dissatisfied after considering my response, then you are entitled to appeal to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (The Parliamentary Ombudsman), through your Member of Parliament.

And so I have contacted my friend Adam Holloway MP to request that he appeal to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration on my behalf. More on this very soon.

—————————

* Based  £4,000/£2 = 2000, 2000 x 40 miles (10% of 400 miles) = 80,000 miles