Jubycell/de Verde Technologies - yet more HHO scamers in the UK

The following companies all sell (UPdate:  most of them now don’t exist) The Jubycell (AKA the Verde Pegasus HOD Cell), it is yet another miracle HHO MPG-increasing, emissions-reducing scam which cannot possibly work.

Inventor

John Hickman of 49 Elm Road, Brixham (Devon, UK) claims to be the “inventor” and has set up a company to sell it and courses on how to install it.

However this “technology” has in fact been about for decades, John has not invented anything here; it was a scam back then and it still is today, no one has any evidence that this “technology” works because they cannot have, because it cannot work, it is pseudo scientific gobbledygook.

This story is a tired ruse that I have seen hundreds of times before, it is so depressing, Con man sets up HHO business and calls himself the “inventor”, lures innocent folks in with the promise of riches beyond their dreams, extracts money from them  in the form of kits and courses and shares in the company… sooner or later they realise they have been scammed or the technology does not work and they either start asking for their money back (which they never get) or they refuse to accept the overwhelming evidence and become “true believers” themselves, they stick in their heels and repeat the scam on more victims - the point at which mere foolishness becomes fraud is a grey area.

Scam

You can read an exhaustive article about HHO, Hydroxy, hydrogen-hybrids and why they are a scam elsewhere on my blog.

The list of shame

(please note I strongly suspect most of these companies are not in on the scam but are victims of it)

http://www.getbettermpg.co.uk/

http://www.theautoworkshop.co.uk/

http://www.jasautomarine.co.uk/

http://www.greencells.co.uk/

http://www.dingsdentspdr.co.uk/

http://www.nilco2technologies.co.uk/

James Tennant Limited

Mike Easy

Seine Energy of Pierre Le Fel in Normandy, France.

Here are some “news” articles these folks have managed to drum up to promote their snake-oil selling businesses:

“Alex Cheetham and Richard Watts have founded Nil CO2 Technologies, having become qualified installers of hydrogen fuel cells developed by a Devon inventor” in SouthWestbusiness.co.uk here.

Update:

Looks like these jokers are now called de Verde Technologies and have the website http://www.hydrogenhybrids.uk.com

Same bullshit, different name.

And here are some more people conned into selling on their horse shit:

http://www.deverdecambridge.co.uk/

http://www.deverdenorthwales.co.uk/

44 Comments

  1. Mike Easy:

    The proof of the pudding is in the eating! My consumption on a 3 litre petrol engine has been reduced 22% and my CO emissions reduced from 1.83% to 1.22% and HC from 183ppm to 173ppm on Crypton Gas Analysis carried out for MOT. With further engine refinements this spring I expect to reduce consumption to 33%. My next installation is on a 2.9 litre diesel and initial tests would indicate a 40% reduction in fuel consumption. Many thousands HHO installations have been installed and for diesel engines running on reclaimed cooking oil it has the added advantage of virtually eliminating the exhaust smell.

  2. Jon:

    Hi Mike, The proof of this pudding is not in the eating, it is in the science lab. If you took your 3-litre petrol to a lab you would find no improvement at all. “Real world” testing is full of inaccuracies and sources of error, the biggest of which is the experimenter them self. You need a blind and independent test in a lab, not you and you mate in the MOT testing station. This “technology” does not, indeed cannot, work and you are either mistaken or a liar. Tell me, where is this extra energy coming from? If it did work then you would be the richest man alive and every physics text book would all need to be rewritten. Whether you realise it or not, this “technology” is bogus.

  3. Artov:

    As soon as you see ridiculous figures such as the 22% reduction in fuel consumption you know it is bullshit. As if multi billion pound car companies looking for a marketing edge would “overlook” the technology if it worked.

    Keep on exposing this Jon!

  4. Bill:

    You sound like the man who Would have laughed at the notion that the world is round. Or any other invention. What I don’t understand is this. Why do you think air, with hydrogen added, is not combustible enough to lower the need for gasoline? Are you uneducated, undereducated, or just plain stupid? HHO is a real invention and it works. “real world” testing hits where it counts. The POCKETBOOK!
    If it works, works. I went from 12-15mpg to 35mpg on HHO.
    Are you saying I didn’t, and this is all some global conspiracy?
    Find your voice in some other field. Your arguments are founded on nothing.
    How can you say what you’ve said and have any credibility at all?

  5. Jon:

    Bill: Gosh, what a well reasoned, well thought out, clever, insightful response… The evidence is overwhelming that the Earth is round, and hence I believe it to be true. The evidence that HHO is nonsense is also overwhelming, and so I conclude it cannot and does not work. I am very happy to change my mind on this, just show me your proof.

    “Why do [I] think air, with hydrogen added, is not combustible enough to lower the need for gasoline?”, because if that were true then it would violate both the first and second laws of thermodynamics, that is why. Because it would either be a perpetual motion machine or because there would need to be another source for the energy to make the hydrogen. Since this source is the gasoline and because no system is 100% efficient then you HAVE to be using more gasoline, not less.

    This is VERY basic physics, it is not challenging…. any smart 10-year-old can grasp this, so why not you?

  6. kc:

    Mike

    I am not sure where you have your info from but i can tell you are wrong. I have a system fitted to my taxi by one of the companys you are saying have been conned. Forget figures and % my car before being fitted 450mls to a tank full i now requlary get 550mls to a tank ?. The proof is in the tank my freind.

    KC

  7. Jon:

    Mate, you are mistaken.

    If you really are getting an extra 100 limes from your tank (which is about 20% BTW) then you are getting it from some place other than your Jubycell. Maybe you have started buying BP Ultimate (which can improve MPG by 10%), maybe you put some air in your tyres, maybe you are human and fallible and changed you driving style, maybe you had a tune up, maybe you let someone from Jubycell make your engine run too lean, maybe you are not carting round so many fat people in your cab… and so on…

    All of these explanations are far more plausible than a magic, science defying, Jubycell is making it happen.

  8. Mick:

    Hi Jon,
    Sorry to rain on your parade but a Taiwanese company Epoch Energy Technology won the Energy Globe Award (in its “Air” category) which opened the UN World Environment Day (3rd June 2010 in Rwanda). The Deputy Secretary General Asha-Rose Mtengeti Migiro (from Tanzania) presented the award at the ceremony. Epoch’s product is a hho unit, “which cannot work under the laws of physics”!!! Perhaps the UN (and its ill-educated scieent.., skientissts…,nerdy geeks with lab coats) which is the largest governing body on the planet has got it all wrong. Hmnnn… Maybe. Maybe not. Glad be of help for debunking these potentially world saving inventions. NOT!!!
    Cheers big ears.
    Love Mick.

  9. Lance B:

    I have read your comments above and add the following: I don’t pretend to understand the technology, it does seem to good to be true. But I had a Juby Cell fitted to my Zafira 1.8i Life Automatic (2004) a year ago. (Zafira’s have rotten fuel efficiency - 19MPG urban), I used to get 190 miles to a tank - I now get 240 - 250. I’m not a fuel efficient driver either.

    Moreover, when my car was MOT tested the emissions had dropped significantly. They say you get more power, I think I do, but I can’t measure it so can’t prove it.

    I have not had my car retuned, air pressure in tyres the same, I still by the cheap Tesco’s petrol -= I have never used the expensive stuff.
    cheers, Lance

  10. Gibx33:

    Please follow links with regard to prof that stainless steel HHO cells contain dangerous Hexavalent Chromium!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8DSZxtWVls
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PSzxi30E4E
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b6SJ16kV70

  11. Mick:

    Gibx33,
    If you bothered to look the casing that Jubycell/de Verde uses is made from a plastic container!!!!! Duh!!!! Let me guess? You have a vested interest in the petroleum industry. Hmnnn!!! Remember ignorance is a choice you make. It doesn’t just happen! Fair enough your links are probably 100% valid with hho units contained in SS, but these units seem to be a different beast as they produce the required hho from only one or two amp (certainly different to almost all hho units that require much higher amps and work much more like the principle of a domestic kettle).
    Have a good day. And hopefully your head won’t get sun burnt if you pull your head out of the sand.
    Cheers big ears.
    Mick.

  12. Jon:

    Mick,
    Talk about the “red herring” logical fallacy! I don’t care it is made from plastic or stainless or even jam, i cannot work and is a scam!

  13. Jon:

    Lance B,
    Humm, a sample size of one and no control and no blinding - what a fabulous experiment.

  14. Mick:

    Jon,
    You forgot to respond to my email about the UN (those dodgy bunch of nobodies who have never amounted to anything and nobody has even heard of) and their endorsement of an award given to a Taiwanese company Epoch) that produces hho generators (http://www.oxy-hydrogen.com/style/frame/templates6/news_detail.asp?lang=2&customer_id=1566&name_id=44835&content_set=color_1&fid=0&nid=20481 ). Did you have a bad experience with a bucket of H2O, an electric current and an engine when you were a small child? Seriously Jon, I am a scientist myself and as a person who is relatively sound of mind and humour, I ask you to stop smoking the “red herrings”. One thing I learnt as a high school student was, “a fact is a fact until proven otherwise”. In the last couple of hundred years we’ve found out that light can bend, the world is round, Darth Vader is Luke’s dad and w**k**g doesn’t make you go blind. Hey here’s a thought why don’t you contact John, get him to install a hho unit to your local Pastors’ car (he could be an independent person to trial the unit - in the eyes of the Lord - swear on the Bible and all that!!!!) and see what the outcome is. And if it does work you could always say that the sample size is too small and therefore not statistically valid (and in your own mind you will be happy and still justified in your views). John I re read your response to kc and his taxi’s economy. “Not carting around so many fat people in your cab…”, Jon please don’t be such a bigot. Well enough of the character bashing. Jon at some stage in the future you will have to put up or shut up. Perhaps you should damn the expense, jump on a plane, fly to England, meet John face to face, pick a car at random, have a unit fitted, run it on a rolling road, do a bunch of relevant tests, let everything be scrutinised by a university or government testing body and see what the results are.
    Oh and with reference to Artov’s response to Mike Easy, “As soon as you see ridiculous figures such as the 22% reduction in fuel consumption”, wow why would you invest if you had a reduction in fuel consumption.!!!!!
    Cheers Humm smears.
    Yours Hummbly Mick.

  15. Jon:

    Hi Mick,

    I have no idea what you are talking about. Some moron at the UN gave an award to a company making a product that does not do what the makers claim it does? This is nothing new, I have seen it several times before, universities endorsing HHO and similar stories. It proves nothing about the product, just the competence of someone at the UN. Thanks for the fuel to make a new blog post, I’ll looking this and comment in a few days.

    As for the rest of your comment, it is nothing but a stream of abuse, irrelevance and yet more logical fallacies (the straw man fallacy, proof by verbosity, more red herrings) nothing worth responding to.

    Seriously Mick, you seem to say a lot and yet have nothing to say. You know, your points would be so much easier to understand if you said a lot less. And you have not responded to even one of my very direct questions, why is that?

    And as for your claim that you are a scientist? I call BULLSHIT on that outrageous barefaced lie.

  16. Gibx:

    Mick Jubycells / De verde cells have ss cathode and anode thats why they are dangerous as ss makes Hexavalent chromium Duaaaaaa….. follow above links!!!!!!!!!!

  17. Mick:

    Gibx,
    As for as I can tell each cell is about 1L in capacity (to be honest I don’t know how big they are, I’ve only seen them in the photos) and if you look at their website, the cells only need a top up every (about?!) 6 months. So that would suggest that the water in the cell might be changed every year (just guessing). This contaminated water (1L!??) should be disposed of carefully and in a responsible manner (E.g. find out from your local council where you should dispose of the 1L per year). Maybe in the meantime you could contact de Verde and get them to ask their clients to do this. Also you could suggest to them to change from SS electrodes to Titanium if you still have concerns. In the interim don’t drink SS HHO water (as it probably contains Hexavalent Chromium) and be aware that when welding SS that Hexavalent Chromium can be released and you could breathe it in. If one or any HHO unit producers prove to have a valid product, that helps individuals use less fossil fuels, then by reducing wear and tear on engines (i.e. less carbon deposits) and that less SS will be needed to make and maintain oil refineries, then this would be of benefit to us all. I read somewhere that 136,000,000,000 Kg of Hexavalent Chromium is produced each year for SS production around the world. Now that is a lot of potential poison!!!!
    Regards Mick.

  18. Bob:

    Jon,

    For your reading pleasure….
    A Proper, Independent, Certified test. The results, on page 10, are 24% fuel saved…etc.

    http://02C1882.NETSOLHOST.COM/images/TCI_Full_Testing_Report.pdf

    I agree, most all of these “magical” boxes do nothing. Ours, on the other hand, does do something, and significantly so. We spent the $$$ to do it correctly.

    If you have further questions you have my email.

    Cheers,

    Bob

  19. Jon:

    Looks impressive to the very ignorant and untrained eye. But who are “CLAUDE TRAVIS AND ASSOCIATES, LLC”? I have no clue who they are or what their credentials are. I don’t understand what the “control” was all about. It does not look like a control to me. I don’t see that it was the Jubycell that they were testing. It was an on road test, so what were the errors (uncertaintities) calculated? They ought to be enormous. I just don’t get how you consider this evidence of anything more than anecdotal. Please, enlighten me.

  20. Bob:

    Then Jon, maybe the first thing you should learn is how to do research instead of simply criticism. Going further with this would be futile….as it is now apparent you have one sole goal…criticize anything over your capability to understand. DO your home work first, then profess!

  21. Jon:

    Really, that is the best you can do? Google my name and I come up. Google your name and you come up. Google the name of the people you say tested your product and nothing comes up! You seriously expect me to take seriously a company with a smaller Google profile than me or you?

    Add to that the weird methodology, that lack of data, lack of error analyses… all they have is results, nothing else… and I am expected to just agree that it was a great experiment with valid results?

    I think you are using the “open minded fallacy” on me here, at least I’m not so “open minded” that my brains have fallen out.

  22. stevennickel:

    Jon, sounds like you need to try some experiments yourself. I have been looking into HHO since 2005 and it wasn’t until recently I came to experiment. Follow some easy tips online to a D.I.Y. hho generator and join the rest of us who have come to unlock this potential energy so globally unrecognized.

  23. Jon:

    stevennickel, you are making me sound like a stuck record (and you don’t make a lot of sense… just sayin’). What do you think would happen if I tested HHO and found it not to work? Would scammers and con men everywhere say “oh, you are right, it does not work” or would you just say I was doing it wrong? I can’t prove it does not work, science can’t prove a negative, you guys have to show the world that it does work, and so far not one single person has shown anything of the sort. Why? Because it does not work.

  24. Andre du Toit:

    jon, you will flunk this test. i have seen a hydrogen motorbike here in South Africa and we are way behind you guys technelogically speaking. But the fact has been proven over and over again - hydrogen is the fuel of the future. For now get on the gravy train and save your money, sooner or later you WILL have to switch.

    Wish I could see your face and reaction when u find out…

  25. Jon:

    Andre du Toit,
    What does a hydrogen powered motorbike have in common with HHO? Nothing, that is what. They are completely different. Hydrogen is a real technology, HHO is not.
    Are you the same Andre du Toit who thinks “hunting” animals in Africa is a fun thing to do? Get the fuck off my blog.

  26. Oliver:

    We recently had someone come along to our weekly breakfast meeting selling these De Verde products. Being very sceptical, I did a little digging and stumbled across your helpful articles Jon. With this technology being supposedly so fantastic I ‘wondered’ if they had a patent to protect their Intellectual Property (expecting the answer to be no of course). According to the De Verde website they do, or at least so they say (http://www.hydrogenhybrids.uk.com/page2.php):
    ‘Since our products are constantly under development; we are pleased to announce that we have successfully applied for a Patent for our latest design. This has been agreed, ‘pending final acceptance’, by the UK International Patent Office (IPO) under their Application No. 1101935.3.’
    Firstly, there is no such organisation as the UK International Patent Office. In the UK we have the UK Intellectual Property Office. It is possible to check the details of any patent or patent application with the IPO and there is no record of Application 1101935.3 (I checked). The UK IPO do not provide international patents either. For protection overseas, you need to apply to patent offices in individual countries or through the international patent system, known as the Patent Co-operation Treaty (PCT).
    I wonder how much longer the patent number will be stated on their website now that this has been found out!

  27. Mick:

    Hi Oliver,
    Look up http://www.ipo.gov.uk and the section UK applications filed. Check out the date 23rd March 2011 on Journal 6357. Look specifically for GB1101935.3, de Verde Technologies Limited, Hydroxy generator cell, 4 February 2011. You just missed out on the prefix GB before the number. Oh well we all make mistakes!!!
    Cheers Mick.

  28. Jon:

    So what happens now? Do they have a patent or just an application for one? Can anyone view it? Can people such as me point out that it is neither new nor novel and therefore is not worthy of a patent?

  29. Mick:

    Jon,
    I’m afraid to say that it is only an application and as far as I know the patent can only be viewed when it is approved. This I assume is to protect the intellectual property of each application. I’m sure Samsung and Apple know about all the legalities surrounding this concept. If you Google patent applied you might find out more info. It seems to be that applications can take upto 18 months to be approved. 18 months of letting customers hang while waiting to see if the patents office will give credence to the product being valid, or validating the fact that the product does what it says on the tin????? Let me pose you a question. If I purchase a HHO unit and installed it on a car, then if I had an emissions test done (well pre and post installation) and it only showed CO, HC and CO2 and I didn’t mention anything about mpg, but it improved emissions what would you say? If I then took it to an independent (as far as I know) third level institution and they found that the emissions had improved would you believe the results or would you need double blind ground mole certification to categorically prove that the results were valid? You have basically no idea who I am and how serious I am about believing that we are going down the wrong road when it comes to burning fossil fuels and climate change. I honestly hope and believe that HHO is one of the many answers that we need to turn the rape of our planet around. Many of the alternatives that we have put before us are either expensive or have environmental drawbacks of their own. If we can find one answer that improves our lot by a consistent 5% then we have done a good thing. Not all of us are here on the earth to screw everyone for money. That’s for governments and big business. Take for example electric cars (which are expensive to produce and buy). What is the CO2 cost of scrapping a small car that is 10 years old and yet gives 45 - 50 mpg? What is the cost of producing a new electric car with exotic compounds (from distant countries)and then shipping the car half way across the world to its place of sale? Will the car or the battery last much more than 10 years? When you produce the electicity is it from renewable sources or only 10% like in Ireland. Is the 90% of electricty produced in a natural gas fired power station that is only around 40% efficient (gas energy in, electric energy out)? Does the national power grid lose 10-15% of its electicity during transmission? How much energy is lost when charging the vehicle? Is the car efficient at tranferring power to its wheels and ultimately moving it along. In the US around 50% of electricity is derived from burning that lovely dirty fuel called coal. Let me create a picture of how crazy this all is. If you believe in the big bang theory then you will probably know that the Earth at one stage had a very high concentration of CO2 in its atmosphere. Over the millions (billions) of years elements turned into compounds, compounds into perhaps viruses, viruses into bacteria, then plants, animals, etc.. While doing this the CO2 concentrations in the earths atmosphere started to drop as Carbon was caught up in plants, animals, etc. or ended underground when the organisms died. Over time a lot of this organic matter was converted into coal, oil, gas, peat, etc.. And here we are in the present day trying to turn around millions of years of work putting Carbon into the ground by digging it up, burning it and trying to put it back into the atmosphere (and only in a period of a few hundred years). And we call ourselves the intelligent species. So, if an inventor can reduce what is known as the activation energy needed to chemically split H2O into H2 and O then I am all for it. If you look at the standard chemical reaction of the electrolysis of water then you will see that this is all at standard temp., pressure and without external influences. If you add a solvent, a catalyst, additional heat, sound energy, etc. then the rate of reaction will of course probably change. Ever tried putting a Mentos in Coke. I haven’t, but on Youtube I have seen that it makes a big bang. It’s not the same but it’s an example like what can happen when you change the standard parameters in a chemical reaction. I hope that there are viable and hopefully cheap options for us all out there.
    Cheers Mick.

  30. Jon:

    Mick,
    That is quite an essay. However I really don’t see what most of it has to do with anything. Coal burning in the USA, renewables, electric cars, grid efficiency… these are all things which I actually know quite a bit about, but I don’t see their relevance here.
    Three points though:
    - Getting granted or denied a patent does in no way show that the product does or does not do what is claimed.
    - I have posted elsewhere on this blog (about “h2gogo” specifically) about why measuring the emissions of a vehicle and not measuring the MPG is daft as you may well be consuming more fuel in order to reduce the nasties in the exhaust.
    - “de Verde Technologies” don’t claim to only clean up emissions, they promise preposterous increases in MPG like 45%. They are not mistaken, they are lying, it is a scam.

  31. Kelvin:

    An advertisement titled “Reduce your fuel costs with De Verde Hydrogen Cell Technology” appeared in the Friday 28th October edition of the Kingsbridge & Salcombe Gazette.
    I read it with increasing incredulity as, like Jon I concluded that this product appeared to contradict both the 1st & 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics (Essentially the 1st Law states that you can’t get something for nothing and the 2nd that you don’t even break-even.) So far as I know these Laws still hold despit recent reports that certain particles appear to travel at speeds in excess of the speed of light.
    The claims made are clearly ridiculous and it is amasing that this type of unsbstantiated crap can still get past editors. However………This has spurred me to return to my previously abandoned project for perfecting the Infinite Improbibility Drive, for which I expect nothing less that a Knighthood and to be immediately appointed a Fellow of the Royal Society!

  32. Jon:

    Thanks for that Kelvin, I have emailed the “news” paper to complain and I will be contacting the ASA too. May I encourage you to do the same? Good luck with the Infinite Improbibility Drive, I think you are more likely to get it working than HHO.

  33. Andrew:

    Jon, I am not a scientist nor am I a technical wizard when it comes to maximising efficiency from an engine - I am however an experienced driver having driven well in excess of 1 million miles over the past 35 years.
    Next week I am getting three water fuel cells fitted to my three year old Transit diesel van which i have owned from new.
    I know having driven this vehicle for 112,000 miles since new that I achieve between 26 miles to the gallon fully loaded on regular trips to S W France which I undertake at least 6 times a year and up to a maximum of 34.5 miles to the gallon unloaded driving to my shop in Oxfordshire along mainly motorways which is a 162 mile round trip three times a week on average.
    I will report back as to whether the system works for me or not - I am ‘neutral’ as to what I think - but I’m prepared to give the system a try as any fuel saving resulting in a cost saving for a small business like mine would be extremely useful.
    I will tell it as I find it - I’ve nothing to prove one way or the other - and I will keep driving in the same manner as always along the same routes as always.
    When I report back - I guess that you will have to make a decision as to whether you are prepared to accept my findings or not.
    If it works I’ll be delighted - if not it will be an expensive mistake. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

  34. Jon:

    Hi Andrew,

    Unfortunately the proof of the pudding is not in the eating, it is in the science lab. This “technology” has been tested in the science lab many times, it has never been shown to work. It only works “in the field”. Why is this? Because it is a scam! Don’t buy it!

    Admirable though your experiment is, it has no blinding and no control. If you find that it works then you will have no way of knowing, for sure, what it was that worked.
    I take it that they are fitting it for you? How will you know that they don’t adjust the mixture while they are there and over inflate your tires? Unfortunately these are very common tricks. Also you will know that you have had this fitted, you don’t know how this may affect your behavior, you are a fallible human being and best left out of any science experiment, this is why scientists use blinding.

    But hey, what if you find it does not work? Well then your HHO guys will say that it is your type of engine, or that you need more cells, or that it was not installed correctly, or that you need an additional bit of electronics, or that your engine is too old, or that your engine is too new… They are con men, they have an answer for everything.

  35. Andrew:

    Hi Jon

    Please forgive my completely off topic reply but hopefully relevant as it illustrates a point.

    Approximately four years ago I discovered a marble statue of Hercules sadly minus his head in S W France which I thought was Roman 2nd or 3rd Century. I bought the statue and took it to the British Museum with who I do a fair amount of business and am in regular contact.

    The top four experts in their field looked at the statue and collectively decided that it was a later copy even though I disagreed. I spent an hour trying to persuade them to take the statue in for further examination but they assured me that there were no known examples of this type therefore my statue was a later copy.

    I sold the statue to a private collector who sold it to a museum in the USA and subsequently that museum after much research found that the statue was indeed 3rd century Roman and they found similar work by the same hand in another museum collection elsewhere - they even found the quarry in North Africa from where the marble was originally extracted.

    Now I know this is irrelevant but two years later I was contacted by the British Museum who thought that it was disgraceful that I had sold such an important Roman statue and allowed it out of the UK.

    The whole point in me recounting this event - is that the four top museum experts in their field who initially looked at and dismissed the statue did so because they had no proof or previous examples to which they could refer - therefore they were convinced that the statue could not possibly be Roman.

    However once additional investigative work was undertaken by another museum elsewhere who were more open minded - the statue was proven to be 3rd Century Roman.

    I accept that there are few if any scientific trials to prove that water cells in vehicles work and give an increase in fuel consumption - However I would suggest that just because something is not scientifically proven - it does not necessarily mean that it doesn’t work.

    Look at the news this week about the 1 kilo weight which has changed it’s shape and mass over the years which is baffling scientists because it scientifically can’t happen - yet it has.

    If the guys who fit my fuel cells can tinker with my tyres and engine at the same time as fitting my water fuel cells and get me an extra 25% fuel efficiency - I’ll be delighted because the Ford main dealership has been trying to get me the maximum fuel efficiency ever since I’ve owned this vehicle and if they can’t get me an additional 25% - either they are rubbish at their job or just possibly the fuel cells work.

    I’m hoping for a decent result - but just because I’m hoping it does not mean that they will work either.

    I’ll keep you informed and apologies for the off topic explanation illustrating my point.

    I work on the theory that to remain open minded one always has to unexpect the expected.

  36. Jon:

    Thanks for your story, I rather enjoyed that you were right. It is not quite the same thing though, your guys were dismissave and did not investigate properly. HHO however has been tested many times and never found to work. Interestingly there is a tiny bit of truth to it - http://www.eco-scams.com/archives/737 - but it is certainly not a 25% fuel saving. Being open minded is a great thing and essential for good science, just be careful not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out. Best wishes to you and please do come back to me with your test results, keep as much data as you can and try to estimate the unknown in your measurements. I am really interested in your results and experiences.

  37. James Woods:

    Jon and your team of charlatans,

    This is a complete rip off. A cursory glance at the first law of thermodynamics firmly pisses on your chips.

    Increase in internal energy of a system = heat supplied to the system + work done on the system

    Enough said.

  38. Jon:

    James, What are you trying to say? How am I a charlatan? I think I have a pretty god grasp of the laws of thermodynamics, thank you… Jon.

  39. James Woods:

    Jon,

    What I purport to is that it is impossible to get any greater fuel efficiency from an engine through the use of a Hydrogen-on-Demand system, ergo your product fails at the first hurdle. If you do have a good grasp of the laws of thermodynamics then how can you stand by these absurd proclamations and expect people to pay good money for a bogus product? If that does not constitute charlatan then both your perception of the english language and reality are seriously skewed. Be a decent chap, own up to your devious ways and go away.

  40. Jon:

    James,
    Erm, I think you should take a closer look at my website, the clue is in the title, it is called eco-scams. The title of this page is “Jubycell/de Verde Technologies - yet more HHO scamers in the UK” and the content of the page calls them out as con men selling a bogus product which cannot possibly work. I have personally put several of these companies out of business and really embarrassed universities which have supported them, i don’t think I am the guy you should be having a go at.

  41. James Woods:

    Do you know it’s quite funny that both the boss of De Verde Tech and you have the same forename. I thought I had a real bite when I noticed your initial response, mistaking it be from John Hickman. Apologies. As you could probably surmise, my posts were somewhat vitriolic owing to the fact that I fell for his cunning marketing and have received little or no benefit on either fuel economy or power. What can be done about John and his little venture of scamming countless idiots like myself?

  42. Jon:

    I see, that is quite funny. No I am a different Jon and this is my website.
    John Hickman would never dare post to this website, he chooses to ignore me because to take me on would require him to justify his claims and he cannot do that.
    So, if the product he sold you did not work why did you not ask for a refund? He claims to have a 30 day money back guarantee but I’m quite sure you get a lot more than that as part of your statutory rights. If the product does not do what the maker claims then you are entitled to a refund, no?

  43. Jon:

    “unmask this charlatan and send him down”… well there is the ASA… who will tell him to stop it soon, maybe, if they choose to checkup on him. I think you are better getting the BBC involved, like I did for Oil Drum. Oh, wait, you need to be already making a documentary about them and their university (of Kent) to be interested and whatnot… No, know one is interested unless there is something really sensational going down…
    Seriously, try getting the local paper interested in a local scoop… no, they are not interested in writing a story either, not unless it is handed to them in the form of an un referenced and not verifiable press release from said con men…

  44. James Woods:

    Jon,

    Thanks for the reply. I have just sent several lines off to the local newspaper to see if they are interested, making reference to his advertisements, the product and the fact that he’s bought a new Harley Davidson and X5 with the proceeds of his scam. Maybe I’ll get a response. I’ll let you know in due course. Coming from a scientific background, I am very keen to expose the con men.

Leave a comment