You are here: PureEnergySystems.com
> News > February
To GEET or not to GEET: Simple Versus Plasma
I propose that two classifications be given: 'GEET Simple', which is easy
to achieve and yields improvement from pre-heating the fuel and possibly some
other pre-treatment effects, giving 5-30% improvement in efficiency; and 'GEET
Plasma', which is the holy grail, giving several-fold increase in efficiency, but
which is extremely difficult to achieve.
|Interview > Listen
On the morning of February 17, I conducted a 53-minute interview with
Paul Pantone and his son David as part of the Free
Energy Now series.
A GEET bubbler is featured on Channel 5 out of
Pure Energy Systems News
On February 14, 2011, David Pantone, son of Paul Pantone, sent out an email to the GEET newsletter subscribers announcing a couple of videos he has compiled as well as stating that GEET Institute is hoping to have a 250kW generator by the end of February.
The two videos are titled "The Suppression and Development of GEET, Invented by Paul Pantone in 1983, up to 2011". They show numerous televised news clips of various stations that have given coverage on the GEET system, usually showing some kind of unusual "fuel" being added to the bubbler, such as Mountain Dew, Crude Oil, water; and some kind of motor running off the vapors from the bubbler. Probably the most impressive one is a large boat that uses a GEET variant.
In introducing these videos, David wrote:
"I have edited a short presentation (two 12-minute videos) to summarize how incredible odds stacked up against GEET, however persistent, are not enough to squelch our dedicated grassroots green movement. Many news clippings and demonstrations of improved fuel economy and reduced pollution are featured in this presentation, which was created by special request for
forbiddenknowledgetv.com. Visit their website to sign up to receive a new video every day -free."
To supplement this story, on February 17, 2011, I interviewed
Paul Pantone and his son David
(14 Mb; mp3; 53 minutes). Paul talked about the 250 kW generator that will run on a crude oil and saltwater mixture; the new club initiative they have launched to promote a grassroots approach to spreading the technology; and answered questions about applications, numbers of replications, and the plasma process.
After that interview, I spoke with someone who at this time wishes to remain anonymous, who I'll call Frank; who has been heavily involved in a team of replicators worldwide who are seeking to get the GEET to work in a useful manner that move it beyond research and development. I've also spoken with others, who have helped me form an understanding and analysis of the technology.
Rather than go on at length, here is a synopsis, the best that I can determine at this time. These are my opinions and do not reflect industry vernacular yet, though I hope it will spawn a healthy and productive discussion.
I do not consider myself a GEET expert. I've never built a GEET
system. I've just been exposed to it a lot over the years from various
claimants on both sides.
What I propose here, to make sense of what is going on, is that there are basically two levels of GEET performance: GEET Simple, and GEET Plasma.
What I'm calling GEET Simple, is an effect that pretty much anyone who experiments with a GEET is likely to witness, and it most likely has nothing to do with plasma manifesting, nor does it probably have anything to do with the presence of the rod. It has to do with pre-heating the fuel via the outgoing exhaust; and may have some assist from water in the bubbler, inasmuch as water and preheating have both been shown to augment mileage and reduce emissions elsewhere. The GEET set-up enables both of these effects to manifest. This is the effect that thousands have replicated, giving them efficiency improvements typically between 5 and 30%, on a transient and controlled
bench top scenario.
Also, by using the bubbler, the more volatile portion of the petrol is first coming off the solution and running the engine. It is going to be the cleanest burn because it is consuming the smallest-chain hydrocarbons. But by the time you get to the heavier stuff in latter portion of the bubbler, the engine doesn't run, nor would you want it to. If it's not running in plasma mode, that stuff would be detrimental to the engine.
Furthermore, the entertainment fluids added to the bubbler, whether they be Mountain Dew, window cleaner, Gatorade, pee, vinegar; don't even get burned in this scenario. It's the light-chain molecules first bubbling off that are burned. It's nothing more than a parlor trick.
I don't mean to be disrespectful by saying that. "Parlor trick" refers to the non-plasma mode, with bubbler, where the petrol goes to vapor and is burned, leaving the other non-burnable stuff behind.
It looks like these other things are serving as fuel, but they probably are not,
at least not in the GEET Simple mode.
Furthermore, because the ratio of light-to-heavy contents of the fuel is changing over time, you cannot start a GEET-run system then walk away. But you have to continually (~every two minutes) manually adjust the carburetor. It certainly doesn't lend itself to running the generator under load. This issue does not contribute to a practical embodiment. Most of the videos you see on the web are showing the start-up phase, while the bubble is burping up the small-chain hydrocarbons to be burned in the engine. That is when the engine runs the best. It is also easy to over-speed the engine and damage or ruin the engine in so doing.
These effects are simple to reproduce; and that is why thousands have been able to do so; but this embodiment is not practical, hence very few are able to actually implement a GEET, even in Simple mode, on a car or generator in a permanent manner. That takes advanced skill and a lot of dedication and patience.
In fact, apparently, of all the people who have attended Paul's class for a
couple of thousand dollars, and of all those who have signed up for dealerships
for several thousand dollars, not one of them has been able to implement a GEET
in a car in a reliable way. None of them have product to sell other than a
which is for experimentation, not for getting a car to work on it.
There are open source plans kicking around, which are not approved by Paul, which describe a way to build a more reliable GEET system. It is being called the "Supplementary GEET." The
Vortex Heat Exchanger
discussion group has been heavily involved in studying that as well as the other GEET phenomenon.
In the files section of the group, they also have all the material that is available from
Paul's classes. It is a diligent research and development group, which has a lot of respect for what Paul has introduced, but which also has an awareness of his tendency to overstate things and not mention difficulties.
There is also a "SPAD" version of the GEET, and a "Giller-Pantone" version which have been very productive in Europe. There have been around five television reports on these, including the large boat. The 36% improvement talked about by a city council in France, is using one of these variants.
The Giller-Pantone method only works practically on Diesels. SPAD will only work on Diesels not gasoline. SPAD is not sold any more by
HYPNOW, but people can make it, you can get the E series reactor from Hypnow which the closest thing to the SPAD that's a kit.
For DIESEL cars, you can get the Ecopra kit (recommended) SPAD, which is only for agricultural or tractors.
Hypnow sell the "nano" versions of the Giller-Pantone method for diesel cars.
These wont save a lot. The best kit that's off the shelf for Diesel cars is by far the ECOPRA one.
SPAD is open source and not made any more by HYPNOW except for diesel tractors/agricultural machinery.
Their E series reactor is the closest thing to it (on their website). Ecopra do the kits for Diesel cars -recommended.
I would dare say that these variants of the GEET Simple approach have nothing to do with the particulars of Pantone's intellectual property. Though his configuration happens to also produce these effect, they are not a necessary and sufficient component for the effect; so he has no IP claim on these systems and the open source projects that are springing up around them.
A simple way to prove this would be to remove the rod and see if the improvements remain at the same level. And perhaps the space the rod fills might create in important geometry, so the rod could be replaced with a wooden dowel or something less likely to burn in the engine heat conditions, while still occupying the same space as the rod. If that is the case (that the geometry is helpful), then Pantone may still have an IP claim in the GEET Simple mode.
The claim with a GEET system that draws so many to it, is that you can get a many-fold increase in fuel efficiency like 3 to 8 times the mileage. In my interview with Paul, he said one person allegedly had achieved a 65-fold increase.
In the waste-to-energy world, a plasma arc is used to convert incoming trash
into elemental form which recombines to syngas, which can be burned, and a
liquid sludge. The idea in the GEET Plasma scenario is that if you start
with liquid of any kind, that you will essentially end up with syngas coming
from the plasma; and the plasma itself may be part of the combustion
These dramatic increases in efficiency purportedly comes about due to the formation of plasma at the end of the rod, which has to be of a specific length and orientation, which is highly fuel-specific. It certainly is not conducive to adding whatever you want to the bubbler, like the Simple mode is. I would dare say that the bubbler is a key part of facilitating the Simple mode, but it is probably detrimental to the plasma mode, where the fuel needs to be homogeneous.
Paul and David say that the plasma mode has a gamut of performance, depending on
how well the system is tuned. It is not an all-or-nothing effect.
But even in getting just 2x mileage or more, from what I can gather, the problem is that this effect is extremely elusive. Very few people have achieved this state. I would dare say it is less than a dozen, if that as a total guess, to illustrate how rare and difficult it is to achieve. It even seems to me that Paul doesn't know how to do it for sure. He's lucked out at rare instances in the past, at best. I doubt that he is the best one to look to for an honest scientific approach to getting the bottom of what the effect is and how to optimize it. He's too full of exaggeration to be of much use.
"My dad's blue engine had a bubbler, and it must have been going to plasma stage, because it was
ridiculous: freezing tailpipe, extra oxygen in the exhaust, burning pure urine, whole 9 yards.
When you have a float valve, so your fuel stays at the right level, you can run the engine
indefinitely. His old blue engine had that set up."
David recently traveled to Australia to help a group there complete a unit;
but even with Paul's guidance over the phone, they were unable to get it to
work. They are still trying get a generator working and a system running in plasma mode.
From what I've been told, when people go to the GEET class, all they see demonstrated is the Simple mode, not the Plasma mode. Anyone who attends that class will be able to achieve the GEET Simple mode because it is so easy to achieve, but the forums from class attendees are extremely sparse on anyone being able to achieve the GEET Plasma
mode, which is what they went to the class to learn how to do.
Suggestions for Experimentation
Beside the fuel improvement, one instantaneous detection method that gets discussed is using a clamp-on amp meter. When the plasma forms, supposedly this will elicit a higher amp reading.
In experimentation to try and replicate the plasma effect, I would suggest rather than trying to tune the rod to the fuel, that the best method would be to try and tune the fuel to the rod, by changing the fuel ratios
(octane) through chemistry. I would also try and separate out the combustion process. The non-plasma set-up is going to burn very different from the plasma set-up. An engine might run fine during GEET Simple mode, then stop running once GEET Plasma is achieved, because the settings are wrong on the engine.
Once a stable fuel-rod combination is achieved, then one can set out to get this system to run an engine.
I think Paul needs to make the distinction between these two (GEET Simple and GEET Plasma), and he needs to be more forthright about the difficulty involved in achieving the latter; and he needs to realize that many of the effects seen from the GEET Simple mode might not even be a function of the rod at all, which is an important part of his intellectual property.
He should also be more amenable to the GEET variants that are achieving stable
These two phenomenon need to be completely separated and stopped being called by the generic name of GEET, because they are barely related. The GEET Simple mode is
most likely primarily a function of pre-heating the fuel. The GEET Plasma mode is a function of plasma, and is the holy grail of fuel efficiency, but as yet has not been properly characterized or understood, making replication nearly impossible.
The parameters that enable GEET Plasma are very stringent, whereas the parameters that enable the GEET Simple mode are very lenient.
It will take a lot of research and development to characterize and optimize
these effects. Paul shouldn't be having people pay for classes and
dealerships until he has a stable product to sell.
# # #
This story is also published at BeforeItsNews.
What You Can Do
- Pass this on to your friends and favorite news sources.
- If you have a GEET or are trying to build one, join the
Vortex Heat Exchanger
discussion list to help the R&D community get to the bottom of these
questions and issues.
- Get the GEET plans for from from http://GEETInternational.com
- Buy a GEET
- Build a variant, such as the SPAD (see download link below).
- Donate to the GEET Foundation to help in their R&D efforts.
- We at PES Network are in a pinch right now. Donations
would be greatly appreciated.
- Subscribe to our newsletter
to stay abreast of the latest, greatest developments in the free energy
Feel free to view/post comments down below. Here are some particularly
My fuel injected GEET
Original Carb refitted, GEET attached to PCV port of aircleaner. Ball valve on carb intake to 'disable' it when required.
My parts for a Freddy V6 cell
Experience with a GEET Simple
On February 18, 2011, 7:30 am MST, Sean wrote:
I built a GEET unit some time ago (and have not run it for some time).
My unit was certainly interesting, and offered some performance benefits -- in addition to construction issues that continue to plague me today.
I guess mine could have been described a 'simple' unit, though I have run different rod lengths, and several fuel input systems to the 'reactor' during my experimentation attempts.
The biggest hassle was early on, slowing down the injection timing pulses to prevent flooding the engine.
The circuits were basically to run the injector. Variable pulse width and speed.
Simple mode I achieved on the first attempt. A simple B&S Carb mounted to the GEET tube. Worked first go.
When trying a 'bubbler' type system, it did quickly burn off I guess the lighter fractions of the 'fuel', and the admission of water could be described as a 'parlor' trick, as when the engine finally decided to quit- much/most of the water remained.
Another issue was with the bubbler system, sucking a vacuum through such a device caused quite rapid cooling of the bubbler- to the point where the 'vapor' would cease to come off the fuel, and again the engine would quit. So, I built the injected system- very basic, a small PWM controlled by a frequency generator. (The two
visible boards) To control a fuel injector. An EFI pump is mounted under the board by the shiny clamp to provide injection pressure of about 40psi. Its was operated by the relay also seen.
All this was in 2007. The generator now is still in my shed. GEET hardware still attached. I have removed the electronics and injection to search for a more passive system. (But could be refitted if I felt the need)
Most revealing was, even with a bubbler system, I could remove the rod, and still run the engine successfully off a 'bubbler', or small
carburetor. Thus I treat it as little more than an enhanced vapor system.
Only, was it plasma... dunno. It was a hot exhaust pipe heating the fuel feed. The old
200mpg docs show plenty of these kind of things. I got the book back in 1996
... just a mash up of old patents and talk. Pouge carbs etc. It's all about fuel
heating/vaporizing. Long banished by modern fuel formulas.
When I get interested, I'll have another go at the thing. I guess nothing exciting really. But it was fun to try. Perhaps I'm too easily sidetracked into other projects.
[Regarding the third photo on the right...]
Ok, one more. My parts for a Freddy V6 cell. Over $1000 on parts visable, and in the black box.
PWMS, valves, electronics.... etc et all.
I plan to have a go at it..... the parts are waiting to go, but I'm in the waiting queue for the final ebook for unrevealed secrets on tube setup/tuning and catalyst chemistry.
I get very serious about replication... I love reverse engineering. Cost isn't an object. Win lose or draw. I have fun in the workshop. Many of my other projects have worked out for me. Not energy related
* * * *
Four Categories of GEET
On Feb. 18, 2011, Marquis wrote:
For me there a 4 categories of GEET
first is doping water:
GEET non magnetic, stainless, or with bad regulations, and systems without rod, Hypnow, ecopra
Vaporization inside tube very hot, rod does not serve, and result is sent to admission to help gasoline, fuel
Most of what is mounted on most engine
Magnetic GEET, quite well mounted, quite well studied, bad balance.
Vaporization, inside hot tube, high tension , rod works a bit, then to admission.
Quite good results, economy... not the best, but good.
GEET Pantone, well balanced, rod works.
Good performances for engine, part of gasoline replaced by water.
Super GEET Plasma
Magnetic GEET Pantone, well balanced, bubbler ultra efficient, rod works, ability of reactor to produce fast and max, over
powerful system, big part of gasoline replaced by water. engine exceeds in low consumption and power is over normal result with same type of engine. Can nearly work only on water. May work only on water
when is started and is reactor is hot.
* * * *
Water Fuel Variant Wasn't Covered in Class
On February 17, 2011, 'We the People' wrote:
That the water vertical
and horizontal rod lengths and implantation were NOT covered in the seminars, in
fact that the paying populous were shunned from asking about is just lame.
I will not betray those that shared that with me, but it is a common revolt
issue from seminars...
Water, and a hint of anything else, is paramount to pure success !
* * * *
Previous Interviews and Coverage
Efficiency > GEET
Pantone of GEET released (interview) - After nearly 3.5 years of
wrongful incarceration, primarily at Utah State Hospital, Mr. Pantone is now
out and ready to move on, while also facilitating the international human
rights organizations clean up a corrupt institution. A review of the GEET
plasma reactor fuel efficiency technology. (PESN; June 1, 2009) (Comment at Examiner.com)