Vehicles “of the Future”

and considerations about Conspiracy Theories.

Me and my “Fusca” — Ilustration by Claudia Ricci

I often receive messages − and I thank for that to whom has sent − about the wonders of the science and technology, of the past achievements, which were crushed and abandoned under the weight of government conveniences or criminal actions by multinational companies or organizations. It is always good to know all the theories and to be able to do my investigations, with which I boost my neurons in research, studies, and learning.

We all tend to believe in conspiracy theories when we do not have enough knowledge or reasonable answers on the subject, but we want the theory to be true. There are many experiences and statistics about it, some of which I post at the end for anyone who might be interested.

It would be great for this to work! Hence the ease in believing.

Perhaps the most widespread “truth” is about electric vehicles, the “Non-polluting vehicles”.

Photo by Waldemar Brandt on Unsplash

“They do not pollute, they are loaded easily, the cost of loading is extremely low …”, says news and propaganda.

Yes, they do not pollute where they travel, but where does the electricity they consume and consume come from?

Photo by Alain Duchateau on Unsplash

Energy is no longer cheap to supply this small number of vehicles if compared to projections for 2030 and beyond.

And how much will it cost in 2030[1]?

Certainly, it will be more than ten times, probably more than up to twenty times than the sites, presentations and advertisements of Tesla, Google, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Nissan that go around.

Photo by Shane McLendon on Unsplash

The cost of these vehicles includes batteries and the environmental and atmospheric pollution that their manufacture involves[2]; and how long will there be lithium to meet this demand?

Photo by Omar Ram on Unsplash

Billions of dollars have already been or are being invested in transmission, distribution, and gas station installations; in 2030/40 it will be trillions.

And all this for what?

Is this to reduce carbon emissions?

No: to move vehicle emission locations to energy generation plants.

To pretend that there is a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, create and reinforce the profits of companies and conglomerates in the sector.

Photo by Håkon Grimstad on Unsplash

Changing its origin, from vehicle exhaust to coal, oil, petroleum, natural gas, or atomic energy generators,

increasing emissions with investments (Hey, celebrate the financial system!) with a lot of additional emission since the environmental destruction caused by digging lithium to gas stations.

Photo by Kendal on Unsplash

The use of electric vehicles can be the wonder dreamed up by conscientious environmentalists — but only where they are needed — , in megacities where its global cost is less than the global cost of public health problems, treatments and medicines, the loss of many lives, the maintenance of

buildings and public equipment caused by pollution.

Photo by Chris Barbalis on Unsplash

Acceptable — in these locals — even if there is no enough renewable energy:

Caracas, Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing, São Paulo, New York, and the like.

The Car of the Future, for widespread use, will come with scientific and technological development that will solve all the obstacles and disadvantages mentioned above.

The Cars of the Present will continue to infest the world where they are indeed Cars of the Past (as when they were powered by coal and gasogen),

by the thirst for power and profit of governments and multinationals.


I spoke, at the beginning, about Conspiracy Theories; well, about EVs (Electric Vehicles), this is what I think and believe.

But, what about other “Vehicles of the Future”?

1 — Hybrid fuel-electric cars were on the rise and would be more viable, less harmful than EVs, and likely to grab a small share of buyers when their cost reached more palatable values ​​with possible mass production; apparently the movement cocked up; was drowned by the wave of VE.

2 — Hydrogen-powered engines:

The energy needed to produce hydrogen is even greater than that needed to meet the possible consumption of vehicles using simple electric energy.

President Bush, when presenting his “The State of the Union” to Congress in 2003, declared that it was time to take a crucial step to protect our environment. He announced a $ 1.2 billion ($ 1.7 billion in 2020 value) initiative to start developing a national hydrogen infrastructure: a network of coast-to-coast facilities that would produce and distribute hydrogen to supply hundreds of million fuel cell vehicles. Supported by a national commitment, he said, “our scientists and engineers will overcome the obstacles to taking these cars from the laboratory to the showroom, so that the first car driven (sic) by a child born today can be hydrogen-powered and pollution-free.

Among his inventions, this was infinitely less damaging to the US and the world than that of the existence of mass destruction weapons in Iraq.


a — Production

The United States already uses about 10 million tons of hydrogen per year for industrial purposes, such as fertilizer production and oil refining. For hydrogen-powered vehicles to become the norm, we will need at least 10 times more. The challenge will be to produce it effectively, at affordable costs, safe of explosions, and ecologically safe.

b— Raw materials

Currently, 95% of America’s hydrogen is produced from natural gas. Through a process called steam methane reform: high temperature and pressure breaks the hydrocarbon into hydrogen and carbon oxides — including carbon dioxide, which is released into the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas.

In the next 10 or 20 years, fossil fuels are likely to continue to be the main raw material for the hydrogen economy. And therein lies the problem: using dirty energy to produce clean energy does not solve the problem of pollution — it just moves it around. “As a CO2 reducer, hydrogen stinks”.

Meanwhile, the major vehicle factories have continued to develop new prototypes: (

Yes … a lot of hydrogen must have escaped in the test room, the air mixture was poor in oxygen, they were dizzy or drunk …

The truth is that to have hydrogen powered vehicles we would have to create huge pollution to produce this “fantastic fuel”, not to mention the incredible distribution network of this element that leaks even through small pores in liquid form (which requires more energy…), or at production stations at each filling station, resulting in the current price (2020) of $ 1,238 per litter[1].

………………………………………….. …………………………………..

[1] the cost of liquid hydrogen is about $2.20/kg to $3.08/kg.

Practical electrolysis (using a rotating electrolyser at 15 bar pressure) may consume 50 kilowatt-hours per kilogram (180 MJ/kg), and a further 15 kilowatt-hours (54 MJ) if the hydrogen is compressed for use in hydrogen cars.[37]

………………………………………….. …………………………………..

Inventions that claim to have created Moto Perpetual:

1 — The fantastic water-powered engine:

Problem: it takes the same amount of energy to separate these hydrogen and oxygen atoms inside the electrolysis cell, as you return when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics have not changed, despite all the hype you read on a blog or news aggregator. Subtract the heat losses in the engine, alternator and electrolysis cell and you are losing energy, not winning — period.

A water-powered car is a hypothetical car that derives its energy directly from the water. Water-powered cars have been the subject of numerous international patents, newspaper articles and popular scientific magazines, news coverage on local television and on the Internet. The claims for these devices were found to be incorrect and some were found to be linked to investment fraud. It can be said that these vehicles produce fuel from water on board without other energy input, or they may be a hybrid type that claims to obtain energy from both water and a conventional source (such as gasoline).

2. The engine that is powered by nothing, I mean, electromagnetism.

Of course, the engine works; The One problem are two:

Where to get magnets — Pure magnetite is extremely rare and expensive; producing artificial magnets is relatively easy, but … How much energy does it take to produce them?

To produce magnets of short life, it is enough (!) to subject the magnetizable part to a powerful magnetic field for as long as necessary for its saturation. Lots of electricity expenditure with low final energy yield.

To produce ferrites — long-life magnets — then complex and expensive processes are needed. I do not understand magnetism enough to evaluate the ammount of the energy that is needed in the different processes, but I put what I found here,, so that my scientific friends will eventually decipher for us:

1. What amount of energy is required to magnetize each of the magnet materials?

To fully saturate a magnet, it must be exposed to a magnetizing field of sufficient amplitude for a time long enough to orient all of the mass of magnet.

Alnico requires 3000+ Oersteds — longer pulse times may be needed to overcome eddy currents in large sections. Ceramic requires 10,000+ Oersteds. Sm-Co typically requires 20,000+ Oersteds but may require over 40,000+ Oersteds on some grades. Nd-Fe-B typically requires 30,000+ Oersteds but may require over 40,000+ Oersteds on some grades. Bonded Nd-Fe-B or NeoForm requires 35,000+ Oersteds.

All these “wishful thinking projects” are hindered by the Laws of Thermodynamics — not yet revoked even confronting the risk to be jailed in known “enlightened dictatorships”.

That is what the Americans practically translated as “There’s no free lunch”.

Good appetite!

Photo by Louis Hansel @shotsoflouis on Unsplash

And, being a pariah on Medium, I always receive this information when trying to post on Medium Partner Program:

“We’re sorry, but the Medium Partner Program is unavailable in your location. Learn more about which countries we support, and what account type is right for you, in our Help Center. If you feel you have reached this page in error, please contact us”.

Furthermore, I have to send the editing version, cause if I click “Publish” my story loses the formating and some of Unsplash’ pictures…

If you want to see the text as originally formated, click in



[3] the cost of liquid hydrogen is about $2.20/kg to $3.08/kg.

Practical electrolysis (using a rotating electrolyser at 15 bar pressure) may consume 50 kilowatt-hours per kilogram (180 MJ/kg), and a further 15 kilowatt-hours (54 MJ) if the hydrogen is compressed for use in hydrogen cars.[37]