Salt-Water Powered Car Gets Approval In Europe – Yes It’s Real


Written by Arjun Walia

It works just like a hydrogen fuel cell except that the liquid used for storing energy is saltwater. This isn’t far from the water powered car, an idea labelled as a conspiracy by many despite the massive amount of evidence behind it. You can read more about that here.

In this case (saltwater) the liquid passes through a membrane in between the two tanks, creating an electric charge. This electricity is then stored and distributed by super capacitors. The four electric motors in the car are fed electricity which makes it run. The car carries the water in two 200-litre tanks, which in one sitting will allow drivers to travel up to 373 miles (600km). Overall, the four-seater is 5.25 metres (0.4ft) long, 2.2 metres wide (7.2ft), the 1.35 metre (4.4ft).

“After making its debut at the 2014 Geneva Motor Show (pictured) in March, the saltwater technology has now been certified for use on European roads.” (source)

Nanoflowcell AG is the company behind the design, and they are currently preparing the technology for mass production.

‘We’ve got major plans, and not just within the automobile industry. The potential of the NanoFlowcell is much greater, especially in terms of domestic energy supplies as well as in maritime, rail and aviation technology”  – NanoFlowcell AG Chairman of the Board Professor Jens-Peter Ellermann.

This is huge news, and is another example out of so many that clearly show how we have so many ways to do better here. Although money remains an issue, it doesn’t have to be.

All cars should be required to be made from this type, or other similar types of clean green energy. A few years ago, if you told somebody it’s possible to fuel a car by pouring saltwater into it, they would have called you a conspiracy theorist.

Last Year The U.S Navy Developed a Technology To Create Fuel From Seawater

Scientists at the U.S Naval Research Laboratory have developed a technology to recover carbon dioxide and hydrogen from seawater and convert it into a liquid hydrocarbon fuel. This could be a tremendous breakthrough and eliminate the need for old ways of generating fuel.

It’s just another example of the many ways of generating energy that are now available that could end our dependence on fossil fuels. These new, clean green ways of generating energy have been around for decades, so why are we always talking about them without ever implementing them?

Refueling U.S. Navy Vessels, at sea, is a costly endeavor in terms of logistics, time, fiscal constraints and threats to national security sailors at sea. In Fiscal year 2011, the U.S. Navy Military Sea Lift Command, the primary supplier of fuel and oil to the U.S. Navy fleet, delivered nearly 600 million gallons of fuel to Navy vessels underway, operating 15 fleet replenishment oilers around the globe.” (source)

The Navy successfully used the new fuel-from seawater process to power a radio-controlled scale-model replica of a World War II aircraft with an internal combustion engine. Below is the footage from the test flight.

“In close collaboration with the Office of Navel Research p38 Naval Reserve program, NRL has developed a game changing technology for extracting, simultaneously, CO2 and H2 from seawater. This is the first time technology of this nature has been demonstrated with the potential for transition, from the laboratory, to full-scale commercial implementation.” – Dr. Heather Willauer (source)

Researchers say that this approach could be commercially viable within the next seven to ten years. They state interest in pursuing land-based options that could provide a solution to our current problems.

Again, another option, and example showing the power of human potential, so what’s stopping us from the implementation of cleaner and greener technologies?

Not long ago, Department of Defence adviser Dr. Harold Puthoff made some noteworthy comments while discussing the reality of free energy. This is what he said:

“I’ve been taken out on aircraft carriers by the Navy and shown what it is we have to replace if we have new energy sources to provide new fuel methods.”

You can watch that full interview HERE.

Whether it be Solar, Free Energy (zero-point), or converting seawater, it’s clear we can do better than we are doing now. It’s remarkable how Barack Obama has constantly pointed out that we will be using oil, gas and coal for the next twenty years, and that we don’t have the technology to lift our dependence off of these resources. Those who are looking into it can clearly see that this simply isn’t true. We have the means to live in ways that are more harmonious with the planet and all beings on it.

Originally posted @ Collective Evolution

1 Comment
  1. T.K. 4 years ago

    the reaction of a hydrogen fuel cell is H2 + O2 -> H2O. this is an exothermal reaction. it gives energy. if you light a mixture of H2 and O2 it explodes.

    forming a crystal out of dissolved Na+ and Cl- is an endothermal reaction. it gets colder. it consumes energy. the other way round, making liquid out of a NaCl crystal gives energy. thats why you put salt on ice on streets. the ice melts because the melting salt heats it up.

    the pronouncement that the the Na+ and Cl- ions separate, creating a charge, by a membrane is nonsense. + and – attract each other. when you put 2 magnets together, do they separate on their own? no.
    a battery creates charge because the two ions (Na+ and Cl-) are artificially separated before. the membrane is needed to reassemble them. read it here:

    the “scientists” (sic) just invert the natural process and proclaim nature goes this way, giving energy instead of consuming it. by the way: ever put a torch at water? it doesnt explode. gasoline does explode. got it? water fueled car /rolleyes

    about the article about extracting H2 and CO2 from water (Dr. Heather Willhauer) i simply clicked on “source” behind the Dr.s name and copied the first comment. read it and then think about if this article here draws the right conclusion. I hope the authors of this page here are just not knowing and not lying.

    This follows the too common pattern of over-hyped energy technology reporting that fails to address foundational issues. For example, we know that energy is conserved. If you are going to make hydrocarbons out of sea water and then combust them to release energy along with water and CO2, then it is clear that an energy source is required for the sea water to hydrocarbon process. That could come from solar, wind, or nuclear power systems, and so the process could still be useful. But any useful reporting on the process would have to address the efficiency of the conversion process. If it takes 10 times more electrical energy to create the hydrocarbon fuel than you can extract by burning the hydrocarbon fuel, then this process is practically useless. If it is only 3 times, then maybe it can be used to create fuel with high energy density from electrical energy that is hard to store. But when the current experiments have only ‘confirmed the presence of the required C9-C16 molecules’ , you can be pretty sure that this is not news worthy yet.



    Share ›

    edfix ganv • 2 years ago

    You’re missing the point. A nuclear powered aircraft carrier that can manufacture its own jet fuel at sea eliminates a huge supply tail segment.


    Share ›
    jms ganv • 2 years ago

    Of course it’s going to require energy. Probably so much that it would have to come from a nuclear reactor. It almost doesn’t matter how much energy it would use since the aircraft carrier has a nuclear reactor anyway which can be built to whatever specs are required to support the fuel generator system. The big deal that this introduces the ability of a carrier to synthesize its own jet fuel from seawater and not need a fuel supply chain; a significant military advantage.

Leave a reply

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




Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?


Create Account