Like us on Facebook and Follow us on Twitter


Talk:Directory:Energy By Motion (EBM)

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:31 am.

  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

Discussion page for Directory:Energy By Motion (EBM)

Image:EBM C44 unit 95x95.jpg

Out of the blue, a company in Hungary (originally from Toronto) springs on the scene with three humongous prototypes getting 6% over-unity, complete with patents, scientific certifications, demo hours, and a price tag for a power plant. The alleged rate: 6 cents/kW-hour.


post here

(Just click on the "There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1].) March 16, 2010

The following comment came from someone who attended the Vienna Free Energy Conference in Vienna, March 12-14, 2010.

My initial thoughts on EBM: In contrast to the many great presentations in Vienna, I was quite disappointed at Dr. Szabo’s performance. Most people (even some of the experts who went to see his big machine and sat through many of his presentations over the years) are still wondering what the EBM machine really does.

It apparently requires electrical input and claims to have electrical and heat output. But there are no reproducible measurements of OU and nobody knows exactly how much of the output is heat and how much is electric. What’s the point of this huge machine, if you need to place it next to a coal power plant to satisfy its huge electrical input? And even after so many years of OU claims, there is still no reliable evidence that the total output is higher than the input and if so by how much…

His presentation was light on technical explanations and full of economic comparisons between the EBM and other power generation technologies. But these comparisons were all terribly flawed with critical parameters missing (i.e. what are each of those technologies powered by, and what is the cost of that fuel/power source, what are the operating costs, etc…).

In general, I am very skeptical about everyone who invokes people’s interest with revolutionary claims and then charges a fee to any visitor who is interested in seeing the claim. Especially since paying visitors have no means of validating the claims on-site.

There are too many people in our field who make a comfortable living from fee-based ‘demos’ and we need more people focusing all their efforts on developing a true (and reproducible) breakthrough. '''

Would it not be possible, citing this person's comments about "huge electrical input" to have say a river turbine near a large urban area power up the units initially and have them both in concert power up a whole region on the national grid? For demonstrative purposes I will post links to articles on existing underwater turbine projects that are already viable. also be so kind to take a look at and likewise this article as well,'''would not this also be reinforced by strengthened conservation in the home using combined technologies "When the sun shines, electricity from solar panels would feed into a personal power grid, and also split water into hydrogen and oxygen" here is that whole article here, Just some food for thought.

"It's interesting for me, that EBM says that they have over 60 patents [sic, see correction above] over the whole world and that they have developed and optimized the

device over the past 20 years and nearly nobody has noticed their work." -- R.K., Oct. 10, 2006

Rebuttal : They have had very strong NDA stipulations and run a tight ship. They have not sought exposure until this time, now that they are ready to produce commercially.

Forum Discussions

Thread about EBM at Steorn's forum

Hungarian Over-Unity Generator (Szabo) (Keelynet Oct. 9, 2006)

See also


- Directory