Paul Pantone claimed his GEET reactor created “plasma” that could run engines on almost anything. Critics called it “pure, unadulterated nonsense.” The truth, as usual, lies somewhere in between.
This article examines what legitimate science tells us about fuel reformation, exhaust heat recovery, and what might actually be happening inside a GEET reactor.
What GEET Actually Does
At its core, GEET is a fuel pre-processing system that uses exhaust heat. Hot exhaust gases heat incoming fuel vapor, which passes through a narrow gap around a central rod before entering the engine.
The patent (US 5,794,601) describes:
- Volatilization chamber (bubbler) heated by exhaust
- Reactor tube with coaxial rod creating an annular flow space
- Counter-current flow — exhaust and fuel vapor moving in opposite directions
- Operating temperatures: 200-900°F (93-480°C)
- Gap specification: 0.035-0.04 inches between rod and tube wall
Notably, the patent itself acknowledges uncertainty about the mechanism: “larger molecules in volatilized fuel appear to be broken into fragments with some type of reaction taking place.”
Legitimate Science: Exhaust Heat Recovery
The concept of recovering waste exhaust heat is established, peer-reviewed science.
Energy Distribution in Engines
In a typical internal combustion engine:
- 30-40% of fuel energy converts to useful work
- 30-40% is lost through exhaust gases
- The remainder is lost through cooling and friction
That exhaust heat represents a massive opportunity. Recovering even a fraction could significantly improve efficiency.
Documented Technologies
| Technology | Efficiency Gain | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Turbocharging | 10-20% | Widespread commercial use |
| Thermoelectric Generators | 2-5% | Commercial |
| Organic Rankine Cycle | 6-32% | Research/Commercial |
| Fuel reforming with exhaust heat | Up to 13-20% | Research stage |
A 2023 paper in ACS Engineering Au concluded: “The thermal efficiency of ICEs can be boosted by more than 13% (and probably close to 20%) by heat recuperation from the exhaust gas using steam reforming or by decomposition of the fuel.”
This is the scientific basis for GEET’s potential. Using exhaust heat to pre-process fuel is not pseudoscience — it’s engineering.
Steam Reforming: The Most Likely Mechanism
Steam reforming is the primary industrial method for producing hydrogen, accounting for about 48% of global hydrogen production.
How Industrial Steam Reforming Works
| Parameter | Industrial Range |
|---|---|
| Temperature | 700-1,000°C (typically 800-925°C) |
| Pressure | 14-40 bar (200-600 psi) |
| Catalyst | Nickel-based (Ni, Ni+MgO, Pt, Rh) |
| Efficiency | 65-75% |
The key reaction is strongly endothermic:
CH₄ + H₂O → CO + 3H₂ (ΔH = 206 kJ/mol)
This means heat must be continuously supplied — which is exactly what the hot exhaust provides.
Can GEET Achieve Steam Reforming?
Here’s the problem: GEET operates at 260-480°C, while industrial steam reforming requires 700-1,000°C.
| Factor | GEET | Industrial SMR |
|---|---|---|
| Temperature | 260-480°C | 700-1,000°C |
| Catalyst | Iron/steel rod | Nickel, platinum, rhodium |
| Pressure | Near atmospheric | 14-40 bar |
| Residence time | Milliseconds | Seconds to minutes |
However, recent research has shown low-temperature steam reforming is possible with the right catalysts:
- Methanol steam reforming works at 200-350°C with copper-based catalysts
- With electric field assistance, water-gas shift reactions have been achieved at 150°C (423K) with dramatically reduced activation energy
The steel surfaces in GEET might provide some catalytic effect, but they’re far from optimal. Some reformation may occur, but at low efficiency.
Pyrolysis: Thermal Cracking
Pyrolysis — the thermal decomposition of organic materials — is another established industrial process that may occur in GEET.
Industrial Temperature Ranges
| Process | Temperature |
|---|---|
| Mild cracking (Visbreaking) | ~500°C |
| Standard thermal cracking | 450-750°C |
| Steam cracking | 750-900°C |
GEET’s central reactor portion reaches 315-480°C (600-900°F), which overlaps with the lower end of thermal cracking onset.
Some hydrocarbon decomposition might begin at these temperatures, but:
- Residence time is extremely short (flow-through system)
- No pressure enhancement
- No optimized cracking catalyst
- Efficiency would be very low compared to industrial processes
Verdict: Minor thermal cracking is plausible; significant reformation is unlikely.
Water Injection: Documented Benefits
Adding water to fuel-air mixtures has legitimate, peer-reviewed benefits:
Documented Effects
- NOx Reduction: Up to 80% at optimal water-fuel ratios
- Knock Suppression: Water’s evaporative cooling allows more advanced ignition timing
- Efficiency Gains: 5-15% improvement possible under certain conditions
The Mechanism
Water absorbs heat during vaporization (latent heat), cooling the intake charge. This:
- Increases air density (more oxygen per stroke)
- Reduces peak combustion temperatures (less NOx formation)
- Allows more aggressive ignition timing (more power)
This is established science. The GEET bubbler, which introduces water vapor with the fuel, likely produces real benefits through this mechanism — regardless of whether “plasma reformation” occurs.
What the Studies Actually Found
ENSAIS/Martz Study (2001)
- 20% fuel consumption reduction
- 85% pollution reduction
- Operation with 20% fuel / 80% water demonstrated
Limitation: Student thesis with constrained equipment; not peer-reviewed journal publication.
Mines de Douai Study (2007)
- 40% increase in fuel consumption
- 25% power reduction
- 50% reduction in CO/CO2 emissions
- 80% increase in unburned hydrocarbons
Finding: Mixed results that don’t support extraordinary claims.
University of Technology of Troyes
- “This system is utopian in the version studied”
- “Not as effective as a catalytic converter”
- “Does not help reduce petroleum consumption”
INRAE (French National Research Institute)
- “No notable reduction” in fuel consumption
- Pollution reduction “approximately the same whether the device is functioning or not”
Summary: The most rigorous studies found modest or no benefits. The positive results came from less controlled conditions.
What About “Plasma”?
Pantone described his reactor as a “Self-Induced Multiple Plasma Field Generator.” Let’s examine this claim.
What Is Plasma?
Plasma is ionized gas — the “fourth state of matter.” Creating plasma typically requires:
- Temperatures exceeding 5,000°C, or
- Strong electrical fields, or
- Intense electromagnetic radiation
GEET’s operating temperatures (max ~480°C) are nowhere near plasma conditions. There’s no ionization source, no electrical input, and no mechanism for achieving the required energy levels.
Critical Ionization Velocity (CIV)
Some proponents claim GEET achieves ionization through CIV — the velocity at which neutral gas begins ionizing when passing through plasma.
The problem: CIV for hydrogen is 50.9 km/s. Flow velocities in GEET are orders of magnitude lower. Laboratory demonstrations of CIV exist, but space experiments have largely failed to confirm it, and the conditions required don’t exist in a garage-built reactor.
The Honest Assessment
“Plasma” in GEET marketing appears to be terminology chosen for appeal rather than accuracy. The device may achieve some degree of fuel reformation, but not through plasma generation.
As one engineering student who built a working GEET device concluded: “No plasma was created, and I do believe that word usage was strictly just for the sales pitch of Paul Pantone. Thermodynamics are the true driving forces behind this concept.”
What GEET Probably Does
Based on the science, a well-constructed GEET system likely achieves:
Verified Effects
- Fuel preheating — Better vaporization, more complete combustion
- Water injection benefits — NOx reduction, charge cooling
- Exhaust heat recovery — Using otherwise wasted thermal energy
Possible Effects
- Minor fuel reformation — Some cracking of heavy molecules at elevated temperatures
- Catalytic effects — Metal surfaces may promote some reactions
Unverified Claims
- Plasma generation — No evidence at these temperatures
- Running on 80% water — Not demonstrated in controlled studies
- Zero emissions — Violates conservation of mass
- 200%+ efficiency gains — Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
The Practical Takeaway
GEET is probably best understood as an exhaust heat recovery and water injection system rather than a “plasma reactor.”
This doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. Exhaust heat recovery and water injection are legitimate technologies with documented benefits of 5-20% efficiency improvement and significant emissions reduction.
What it means is that the mechanism is more mundane than advertised, and the most extreme claims (80% water fuel, zero pollution, running on crude oil) remain unverified by rigorous testing.
Why Does This Matter?
Understanding the real science helps builders:
- Set realistic expectations — 20-30% improvement is valuable; 800% is fantasy
- Optimize construction — Focus on heat transfer and vaporization quality
- Troubleshoot failures — Understanding the actual mechanism helps identify problems
- Advocate honestly — Credibility requires accuracy
Paul Pantone gave his technology freely to the world. The best way to honor that gift is to understand it clearly — including both its genuine potential and its documented limitations.
Sources
Peer-Reviewed Research
- ACS Engineering Au - Heat Recuperation from ICE by Fuel Reforming
- RSC Advances - Thermochemical recovery technology
- Energy Conversion and Management - Water injection review