QS Energy Inc (QSEP)

[As I See It]

In light of all of your claims that the AOT can't reduce crude oil viscosity because it violates some crackpot law of nature that you just dreamed up and have yet to defend:

Please explain why we are about to go on another pipeline of a major multi-billion dollar energy company to test the AOT's ability to reduce viscosity of crude oil with an electric field.

Please explain the report from the second largest Chinese oil company verifying that Dr. Tao's electric field did in fact reduce the viscosity of crude oil.

Please explain how the AOT was run for one week, 24 hours a day, on a live pipeline in China achieving "results consistent with" the amazing lab test results I highlighted in post #46965.

Please explain how the engineers working for the DOE verified test results indicating the viscosity of crude oil was reduced by the AOT.

Please explain how ATS concluded that the AOT reduced viscosity of crude oil treated on the TransCanada pipeline. Don't throw in the red herring about the initial test being flawed. ATS said that a subsequent test showed viscosity reduction and that it could have been better if the engineering of the device was improved.

the first full test of the AOT equipment on the Keystone pipeline was performed in July 2014 by Dr. Rongjia Tao of Temple University, with subsequent testing performed by an independent laboratory, ATS RheoSystems, a division of CANNON (“ATS”) in September 2014. Upon review of the July 2014 test results and preliminary report by Dr. Tao, QS Energy and TransCanada mutually agreed that this initial test was flawed due to, among other factors, the short term nature of the test, the inability to isolate certain independent pipeline operating factors such as fluctuations in upstream pump station pressures, and limitations of the AOT device to produce a sufficient electric field to optimize viscosity reduction. Subsequent testing by ATS in September 2014 demonstrated viscosity reductions of 8% to 23% depending on flow rates and crude oil types in transit. In its summary report, ATS concluded that i) data indicated a decrease in viscosity of crude oil flowing through the TransCanada pipeline due to AOT treatment of the crude oil; and ii) the power supply installed on our equipment would need to be increased to maximize reduction in viscosity and take full advantage of the AOT technology.

Obviously the crude oil viscosity was reduced for significantly longer than a few milliseconds.. But hey, why should we believe actual field tests run by actual scientists?

You can argue that we haven't been successful with a commercial product YET, but you can't argue that some lame idea of a physical law of nature has prevented the AOT from reducing the viscosity of crude oil.

Your little equation "mass flow m=density * velocity" is simply a definition and is irrelevant to our discussion of reducing viscosity. The AOT will ultimately either increase the velocity number in your equation or reduce the power needed to maintain the velocity.

What is with this crap?:

Look how pundits bring up Tao’s neutron scattering Petrie dish test that happen close to a decade ago but fail to acknowledge its never been run again or backed up by an independent researcher in the field. Why not run it again...this is claimed as a new discovery that would disrupt industries yet not a single additional neutron scattering test to back it up.

We all know the reason for this question. The "pundit of a different stripe" doesn't like the results of this test, done at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and is desperately trying to invalidate them by any stupid means possible. Photographic evidence at the nano level is difficult to dispute. Nice try.

I'm sorry. I just noticed the defense for "The Laws Of Nature" fiction. Here it is:

Qsep claims a mass flow increase of over 6% simply by applying the magic field which acts in opposition to the know physical laws that keep getting twisted around

I don't know what to say except WOW!!! Dam those "twisters".