The market is rejecting battery-powered electric vehicles!
    The battery electric vehicle (BEV) market has peaked, and some say it's declining. There is a growing sentiment that there will be no market transition to BEVs even though politicians have spent trillions of dollars in public money to force it. Companies that only produce BEVs may not have a future unless they abandon the BEV market or make them truly user-friendly. Tesla ended 2023 with 88,009 reported unsold BEVs, and its stock price fell by more than 65%. More than 30 BEV manufacturers in the West and hundreds of others in China have gone bankrupt, leaving tens of thousands of vehicles unsold. Even dealers and banks are still being affected as tens of thousands of BEVs collect dust on sales lots. The price of electric vehicles fell, production lines stopped working, and thousands of workers were driven home. People want a viable choice! Political interference in the auto market has reached a breaking point when governments recently began introducing legislation to eventually give the world grid a complete and total monopoly on motive power. Both the auto industry and its loyal customers are now resisting being forced into only buying BEVs.  (see Figure 2) Recently, the U.S. Congress responded to this growing discontent by passing a bill (H.R. 1435) that prevented California and other U.S. states from adopting or enforcing regulations that "directly or indirectly restrict the sale or use of new motor vehicles with internal combustion engines.  "Freedom of Choice ruling!

Why BEVs are losing market share: 

1. BEV's Limited Range Causes Stressful "Range Anxiety"!
2. Insurance companies report that BEVs are involved in accidents 50% more, and there may be a fire hazard if their batteries are damaged. This is reflected in their insurance rates skyrocketing.  Guardian Mag 
3. BEV owners have 79% more reliability problems than fuel-powered vehicles. Institute for Energy Research
4. The heavy batteries of BEVs cause them to handle poorly, leading to more problems.
5. BEVs cannot stop quickly in an emergency due to their weight. 60-0 mph Tesla = 152 ft. BMW 331i = 100 ft. (data from, Tesla Consumer Report, BMW Edmunds)
6. BEVs cause greater CO2 emissions as well as toxic and carcinogenic emissions than ICE vehicles.  Science Direct
7. BEVs have twice the tire wear of ICE vehicles. Emissions Analytics tests show that tires produce about 2,000 times more particulate pollution than exhaust pipes. Guide House 
8. The computer interface of the BEVs causes distractions and accidents for the driver. Study on EV touch screen safety.
9. BEVs have a low resale value. The Fortune Magazine website recently noted, "No one wants to buy used EVs and they're piling up in weed-infested graveyards."  Fortune Magazine

Kamtech RE can fix these problems. 
     Kamtech's RE technology is more environmentally friendly than any other EV technology. It can also solve many problems with current EVs and better meet the needs and desires of the automotive market than any other alternative. Its widespread application can not only effectively reduce society's CO2 emissions, but more importantly, Kamtech's RE can more effectively use the commodity that has become the foundation of modern life and pulled billions out of poverty,  petroleum.

Lie #1 "EVs are Zero Emission Vehicles!"  
    Perhaps one of the reasons the car buying public is starting to resist buying EV is the massive amount of lies that have been used in marketing them.  The first lie and perhaps the greatest lie about Electric Vehicles was told by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) when they called EVs  "Zero-Emission Vehicles"!  In 1990, California passed laws demanding the development of Electric Vehicles.  The commercial development of EVs was to take a few more decades despite close to a billion dollars of tax monies being gifted to many politically connected corporations over the next three decades.    

Inspiration Needed To Make EVs Road Ready.
   At the time the best example of an Electric Vehicle was the humble golf cart that was used on private lands.  One of the first moves was the 1995 taxpayer grant of about 300 million USD in today's money, to General Motors Corporation to build just 600 BEVs.  That's about half a million for each BEV.  After a few years of public use, they were all destroyed. Not a good start!  https://www.businessinsider.com/gm-ev1-history-2016-3

The Political Class Saw The Need to Organize.
    By 2008 massive amounts of money were flowing between the politicians and a few developers of EV.  One EV entrepreneur was destined to become richer than half the countries in the world.  In 2015 to better organize several international, state, and provincial government regulators and lawmakers to manage the gifting of tax monies, and receipt of lobbying monies the “International Zero Emission Vehicle” Alliance (ZEV Alliance) was formed.  Their noble-sounding goal "to accelerate society's transition to 100% 'zero-emission vehicle' sales".  https://theicct.org/international-zero-emission-vehicle-alliance/ The only losers have been the world's taxpayers and electric ratepayers.  (See slide 1)

Organized To Advertise A Lie.
     Then a few years ago, several EV makers and their support industries joined forces with several large Electric Utilities Corporations and formed a lobbying group called "Zero Emission Transportation Association" or ZETA.   The goals of this wealthy lobbying group were threefold.  1. Seek out massive government subsidies and tax breaks for their members, and 2. Get large taxpayer subsidies for the buyers, and builders of BEVs. 3. Eventually get a legal monopoly that would force all vehicle owners to be permanently plugged into their utility members' large smoke-belching Electric plants.  (See slide 2)  See https://www.zeta2030.org/  To achieve these goals ZETA started pouring millions of dollars into, the pockets of media influencers, and the world's political leaders.   Their main propaganda tool was the lie that BEVs produce "Zero Emissions" when they are made or driven!  However, this is a lie of the first order!  Several independent studies have concluded that BEVs are responsible for far more CO2 as well as millions of tons of water vapor and several deadly chemicals being emitted into Earth's atmosphere than comparable-sized ICE vehicles.  (see slide 3)

Kamtech RE Has Lower Emissions From Start to End Of Life
    Kamtech's RE technology, when used to power a REEV will emit far lower CO2/km than any BEV, ICE, or hybrid.  Slide 3 clearly shows this.  The greenest line on the graph is the one added to illustrate the lifetime CO2 emissions of a Kamtech REEV.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1E8SQde5rk&t=692s

Lie # 3 "CO2 Is Deadly To Life On Earth!"
    For the last six decades, the "Climate Industrial Complex" has documented an increase of 1 CO2 molecule in 10,000 molecules of air.  Based on this somewhat questionable data thousands of members of the "Climate Industrial Complex" have become very wealthy getting Government grants while preaching the Earth will soon become unlivable for humans, therefore governments must outlaw fueled vehicles.

Is CO2 Going To Doom Earth?
    On the other side of this argument are thousands of biologists who have noted that if greenhouse CO2 content gets below 1 molecule per 6,000 molecules of air plants die, and without plants, Earth would become a dead planet!  
 https://essopenarchive.org/users/459592/articles/608417-we-are-in-a-co2-drought-not-much-time-left-for-life-on-planet-earth 

The World's Top Climate Experts Exposed for Fabricating Data!
    In the fall of 2009 several of the world's leading "Climate Experts" were caught up in the famous "Climategate" scandal.  The scandal involved hundreds of hacked email messages between some of the richest and most outspoken leaders of the so-called "Climate Industrial Complex".  These emails clearly revealed that these developers of thousands of data points for historic CO2 levels had conspired to fake massive amounts of their  "historic" temperature and CO2 data to fit their claims that atmospheric CO2 was historically very low.  These historic estimates were shaped from examining the tree rings of a few bristlecone and foxtail pines trees in the Western United States, and a few other locations.  Biologists note that tree ring width normally indicates the amount of water a tree receives not its temperature.   Any temperature of CO2 data history based on the tree ring width from a few trees in one or two areas would be about as meaningful as reading tea leaves.  
https://www.perc.org/2010/06/09/the-case-against-the-hockey-stick/

Water Vapor Is A Far More Active Greenhouse Gas 
   A paper by Ahilleas Maurellis and Jonathan Tennyson, cited below, called water vapor "the most vital molecule in our atmosphere, yet it is rarely discussed. Indeed, water barely rates a mention in the hundreds of pages of the 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change."  Why are water vapor and clouds not considered in any Climate Models, when water molecules are frequently 100 times more plentiful in the world's atmosphere and have a far greater greenhouse effect than CO2?    Could it be a fear of offending the commercial sector that pumps billions of tons of water vapor into Earth's atmosphere every day, the world's electric utilities?  This same sector adds 70% of the heat energy used to power their massive heat engines directly into Earth's atmosphere, directly causing global warming.  (Thermal Pollution)    https://jvarekamp.web.wesleyan.edu/CO2/359%20CC%2008/PWMAY03.pdf
https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/watervapor01.htm 

Driving BEVs Increases Deadly Gases In Earth's Atmosphere.
   When BEVs recharge from the grid they become directly responsible for emitting not just CO2 but several cancer-causing gasses, and caustic acids, produced by the grid's large steam or gas turbine heat engines.
This is not a significant issue with internal combustion-powered vehicles.
What motivates regulators and lawmakers to want to force people into BEVs against their will when their energy source is so damaging to people's health and the climate?  Clearly, the most dangerous "Climate Feedback loop" is the one that moves trillions of dollars coming out of the pockets of taxpayers into the pockets of members of the Climate Industrial Complex.

BEVs Greatest Emissions Of CO2 Happens When They're Made!
     In 2017, a Swedish government study looked at how much CO2 is emitted by the making of BEV battery packs of different sizes. The study found that the extraction, transportation, and production of EV batteries released between 254 kg and 270 kg of CO2/kWh into the planet's atmosphere.  A BEV with a 100 kWh battery is responsible for more CO2 emissions than 10,000 liters of gasoline before it leaves the factory.   This is equivalent to the fuel used to drive a Toyota Camry well over 80,000 km. see:   https://www.energimyndigheten.se/globalassets/forskning--innovation/transporter/c243-the-life-cycle-energy-consumption-and-co2-emissions-from-lithium-ion-batteries-.pdf  A Kamtech REEV would be responsible for a fraction of the CO2 emitted by a BEV, and less water vapor.  Kamtech also uses Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition which allows for very lean burn, at lower temperatures.  See Exhibit section.

The Visionaries Behind The Concept    
    In 1982 Professor Antoni Oppenheim, of the University of California coauthored an SAE paper with J. Douglas Dale University of Alberta entitled "A Rationale for Advances in the Technology of IC Engines, (SAE #820047) Professor Oppenheim had made outstanding contributions towards advancing mankind's knowledge of combustion and especially the dynamics of explosions and reactive systems. Though retired he continued doing research at the University of California until he died.  This 1982 paper noted that the mechanics of the Internal Combustion Engine, which was first patented in 1861, had reached its peak of development by the end of the 1960s. In the 1970s the auto industry was confronted with two issues, pollution, and high fuel costs.  

The Industry Chooses  Band-Aid Fixes
    What was the auto industry's response to these two issues? The whole sector chose a band-aid approach. In the mid-1970s many countries made laws mandating the use of catalytic converters to finish burning unburned fuel that were needed to keep the engine parts from melting. However, the added back-pressure they caused lowered thermal efficiency. Then in an attempt to compensate for the standard engine’s flawed mechanical design, the industry added computer controls and lowered compression ratios.

The Internal Combustion Engine Concept Needed A Totally New Design!
    Oppenheim and Dale's 1982 paper argued that far more needed to be done to fix the systemic flaws of the typical 4-stroke Otto cycle heat engine. The paper challenged the industry to radically improve the basic mechanical design of the ICE concept to provide a more favorable environment for the combustion process and the extraction of mechanical energy from the combustion process. They outlined the goal of such a new engine design as, (1) minimizing pollutant emissions, (2) maximizing engine efficiency, and (3) optimizing tolerance to a wider variety of fuels.

The Internal Combustion Engine Concept Has Far Greater Potential!
    The paper also recognized that the IC engine concept was a far superior power source for vehicles because of the concept’s inherent potential for greater efficiency, compactness, and its fuel's high energy density when compared to batteries.  There is 13.1 kWh of energy in a kg of gasoline while only about .17 kWh of energy can be stored in a kg of batteries.

Who Will Take Up The Challenge?
    In the early 1990s, Jim Duncalf, owned a small machine shop and engineering firm with clients in the computer chip industry and the local Toyota plant.  Duncalf was a long-time energy conservation advocate who had spent five years on the speaker's bureau of the Illinois Department of Energy.  He was the grandson of an Engineer who got his degree when steam engines were the main power source for society.   In 1991 while doing research to improve a client's cam-driven manufacturing machine at the West Coast Patent Library, Duncalf came across twenty-some old patents for cam-based engines.

Silicon Valley's Most Famous Pioneer Had The Same Vision! 
     After studying the patents Duncalf became fascinated with the concept especially when he learned of other successful engines that had been made in the late 1920s. One backed by Sherman Fairchild, whose company made the world's first semiconductor, and was considered the father of Silicon Valley had produced several extremely robust cam-centered engines for the US Navy. Fairchild's cam engine the 447-C was the first engine to successfully complete the US Navy's type certificate process, being awarded engine ATC No. 1 on June 1, 1928.  Duncalf reasoned that ATM's new computer-controlled (CNC) milling machines could now do a much better job making an engine than Fairchild's cam engines which were made with manually controlled milling machines and lathes.  See Caminez

Duncalf Faced Lots Of Discouraging Words!
     For several months Duncalf's discussion with other engineers about designing a modern version of a cam engine was met with extreme negativity. Finally, an engineer acquaintance at California's Laurence Livermore Lab set up a meeting with Professor Oppenheim. On that very first meeting, Professor Oppenheim was extremely positive about the concept as a way to improve the basic design of the ICE concept.  He quickly agreed to give his assistance and guidance in Duncalf's design efforts. Oppenheim explained the challenge he and his associate had made to the automotive sector outlined in his 1982 SAE paper and gave Duncalf a copy of the paper, along with several other articles on other engine designs. He also explained why the engine should be configured as a 2-stroke. Several brainstorming sessions later Duncalf filed his his first of many patents on the concept.

 The Team Went Down Many Dead Ends.
    Like the development of any new technical concept, trial, and error guided the team toward the most practical design as dead-end concepts were tried and abandoned.  Any new technology involves the invention of both the final product and the invention of the manufacturing and assembling process. The process of this self-funded development was destined to take years.

It Took A Decade Of Design Work.  
    After almost a decade of brainstorming sessions, design, and component testing finally, in 2001 Duncalf produced two different dynamic/assembly prototypes to test the robustness of lower-end and experiment with assembly methods. The cam profile and retaining system had to withstand all the inertial forces while operating at running speeds.  The first design had several flaws but it did prove that the basic design could withstand at least the inertial forces of a running engine.  However, Duncalf quickly realized that he had reached the limit of his skill, expertise, and knowledge of actually building working prototypes.  It was time to look for help.  That help came with the signing of a license in 2001 with Mark Beierly owner of Earthstar Aircraft in Santa Margarita, California, USA.

A New Player Brings New Perspectives And Success. 
    Beierly vision for the design was to build aircraft engines. However, Duncalf's vision was to provide a mobile power-generating system for Electric Vehicles that would be far more efficient, cleaner, and emit a fraction of the CO2 and none of the more toxic substances produced by the world’s mostly coal and natural gas-powered electric grid.  Out of this new association came many new ideas that would lead to better designs.
The resulting design work resulted in these and other patents.
US Patent US5553574A 1995 Duncalf
US Patent US6691648B2 2002 Beierly
World Patent WO2014/107628A1 2014 Duncalf
World Patent WO2016/0230556 2016 Duncalf and Agent
.
 More Patents And Success.
     The early development team included two consultants, Professor Oppenheim, and Henry Yunick, and two engine builders, Jim Duncalf and the staff of Advance Technologies Machine who built the first 2 dynamic test designs, in 2001.  Later that year Mark Beierle, of Earthstar Aircraft and his staff joined the team to add his improvements to the concept.  Earthstar Aircraft financed and built the next 3 working prototypes.  They were successful beyond belief.  They showed clearly that the Radial Cam concept could raise thermal efficiency very close to 50%.  The longer dwell time on both ends of the stroke allowed time for more of the heat to be converted into work and the exhaust temperatures were so low (450 C) that one of the prototypes used an aluminum exhaust manifold.  While the team felt very vindicated by this success Professor Oppenheim warned that there might be some political opposition ahead, based on the governments strong anti-ICE engine stand that they were taking against the auto industry.  He told us of a few life experiences he had of powerful political opposition that derailed promising technologies, blocking their commercialization with threats, fines and even lies about the technologies.    

Powerful Political Interests Not Happy
    Oppenheim's words rang true very quickly.  Within a year of publishing the Rad-Cam's development, political pressure began against Duncalf and Beierly.  https://www.ultraligero.net/Descargas/Manuales/Rad_Cam/R_8600.htm The threats were implied at first but eventually became intense.  Eventually, heavy government fines were levied which were framed as tax violations.  

The Development Team Got a Lesson on America's Two-Tiered Justice System
The message was made clear to both Duncalf and Beierly.   The heavily lobbied political class wanted to see the internal combustion engine eventually outlawed, and they did not want to see any improvements made to the technology.  It became clear that the same rules did not apply to the owners of the massive coal-fired or natural gas-fired heat engines that pump millions of tons of pollution into the atmosphere while making power for the electric grid and the growing number of EVs.  Billions of tax dollars were being gifted to the owners of America's electric grid and several companies that make electric vehicles.    https://www.deseret.com/2000/4/22/19503215/gore-urges-demise-of-combustion-engine/ 

Follow The Money!
       Many of the world's politicians have been swayed to enforce the wishes of the rich owners of the world's electric grid.  This sector's lobbyists spend millions of dollars each year to make sure their interests are given priority in laws and regulations.  This politically powerful sector has a long-term plan to get a total legal monopoly to provide all the motive power to society.  This was a déjà vu moment for Duncalf.  In the mid-1970s he faced opposition against his solar-powered technology from a local power company that wanted to exert its monopoly rights.  He was not alone in this fight which came to a head when the US passed the "Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978".  This Law broke the previous monopolies held by the large electric utility companies. In 1935 Duncalf's father had his parent's windmill/battery electric system destroyed under an 1880 Utility monopoly law that did not permit farms or private people to generate electric power once a monopoly was given to a territory.

Development Halted For Years
    Beierly left the development team fearful of continued problems with regulators.  He sold his business but remains on as its manager and designer. His new direction was to develop battery-electric powered aircraft.  For several years the EV/electric grid lobby group ZETA has openly published its goal, which is stated with this note "by 2030 every car sold in the United States must be an electric car", so eventually every vehicle owner will have to buy energy from the Electric Grid.

 Forced Compliance Brings Postpones Development
     It took Duncalf 6 years to pay off the fines levied but in 2009 he moved to Florida and quietly started working on the concept again. In mid-May of 2011 Duncalf posted this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFYlx-rxWgM Shortly there after a 30k fine was again demanded from Duncalf if he continued his work on his ICE concept.  Finally tired of fighting in 2013, under the advise of his attorney Duncalf changed his DBA to Kamtech SA and left the US to continue his work to further develop the RE concept, under an agreement with his patent agent and shareholder of a Vietnamese Company. After working with the Vietnamese company for fourteen months, the company failed to produce any parts to the required specs. This led to the filling of the last patents.  

The Design Is Finally Ready For Prime Time
    Over the next few years, Duncalf and his new associate, Pham Duy Tung self-funded one more engine to test the dynamics of the redesigned lower end. The lower end proved to be robust, other changes such as the use of a carbon piston were not successful.  The last design work was to develop an improved thermal management system.  Once again it is clear that Kamtech needs to recruit a larger company that has the infrastructure, ability, and desire to finally put this revolutionary engine design to work for society.

The Team Needs Your Help.
    Duncalf and Pham are now seeking a partner to bring to market the Kamtech RE.   Kamtech's thermal efficiency is what makes it a significant technological breakthrough that will advance electric vehicle design making them truly "user-friendly".

As outlined above in the early 1990s UC Berkeley Professor Antony K. Oppenheim, offered to assist mechanical engineer Jim Duncalf who owned a small engineering firm, Advance Machine Technologies in designing a more efficient internal combustion engine based on cam-actuated pistons.

    To help solve some of the project's many mechanical issues, Duncalf consulted with the famous retired mechanic Smokey Yunic.  Once the mechanics of the cam system were proven to be sufficiently robust the team was joined by engineer Mark Beierle of Earth Star Aircraft Company.  Mark was responsible for several design changes and built and tested three fully operational prototypes.  Many years later Duncalf moved to Vietnam and eventually was joined by Pham Duy Tung to assist in building the last prototype and design the final RE design.   The sixth prototype was to test the most recent design changes and new materials.  This test prototype was built in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Kamtech SA is a dba of the two remaining principals.

    The current design has also had significant design input from Professor Huynh Thanh Cong, who teaches Internal Combustion Engine technology, at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology.