- [Narrator] Necessity is
the mother of invention, as the old saying goes. And while there are some amazing and brilliant invention
concepts in the world, not all of them are entirely feasible. In this video, I'll take
a look at five examples of projects that were doomed
to fail, from the start, due to simply being impossible. - Amazing! - [Narrator] Number five, Fontus. The 300,000 dollar
self-filling water bottle. In theory, the concept behind
the Fontus water bottle had remarkable real-world applications. Utilizing the properties of
latent heat vaporization, it was marketed as being
able to produce water, simply by being exposed to air and light. Effectively, making it
what is commonly known as a peltier device. Although, geared toward cyclists
who could strap the bottle into a carrier and produce
water as they biked, the technology would have had
humanitarian implications too. And for a mere 160
dollars, it was a bargain. After the Indiegogo project accrued over 340 thousand dollars, however, many people were disheartened to realize that Fontus didn't operate as promised. The YouTube channel, EEVBlog,
outlined the thermal dynamics behind the invention. Showing that it would take
upwards of 60 plus hours to fill, under normal circumstances. That the relative humidity
needed to produce results had to be upwards of 80 to 90 percent. And at the actual size
of the solar panel needed was several hundred times larger than the iPad-sized panel
that came with the Fontus. In theory, the technology
behind it is solid. But, in order for it
to be really effective, It would've had to be implemented
on a much larger scale. It seems a shame that so much ignorance even led to it winning awards. Including a mention from
the James Dyson Foundation, which recognizes young innovators. And, subsequently, gaining funding from the Austrian government. Number four, Triton Artificial Gill. Another really great idea
with a lot of promise, the Triton Artificial Gill
was maybe too good to be true. Advertised as a small,
mobile breathing apparatus, it would have been the next evolution of scuba diving equipment. Allowing divers to breath under water for upwards of 45 minutes, up
to a maximum depth of 15 feet. It wouldn't have to rely on bulky tanks, since it would use special filters that extracted oxygen molecules
directly from the water. Unfortunately, amateur scientists quickly debunked the
technology as being unfeasible. Mostly because it was
impossible for enough water to pass fast enough through the filters to produce enough oxygen. Even if such a device
were 100 percent effective and efficient, in order
to draw enough oxygen from the surrounding environment, it would have to pump nearly five liters through it's filters every 15 seconds. A second problem is that you would need somewhere to store the gas. And even though Triton's
schematics show a compressor, in order to work as advertised,
they would have to be better than anything currently on the market. The third and final problem is modulating the amount of oxygen
a diver would take in. Something that bigger and
bulkier breathing systems solve by adding other gasses,
such as helium or nitrogen. Following a slew of complaints, this led Triton's CEO, Saeed
Khademi, to cancel and refund the 800 thousand dollar
Indiegogo campaign. They eventually relaunched a new campaign, pointing out that the Triton
used liquid oxygen cartridges in order to work properly. So, while this may be a case of misrepresenting their product, rather than an outright scam, it's nevertheless damaged their trust. And it'll probably still be a few decades before we see the sort
of consumer technology that makes an independent
breathing system feasible for the mass market. Number three, TALOS Iron Man Suit. If you're going to waste taxpayer dollars, you have to at least hand it
to the Department of Defense for being ambitious. The Tactical Light
Operator Suit, or TALOS, takes it's cue from the Marvel universe by outfitting a soldier in an 80 million dollar piece of armor. Replete with enough high
tech devices and capabilities to make it reminiscent of a
sci-fi video game character. In conjunction with SOCOM and DARPA, the TALOS suit showed a lot of promise. Which included gel-like body armor that hardens instantaneously
when it comes into contact with high velocity projectiles. Unfortunately, bringing the project from theory to application
has been a long road. And critics have pointed
out a number of obstacles and trade off's in it's design. Which make it's benefits
practically impossible to achieve. Most notably, the suit,
in it's current phase, severely limits mobility. And is nearly impossible
to control with both hands, while simultaneously holding a weapon. Again, though it would be able to track a variety of different problems facing soldiers on the ground, including a thermal regulation system that would prevent them from overheating, and it would probably reduce
casualties in armed conflicts, the suit doesn't come cheap. In fact, congress has voiced
it's concern from the onset. Especially regarding the cost of even producing one workable prototype. Add that to the hundreds
of millions of capital the teams expects would be required to finish the project and implement it, and you have to wonder if you're really getting enough bang for your buck. No pun intended. Number two, Laser Razor. Hearing about any product
with the word laser in it, generally elicits a mixture of suspicion and nerdy excitement. And that was certainly the
case for a startup company, called Skarp, who began
advertising a next gen razor. It was water resistant, battery powered, and, yes, used laser technology to produce an incredibly close shave. However, the actual
description of the product used a lot of pseudo-scientific jargon. Such as using a specific
frequency of light to give a close shave. The only problem, Skarp didn't even have
a working prototype. And, according to scientists,
the fiber optics involved could, at best, cut a
single hair at a time. Meaning you'd be spending hours in front of the mirror every morning. That didn't stop Skarp
from producing a video which showed the razor cutting three hairs on the back of a man's head. But the fact it was never demonstrated doing what it was supposed to
do should have been a warning. Nevertheless, they
managed to bring in close to four million dollars, with promises to launch
their product in 2016. Which, of course, never carried through. And led to Kickstarter banning them. According to Kickstarter,
ban's can't be undone. So it should've ended there. But, soon after, an identical product was relaunched on Indiegogo
by the same company, and raised another 442 thousand dollars. This time, they promised
that 5,000 working prototypes had been made. And that the issue had been
in finding the proper diodes and fiber optics necessary. But until you see a five
star rating on Amazon, it's probably a good idea not to believe everything you see or hear. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice. Number one, Waterseer. Another device with great potential and an innovative approach
to new technology. The Waterseer, like the Fontus, was inspired as a way to help
alleviate water shortages. For only 134 dollars,
that alien-looking device featured a long, metal cylinder that was planted 6 feet in the soil. Where a condensation chamber, at the end, would collect water. On the top, a turbine would catch wind and direct air down the cylinder, where the relative
difference in air temperature and soil would create
a condensation effect. Originally, it was marketed
as being able to produce upwards of 11 gallons
of fresh water in a day. So, it's no wonder that many people hopped aboard the Waterseer train. If feasible, it would represent a solution to arid areas plagued by drought. So, the humanitarian
implications were obvious. During their Indiegogo campaign, they managed to pull in
nearly 334 thousand dollars. However, a close look at the
theory and practice revealed that 11 gallons was an
extremely ambitious estimate. One avid Redditor went
so far as to do the math. And, even in a climate
that was incredibly humid, he chose Kuala Lumpur, in Malaysia, the relative difference between
soil and air temperature hovered somewhere around eight degrees. This, by itself, which
was a generous estimate, doesn't necessarily
guarantee condensation. Given 100 percent humid air,
at 86 degrees Fahrenheit, and soil at 30 degrees Fahrenheit, which are ideal circumstances, you'd get only about
point five ounces of water per cubic yard of air pumped. At 50 percent humidity,
you'd get half of that. Additionally, the device
functions on the premise that the relative differences
in temperature will be stable. But, as warm air is driven down the tube, it would heat up the cylinder
and the surrounding soil. A variable that didn't seem to
be taken into consideration. That isn't to say that the project, which was designed by
students out of UC Berkeley, doesn't have some merit. And, perhaps, with further
research and development, might yield something of promise. But, for now, the analogy of
squeezing water out of rock seems to hold. The only limit to what people
will throw their money at seems to be the imagination
of those willing to push the envelope. Either academically or creatively. Sometimes it pays off
and sometimes it doesn't. And whether or not it will be remembered as a stepping stone to something
greater or a complete scam, is a judgment best left to history. Can you think of any
other expensive projects or inventions that didn't work? Or other examples of wasted
money in the pursuit of science? Feel free to leave a comment
in the section below. And don't forget to subscribe,
thanks for watching.
