Sadly, I can't access it from home (subscription needed), but Nature's news section published an editorial this week about Kanzius, essentially slamming the idea. They didn't address one possible outcome (a more energy-efficient way to do electrolysis), but they did a more thorough debunking of the 'perpetual motion' model of energy this guy was apparently claiming. (Essentially, you break apart water to get hydrogen, then burn the hydrogen to produce water again. That's a closed loop, so it can't produce energy, and will always lose a little.)

Nature is, in general, fairly conservative in their claims, and it's not a good sign for this guy's physical evidence that they're already taking a position.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com