Sorry, but some things do have limits. There is ONLY that much chemical power available in 150 liters of hydrogen gas. It's all there is.
The first 5 items on your list aren't constrained by the laws of thermodynamics.
And, I NEVER said it was impossible to run a motor on anything other than gasoline. I just said that it isn't practical, and the limits aren't imposed by people, or by wishful thinking. It is physically impossible for hydrogen gas to contain more than 52 KCal for every 22.4 liters of gas at standard temp/pressure. There just aren't enough hydrogen atoms to combine with oxygen to provide any more.
That is different from technological limits. For instance, no one thought you could have a flashlight that could light up for a half hour just by shaking it for a minute. There was no physical limit - just a technological one. But, THREE different technologies had to develop to the point where it could be possible. First, white LEDs of sufficient brightness (and yet low energy consumption) had to be developed. Second, light-weight, high strength magnets had to be developed in order to provide a generator with enough capicity at a low enough weight . Third, high capacity, ultra-low leakage capacitors to store the energy until it could be used had to be developed. Once all three legs of a "shakem flashlight" WERE developed, it was only a matter of time until someone came up with the idea.
The same thing, to a certain extent, happened with the first 5 items on your list. For instance, the flat earth theory was KNOWN to be false by educated men since several hundred BC, AND Erastothenes calculated the correct size of the earth at about the same time. However, Ptolemy thought that the diameter of the earth was only about half its actual size, and, because he was better known than Erastothenes, (he must have had a better publicist...) his ideas were given more credit. Columbus failed! He was trying to get to China by heading west. If the Americas weren't in the way, Columbus would have turned around, and might have gotten back home. Maybe.
What you're proposing, graucho, is different. Electrolysis of hydrogen from water is a well understood process. Men have been electrolyzing hydrogen from salty water for 200 years. Internal combustion engines have been in a constant state of development for more than a hundred years. We are already at about 50% efficiency in converting the potential energy from fuel into mechanical energy - into work. Even IF we are able to start using ceramic bearings, rings, pistons, valves and cylinders, eliminating the need for lubrication, and virtually eliminating friction, we can't do more than double the output of the engine, EVEN with the "perfect" engine. That's not going out on a limb on my part. I'm sorry that you've invested so much time in this thing. But, the ONLY thing that could make this an attainable endeavor is a radically new process to break the hydrogen-oxygen bond in water, that doesn't need more as much energy as is present in hydrogen that's released as it takes to extract it. You're using 95 kilowatts of energy to extract 5 kilowatts worth of hydrogen. And then, burning that hydrogen in an engine that only returns half of the energy as useful work. THAT's just not going to cut it.