Water burning engines...

[Texan]

Wonder why the BIG oil companies aren't showing this video??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rb_r...eature=rela...

o~\o

[TXplt]

Hydrogen or electric/hydrogen powered vehicles is what most of us have been alluding to on a decent energy policy in many of the previous threads. This has the potential to save us from oil.

However, this requires a source of hydrogen. The most promising of minimally polluting sources are nuclear power plants or conventional electric power plants. You can't get energy from water (unless it's moving !) any more than you can design a perpetual motion machine. Some outside energy source splits the water into hydrogen and oxygen -- either via a chemical reaction or electrolysis. This process requires energy. The hydrogen is later burned in either a conventional or fuel cell engine. It's very clean burning--basically, you're just recombining it back with oxygen to make water (thus getting back the energy you used splitting the water apart).

Hydrogen power will be great, but it's useless without the primary source of energy to make the hydrogen. That's why we need to start building right now. Storing hydrogen for any length of time without it venting is a bit tricky, but engineering will overcome this with little difficulty.

[TexasT]

It would just drive the price of water up....

[TXplt]

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

It's fizziks..............

I'm going back to buying my one gun a month....

[ArkansasHunter]

Was the inventer murdered ? I watched another video after this one that said he was killed, but it didn't say.

This country needs to jump on this and have a massage change over to it.
You can store enough hydrogen to get moveing and a generator can provide the energy.

[SKS NOOB]

Right now the power it takes to yeild the amount of HHO to power a car is more than the energy produced. It is a WONDERFUL step in the right direction, plus I saw this over a year ago on T.V., but improvements have to be made to be feasable. Also what they said was that the U.S. Govt was looking into his invention for their millitary vehicles. Imagine if the military were able to increase the yeilds. Who's OPEC?

[SwedeSteve]

Isn't it Gov Schwarz of CA who is trying to build the "Hydrogen HWY" from CA thru OR, and into WA?

[KGunner]

Why would big oil show a video of this? When you own a business, do you advertise your competitors? We have nobody to blame but ourselves for high gas prices...and India and China too.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by KGunner

Why would big oil show a video of this? When you own a business, do you advertise your competitors? ......

Gunner, my comment was tongue in cheek...!!!! My point exactly they don't want you to see this.

o~\o

[Zephri]

hmm water burning engine, what happens when the world gets short on water? probably much worse than being short on oil, we need this stuff to survive ya know!

[andrew cochran]

Originally Posted by ArkansasHunter

Was the inventer murdered ? I watched another video after this one that said he was killed, but it didn't say.

This country needs to jump on this and have a massage change over to it.
You can store enough hydrogen to get moveing and a generator can provide the energy.

I can imagine that he was. The oil companies don't want people to come up with this tecnology.

[Troy]

oil companies are what, recording record profits right now or near that anyway. of course they dont want this "free" energy. envirnmentally friendly or not, they aren't gonna stop till they've raped this planed of all the oil. then they will be the heros for finally implenting another fuel source. not cause they want to, but because they have to and they got to be first so they can make their money somewhere else since the oil is gone.

[Chris]

I'm in the process of putting a new engine into my mustang that sadly blew up. During my goofing around I've found a way to inject a bit of hydrogen into the engine and will increase the mpg by 20-30%. It's rather interesting, and I'm thinking of doing that...just think a mustang getting 40mpg. That's what I call hot.

[TXplt]

Originally Posted by SKS NOOB

Right now the power it takes to yeild the amount of HHO to power a car is more than the energy produced.

This will always be the case. Water is at a lower energy state than the Hydrogen and Oxygen that are burned to create it. When Hydrogen and Oxygen are combined via combustion they create water (and liberate heat energy). Splitting them apart (from water) requires the same energy as is gotten from putting them back together (i.e. combustion). In practice, the process loses energy because any heat engine loses typically between half and 2/3 of the energy put into it. Fuel cells also aren't close to 100% efficient either.

Originally Posted by Chris

I'm in the process of putting a new engine into my mustang that sadly blew up. During my goofing around I've found a way to inject a bit of hydrogen into the engine and will increase the mpg by 20-30%. It's rather interesting, and I'm thinking of doing that...just think a mustang getting 40mpg. That's what I call hot.

Please let us know how it turns out--I'd be interested if the MPG gain offset the cost of the hydrogen--this could be promising. I'd watch the temps and the cat, though--just like nitrous. Is it OK with the EEC ?

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Zephri

hmm water burning engine, what happens when the world gets short on water? probably much worse than being short on oil, we need this stuff to survive ya know!

Actually, you're burning the hydrogen that came from the water, and using the oxygen that came from the water, or oxygen from the air, to do it. The result is water again; so you aren't losing any. But as pointed out, you need a cheap, economical method and energy source to do the original splitting, as well as a practical way to distribute and store the hydrogen.

Nothing new or suppressed about this technology; Ahnold the Governator has a hydrogen-powered Hummer. It just isn't very practical or affordable right now.

[Big Dog]

Two big problems with any 'alternative fuel' vehicles....

1) Big Brother MUST be able to tax it, else it won't go mainstream.

2) You MUST have the infrastructure built nationwide to support it - fueling (or charging) stations, dealer network, cheaper batteries and safe disposal of same when they wear out.

Without this, it'll only be a guy here and there building his idea, and maybe some local municipalities doing it to 'go green'.

[Deersniper]

I talked with a Mechanic last night, who has tinkered with it. He said you can pay 150, 300, up to 3000 dollars for units available, but you wouldn't have enough room to put it under the hood. You would have to have a 5-10 gallon pressurized tank, and would have to maintain the water level at all times. If you just filled that tank with pressurized hydrogen, you could introduce it like nitrous oxide but O2 sensors would have to rewired to run the engine lean which would involve computers, sensors etc. He said just go buy a more economical car.

[TXplt]

^^
When we get to hydrogen powered cars, storage is a problem (H's energy density when only compressed isn't much good). Liquid Hydrogen is OK and would work for "gas" stations, but needs to vent over time like LOX--you could probably minimize the H lost, though. Engineering will overcome this in time (i.e. it's an issue but not a really big problem in the grander scheme of getting the primary energy sources). Electrolysis of water within the car itself (i.e. splitting of the water by the electrical system) is a negative energy proposition (by about 2/3 or more -- you'll lose over 2/3 of the energy vice what you'll gain back from the Hydrogen--for every 1 cup of fuel you'll get less than 1/3 a cup doing useful work). This could be different if the hydrogen injected dramatically improves the temperature and efficiency of the fuel burning in the cylinders. I don't mean to rain on the parade, but I don't think this is so.

I am interested in if the injection of hydrogen or a hydrogen/oxygen mixture would improve combustion effeciency of fuel itself to the extent it'd be economically worthwhile. My gut feeling is no (otherwise someone would be doing it by now). Maybe I'm wrong--in this case that would be a good thing.

[jimkim]

TXplt what do you think of a home fueling station that would use this device and a compressor to fill a small tank. It would work for people who make small commutes. It could come with a solar panel. You could hook it to your plumbing let it run all day. When you get home you would change out tanks. They would be in the back like NOX tanks. I think if it would produce 5 gallons equivalent fuel a day it would work for most people. It could be set to automatically turn off when the tank was full. I've been waiting on this for over twenty years now. I believe we have the technology to build it now. The unit could be sold with the vehicle.

[TXplt]

To be brutally honest, I suspect the original device listed in the top might actually be one of those gas saving hoaxes (that's why I'm interested to see if people actually can improve gas mileage via hydrogen injection--it could work, but I've not seen it happen--doesn't mean it couldn't work either). Hydrogen is a great fuel; it burns clean and spectacularly hot. If a little hydrogen would improve combustion all that much, what you described will work with no problems. If not, it still might help depending on your energy needs.

What you described is potentially a good idea--you use some type of energy source (solar panels, windmill, maybe power off the grid to supplement these) to split water into hydrogen and oxygen and collect and compress this--just remember that even for short trips, the amount of energy you'd need to generate is a fair bit (let's say you drive a car for 30 minutes a day even if only requiring an average of 20 HP -- to "charge" this car you'd need a 90 amp car alternator to operate at full load for 11 hours a day which is a bit of a feat). For a multi-fuel vehicle, it could be used as the primary fuel for short trips, and as a supplemental fuel for longer trips. When we evolve to hydrogen powered cars, it could supplement the "gas" you buy from the hydrogen station. What it would come down to, I think, is cost. After development, would this system (with the plumbing and capital installation) cost less than an equivalent system of powering the vehicle off the grid (or off the solar cells/windmills) using batteries ? It might be more efficient or cost effective to use the solar cells/windmills to charge high density batteries and use these either as stand alone in a vehicle or as a hybrid (with batteries and a hydrogen fuel cell perhaps). I guess the bottom line in the whole concept would be the bottom line--could the solar cells/windmills/etc. you install to generate enough power to satisfy the energy needs of your trips justify their cost over the long term. In general, unfortunately, the answer to this for most people has been no (even with Gas at $10 a gallon or electricity at 30c/kwh it's still, energy wise, a thermodynamic bargain).

This is probably why we don't see alot more of individual energy independance in the U.S. (i.e. homes generating their own energy--although generating your own energy is kind of a good thing). Our energy requirements are significant, even as individuals, and rolling your own takes a fairly large capital expenditure for both installation and MX--money which you can spend elsewhere (it can work though, although not typically in urban areas). When you think of it, our power plants are really amazing animals and enjoy very significant returns to scale (1 plant can satisfy the needs of many homes, alot cheaper than you can do on your own). We just need to use a better primary energy source (which we currently have available--nuclear, renewables, coal, and fusion), and need to use this (not oil) to power our cars sometime soon.

Anyway, my 2C worth