You still need energy to make the HHO: if this is real. No mention on how efficient the process of making the HHO is.

Its probably a typo meant to be H2 gas or something of that nature. either that or HHO is an abbr. for something and not 2 hydrogens and an oxygen

No way this can be real...

This guy is going to wash up in the English Channel just like Rudolph Diesel, whose diesel engine initally was run on vegetable oil. After his death oil companies started selling what we now think of as diesel fuel, petrodiesel. In a few years we'll see this guy's HHO engine running on petroHHO.

Any idiot who's been through high school chemistry can use electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen gasses. They even conveniently accumulate at the opposite electrodes. I don't feel like working out the details, but there might well be enough hydrogen and oxygen in four ounces of water to provide enough energy to propel a vehicle a hundred miles. What the guy fails to mention though is that the amount of electrical energy you must put into the electrolysis process exceeds the energy you get back out when you recombine the hydrogen and oxygen gasses.

I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on this. When last I checked, electrolysis is a lossy process, meaning that you lose a good deal of energy in creating the HHO gas. This would work fine at home, on the guy's welder, where you can plug it into the wall and get all the energy you need. In a car though, you either have to bring the fuel ready-made or have a big enough battery to make it on the fly.

HHO is not actually water, water (H2O) is actually 2 sets of H2O 2(H2O). so HHO is what you get when you split water, the first step in making hydrogen fuel. If this company has figured out a way to do this inexpensively, then we have a new and bright future ahead of us... i hope exxon treats the guy well.

I spent a few minutes crawling around on the net, so to save you all a few minutes, I'll post a summary: This is basically a hoax. The math essentially works out that it's impossible to get that much mechanical energy from electrolysis, the welds are weak and horribly inefficient compared to more conventional processes, and the whole idea has been around long before this guy existed and still hasn't panned out. Don't waste any more time on this guy.

Thank you deeddawg and DeeJayQueue. It's only because of guys like you that we don't have to change "Gizmodo" into "National Examiner online" You need to have a grasp of one of two things to call "Oscar Mayer Balogna!" on this one: 1. a vague knowledge of thermodynamics 2. that old maxim: If it sounds too good to be true...

http://hytechapps.com/index.html Here is the link to the guys site. The Fox news report seemed to blow HHO's capacity out of proportion.

DeeJay, thus why he made his car a hybrid. Anyone can tell that there was still a major factor missing from what they told us in that report. The important thing is that there is progress being made.

I saw a similar clip about this guy a couple of months ago. It looks like he uses electrolysis to create hydrogen. He burns the Hydrogen (hence the flame) and then the Hydrogen quickly recombines with Oxygen to form water again. He still needs a lot of energy to drive the electrolysis, proably from electricity. If he does have a unique electrolysis process, it could still be useful; it could form the basis of a home electrolyis system to fuel your car overnight. This is not the alternative energy breakthrough you were looking for. Move along.

I like the idea of using water instead of Acetylene for a cutting torch, takes a lot of headache out of replacing used cylinders. On a car however, something doesn't add up. It does take a large amount of power to split enough water to push a 2000lb car. Power supply would be the trick to this. 4 ounces of water to go 100 miles is reasonable, because the system will contain a lot more than that. The water will be continuously recycled in the system while losing some in exhaust to keep the system running smoothly. I other words, as the the atoms form other things like HO and O3 and even a little CO2, the imupurities will be exhausted to keep from interfering with the cycles operation.

There's no way in hell I'm going to pile on and take a shot at this guy. More power to him. I'd rather give this guy a million in tax money than give 100000 billion to Al Gore to throw down a bottomless hole that takes us nowhere.

This is actially kind of funny. I actually went to Largo High School, which is right next to Clearwater Florida, back in 2000 he kept telling me about his HHO and I was like "bullshit" pretty much if I can remember it correctly, they are burning crabon rods in the water, I've unfortunatly lost contact with him.

Or rather, it's important to note that Fox was telling us there's hope on the horizon for independence from petroleum. Good ol' Fox, proving that America is winning the war on...something...somewhere. Kinda. Well maybe not, so let's take a look at this weekend's weather! Looks like lightening...hey...we could run a story on how much power there is in lightening! That should distract people for a while...

This guy has an idea, he implemented his idea, and everything sounded only decent until he mentioned "special electrolysis method" and that the government was getting behind it. "Special electrolysis" means electrolysis plus something, which gives me the feeling that there is still a large amount of energy involved into even starting the process. And the government will pay this man ASSLOADS of cash, to shut the hell up and dissapear. If this technology ever hits cars and such the way Fox News so eagerly puts it, it will be a reverse-engineered and dumb-downed version which still requires petroleum. Meanwhile, the brains behind Enviroethical, has a method of fueling EVERYTHING with water, but insists on waiting for the "right time". Gosh-dang humanity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO

Uhh... should someone tell this dude that we're running out of water, too? we need a car that runs on frozen dog shit, people.

On the topic of electrolysis and how it's actually not completely understood yet, I point you to this video, despite its' pseudo-conspirative title, it's still interesting stuff: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-33339921941687908... So yeah, I guess someone got his patents stolen or something if this is the same tech. Let the wannabe-science-debate commence! Cheers!

@ autonomousgerm: last time I checked, Rudolf's engine ran on coal dust and compressed air. He was interested in using vegetable oil, but he never got anywhere before committing suicide (probably). [The most likely candidate to have offed him was the military, not the automakers (according to wikipedia, fount-of-all-truth)]

Have you watched That 70's Show Hyde: "The government has this car, and it runs on water, man."

Don't let your preconceived notions about chemistry and physics limit your outlook on this new process. A relatively small battery may initiate the process. The potential energy of the hydrogen atom is much greater than that of the battery, and splitting water by electrolysis at a minute scale is not that farfetched of an idea. (Bear in mind I'm not talking about fission, or splitting the H atom to release nuclear energy.) The key here is making the process efficient enough. This guy may be onto something that may radically change the way in which we make energy.

In the 70's I didn't believe my teacher when I was told about a motor that ran on Air ,
then I saw this small engine with a little valve on top to shut the engine off , the concept was like the diesel's high compression
ratio except there was no fuel or exhaust like a standard deisel.
The engine had a heavy flywheel like older tractors had, once the vavle was shut you only had to give the wheel a good yank and it sat ther and ran during our entire class time, before we left the teacher opened the valve and the engine stopped.

Hydrogen based cars are dangerous if the use liquid forms and store it in the trunk ,but someone figured out that water could be stored and prior to intake the seperation occures
to then force the dangerous part to be inside
a controlled area and even a flashback could only reach the water and become ineffective and starting the water on fire.

I don't know whether this is ligitimate or not (have no sound on the PC I'm using, so can't hear what the guy is saying), but HHO is more than likely H2O--aka, water. I do know that back in the '70s or '80s a guy actually did invent a car that ran on straight water, using some sort of reactor to split the hydrogen and oxygen apart, then burning the hydrogen as fuel and giving off the oxygen as emissions (you could actually put your face right down in front of the exhaust pipe and breath the "fumes" without any harm coming to you. this would have been a solution to the oil crises we have experienced over the decades, and it would have helped to clean up the environment by reducing polution as well. Water would also be a self-replenishing fuel source, since water never disappears, it just changes form; and if you were ever in an accident, there would be no worries of a fuel spillage polluting the ground, since the fuel would be water, which the ground needs anyway (plus it wouldn't have the potential to blow up, assuming that the hydrogen and oxygen weren't separated until shortly before the hydrogen is burned and that no large quantity of hydrogen is stored in the car for an extended period of time). However, hydrogen and oxygen are more stable when combined into water molecules then they are separate as H2 and O2 molecules, so energy is required to break the molecules apart and to keep them apart. So one has to wonder how the system would really be efficient, assuming that it might have required more energy to be put in than it would actually be creating. Supposedly though, the engine did work, and ther story was featured in Popular Mechanics. All the patent rights were bought (I don't know by whom), and the man, the idea and the system itself seemed to just disappear. If someone tried to rediscover the system today, they might be arrested and charged with trying to create a hydrogen bomb (even if they could prove otherwise, the oil companies would make sure that the government make the person disappear).

I know alot about this subject becasue it has been of a personal intrest to me. If you would like a full explaination email me at cashenda@msu.edu.

for a brief explaination;
Water is electrolysed to produce hydrogen and oxigen. Then these two gases are allowed to combined to produce HHO as a gas. This is different from gasious H20 becuase of its arrangment. this gas burns just as hydrogen and oxigen would. This mixture is added to a combustion engine to give it 30% extra effiency. The combustion of this mixture only produces 44% of usefull effiency as compared to the energy it took to create this gas. But most of the energy that was used to create this gas was form heat which is lost anayways. therefor an overall addition to usefull enery is created.
I am currently finishing a term paper on this topic so if you would like a copy email me.

i think he uses ampeeres to get his hho gas from water. the system is quite simple to build yourself too. you just need to get some stainless parts and ceramic coating to some motor parts etc. I have instructions to convert car to run with water and am quite sure its the same way.

this is real. i have made one and attahced it to my 2004 mercedes c230 kompressor, 1.8 L turbo engine. working great. costs about $1000. you need custom everything for it to work properly. feel free to email me at costellogroup@yahoo.com or aim me at miafllwpb

To all who say it takes lots of energy to use hydrolysis to get the hydrogen out of the water in the first place...you are correct using old techniques, but the way this and other similar engines run is using a higjly efficient pulsed circuitry which means using basically so little energy the kind a spark plug in a car linked to a car battery would use, thus getting 400% energy back. It's not overunity, just that hydrogen is bloody energetic, and we are lucky it's in water.
As for washing up in a few years time on a beech, the last guy who did this and signed a contract with the Pentagon to fuel the tanks, died as he was holding a toast to the pentagon at their inaugural dinner for him. He collpased and they discovered his glass had been poisoned.
Pentagon, oil compannies etc , who did it, who knows, but I doubt tanks do use this fuel, so seems like it was all a ruse to lure him into the government's confidence and then murder him, poor soul. he was not a scientist and had no formal scientific education...he experimented and thus kept an open mind unlike those who study science and whose minds are closed by the 'scientific laws' which we learn in school and tell us we can't do stuff...

check these http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-33339921941687908...

http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html

HHO car that runs on water. Heads up people: I lived and work in largo ( Town next to Clearwater)and have US. patent and trade marks as well as EPA registered chemicals. This guy claims to have a Patent on this product but I can't find it on record with US PTO, just search inventors name Denny Klein in reverse Klein Denny per PTO inventor search and "O" so I call his office and ran into his screen. I offered to purchase 100's of his devices for our Fleet and power all of our buildings, Homes ect if he could prove it did not infringe on the Meyers device or if he bought the rights to the Meyers device. I asked for a one on one 1/2hr meeting with this Denny Klein ASAP which would take only a little time to prove positive or negative as to his claim and any future business we would conduct ($1,000,000.s). His screener blew me off!!! He said " Mr. Klein does not do things ASAP" which sounded strange. All good research and business is conducted in this manner (AS Soon AS Possible)not drop everything and meet with me NOW. I'm a real Scientists my name is Glenn D. Gordon look me up on the PTO web site and see, NPR is my home now 1hr from Largo also see patent 018 ect. BTW he still is at the same location years after these news releases. If real he would be a billionaire or dead like Meyers. Anyone else have any personal business with this guy? GDG out

HHO is 2H atoms and one O atom the difents betwwen water and HHO is the hydrogen conted to hydrogen then to oxygen

I see not too many people are rooting for this possibility and I find that strange given what it would mean to the world. We should be rooting for this as it would mean we could enjoy the American dream while we were awake. I also see many people do not understand that their are many variables that affect the rate of a reaction so comparing this to the electrolysis that proves the text book formula of current over time experiment done in high schools and colleges around the world is to assume that is what he is doing. And as an old boss told me once when you assume you make an ass out of u and me. As far as the guy who called Denny Klein and talked about Stan Myers patent you should know that you scare Klein because his patent (which I saw on the PTO website in 2006) could not be defended as others have patented the same thing before him. But patents are only good for 20 years so Myers patents have all expired and now belong to the public domain. And I think Denny Klein knows this and you scared him. That means nobody owns them. There are many accounts of this technology being viable, but what would that do to the current economy? Just think about it for a minute; no gas stations no wires going to your house, and you could grow your own food year round with the energy produced by this type of device. How would the government control us? Don't forget the taxes they would loose on energy sales. Anyway just my 2 cents. And if you are interested in another technology that could replace fossil fuels and release us from energy slavery try checking out Low Temperature Nuclear Fusion (LTNF).

"With the ever increasing costs of fossil fuels and planned shortages by the international oil producers, the MagDrive HHO Generator is an essential fuel assistant for the internal combustion engine. These units have wide applications in the Automotive Fuel Arena.

If you are looking to save from 15 - 40+% on your fuel costs and get back that new car performance, or if you want to extend the oil change and tune up service period then a MagDrive on demand hydrogen fuel system is an essential part of your future motoring requirements

...

Our entire range of MagDrive HHO generators are ...... "HYBRID FUEL UNITS"

This means they are to be used in conjuction with your vehicles normal fuel.

Take Note: This process is not perpetual motion, over unity or zero point energy.

The introduction of a superior supplemental fuel when combined with fossil fuel causes the engine to run to it's optimal capacity.

All this whilst simultaneously lowering the emissions and operating temperature of the engine. This also extends the oil change and tune up period requirements."

[fuelfromh2o.com.au]

Come on everyone, its not chemistry. Does that bottle really look like a way to perform electrolosis. That takes ALot of time and a better design.close but no plating.

Look at it... its a water bong. cool air = good combustion. hot gas?? please, it will be hot when it hits my spark plugs. and a fuel pressure regulator? lean fuel means more gas mileage. but he knows how to market cause we're all on this website posting, which means we will always remember him. so either way he wins. lol

This whole running on water thing is a load of BS.

First off, there is no such chemical as "HHO." It's called Oxyhydrogen, all it is is a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen gases, "HHO" is not a compound, it is not possible for it to exist. One Hydrogen atom cannot bond to both Oxygen and another Hydrogen. It just isn't capable of existing. What people are talking about is creating a mixture (a mixture just like if you mixed sand and salt together) of Hydrogen gas and Oxygen gas through the process of hydrolysis.

The following is something I have written regarding the subject--specifically in regard to powering the hydrolysis with an internal combustion engine that transfers its energy into electricity then uses the electricity for hydrolysis then uses the hydrogen as fuel. This process could also be powered by any other electrical source. When I speak about gasoline, you can replace it with battery power and you get the same effect.

[quote=soldier9599;1575031]This is complete BS. In a perfectly efficient engine, the amount of energy that you get out of the hydrogen fuel is the same as the amount of energy you have put into the water (that energy comes from gasoline) to turn it into hydrogen. All you are doing is using gasoline to turn water into hydrogen then back into water again, which uses the same amount of fuel as just running your car on gasoline. There is no chemical energy that is released in a chemical reaction that has the same products as reactants--all of the energy that was released by the oxidization of Hydrogen is the same as the energy that was already used by the gasoline to perform the initial hydrolysis (breaking down water to H2 and O2). So, assuming the engine has 100% efficiency, this uses exactly the same amount of fuel as a normal combustion engine.

This engine, though, is definitely not perfectly efficient, so there will be energy losses--just like in any other engine--except that it will happen two times over. If anything this will be less fuel efficient than your standard internal combustion engine that runs completely on gasoline.

Break chemical bonds of gasoline to get X amount of energy. Use X amount of energy to break down water (2H2O + X --> 2H2 + O2). Then burn (oxidize) your new Hydrogen fuel that you just used gasoline to create (2H2 + O2 --> 2H20 + X). Your overall equation would be:

2H2O + X --> 2H2 + O2 --> 2H2O + X

OR

2H2O + X --> 2H2O + X

Your end result is the same amount of energy being put into your car as the amount of energy you got out of your gasoline for the hydrolysis (at 100% efficiency).

Why not, instead of taking gasoline's energy and putting into hydrogen then using that same energy that came from gasoline, just use the gasoline's energy in the first place. Since every transfer of energy sends energy into entropy, this overcomplicated (and expensive) engine ends up being less efficient.

Let's say your internal combustion engine is 50% efficient. In this case, you are only getting X/2 amount of energy getting put into your hydrolysis. Assuming that the hydrolysis has 100% efficiency (which it probably doesn't, I'm just being nice), you now have this hydrogen fuel that contains X/2 being put through the internal combustion engine (at 50% efficiency) so your output of energy into your wheels would be X/4. Let's say you just used straight up gasoline. You would put it through the internal combustion engine at 50% efficiency which would yield X/2 amount of energy being transfered to your wheels. Of course this is a hypothetical but the real life numbers would inevitably follow the same pattern.[/quote]

The same goes for using batteries. Why use a battery to turn water into hydrogen then burn the hydrogen when you (in an engine with 100% efficiency) wouldn't be getting any more energy out of the hydrogen than what you put into it from the battery? And, again, this isn't a 100% efficient engine, so you would actually end up with less energy output than you initially put into it from the battery.

Hydrogen fuel is a joke!

Imagine if you had a car that did the following:

It has a total of two engines. The first engine is used to charge a battery. The battery is used to power a machine that converts the waste products of the first engine back into gasoline. That gasoline then goes into the second engine and powers your car. Obviously, both engines would not be 100% efficient and neither would the conversion process. This would be three inefficient processes compounded on top of each other, rather than just one, making the total inefficiency not three times as inefficient, but the inefficiency would be cubed (increased exponentially).

Sounds redundant and retarded, right? Yeah, that's the same idea behind this whole running your car on water and/or hydrogen notion (See my above post).

Sorry about the wording of my previous post. I was very busy but could no longer stand by to watch stupid people make stupid comments.

This system "works" because it produces a net gain of usable energy. This does not mean that it creates energy or follows the direction of Dr. Kaneavu's low voltage electrolysis which can only be explained by nuclear fusion. The process is simple converting HOH to HHO takes a certain amount of energy which is supplied by two forces delta H and activation energy. At STP obviously, this does not return a net benefit but when running the reaction thermo coupled with something like the down pipe, the system takes very little activation energy. The problem is that there is very little room for error when building the physical electrolysis unit because you desire the product HHO not H, H, O which only forms in high pressure and accurate three dimensional conditions.

The moral of this story is that the system utilizes some of the heat lost in a combustion engine to help provide the conditions to easily make useful chemical potential energy. Then, using this chemical potential energy produces a net gain of about 44% as a system. The problem is unless you are a chemical engineer and a well educated mechanic you are not going to just make one from a kit.

I guarantee you that this is theoretically possible but it is up to someone else to make it practical. I made an offer for a paper on the subject in my last post. That offer no longer stands. I published that paper and no longer have the rights to it. However, email me a cashenda@msu.edu can we can talk more. Please don't send me a stupid email. Do your reading and then send me questions. If anyone does get this to work please email me.

Dan