gventure

charlesmtg

t1turbo

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

cashenda

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).

soldier9599

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!

soldier9599

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

bmcgig

...

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]

Rekit

wherethegoodgo

Blackhygo

HomeGuard

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

http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html

silverviolet

costellogroup

Henrikolavi

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.

cashenda

mattthie

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.

rockothedog

javi

Blue_Six

andy

Danj3ris

Mr Torben