Water for Fuel???

[karlthev]

Anyone here about this one? Sounds too good to be true but...:shrug:


Karl


http://www.drivewithwaterfuel.com/?hop=theipaff

 

[Empath]

It is pure unadulterated nonsense, but we'll still move it over to the Cafe for others to discuss. The Questions/Problems/Suggestions forum is a forum for dealing with utility issues regarding the board.

 

[karlthev]

I agree but just had to ask..:shrug: Sorry about the mis-post and thanks for the move.


Karl

 

[ABTOMAT]

Simply put, water is made out of usable hydrogen and oxygen, but it takes more energy to to seperate it than you get from the results. That scam contraption will take more power than it produces. What it does produce isn't particularly usable in an engine without much volume or mixture control.

Now, on an industrial scale, electrolysis can be viable if you power the plant with renewable energy like solar or hydroelectric power. Break down the water, seperate, filter, and compress the gasses, etc.

 

[Hooked on Fenix]

The only feasible way to produce hydrogen from water I have ever seen is by using nuclear power. Popular Science did an article about plans to build a nuclear reactor that produced a lot of heat, enough to snap the bonds of hydrogen and oxygen from water. It used a graphite dome and the nuclear material could be added or subtracted as needed. It was supposed to be meltdown proof. However, few, if any, nuclear reactors have been built since the disaster at Three Mile Island. The only effective way to get hydrogen from water is to get it as a byproduct of something else. Using solar or other energy to obtain the hydrogen is expensive and you usually get less energy out than you put into it.

 

[e2x2e]

And the water prices go^:ironic:

 

[270winchester]

i will take it as seriously as compressed air cars.

 

[Qoose]

What irks me is that besides creating hydrogen for later use or as a portable fuel source, why not just nuclear/solar/wind energy directly? I'm suprised more people don't see the foolishness of creating hydrogen from other sources, and then burning it to create something that you could get a lot faster. Especially when efficiency is factored in. That being said, I do understand and support hydrogen as a energy carrier for use in cars or other ways, but it would be nice if more people knew that we only get hydrogen from other sources, sometimes nuclear, sometimes oil. Pet peeve for me when people think you can mine hydrogen.

Now running your car off of "HHO" is a scam. You can smell it from the other side of the internet.

I have however wondered about the validity of another place that talked about a hydrogen retrofit. They didn't claim to run your car off totally off hydrogen. Rather, they said that by using some torque to create hydrogen, and feeding it back into the fuel line, you would get a better burn, kind of like injecting a mix of propane into some large engines. This makes sense to me because electrolysis would create a nice supply of Oxygen on top of the Hydrogen, helping combustion. I'm skeptical of this as well, but this seems a lot less shady than the miracle "HHO". Any thoughts?

 

[karlthev]

Yeah, I guess it does....I brought this up because a relative installed this equipment on his wife's care and is claiming 40% increase in mileage. I know him...sort of...and I have always taken him to be honest as well as a very clever guy with a real knack for car repairs and in general, a very "handy" guy. He hasn't tried to sell me anything either so I am inclined to believe him, to a point. Now, I may have beem misleading with the title of this thread, in actuality, as you said, the hydrogen (HHO) produced is used to supplement the gas for overall better mileage, not to power the car entirely
(40% increase). Given that, I still have difficulty understanding the concept of "excess". "wasted" electrical energy being utilized to extract the HHO from the water. Sounds like a "free lunch" of sorts.....

Karl