Run Your Car on Water

[Mattlach]

I would like to know where they find the morons that would actually fall for this.

They must be out there, or jokers like this wouldn't be able to pay google to advertise their site...

I'm really hoping this is an April fools prank.

[saabchilten]

oh yea i've seen that. you only need to do the math to realize it's not possible. if the math i have for the audi 4.2L v8 is right, it would suck up 4776L of hydrogen per minute at 8000 rpm (yes, i realized after doing my math that it redlines at 7000). nothing but tank hydrogen can give you a good run (as in something like a top-speed attempt) time at that rate of consumption, and even then, you wouldn't be able to fit a big enough tank!

[RITmusic2k]

The science behind it is legitimate; my roomie and I have an electrolysis generator sitting in our garage right now.


What they're implying with their headline is, of course, not feasible without extensive modifications to your vehicle. Just do a youtube search for 'HHO engine' or similar phrase, and you'll see some good videos of people who have built running HHO vehicles.

The trick is, you generate your fuels at home, then fill pressurized tanks to run the vehicle. It takes way too much electricity to generate on the fly from an onboard water tank.

[900t]

Originally Posted by RITmusic2k

The science behind it is legitimate; my roomie and I have an electrolysis generator sitting in our garage right now.


What they're implying with their headline is, of course, not feasible without extensive modifications to your vehicle. Just do a youtube search for 'HHO engine' or similar phrase, and you'll see some good videos of people who have built running HHO vehicles.

The trick is, you generate your fuels at home, then fill pressurized tanks to run the vehicle. It takes way too much electricity to generate on the fly from an onboard water tank.

Not just "way too much", but rather the extra load on the engine to drive the alternator to produce the hydrogen is more than what would be gained by burning it...

How do you calculate the hydrogen going in at a speed... I think you have that wrong The volume of intake goes by engine load (eg horsepower at crank) not by speed

[saabchilten]

oh i'm sure i have it wrong. are you kidding me? i just learned the ideal gas law! regardless, an engine will still have to suck in a ton of hydrogen to get the ideal 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen ratio for burning (knowing oxygen accounts for only part of the atmosphere). it cannot be generated fast enough on demand. the best way i can see to up the DC output from the alternator is to convert the power to an rapid on-off signal and then run it into a step-up transformer, which is what i believe Stanley Meyer did in one of his patents. i'm not entirely trusting in the patent though since i know he was completely paranoid.

[900t]

Originally Posted by saabchilten

oh i'm sure i have it wrong. are you kidding me? i just learned the ideal gas law! regardless, an engine will still have to suck in a ton of hydrogen to get the ideal 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen ratio for burning (knowing oxygen accounts for only part of the atmosphere). it cannot be generated fast enough on demand. the best way i can see to up the DC output from the alternator is to convert the power to an rapid on-off signal and then run it into a step-up transformer, which is what i believe Stanley Meyer did in one of his patents. i'm not entirely trusting in the patent though since i know he was completely paranoid.

Nah you know what I mean, the "4,2 litres" of the engine is just "physical space" but when the engine is idling for example at 750 r/min it will only aspirate a few litres of air per minute at sea level, in each cylinder is less than 1% filled To run the engine entirely on hydrogen yep that is totally impossible. Plus also it would be like making a perpetual motion machine

[saabchilten]

oh dear god, you're not talking about that insane idea of using the water vapor from the exhaust to create hydrogen gas, are you? that one is complete crap since things other than water vapor will come out of the tip.


now where's a video clip of mythbusters' 'gasbuster'? all with jamie holding the hose from a hydrogen tank next to the carburetor of a running car with cut fuel lines.
EDIT: well it's not on google video anywhere, but methane looks promising as per a banned episode that is on there!

[cse_20]

P(total)=P(used)+P(wasted)

Power cannot be created by switching it or any other means if it is not there to begin with.
cse_20

Originally Posted by saabchilten

oh i'm sure i have it wrong. are you kidding me? i just learned the ideal gas law! regardless, an engine will still have to suck in a ton of hydrogen to get the ideal 2 parts hydrogen to 1 part oxygen ratio for burning (knowing oxygen accounts for only part of the atmosphere). it cannot be generated fast enough on demand. the best way i can see to up the DC output from the alternator is to convert the power to an rapid on-off signal and then run it into a step-up transformer, which is what i believe Stanley Meyer did in one of his patents. i'm not entirely trusting in the patent though since i know he was completely paranoid.

[saabchilten]

again, i'm doubtful of the patent. a transformer would up the voltage, but it still wouldn't overcome the fact that electrolysis is inefficient. too much power is wasted as heat in the process. there's easier ways of getting it from things other than water, but storing enough is still all experimental, as per the BMW h series cars.

[Mattlach]

Originally Posted by saabchilten

again, i'm doubtful of the patent. a transformer would up the voltage, but it still wouldn't overcome the fact that electrolysis is inefficient. too much power is wasted as heat in the process. there's easier ways of getting it from things other than water, but storing enough is still all experimental, as per the BMW h series cars.

As has been eloquently stated in this thread before.

Energy in = Energy Out + Energy Stored

The Energy out takes many forms, most of which are waste.


So in this system, the engine runs the alternator, which in its turn powers the electrolysis which releases the hydrogen gas, which is burned to power the engine.

This is a circular relationship. Even if it is perfectly 100% efficient, the best it will do is break even, not gaining you or losing you any milage.

But, no systems are perfectly efficient. In fact electrolysis is usually between 25 and 40 percent efficient, so in other words you'd be losing more energy to inefficiencies than you'd be creating using the hydrogen system, and thus your mileage would be significantly LOWER.

Now, even if this actually was an effective way of creating energy, you'd need an engine that could run on hydrogen. Unless you have one of those BMW prototypes, or some sort of rare engine conversion, you don't.

Essentially this is completely impossible on so many levels it isn't even funny.

Lets set aside the fact that the inefficiencies in the system make it completely useless for a while.

If it DID work they wouldn't cost $50.

It costs A LOT of money to convert a car to run off of stored hydrogen. Add to that the cost of some sort of electrolysis system, and you'd have something costing many, many thousands of dollars.

Essentially, Even if you don't posses an engineering or science degree, the golden rule is, and always will be: "If it looks too good to be true, IT IS".

[saabchilten]

i think the reason why hydrogen always looks so appealing is we can consume and expel water while still enjoying the sound of an internal combustion engine (which i don't think i could drive a car without ), but there is not yet anything that actually works and can be implemented. i agree, it is too good to be true, and it isn't worth using unless some magical way of efficiently making and storing tons of it is invented. there are plenty of other fuels that burn much cleaner than gasoline, that our cars can be converted to, and that we can collect much more efficiently than hydrogen.

[Mattlach]

Originally Posted by saabchilten

i think the reason why hydrogen always looks so appealing is we can consume and expel water while still enjoying the sound of an internal combustion engine (which i don't think i could drive a car without ), but there is not yet anything that actually works and can be implemented. i agree, it is too good to be true, and it isn't worth using unless some magical way of efficiently making and storing tons of it is invented. there are plenty of other fuels that burn much cleaner than gasoline, that our cars can be converted to, and that we can collect much more efficiently than hydrogen.

Well, We DO have limitless renewable sources of electric power. (Solar, Wind Water) If properly expanded, they COULD be used to electrolyze water into Hydrogen for fuel. In this scenario the Hydrogen is merely a battery. A way to temporarily store energy.

[woywitka]

Look. I'm not ready to run my car on these expensive fuels. Clean Di Hydrogen Monoxide is like $1.50-$3 a litre at stores, I will stick to unleaded gasoline at $1.31 a litre.

Whiteout is like $300 a litre and olive oil is $12 a litre.

GLad my car runs on gasoline.

[900t]

Friggin bottled water

It is pretty easy to make an ICE run on H2 gas. Carrying it is hard. The BMW 7 uses a positively huge tank, at very high pressure. But, about 2% of the hydrogen inside evaporates out of the leak valve in order to prevent explosion (as it is supercooled) So I guess the best thing is to drive the Bimmer everyday

But storing enough H2 needs a big tank, that is heavy... it isn't really feasible to get the kind of range (500-1000 km) that is expected from a car on a tank. And considering the amount of places to get H2, you really need more like a 5 000 km range not the 150-200 km range of the 7 series.

[saabchilten]

Originally Posted by Mattlach

(Solar, Wind Water) If properly expanded, they COULD be used to electrolyze water into Hydrogen for fuel.

i believe that's what BMW is doing with their h series cars. it'll be years before anything like those concepts could reach the market because of all the testing. i, personally, don't like the liquid hydrogen tank because of its weight, but it's the best there is now.

Originally Posted by woywitka

Look. I'm not ready to run my car on these expensive fuels. Clean Di Hydrogen Monoxide is like $1.50-$3 a litre at stores, I will stick to unleaded gasoline at $1.31 a litre.

Whiteout is like $300 a litre and olive oil is $12 a litre.

hehe, dihydrogen monoxide, a.k.a. water. well i was thinking of methane from cows or used vegetable oil (if you have a diesel) since restaurants will gladly give you that for free. all of that discussion is worthy of its own thread though!

i'm starting to turn this into a debate, i think, and i don't mean to. in discussions about any possible energy sources, i think idea input is necessary, not arguments.

[GearHead]

In that setup You can not run your car on H2 gas because the generator will not make enough.However it can be used to displace some gas and still run because h2 has more energy per unit volume than gasoline.If you tried to inject the H2 gas straight into your engine without supporting mods you would get less MPG because the O2 sensor would see an abundance of O2 and think that you are running lean,however if you altered the signal from the O2 sensor so that what the computer saw the readings as "normal" you would be getting better gas MPG because the car would be running on less gas than it would normally be.

The best way to electrolise water is pulsed AC.If you pulse with increasing voltage/amperage it works better than conventional methods,IE the signal wave wouuld look something like this: .:| .:| .:|

doing it that way excites the molecules faster leading to more efficient.Doing it that way you can have electrolisis aproaching 75% or better effiency.



A side effect is the need for stainless steel exhaust and possible engine parts due to increased water.

I looked up how to boost MPG with HHO.I would experiment with my car but its a turbo and I can't figure out how to get the engine to suck the HHO gas from the generator under boost...I definatly would run it if I could...

I suppose I could set up something on my subaru offroad toy and see if it uses less gas than it does when Im out 4x4ing...but it hardly uses any gas to begine with...

[900t]

GH that isn't possible because it takes more gasoline to make that H2 in the first place

[RITmusic2k]

I'm gonna clarify for all the people talking about how much air you'd have to draw through the engine and such to make hydrogen combustion feasible:


I'm saying, the only way you can even manage decent storage is to bring both components with you - the hydrogen in one tank and the oxygen in another.

When you electrolyze water, you get two H2 molecules and one O2 molecule from every two molecules of H2O. This ratio of 2:1 hydrogen to oxygen is ideal. You get the raw ingredients for combustion, already proportioned correctly, straight from the source. This gas, when combined, is called HHO.

The problem is, it cannot be pressurized as HHO, or it will ignite and kill you... really badly. The trick is to collect the component gasses individually (whch is easily done with the correct hydrolysis generator), which allows you to fill pressurized tanks and carry both your hydrogen and your oxygen in the vehicle... no intake system necessary. Your combustion exhaust is water vapor, and you're good to go.

It's still less energy efficient than having a plug-in electric vehicle, but it can be cheaper than buying gasoline... you just can't go that far from home

[GearHead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFGhZ...eature=related

[Si]

......Ohhh my, another Witch hunt by the SaabCentral Inquisition Tis magic they must be burnt at the stake.....I wonder what the ratio of people posting comments to people actually reading the site is, about 100/0 me thinks.

There's been loads of studies that show engine efficiency can be increased by introducing a small amount of hydrogen into the mix of fuel and air, after all only about 30% of the energy released by the chemical reaction is converted to power, saying it's bull is like saying you can't generate extra power by altering the ignition timing at certain loads and rpms, your not altering the amount of fuel/air burnt, just the conditions which it is burnt in.

Forget about energy conservation, if you are stuck on that don't even bother posting as you don't understand the principal.