Burn water in your engine

bstratt

bstratt

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
1,299
Location
St. Charles, IL
Display Name
Display name:
Canuck
If this is fake its well done! But what happens when the temperature goes below zero?
 

Attachments

  • WaterFuel.wmv
    3 MB · Views: 108
He uses electricity to separate the Hydrogen and Oxygen. I wonder if the amount of electricity will be the single limiting factor in wide spread use as a replacement for autogas. Isn't that now the limiting factor for electric cars now?
 
John watch the oil companies and govt. make this guy dissapear :)

But, in all honesty this is the kind of thinking that we need to be supporting. It kills me that here in MA we have people that are opposed to wind farms!!!!

I could go on but I'll spare you all.
 
The Fox News report makes it seem like the energy is coming from water. Rather, it requires electricity. It makes a lot of sense for welding, where there is a large and reliable electric supply, but in a car he's dependent on a battery to electrolyze the water to Hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen in a motor. Hard to believe it's more efficient than just running an electric motor. Since the electricity ultimately comes from a power plant I don't see how it avoids dependence on fossil fuels or nukes.
 
BobS said:
The Fox News report makes it seem like the energy is coming from water. Rather, it requires electricity. It makes a lot of sense for welding, where there is a large and reliable electric supply, but in a car he's dependent on a battery to electrolyze the water to Hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen in a motor. Hard to believe it's more efficient than just running an electric motor. Since the electricity ultimately comes from a power plant I don't see how it avoids dependence on fossil fuels or nukes.
Click to expand...

The energy liberated from the output of any form of electrolysis is always less than the energy it takes to separate the hydrogen and oxygen in the water since some of the input inevitably gets converted into heat. But even if the separation process is 100% efficient, you can't get any net energy out of such a process since the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen releases exactly the same quantity.

Here's another online article on the same stupid idea. This one even goes so far as to dispute the "nonbelievers" silly idea that you cannot invent your way around the laws of physics.
 
lancefisher said:
The energy liberated from the output of any form of electrolysis is always less than the energy it takes to separate the hydrogen and oxygen in the water since some of the input inevitably gets converted into heat. But even if the separation process is 100% efficient, you can't get any net energy out of such a process since the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen releases exactly the same quantity.

Here's another online article on the same stupid idea. This one even goes so far as to dispute the "nonbelievers" silly idea that you cannot invent your way around the laws of physics.
Click to expand...
Lance is right on. However, I think the idea has merit from another viewpoint.

What is the objective? If it is to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel, the idea is a failure.

If the objective is to reduce pollution without crimping the US's love affair with the automobile, maybe the idea has some merit. The cars would be pollution free, as no fossils are burned in the car. The local powerplant would still be spewing forth. However, it should be easier to reduce pollution from one static source (the powerplant) than from a million(s) of vehicles in all levels of disrepair.

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
Lance is right on. However, I think the idea has merit from another viewpoint.

What is the objective? If it is to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel, the idea is a failure.

If the objective is to reduce pollution without crimping the US's love affair with the automobile, maybe the idea has some merit. The cars would be pollution free, as no fossils are burned in the car. The local powerplant would still be spewing forth. However, it should be easier to reduce pollution from one static source (the powerplant) than from a million(s) of vehicles in all levels of disrepair.

-Skip
Click to expand...

Skip, aren't you assuming the only way to generate the electricity is oil? What about hydro electric, atomic, wind farms, etc.?
 
Well you can't very well hook up a hydroelectric plant to your car, and so far I haven't seen "Mr. Fusion" being sold in the local Home Depot. A wind farm on top of the car would still not break the entropic cycle of energy loss.

But there are other possibilities here - again the goal being to reduce, not necessarily eliminate (initially anyway) the dependence upon oil.

Would a diesel generator be able to provide enough energy to power the electrolysis and charge the battery (in conjunction with the energy reclamation systems already in place) in a hybrid car, for example?

And if so, could the HHO burn provide the push of power needed to give satisfactory acceleration?

I won't dismiss the idea outright - I think the avenue should be pursued - but I think the media is, natrually, latching onto the old "There's this car that runs on water" idea just to get a story. :)
 
Greebo said:
But there are other possibilities here - again the goal being to reduce, not necessarily eliminate (initially anyway) the dependence upon oil.

Would a diesel generator be able to provide enough energy to power the electrolysis and charge the battery (in conjunction with the energy reclamation systems already in place) in a hybrid car, for example?

And if so, could the HHO burn provide the push of power needed to give satisfactory acceleration?

I won't dismiss the idea outright - I think the avenue should be pursued - but I think the media is, natrually, latching onto the old "There's this car that runs on water" idea just to get a story. :)
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to bet that a diesel engine powering the drivetrain in the conventional manner would be far more efficient than any scheme involving onboard electrolysis and a fuel cell. The only hope for this kind of technology is as a fixed source for hydrogen fueled cars.

BTW did anybody else catch the HHO (as in H2O) for the "fuel"?
 
Greebo said:
Would a diesel generator be able to provide enough energy to power the electrolysis and charge the battery (in conjunction with the energy reclamation systems already in place) in a hybrid car, for example?

And if so, could the HHO burn provide the push of power needed to give satisfactory acceleration?
Click to expand...


That would need to be one huge diesel. Especially the acceleration part. There are plenty of 50 mpg small diesel cars out there (I have one) but if you "have" to pass someone every couple minutes like we all do it just won't cut it. My diesel is parked but when fuel prices hit 5 bucks I'm getting it out:hairraise: .
 
CapeCodJay said:
John watch the oil companies and govt. make this guy dissapear :)

But, in all honesty this is the kind of thinking that we need to be supporting. It kills me that here in MA we have people that are opposed to wind farms!!!!

I could go on but I'll spare you all.
Click to expand...
Windmills are popping up all over in the ones. We need the wind farm and what's wrong with putting it out in the bay? The new idea is out by Fall River. The vocal minority in MA must be making a ton of money off the traditional power plants. It's the only reason because common sense says you should try everything.
 
Oh I am glad to hear that someone is MA can agree with me that it should be allowed to proceed!
 
I live in MA and I go to the Cape an Islands often. I fully support the consturction of the wind farm. I am ashamed that our elected officials are trying to kill this because of trumped up environemental issues. All they care about is protecting their exlusive and privileged views.
 
bstratt said:
Skip, aren't you assuming the only way to generate the electricity is oil? What about hydro electric, atomic, wind farms, etc.?
Click to expand...
No, I am assuming we will be running non-fossil fuel powerplants at 100% capacity. If we use less gasoline in conventional engines, the delta energy required to produce the new waterfuel will come from hydrocarbons.

Maybe not a good assumption but as fossil fuels go up in price it will become more and more true.

-Skip
 
lancefisher said:
The energy liberated from the output of any form of electrolysis is always less than the energy it takes to separate the hydrogen and oxygen in the water since some of the input inevitably gets converted into heat. But even if the separation process is 100% efficient, you can't get any net energy out of such a process since the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen releases exactly the same quantity.

Here's another online article on the same stupid idea. This one even goes so far as to dispute the "nonbelievers" silly idea that you cannot invent your way around the laws of physics.
Click to expand...


Yep, simply physics always gets in the way.
 
lancefisher said:
The energy liberated from the output of any form of electrolysis is always less than the energy it takes to separate the hydrogen and oxygen in the water since some of the input inevitably gets converted into heat. But even if the separation process is 100% efficient, you can't get any net energy out of such a process since the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen releases exactly the same quantity.

Here's another online article on the same stupid idea. This one even goes so far as to dispute the "nonbelievers" silly idea that you cannot invent your way around the laws of physics.
Click to expand...


Yep, simply physics always gets in the way.
 
gmwalk said:
I live in MA and I go to the Cape an Islands often. I fully support the consturction of the wind farm. I am ashamed that our elected officials are trying to kill this because of trumped up environemental issues. All they care about is protecting their exlusive and privileged views.
Click to expand...


Closing on a house on the Vineyard Friday. I couldn't agree more. These farms are seven miles off shore. Almost invisible from the land.

Did you hear the Walter Cronkite story about this? He has a house on Nantucket and was recruited to be the voice of opposition. But then he did his own research and changed his position to one of support.
 
Welcome and Congrats Corjulo!
Cape resident myself here. I look forward to seeing/flying soon!
Where on the Vineyard?
 
silver-eagle said:
Windmills are popping up all over in the ones. We need the wind farm and what's wrong with putting it out in the bay? The new idea is out by Fall River. The vocal minority in MA must be making a ton of money off the traditional power plants. It's the only reason because common sense says you should try everything.
Click to expand...


The Indian reservation out of Martha's Vineyard is also talking about it. Problem is they have a reputation of complete incompetence so I doubt they have the organization skills to get the project built.
 
Greebo said:
Well you can't very well hook up a hydroelectric plant to your car, and so far I haven't seen "Mr. Fusion" being sold in the local Home Depot. A wind farm on top of the car would still not break the entropic cycle of energy loss.
Click to expand...

I was thinking batteries in the car which were recharged from plugging into a fixed outlet powered by renewable sources.
 
Nobody has mentioned solar.

I have solar panels on the roof. They produce 2/3 of my power usage (I could get that closer to 100% by putting panels on the other side of the roof - my roof faces east/west).

Given, you don't get power at night and output is reduced when cloudy. However, it's gonna be sunny somewhere and we already have a transmission network across the country. Flywheels can be used to store power for nighttime.
 
MSmith said:
Nobody has mentioned solar.

I have solar panels on the roof. They produce 2/3 of my power usage (I could get that closer to 100% by putting panels on the other side of the roof - my roof faces east/west).

Given, you don't get power at night and output is reduced when cloudy. However, it's gonna be sunny somewhere and we already have a transmission network across the country. Flywheels can be used to store power for nighttime.
Click to expand...

I don't know much about solar. So everything I'm about to write is completely uneducated and wrong.

So..It takes 1/2 of the surface area of your roof to provide 2/3 of your power. That would mean the only viable option I could see for solar would be for everyone in the country to put solar panels on their roof and share their power with everyone else. Perhaps the power company would put them on and they would own the panels. Either way. There is no way that could ever happen.

Solar takes a lot of surface area for the amount of power that is generated.

I personally think rat powered generators are the ticket. The fuel would be cheese...which is a pretty renewable resource.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top