[jouk45]

this is just a preview for the non believers 

[Nathanael Jones]

Do you have one installed and working in your vehicle yet Jouk?

[michael papworth]

In principle:

* the car's battery produces energy to separate water into HHO gas.
* the car's engine burns HHO to produce energy (and water as the exhaust gas) - some of the energy is used to drive the car forward and some of the energy is returned to the car's battery to produce more HHO - also known as Brown's Gas.

Simple!

You have just designed a perpetual motion machine.

It's similar to the popular idea of using a generator to drive a dynamo and using the dynamo to drive the generator and get a bit of free energy out.

Yes, it works when you talk about it. The problem comes when you do the science and maths behind it. There are energy losses at every step, so energy put in is immediately dissipated and no energy can be taken out.

Ian (Reply #12) explained it perfectly in greater detail.

There is a law called the 2^nd law of thermodynamics - you can't get owt for nowt. There is absolutely no doubt that it is true. It's also called entropy if you want to look it up.

Please, don't waste your money on scams like this. If it could be done there would be university departments all over the world researching it. (It's like cold nuclear fusion. No one is researching it because it simply cannot work.)

BTW - the hyodrogen car developed by Honda (Reply #20) didn't produce its own hydrogen, it fills up with hydrogen from a hydrogen tank. Why? Because it CAN'T produce its own hydrogen. Honda know about the 2^nd law.

Some other stuff - (i) a fuel cell isn't something you can make on the kitchen table and (ii) HHO gas is extrememly dangerous. You could blow up your own house and two houses either side by messing with this stuff.

[Nathanael Jones]

"you can't get owt for nowt"


Interesting,.... but your logic is flawed.
You are actually putting something in: WATER

The water is used up and is therefore a supplementary "fuel" in this case.
Also any auto electrician will tell you that an alternator puts out approx 17 volts,.. where the battery only uses 12,.. so it is this wasted voltage that is used to split the water,... making the system less wasteful, but not breaking any law of thermodynamics!

So,... the question is,... in real life, taking in to account all the inefficiencies and energy losses:

Does it actually make any difference at all to your fuel consumption???

I want to hear from someone who has actually tried it,... not a 3rd party who thinks they know about it!!

Are there any "run your car on water" forums???

[michael papworth]

Don't want to be snotty about this, but I do have an honours degree in physics and astrophysics. I know a thing or two about thermodynamics and the laws of energy.

I can promise you that my logic is not in the least bit flawed.

* If you really do want to know about this, check out "entropy" on the internet. Go for a site that is created by a university or some other body. It will tell you that "you can't get owt for nowt" but put it in rather more scientific language. It comes down to the same thing. It is the second law of thermodynamics.

* Water is not a fuel since it cannot be oxidised. Water is hydrogen oxide. H₂O.

* Ask any auto electrician (who really understands their theory) and they will tell you that voltage is not "used up" - it a measure of the potential diference between two points. The alternator needs to produce a voltage in excess of 13.6 V - the excess is used to "push" the electric current through the battery "the wrong way" in order to charge it.

* You cannot use "wasted voltage" to split the water. (i) There is no "wasted voltage." (ii) Energy is needed to split water - the relationship between energy and voltage is more complex than that.

[Nathanael Jones]

I bow to your wisdom Wally!

BUT,...

If the water was split using a different method (Solar panels perhaps),.. could this still be a simple way to compliment the petrol/diesel going into your engine and reduce fuel costs?

[Clive McDonald]

The piston draws in petrol (fuel), this mixes with air, the active component part being oxygen. To introduce hydrogen as some part of the air intake would lessen the available oxygen, possibly lessening the power output.

There is no reason to believe the piston would draw in less petrol. Therefore it is unlikely there would be any saving.

Years ago Noel Edmunds invested a lot of money in this(100mpg car). He thought it would make him rich. He lost his money.

[jouk45]

its the baking soda that creates the electrical current, in the water, The term fuel from water, is misleading, the soda makes hydrogen gas, its the gas that is used as a fuel mixture, if you want to buy one ready made this is the best one, check there videos out
www.shop.hydrofuelsolutions.com/product.sc?categoryId=3&productId=2
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LldM8UzeU8g

[Mr H]

Rather than wasting your money on Hydrogen scams why not check out a vehicle that actually runs on AIR.....
The Indian rights to produce this vehicle were recently bought by TATA of India and will be on sale in the UK by the end of the year....... and estimated to cost less than £3k it should be a certified winner with the price of fuel today...

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7241909.stm
www.theaircar.com/acf/
zeropollutionmotors.us/
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqpGZv0YT4


Regards
Mr H

[Nathanael Jones]

The piston draws in petrol (fuel), this mixes with air, the active component part being oxygen. To introduce hydrogen as some part of the air intake would lessen the available oxygen, possibly lessening the power output.

There is no reason to believe the piston would draw in less petrol. Therefore it is unlikely there would be any saving.

Years ago Noel Edmunds invested a lot of money in this(100mpg car). He thought it would make him rich. He lost his money.

Splitting water gives you both hydrogen AND oxygen in the perfect ratio for re-combustion.

[jouk45]

nathan both are seperated when set up in the engine compartment, the hydrogen is put into the intake, the oxygen is put into the air vacum pipe,

[windowwashers]

is this topic still here

now if you could run your car on water and heat it for wfp then that would be something to do with window cleaning 

Joe if you are online please msn me.

Ian

[Ian W]

Does any one on here belive that the big oil Giant want this Technology put out?? I don't think so, there has already been reports of murder of people developing Hydrogen to run our vehicles.
I think you can see this on utube somewhere.
Any way that's my tuppence worth.

Hey Jeff, my dad always tells me the story of a guy who invented a tablet that you put into a tank of water. You could then use the vehicle as if it were filled with petrol, without any modification. Apparently, he was bumped off. Do you know anything of this story?

On topic, I guess that the scientists among us are correct. You won't get free energy. However, as this is a supplement to the regular fuel and it is using energy that is already produced, won't there be some benefit?

[jeff1]

Does any one on here belive that the big oil Giant want this Technology put out?? I don't think so, there has already been reports of murder of people developing Hydrogen to run our vehicles.
I think you can see this on utube somewhere.
Any way that's my tuppence worth.

Hey Jeff, my dad always tells me the story of a guy who invented a tablet that you put into a tank of water. You could then use the vehicle as if it were filled with petrol, without any modification. Apparently, he was bumped off. Do you know anything of this story?

On topic, I guess that the scientists among us are correct. You won't get free energy. However, as this is a supplement to the regular fuel and it is using energy that is already produced, won't there be some benefit?

I heard that story years ago, I also head he was bumped off but that's all I know.

The scientists are right, you don't get something for nothing, but with the fuel cell I don't see anyone claiming you will get something for nothing?

I also said in my post that you still need fuel in your tank, the cell supplements your own fuel but give better miles per gallon per tank, so there is your benefit, if your van is doing, lets say 30mpg and you add a fuel cell you can now increase the mpg, even if it was by 10/20% there is money saved, if you add a bank of cells then again you get an increase in fuel consumption, a bank of cells can be any number you like, some guy's have 6 cells fitted, but you need the room under your bonnet for this amount.
In a cell you have the activator with 1ltr of pure water, I suppose this is were the term run your vehicle on water comes from.

[elite mike]

hi guys

thanks for all the replies,its given me plenty to think about.

also i have been looking at electric vans and cars ,for my compact work,

these seem to be a more viable option

regards
mike

[Ian W]

I heard that story years ago, I also head he was bumped off but that's all I know.

The scientists are right, you don't get something for nothing, but with the fuel cell I don't see anyone claiming you will get something for nothing?

I also said in my post that you still need fuel in your tank, the cell supplements your own fuel but give better miles per gallon per tank, so there is your benefit, if your van is doing, lets say 30mpg and you add a fuel cell you can now increase the mpg, even if it was by 10/20% there is money saved, if you add a bank of cells then again you get an increase in fuel consumption, a bank of cells can be any number you like, some guy's have 6 cells fitted, but you need the room under your bonnet for this amount.
In a cell you have the activator with 1ltr of pure water, I suppose this is were the term run your vehicle on water comes from.

It seems quite a feasible idea to me Jeff. The way you explained it is exactly what I was thinking. Thanks. 

[elite mike]

have a look at this then guys


www.green-car-guide.com/news-2008-04/peugeot-citroen-fuel-cell-van.htm