2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

## 2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference PRE-REGISTER NOW!!! http://energyscienceconference.com

 Energetic Forum Proof that HHO is a Scam - Aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml
 Register FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 Eric Dollard Magnetizer Products Tesla Chargers 2019 Energy Conference Energy Science Forum Donate Energy Times Advertising

 Water Fuel This forum is for discussion on any water fuel topic dealing with electrolysis, Stanley Meyer, hho, Brown's Gas, Puharich, etc...

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

#1
05-13-2013, 06:26 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Proof that HHO is a Scam - Aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml

So it's not just me and a few heretical members here that aren't convinced:

[URL="http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml"]The proof that HHO is
How much gas is needed to reduce fuel consumption by 40%?

Well the first thing is to work out how much energy it requires to keep an average vehicle cruising at(say) 65mph. According to this source it takes around 20HP to cruse at that speed.

Let's convert that to electrical energy by multiplying by 746 (the number of watts in a horsepower). We get 14,920, or roughly 15KW.

Now, if we want to replace 40% of that power with energy from HHO gas, we'll need to use at least 15KW x 0.4 which comes to 6,000 watts (6KW).

If we assume that the electrolysis cell which converts electricity into HHO gas is 100% efficient (which it certainly isn't) then that means we'll need a massive 6000W/12V or 500 amps of current to make that much gas.

Suddenly those 30A wires are looking rather inadequate aren't they?

What's more, since the average car's alternator can only deliver about 80A of current, this means the battery would have to deliver the other 520A and (in the case of even a good 80AH unit) would be flat in under 10 minutes.

Of course these simple calculations ignore the fact that electrolysis cells are not 100% efficient and the even more important fact that the average internal combustion engine is only around 30% efficient -- so even if we delivered 6KW of HHO gas to the engine it would only produce under 2KW of actual power.

With these inefficiencies taken into account we'd actually need a staggering 1,500A of electrical current to generate the necessary HHO gas to reduce our fuel input by 40%.

So clearly the math doesn't add up. There's just no way you can extract enough electrical energy from your car's automotive system to create the gas volumes needed to create any meaningful amount of energy.
__________________

 Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets
#2
05-13-2013, 09:52 AM
 Jetijs Gold Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,134
You obviously don't take into consideration the fact where the economy comes from. The hho is not a source of fuel, it is just a catalyst and thus is needed in small quantities. If you would analyze the gasoline that you have in your local gas stations, you would find out that it is far from ideal. It does not burn fully. It has hydrocarbon chains that should range from C5 to C12, but it often, or almost always contains a fair percentage of longer hydrocarbon chains, more in the range of kerosine and diesel. These do not burn fully in the explosion that happens in the engine and are released out along with the exhaust gases. And that is why they had to add catalytic convertes in the exhayst - just to bur those unburned hydrocarbons for better emmisions. The truth is that hho only helps to get the most of it out of fuels. and that is a fact I have proven more than 10 times. You are right on that if the hho would be used as pure fuel and produced in ordinary fashion, it would consume way too much power to be viable. But in most cases hho is used just as a booster. Kinda like putting a bit of gasoline on wet wood so it would burn better. The confirmation about those hydrocarbon chain stuff you can get at the fuel from plastic waste thread. It all becomes clear once you see what various fuels are made of.
__________________
It's better to wear off by working than to rust by doing nothing.
#3
05-13-2013, 11:51 PM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jetijs The hho is not a source of fuel, it is just a catalyst and thus is needed in small quantities.
Yours is an argument I hadn't heard before but is also an entirely unorthodox one given the very name of this here forum.

As for the economy, I've never seen hydrogen's role as anything more than an energy currency and an inefficient one at that although the inexpensive electrolysis catalyst discovery I reported on may improve that to a degree as we're seemingly headed for a hydrogen economy anyway.
__________________

#4
05-14-2013, 09:54 AM
 Jetijs Gold Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,134
Hi.
I have a long history of hho stuff. You can see all my hho related pictures with diffenent size and type cells here:
http://www.emuprim.lv/jetijs/index.p...el=album&id=12

Too often I had to bttle with skeptics and did not have any arguments about why there is economy if you put a booster in a car. I had the results but could not explain them properly. Only when I started working on plastic pyrolysis and got into all the fuel stuff much more deeper, did I understand where the energy comes from. I had another thread here:
Efficient Carburetor designs

it is about efficient carburetor designs based on some older patents that have quite a story behind them. The jist of it is that every liter of pure high quality gasoline has the power to move the average car about 100 km. I don't know about that, but I am sure that you can double your mileage if you could get pure gasoline without any additives, if you used air ionizer in the air intake and boosted that with a bit of hho or hydrogen. Unfortunately the gasoline in your gas tanks is far from perfect, not only it contains longer hydrocarbon chains in great percentage than needed (diesel, kerosine, petrolium), it also contains even smaller than needed hydrocarbon chains which can be buthanol, propanol or other waste products of oil refinery process that no one will notice anyway. I have tested it in a small pyrolysis unit, at certain temeratures only certain hydrocarbon lengths should evaporate and condensate. So gasoline should evaporate fully only in certain temperature range. But the truth is that around 15% evaporated way before those temperatures were reached, and around 10% of the fuel was left in the reactor even at higher than needed temperatures. This proves that the fuel is not gasoline but a mix of different fuels that all need their own specific conditions to burn fully. So no wonder we waste so much fuel that is unburned and turned into unuseful heat in the catalytic converter only to decrease hydrocarbons in the emissions. That is the fuel you paid for that is burned in that catalytic converter, but you are turning it into heat instead of torque. So hho is a way to recover some of those losses in heat. But the whole hho deal is rather complex to get to success. Many fail and then claim that all this hho stuff is just a scam (I am not talking about you right now). They fail for various reasons. Either they have a crapy cell, or not a good power limiter to a cell, or the power levels that go in the cell are not adjusted to the sweetspot (every car has its own sweetspot) or the engine computer is working against the changes and an EFIE or different approach is needed to fool the computer, othervise there will be no economy or even increased fuel consumption. There are several important steps which you must take in order to get the results. Miss one step and you are almost guarantied to fail.
Jetijs
__________________
It's better to wear off by working than to rust by doing nothing.
#5
05-14-2013, 03:07 PM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Well, that would help explain Aaron's confusion about water fuel which I brought to his attention:

To quote Stan Meyer is one thing, but since you accept it as fact, I wanted to know what evidence existed? (I assumed nitrogen might be needed to reduce pre-ignition combustion (before the pistons reach TDC). That's why I asked for evidence. As for skeptics, we're not all evil. Isn't Farmhand one?

BTW: Can you explain the discrepancy between what I've bolded in your posts:
First of all, it is not a theory, associates of mine have taken it beyond what I have and reducing propane usage on a jet as I said is a phenomenal achievement by itself. Several others have gone all the way. The red car in the OZ nitro cell documents is owned by a friend of someone I know. It runs on 100% water with a pinch of salt, a coil around the cell and a vacuum on the cell but also ambient air comes into mix with the hho. It has a lawnmower carb on the engine and runs on this fuel exclusively.
But on that OZ Nitro cell thread, you state:

high mileage with lawnmower carburetor - but low power
I remember you going into all of that.

376 miles per gallon Opel - had a lawnmower carburetor, was stripped down to bare essentials and actually did 376 miles per gallon. This test was done by Shell Oil Company. It was very low power but did prove the point about vaporizing the gasoline.

We don't have the details, but I'm sure gasoline vaporization is part of the red car but they don't discuss that. They make it look like water fuel, but 2 gallons of gas an 2 liters of water - sounds to me more like a very efficient water vapor injection system and all the nitrogen part of it could be a red herring.

I understand that nitrogen can play a key role but looking at the fact that the red car has a lawnmower carburetor, I'm inclined to believe it was a snail using gasoline vapor and water vapor supplement.

...and then:
I posted everything I know about it right here in this thread, which is mostly taken from the websites that I could find discussing it. I never noticed the lawnmower carburetor part of the story until relatively recently.
Now you see why I'm so skeptical about 'water fuel cells'?
__________________

#6
05-14-2013, 06:36 PM
 Aaron Co-Founder & Moderator Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Washington State Posts: 11,007

You're completely involved in disinformation by spreading your
ignorance all over this forum and it will come to an end soon.

Even MIT's PLASMATRON can give a 30% increase on a gas engine
as a matter of scientific fact and the original Russian patents were
using water as the fuel to be cracked and not gasoline.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

#7
05-15-2013, 04:18 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jetijs ...it is about efficient carburetor designs...
I thought fuel injection replaced carburetion for its efficiency, but you're right--it hasn't completely eliminated unburnt fuel from the exhaust and your explanation as to why does appear to make sense. Do you know if anyone has comparison tested the exhaust of an engine using varying uniformities of hydrocarbon chains? I'm sure engine temperature, ambient air temperature and other factors might also affect the percent of fuel burnt during ignition.

I understand the pros and cons of carburetors which is partly why I posted the above experiment Aaron mentioned, but more importantly, I wanted your comments since it appears to support your argument for HHO as a gasoline additive.
__________________

#8
05-15-2013, 05:37 PM
 Michael John Nunnerley Gold Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,193
Hi All

Well Jetis is totally right, but there are also more things that go on that can't be seen.

I have posted in two other threads here about nitrogen and what happens when elements break and combine, now there is also a third item, transforming of elements such as in nuclear reactions. Now I am not saying that there is a nuclear reaction going on, but there is an atomic change of state and it can be done very simply, below is a picture of a 316SS electrode after running 20 seconds in a system of electrolysis that I have designed and have two patents pending, the voltage was 2.7v and the current 3.5amps. You can see what has happened to that electrode, the colouring alone indicates temperatures in excess of 1000c to cause the green and pink colouring to 316 SS along with an oxidation and reduction at the surface area.

By using different elements it can transform them into some very interesting items. this is a hot potato at the moment "excuse the pun", and as so I will not be going into this any more on an open forum, it was just to show what can happen if things are done in the right way.

Just tried to upload the photo but the file is too big, sorry about that, if I get a chance I will find another way

Mike
__________________

#9
05-15-2013, 06:15 PM
 Michael John Nunnerley Gold Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,193
Aaron, I have sent the photo via skype to you, if you can post it as I do not want to create an account just for one photo

thanks

Mike
__________________

#10
05-15-2013, 06:21 PM
 AstroNod Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Netherlands Vlaardingen Posts: 43
Plasma electrolysis

Hello All .

HHO is great No scam .

the cover up of the systems found on the internet are mostly scams .

one of them is the stanly meyers basic tube spitter , not one internet site tell what he did with the dynamo AC and the so called rotairy puls generator ect.

that clainm 1700% overunity if i remeber it right .

All i did see are not the right one ... however the bifilair coils look great.

Anyhow Plasma Electrolysis is about 8000% overunity .

At the moment i work on a new water Heater its right now steady >450% overunity .

running tests on Astronod on Vaughn Live [ Astronod on Vaughn Live [ http://vaughnlive.tv/astronod ] ]

anybody is welcome on my channel to see and ask questions live .

i do more things like tesla antenna` s hydrogen oxigen generation .

see ya there or here .

all the best .

John
__________________

#11
05-15-2013, 10:57 PM
 stevie1001 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 91
bla bla

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley Hi All Well Jetis is totally right, but there are also more things that go on that can't be seen. I have posted in two other threads here about nitrogen and what happens when elements break and combine, now there is also a third item, transforming of elements such as in nuclear reactions. Now I am not saying that there is a nuclear reaction going on, but there is an atomic change of state and it can be done very simply, below is a picture of a 316SS electrode after running 20 seconds in a system of electrolysis that I have designed and have two patents pending, the voltage was 2.7v and the current 3.5amps. You can see what has happened to that electrode, the colouring alone indicates temperatures in excess of 1000c to cause the green and pink colouring to 316 SS along with an oxidation and reduction at the surface area. By using different elements it can transform them into some very interesting items. this is a hot potato at the moment "excuse the pun", and as so I will not be going into this any more on an open forum, it was just to show what can happen if things are done in the right way. Just tried to upload the photo but the file is too big, sorry about that, if I get a chance I will find another way Mike
and what does that show?
Promises.
Oh, you forgot to tell that the MIB are hunting you down and forgot to mention some bible texts....

Scam, till proven otherwise.
__________________

#12
05-16-2013, 01:55 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by stevie1001 and what does that show? Promises. Oh, you forgot to tell that the MIB are hunting you down and forgot to mention some bible texts.... Scam, till proven otherwise.
You didn't read the Alchemy Through Vernon Roth's Alchemical Hydrogen Cells. When large mining companies start panicking as young, urban EF hacks begin selling gold-crusted electrodes on a daily basis, it'll be MJ Nunnerly and 'the Roth child' who'll be laughing all the way to their newly formed bank.
__________________

#13
05-16-2013, 02:11 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by AstroNod ... the systems found on the internet are mostly scams .
...and for reasons you obviously don't begin to understand:

Quote:
 Anyhow Plasma Electrolysis is about 8000% overunity . At the moment i work on a new water Heater its right now steady >450% overunity
__________________

#14
05-16-2013, 07:28 AM
 Michael John Nunnerley Gold Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,193

Here is a link to the photo

ImageShack&#174; - Online Photo and Video Hosting

Mike
__________________

#15
05-16-2013, 07:38 AM
 wings Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 216
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Aaron I'm not confused about anything and I'm tired of your mouth. You're completely involved in disinformation by spreading your ignorance all over this forum and it will come to an end soon. Even MIT's PLASMATRON can give a 30% increase on a gas engine as a matter of scientific fact and the original Russian patents were using water as the fuel to be cracked and not gasoline.
related to cold plasma reforming

Plasma Fuel Reforming :: Ceramatec
__________________

#16
05-16-2013, 07:58 AM
 stevie1001 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 91
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Ein~+ein You didn't read the Alchemy Through Vernon Roth's Alchemical Hydrogen Cells. When large mining companies start panicking as young, urban EF hacks begin selling gold-crusted electrodes on a daily basis, it'll be MJ Nunnerly and 'the Roth child' who'll be laughing all the way to their newly formed bank.
You are right that i didnt read that book yet.
Please explain it to me. Dont hold back.
I never seen any gold on my electrodes, so i am doing something wrong, it seems.....
__________________

#17
05-16-2013, 08:10 AM
 wings Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 216
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wings related to cold plasma reforming Plasma Fuel Reforming :: Ceramatec
PLASMATRON Systems - WATER as FUEL - review of available technologies - M.D.G. 2006
__________________

#18
05-16-2013, 09:11 AM
 stevie1001 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 91
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wings PLASMATRON Systems - WATER as FUEL - review of available technologies - M.D.G. 2006
82% efficiency till 98%......
__________________

#19
05-16-2013, 12:13 PM
 tutanka Gold Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,079
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley Here is a link to the photo ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting Mike
And what is the new? In my reactor I can reach 1200°C using chemical plasma and not electric plasma. I can dissociate also CO2 creating a lot of CO.
__________________

#20
05-16-2013, 01:07 PM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
@Stevie: Here's the link for Vernon Roth's Alchemicla Hyrdogen Cells

-----------
Quote:
 Ruggero Santilli has been nominated for a Nobel Prize
... but not for his controversial 'magnecular' theory:
Magnecules have also been invoked as an explanation for a purported "HHO gas", which Santilli claims is "a new form of water" produced by electrolysis.[14][17] The name comes from the supposed chemical structure (H × H)–O, where “×” represents a "magnecular bond" and “−” a conventional molecular bond. This has subsequently been adopted by water-fueled car scams and pseudoscience involving electrolysis machines and water torches.[18] It is claimed that these devices produce HHO gas, with a number of unique properties, instead of the usual oxyhydrogen gas, which is simply a mixture of diatomic hydrogen and oxygen gases.

In 2006, Brown University Professor of Engineering Joseph M. Calo wrote in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy that Santilli's article had "many serious misinterpretations, and misunderstandings of the 'data' presented", provided "absolutely no scientific evidence" to support HHO gas's existence and he described Santilli's Magnecules as “pseudo-science as well".[17] Two scientists, Martin Cloonan[19] and J. V. Kadeisvili[20] have published replies to Calo's article, in support of Santilli's "HHO Gas" theory.
And for those wondering about the 'plasmatron:

Quote:
 The “plasmatron” was invented in Russia in the 1970’s. The inventor, Rabinovich, was able to find a job at MIT and, when H2 generation/fuel conversion/NOx removal was at a rage, worked w/Cohn & Bromberg at MIT on a plasmatron for fuel conversion and generating H2 reductant for NOx removel. Arvin Meritor became an industrial backer of the device, hoping to find a large market for it. People wonder ‘What ever became of the MIT/Arvin Meritor plasmatron?’ – it seemed to work so well. No conspiracy here: the device did work well for short periods of time; however, for reasonable operating times required of industrial/automotive devices, the MIT plasmatron made bunches and bunches of soot – very undesirable to inject into an engine or a NOx-removal system. Discovering this, Arvin Meritor promptly dumped MIT and withdrew funds for subsequent work. ---------- Although in principle the device could process all of the fuel for a vehicle, the researchers say that it's most cost-effective to convert only a fraction of the fuel into hydrogen-rich gas. That's because even though such gas increases the efficiency of an engine, the plasmatron itself consumes energy. The best results in the recent tests were achieved by converting 25 percent of the gasoline into hydrogen-rich gas.
@Jetijs: Now I understand what you meant when you said it was all about the (fuel) economy. These guys obviously didn't search for, or find that sweet spot.
__________________

#21
05-16-2013, 02:37 PM
 wings Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 216
The Ohio University scientists who developed the urine technology found that attaching hydrogen to nitrogen in urine allowed it to be stored without the strict requirements of ordinary hydrogen, and allowed it to be released with less electricity (0.037 volts versus 1.23 volts needed for water).

__________________

#22
05-16-2013, 03:07 PM
 wings Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 216
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wings The Ohio University scientists who developed the urine technology found that attaching hydrogen to nitrogen in urine allowed it to be stored without the strict requirements of ordinary hydrogen, and allowed it to be released with less electricity (0.037 volts versus 1.23 volts needed for water). Your Car and Home Could Soon Be Powered By Urine

Hydrogen from Urine (fire from pee) - YouTube
__________________

#23
05-16-2013, 03:53 PM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wings The Ohio University scientists who developed the urine technology found that attaching hydrogen to nitrogen in urine allowed it to be stored without the strict requirements of ordinary hydrogen, and allowed it to be released with less electricity (0.037 volts versus 1.23 volts needed for water). Your Car and Home Could Soon Be Powered By Urine
You'll find a link to a more recent news article and one to Prof. Botte's commercial venture here on this post.

--------
Unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary, I for one am inclined to accept the 'HHO scam' claim. One such 'HHO Research Site' claims:
Quote:
 With most diesel and petrol fueled vehicles, about 65-75% of fuel is wasted and goes out the exhaust port to be burnt up by the catalytic converter to try and stop pollution. What is new is that we can now separate the gases in high volumes with much less current than was possible a few years ago because of modern electronics and the availability of exotic metals and other materials to construct the Hydrogen - Oxygen Generation Cells that make them more practical for use.
I don't know about the rest of you. On the one hand I find it reprehensible that such websites/individuals get away with this, but on the other, anyone who's dumb enough to fall for this deserves the lesson (hopefully learned).
__________________

#24
05-16-2013, 06:01 PM
 Michael John Nunnerley Gold Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,193
Quote:
 Originally Posted by stevie1001 and what does that show? Promises. Oh, you forgot to tell that the MIB are hunting you down and forgot to mention some bible texts.... Scam, till proven otherwise.
IF you don't know what that shows, then you should keep quiet and learn something before opening your mouth, this is why I very rarly post anything any more. And what is all the bible text, I'm a believer in science not religous nuts who have caused just about every war that has been "my view", sorry if I offend anyone, all have a right to believe in what or who they want, and as far as MIB's you wouldn't even know one if you saw one and thats not to say if I would unless they introduced themselves

The colouring shows that double AND triple chemical bonds were broken and remade WITH VERY LITTLE ENERGY, "a transformation took place". What was produced at the end in this is of my concern and not yours. If I post something it is fact and tested, I gain nothing from you, my work is my living, or do you want that as well? I sell no books or videos but I do sell to companies who WILL use the end product which will be of benifit to mankind.

The next time you buy a computer or a mobile phone or the future generation of hydrogen battery cell etc etc you just might have put some money in my pocket

best of luck learning, I'm gone

Mike
__________________

#25
05-17-2013, 03:23 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley Hi All Well Jetis is totally right, but there are also more things that go on that can't be seen....
Do you mean 'totally right' from an economic standpoint--HHO as a fuel additive can do more than just provide a cleaner burn? I'm not convinced, especially given the controversial (at best) evidence others have provided in support of Jetijs's assertion. Or do you mean that HHO is best suited to applications other than as a gas addititve?
__________________

#26
05-18-2013, 08:51 AM
 stevie1001 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 91
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley IF you don't know what that shows, then you should keep quiet and learn something before opening your mouth, this is why I very rarly post anything any more. And what is all the bible text, I'm a believer in science not religous nuts who have caused just about every war that has been "my view", sorry if I offend anyone, all have a right to believe in what or who they want, and as far as MIB's you wouldn't even know one if you saw one and thats not to say if I would unless they introduced themselves The colouring shows that double AND triple chemical bonds were broken and remade WITH VERY LITTLE ENERGY, "a transformation took place". What was produced at the end in this is of my concern and not yours. If I post something it is fact and tested, I gain nothing from you, my work is my living, or do you want that as well? I sell no books or videos but I do sell to companies who WILL use the end product which will be of benifit to mankind. The next time you buy a computer or a mobile phone or the future generation of hydrogen battery cell etc etc you just might have put some money in my pocket best of luck learning, I'm gone Mike
And this is exact the problem with Mike.
Lots of talk. Not any scientific prove whats so ever.
So why did you ever come here to this forum? Share all your knowledge with us?????
Some testing papers? Prove of technology tests done by independent testers? Building papers? Schematics? Nothing seen here, Mike.
So, no loss if you leave here. Don't waist my and others time.
If you would come out with some of above mentioned information and you have really something that works, then of course all the credits for you.
Till then, dont ask us to praise almighty Mike.

Peace to all builders and info sharing members.
__________________

#27
05-18-2013, 11:09 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
I saw a post here earlier today referring to a gov't doc but is it just me that can't access it? Here's a reference to what it says:
In November 2007, the U.S. Department of Transportation published a 94-page report titled, "Guidelines for use of hydrogen fuel in commercial vehicles final report," that was targeted toward safety issues surrounding handling hydrogen. The report also focuses on diesel trucks more than gasoline-powered cars and covers hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, internal combustion vehicles and hydrogen-on-demand technology.

Here are some excerpts from the document:

"Today, virtually all commercial trucks are powered by diesel fuel, while private cars are fueled by gasoline. Supported by our National Energy Policy, a new generation of technologies is currently being developed that allow the use of hydrogen as a fuel to power cars and trucks. In the future, hydrogen may be used in one of three ways to power vehicles:

. To produce electricity in a fuel cell

. As a replacement for gasoline or diesel fuel used in an internal combustion engine

. As a supplement to gasoline or diesel fuel used in an internal combustion engine

"Several fuel cell buses have been demonstrated that reform, or extract hydrogen from, liquid methanol onboard (Georgetown University, 2003), and there are fuel cell APU systems under development that will derive their hydrogen from onboard reforming of diesel fuel or gasoline (Delphi, 2005). In addition, there are several commercial hydrogen injection systems available for retrofit on diesel engines (CHEC, n.d.). These systems produce small amounts of hydrogen by electrolysis of water carried on the vehicle, which is injected into the diesel engine along with the diesel fuel.

"A hydrogen injection system for a diesel engine produces small amounts of hydrogen and oxygen on demand by electrolyzing water carried onboard the vehicle. The electricity required is supplied by the engine's alternator or 12/24-volt electrical system (see Section 1.5 for a description of electrolysis). The hydrogen and oxygen are injected into the engine's air intake manifold, where they mix with the intake air. In theory, the combustion properties of the hydrogen result in more complete combustion of diesel fuel in the engine, reducing tailpipe emissions and improving fuel economy (CHEC, n.d.).

"A hydrogen injection system for a diesel engine produces and uses significantly less hydrogen than a hydrogen fuel cell or hydrogen ICE, and does not require that compressed or liquid hydrogen be carried on the vehicle. The system is designed to produce hydrogen only when required, in response to driver throttle commands. When the system is shut off, no hydrogen is present on the vehicle."
Anyone know whether this tech is standard on commercial (diesel) vehicles yet, or at least in the R&D stage? Keep in mind that report is now 6 yrs old. The 4% I saw quoted in that post would be a significant annual cost saving for long-haul trucking operators or bus lines where fuel is by far the largest expense. If a rig's driver could simply unroll a 'solar blanket' over the top of their trailer, how much more efficient could such a system be? Seems there's real potential here.

Even Wikipedia's: Hydrogen Fuel Enhancement page supports the claim:
There has been a great deal of research into fuel mixtures, such as gasoline and nitrous oxide injection. Mixtures of hydrogen and hydrocarbons are no exception.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] These sources say that contamination from exhaust gases has been reduced in all cases, and they suggest that a small efficiency increases is sometimes possible.
...while cautioning:
To date, hydrogen fuel enhancement products have not been specifically addressed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, as no research devices or commercial products have reports available as per the "Motor Vehicle Aftermarket Retrofit Device Evaluation Program."[10] They do, however, point out that installation of such devices often involves illegally tampering with an automobile's emissions control system, which could result in significant fines.[11] Environment Canada does have a research paper on the subject. In tests done in their laboratory in 2004 they found no improvement in engine efficiency or fuel economy.[12]
Hydrogen fuel enhancement from electrolysis (utilizing automotive alternators) has been promoted for use with gasoline-powered and diesel trucks,[13][14][15] although electrolysis-based designs have repeatedly failed efficiency tests and contradict widely accepted laws of thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy). Proponents, who sell the units (often called "HHO devices"), claim that the dynamics are often misconstrued, and due to the chemical properties of the resulting mixture, it is possible to gain efficiency increases in a manner that does not violate any scientific laws. Many tests by consumer watch groups have shown negative results. This technique may seem appealing to some at first because it is easy to overlook energy losses in the system as a whole. Those unfamiliar with electrodynamics may not realize that the electrolytic cell drains current from a car's electrical system causing an increase in mechanical resistance in the alternator that will always result in a net power reduction.[16][17][18] [19] Since it requires more energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen than would be gained from burning the hydrogen produced in this method, the concept of such a device is often stated to be in direct violation of the first and second laws of thermodynamics.[20][21][22][23][24][25] Monetary prizes have been offered to sellers or promoters of these devices to demonstrate their claims of increased fuel economy are true (see US\$1,000 Water Car Challenge), with very few sellers taking the challenges and no device passing the challenges.
WHAT?!?!? '...very few sellers taking the challenge?' Should we start a new thread with links to these prize(s)? While the \$1,000 is peanuts, the value might be in the PR depending on who's running the competition(s).
__________________

#28
05-18-2013, 03:19 PM
 Jeff Pearson Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Taos NM Posts: 188
I got an increase of 3MPG with a booster. Ozzy Freedoms cell. The exhaust was the most impressive part of the setup; Cleaned it right up.
__________________

#29
05-19-2013, 02:15 AM
 Ein~+ein Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 298
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jeff Pearson I got an increase of 3MPG with a booster. Ozzy Freedoms cell. The exhaust was the most impressive part of the setup; Cleaned it right up.
Strange! One would think with all the bad press they're getting, it's a scam:
> Ozzie Freedom Charged with Fraud by State of Texas
> Water 4 Gas "Ozzie Freedom" charged with FRAUD in Texas
> (Texas) AG Charges California-Based Business With Fraud In Water-To-Fuel Scheme
> AG Charges California-Based Business With Fraud In Water-To-Fuel Scheme
> Run Your Car On Water" Scheme Could Leave Consumers All Wet
> Texas Sues Water4gas.com
> Is using Water for Fuel / Water4Gas a Hoax?
> Texas AG Cruelly Informs Us Water Can't Be Turned Into Gas

--------------------------------------------------------------------
A Question for 'Water Car' True Believers from a tree hugger

But there's a question we'd like to ask those who are so certain that 'water cars' (with water as the only fuel, and not as an energy carrier via hydrogen) already work and are somehow kept hidden: If some people had that technology, why would cars be the first thing they try to make? That's hard, with huge supply chains and massive capital investments, lots of regulations and red tape, etc. Why not make power plants right next to rivers (or just use tap water) and sell the power? They could start very small (less than 1 megawatt) to show that it works. That would be much more profitable, no? Or even sell the technology to makers of portable electronics, which don't have vested interests in oil and cars.

So why aren't we hearing about 'water power plants' (other than hydro), or 'water powered laptops'? It's always 'water cars', and mostly when gas prices are up. Could it be that it's just a really nice story that strikes the imagination (the image of pouring water in a fuel tank is powerful), the way many urban legends do?
__________________

#30
05-19-2013, 03:09 AM
 Jeff Pearson Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Taos NM Posts: 188
Yeah, its nots even a very good cell, but the little bit of HHO or whatever was effective, not very but effective. I later self destructed 4 cells forcing enough power through them to just barley run the engine on HHO mixed with ambient air drawn through the cells. Even that didn't blow the 10 amp fuse to the cells so its way less power than what the alternator can supply with a crappy inefficient cell!!!!!!
__________________

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules

Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

 Choose your voluntary subscription \$5 : \$5.00 USD - monthly \$7 : \$7.00 USD - monthly \$10 : \$10.00 USD - monthly \$25 : \$25.00 USD - monthly \$50 : \$50.00 USD - monthly \$75 : \$75.00 USD - monthly \$100 : \$100.00 USD - monthly \$175 : \$175.00 USD - monthly \$250 : \$250.00 USD - monthly

For one-time donations, please use the below button.

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:32 AM.