So yeah, this video looks pretty awesome and could solve tons of problems if it's true, but I'm still not 100% on that.

clicky

so i'm not going to go through the agony of loading the video, but i can tell you that i know a guy that converted his lawnmower to water power. he claimed that the only setback is that metal rusts so everything the water ran through would have to be ceramic, which is very expensive, he has to drain the mower after everytime he uses it.

Agony? It's a 2 second download?!

This was posted a few weeks ago.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

it takes me 30 minutes to download a song

i too have 56k

f**k! I'm going to cry. That video contains so little intelligence I'd have thought an amoeba wrote the script. The ONLY purpose of the system in automobiles is to reduce emissions of partial combustion products and possibly nitrogen oxides. YOU CANNOT GENERATE POWER WITH WATER (unless you use a fusion reactor, but that isn't what's happening)!

It looks like a pretty neat idea for a welding torch, and it might be useful in automobile emissions control, but I highly doubt it would generate an overall increase in the fuel-efficiency of the vehicle. Still, there is nothing revolutionary about it. I can make hydrogen gas in my kitchen easily enough, but it is an incredibly inefficient process. If anyone wants an in-depth explanation, I'll write one, but otherwise I'll drop the subject.

Nothing in the world pisses me off like that video. It is either a disgusting display ignorance, or an evil and malicious distortion of science.

now im tempted to watch it

patented the method of turning H2O to HHO

Ludicrous.

Tracer Bullet said:
f**k! I'm going to cry. That video contains so little intelligence I'd have thought an amoeba wrote the script. The ONLY purpose of the system in automobiles is to reduce emissions of partial combustion products and possibly nitrogen oxides. YOU CANNOT GENERATE POWER WITH WATER (unless you use a fusion reactor, but that isn't what's happening)!

It looks like a pretty neat idea for a welding torch, and it might be useful in automobile emissions control, but I highly doubt it would generate an overall increase in the fuel-efficiency of the vehicle. Still, there is nothing revolutionary about it. I can make hydrogen gas in my kitchen easily enough, but it is an incredibly inefficient process. If anyone wants an in-depth explanation, I'll write one, but otherwise I'll drop the subject.

Nothing in the world pisses me off like that video. It is either a disgusting display ignorance, or an evil and malicious distortion of science.

Hydrogen cars are nothing new. These cars generally use the hydrogen in one of two methods: combustion or fuell-cell conversion. In combustion, the hydrogen is "burned" in engines in fundamentally the same method as traditional gasoline cars. In fuel-cell conversion, the hydrogen is turned into electricity through fuel cells which then power electric motors.

The big issue is how to make the hydrogen out of water, efficiently. Right now, hydrogen is not economically feasible to use for transportation , nor will its use reduce global warming. Key problems are the cost and greenhouse gases generated during production, the low energy content per volume and weight and size of the hydrogen container.

I always thought hydrogen (and thus, fuel-cell) cars would only be economically feasible when a new process would have hydrogen as it's by-product, or if an efficient way to make hydrogen out of water would be found. If this could happen in large enough quantities, hydrogen could be transported to gas stations the same way gasoline is supplied now. You then fill up your hydrogen tank and off you go.

So the question is, has the man in the article won the race toward efficient hydrogen production? i doubt it.

---

These words are my diaries screaming out loud

The solution for the lack of clean energy lies in nuclear fusion, but
according to an article I read a month ago it's not currectly possible
due to the problems in handling plasma(as in fourth form of matter).
It's just too hot to handle(like some women).

---

''Everyone wades in s**t until they're competent enough to walk on it. Jesus style.''
Dystopia - Empires

Pvt.Scythe said:
The solution for the lack of clean energy lies in nuclear fusion, but according to an article I read a month ago it's not currectly possible due to the problems in handling plasma(as in fourth form of matter). It's just too hot to handle(like some women).

thats why they capture it in a magnetic field. as i spammed here a few times already, they're building a fusion reactor atm.

Tracer Bullet said:
f**k! I'm going to cry. That video contains so little intelligence I'd have thought an amoeba wrote the script. The ONLY purpose of the system in automobiles is to reduce emissions of partial combustion products and possibly nitrogen oxides. YOU CANNOT GENERATE POWER WITH WATER (unless you use a fusion reactor, but that isn't what's happening)!

It looks like a pretty neat idea for a welding torch, and it might be useful in automobile emissions control, but I highly doubt it would generate an overall increase in the fuel-efficiency of the vehicle. Still, there is nothing revolutionary about it. I can make hydrogen gas in my kitchen easily enough, but it is an incredibly inefficient process. If anyone wants an in-depth explanation, I'll write one, but otherwise I'll drop the subject.

Nothing in the world pisses me off like that video. It is either a disgusting display ignorance, or an evil and malicious distortion of science.

well I'd like an explanation.The video looked real enough, but why the anger? What is happening? Is it all lies? Does this process not work? And remember, I'm not a scientist (or even a scientific hobbyist) so keep it as simple as possible.

i remember the process of electrolysis from 7th grade biology class....electric current passed thru water, separating the molecules.....1 test tube full of hydrogen, one full of oxygen...took about 4 minutes for the process to work....point is, the technology has been there for many years, they just havent figured out a way to make it efficient, basicly because of big oil.....and this guy in the video, well, hes full o s**t, imho.....

Doc B... :dodgy:

Sounds like something similar to hydrogen powered cars - seeing that
hydrogen comes from water.

---

'The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit.' - Somerset Maugham

I saw this topic a while back on other forums, was gonna post it here, but almost every forum I saw post the topic ended up debateing beyond 10 pages. Felt like spareing yall the humility.

But on this topic, I realized a couples days after first whatching the video somthing interessting. If Hydrogen is a combustable liquad and oxygen feeds the flame, then technically we are all drinking "rocket fuel" every day. I mean just think about it. (I am not saying try to apply it, so do not take i too seriously.)

---

You know, I've actually got nothing to say

Hydrogen is in gas from under normal pressure. And yes, we are drinking
rocketfuel. Also iron that rusts is actually slowly burning. Yes,
Blister that was mentioned in the article too, but I forgot to add it.
The main problem with that was in finding superconductive material that
would work in higher temperatures or something like that.

---

''Everyone wades in s**t until they're competent enough to walk on it. Jesus style.''
Dystopia - Empires

Why am I angry about it? Because I don't like being lied to. Because they are perpetuating a common misconception. Because scientific ignorance and the irresponsible idiotic nature of the American media are two of my biggest pet-peeves!

The thing that bothers me most is that this "news" piece has almost nothing whatsoever to do with the subject matter of the claimed patents. Journalists ought to be the best critical thinkers in the country. At best, those two are gullible saps. At worst, they fabricated 90% of the piece to inflate it's apparent importance.

What is claimed is a very simple design for an electrolytic cell that will split water into hydrogen and oxygen gas. The primary innovations are it's ease of servicing and the enhanced surface area of the electrodes. The intended purpose of the invention is to mix small quantities of hydrogen and oxygen with conventional petroleum fuels. Apparently doing this promotes complete combustion and can reduce the emission of partial combustion products, as well as possibly making the engine somewhat more efficient. no real science was done here, just some fairly simple, but clever, engineering.

Another thing that really bothered me was their reference to water as a "fuel". I'll try to explain things in a way that non-scientist can understand.

Why can water never be used as a chemical fuel? because it is already at a potential energy minimum. Splitting water and then burning it is like picking a book up off the floor and then dropping it again. By picking the book up you store gravitational potential energy, and by splitting the water you store chemical potential energy. Dropping the book, or burning the hydrogen simply releases that potential energy, and gets you back where you started. However, the trick is that you've got to put more energy into raising the book or splitting the water than you will ever get back out when you burn/release it. That is a fundamental principal of nature, no way around it. Any time you convert one form of energy to another you loose some as dissipated heat.

As others have said, electrolysis of water is an incredibly inefficient way to generate hydrogen. You've got to put WAY more electrical energy in than you get out in chemical potential energy. So, unless you have a cheap, clean, plentiful source of electrical energy, you can forget about using electrolysis as a means of generating hydrogen as a vehicular fuel.

The on-board system described by the patent would have to use electricity generated by the cars alternator to make the hydrogen. this would increase the load on the engine and decrease the power available for actually moving the vehicle. The only way a system like this could improve fuel efficiency is if adding the H2 and O2 caused a large enough increase in petroleum combustion efficiency to overcome the losses incurred by running the electrolytic cell. I doubt this would be the case, and if it is, I expect that the gains would be rather meager.

All that said, I think the welding torch idea sounds pretty cool. All you've got to do is fill it up with water and plug it into an electrical outlet and you've got a hydrogen torch. No need for dangerous compressed gas cylinders! Plus, I expect that the purity of the flame would be hugely desirable for welding reactive metals like titanium and aluminum.

sniff***..... ive missed you TB....

Doc B... :dodgy:

You too Doc. :smile: I get fired up about the strangest god damn things, don't I?

Well at least you can explain it. If I asked that to alot of other people, it woulda been so damn complex.

You do Science. I liek you.

You explained it very well. But as an aficionado of all things automotive, I can tell you that a larger alternator does not increase the drain on the engine much at all, only adding a second alternator or a larger alternator with a smaller pulley would decrease engine power significantly.

Instead of just an alternator, it would be an efficient idea to run a generator from a gearbox that would be in place of a conventional alternator. A generator will generate more electricity the faster it is run, whereas an alternator supplies the same amount of current no matter how high it goes as long as it is above a certain speed. if you run a generator geared to make more electricity while keeping the same pully size on the engine, and gearing it such that the smaller gear on the generator would be going faster because it is geared by the larger one, you would have lots more electricity with little more strain.



In this schematic:

• is the crankshaft, from which all engine accessories get thier power. When you add more belts and more accessories, it puts more strain on the engine which has to create more horsepower and torque. This is why your car will run weaker when your Air Conditioner is on, because when the AC is on, it engages a clutch that causes one more accessory to be added on to the load that must be taken on by the crankshaft.
• is the small gear that goes to the front of the generator.
• is the large gear that gears the smaller gear for the generator. As you all should know by now, when you run a small gear from a big gear, the small gear makes many more revolutions per minute than does the large one.
• are just all the other accessories like AC, power steering, and thermactor (wikipedia it if you don't know).

In a normal car there is no number 2 and number 3 is the pulley on the front of an alternator.

Anyway, this setup would make more electricity and with a voltage regularot installed it would not hurt your electrical performance either.

---

I tried sniffing coke, but the ice cubes kept getting stuck in my nose.
http://www.dimebowl.com

if you look in the corner it says "fox" - that should be indication enough NOT to watch it

---

Posting And You

Nickelplate will you adopt me?

---

o

Why does everything cool in the internet have to turn out to be fake.

I just remebered something from watching the Discover channel som years back.

A bunch of Japanease Engineers have this idea of building a giant city like pyramid to replace the city. The peoblem would come from powering it. Fossil fuels are too dirty, and the maitenence of nuclear fuel is too needy and danferous. Thus, they did a little research and figured that they'd use the ocen below them as a power source. The idea comes from electrolocus, but they lacked reserves, or wants for that matter, for normal electrical generation. They wanted this city to rely on itself. Thus, through further research, they found a microscopic organism that lives in the ocean releaseing Hydrogen as a byprodoct. The only problem with this idea is that the organisms release so little of the Hydrogen that it would be impossible to maintain an entire city power structer.

--Short in closing,
*There exists a micro-organism that breaks down H2O.
*But it breaks down so few H20, that the idea is infeasable.

---

You know, I've actually got nothing to say

Baron von Snickers said:
Nickelplate will you adopt me?

Yes, for another bottle of whiskey, ANYTHING. :biggrin:

---

I tried sniffing coke, but the ice cubes kept getting stuck in my nose.
http://www.dimebowl.com