There is a man in Canada who has been running engines on hydrogen . A video of this can be seen at www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h2ocar/htm .
This video was taken a few years ago.This system is unique because the process
used by the inventor actually produces hydrogen using non toxic alloys and the hydrogen can be produced at very low cost.
You can see with your own two eyes .....this has been demonstrated to many people
including scientists etc....it is real. The project and appearance of the engine has greatly improved in the last 2 years . check it out.
The link you gave didn't work. This is probably the correct URL: http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm
Why is a normal petrolium/deisel based engine running on hydrogen?
I thought hydrogen based technology was different.
Technically if you can run a normal engine off hydrogen then whys it taking so damn long to build hydrogen technology?
Sorry but that video looked EXTREMELY amatuer yet the results they got were BRILLIANT
...So why cant genius scientists get further?
Its about sticking a reactive metal into water to break an O-H-H bond into water...........thats basic science....
I think this is an opposite way of using hydrogen given that today scientists look at converting the hydrogen into water for a non pollutant fuel
problem is is that the hydrogen is reacting with the earths oxygen meaning yet more lack of oxygen, and more water when you think about it-unless they get the hydrogen from the water
now THATS a good fuel
Water being broken down into hydrogen the engine using the hydrogen and re assembling it into water to then go BACK into the fuel tank to be reused
Of course this would mean no one would need to top up fuel for ages-so this technology will never exist because it means less money
I thought hydrogen based technology was different.
Technically if you can run a normal engine off hydrogen then whys it taking so damn long to build hydrogen technology?
Sorry but that video looked EXTREMELY amatuer yet the results they got were BRILLIANT
...So why cant genius scientists get further?
Its about sticking a reactive metal into water to break an O-H-H bond into water...........thats basic science....
I think this is an opposite way of using hydrogen given that today scientists look at converting the hydrogen into water for a non pollutant fuel
problem is is that the hydrogen is reacting with the earths oxygen meaning yet more lack of oxygen, and more water when you think about it-unless they get the hydrogen from the water
now THATS a good fuel
Water being broken down into hydrogen the engine using the hydrogen and re assembling it into water to then go BACK into the fuel tank to be reused
Of course this would mean no one would need to top up fuel for ages-so this technology will never exist because it means less money
just realised my last post
that technology WILL become in use actually
as water costs nothing....
but i guarantee if that technology DID come about-water rates would go up for sure lol
that technology WILL become in use actually
as water costs nothing....
but i guarantee if that technology DID come about-water rates would go up for sure lol
QUOTE (Neutron+May 23 2005, 08:57 AM)
The link you gave didn't work. This is probably the correct URL: http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm
Oh yes the scientists must all be stupid... the oldest process in the world and no one thought about using it... hell must they be stupid... or might there be a reson why not?
Oh yes the scientists must all be stupid... the oldest process in the world and no one thought about using it... hell must they be stupid... or might there be a reson why not?
"Hydrogen: This fuel is complete in itself. It does not need oxygen from the atmosphere to burn, which is an improvement over fossil fuels in saving the oxygen in our air supply."
Hydrogen doesn't need oxygen to burn? If I recall correctly, the definition of "burn" itself requires the presence of oxygen. Ever remember what the firemen all taught us in grade school? "Fire is like a three-legged stool - the legs are fuel, oxygen, and a spark - without all three legs, the stool cannot stand and the fire will not start."
What makes hydrogen so dangerous to handle is that if put in contact with oxygen, it will rapidly burn and generate water.
2H2 + O2 --> 2H2O
Hydrogen cannot burn without oxygen.
Hydrogen fuel cells operate on a different principle, by splitting hydrogen into a proton and electron via a membrane. The electron, in a wire, gives electrical power to the car or device, and meets the proton at the other side of the membrane. Oxygen is used up in the process only so that the car doesn't end up spewing pure hydrogen into the air. Instead, the oxygen is combined with the hydrogen to create water, slowly, and the water is released into the air with no pollutants.
"In fact, when hydrogen burns perfectly, nothing at all comes out of the tail pipe."
Huh?
Someone needs to teach these people the Conservation of Mass and Energy law. You can't put in something and get nothing out. There's no way to completely convert hydrogen into energy unless you have a positron and an antiproton to make a matter-antimatter reaction, which would only produce light. Something will always have to come out of the tailpipe.
"The environment is experiencing tremendous problems at the moment, and one of the most serious of these is that we are losing our oxygen. The oxygen content of the air is becoming so low that it threatens our very existence in some areas. The normal oxygen content of our air is 21 percent. But in some places it is only a fraction of that! In Tokyo, Japan, for example, the oxygen content of the air has dipped to 6 or 7 percent. If it reaches 5 percent, people will begin to die. Tokyo has even put oxygen disbursement centers on its street corners, so that people can get emergency oxygen if they need it."
What? A google search showed no such oxygen distribution centers in Tokyo. The problem in the world isn't that we're running out of oxygen, but that too many pollutants, like carbon dioxide and other industrial products, have gone into the air. This makes the percent of oxygen in the air drop, but not the total amount - it just spreads out to other places, pushed away by the pollutants.
Remember, at STP (Standard Temperature and Pressure) 1 mol of any gas fills up 22.4L. That's a direct measurement of how many molecules are in the air - 1 mol. If you add more molecules, in order to keep the gas at STP, you have to expand the volume. The same thing happens with the air near industrial plants - the lower concentration of oxygen is due to it being driven away by the pollutants, not because the oxygen is missing.
I'm sorry, but most of this page seems to be a fraud. It even references Brown's gas, which has been very disputed in that many people claim that its miracle properties, touted by Brown himself, are a fraud and that those miracle properties do not exist.
That would be nice, but remember that it takes energy to break water into hydrogen and oxygen. Electrolysis requires electricity, hence the name. So, it's like putting the energy in when you electrolyze water, and taking the energy out when you run it through a fuel cell. If the energy you're putting in is about the same as you're getting out, there's no energy gained for moving a car.
Hydrogen doesn't need oxygen to burn? If I recall correctly, the definition of "burn" itself requires the presence of oxygen. Ever remember what the firemen all taught us in grade school? "Fire is like a three-legged stool - the legs are fuel, oxygen, and a spark - without all three legs, the stool cannot stand and the fire will not start."
What makes hydrogen so dangerous to handle is that if put in contact with oxygen, it will rapidly burn and generate water.
2H2 + O2 --> 2H2O
Hydrogen cannot burn without oxygen.
Hydrogen fuel cells operate on a different principle, by splitting hydrogen into a proton and electron via a membrane. The electron, in a wire, gives electrical power to the car or device, and meets the proton at the other side of the membrane. Oxygen is used up in the process only so that the car doesn't end up spewing pure hydrogen into the air. Instead, the oxygen is combined with the hydrogen to create water, slowly, and the water is released into the air with no pollutants.
"In fact, when hydrogen burns perfectly, nothing at all comes out of the tail pipe."
Huh?
Someone needs to teach these people the Conservation of Mass and Energy law. You can't put in something and get nothing out. There's no way to completely convert hydrogen into energy unless you have a positron and an antiproton to make a matter-antimatter reaction, which would only produce light. Something will always have to come out of the tailpipe."The environment is experiencing tremendous problems at the moment, and one of the most serious of these is that we are losing our oxygen. The oxygen content of the air is becoming so low that it threatens our very existence in some areas. The normal oxygen content of our air is 21 percent. But in some places it is only a fraction of that! In Tokyo, Japan, for example, the oxygen content of the air has dipped to 6 or 7 percent. If it reaches 5 percent, people will begin to die. Tokyo has even put oxygen disbursement centers on its street corners, so that people can get emergency oxygen if they need it."
What? A google search showed no such oxygen distribution centers in Tokyo. The problem in the world isn't that we're running out of oxygen, but that too many pollutants, like carbon dioxide and other industrial products, have gone into the air. This makes the percent of oxygen in the air drop, but not the total amount - it just spreads out to other places, pushed away by the pollutants.
Remember, at STP (Standard Temperature and Pressure) 1 mol of any gas fills up 22.4L. That's a direct measurement of how many molecules are in the air - 1 mol. If you add more molecules, in order to keep the gas at STP, you have to expand the volume. The same thing happens with the air near industrial plants - the lower concentration of oxygen is due to it being driven away by the pollutants, not because the oxygen is missing.
I'm sorry, but most of this page seems to be a fraud. It even references Brown's gas, which has been very disputed in that many people claim that its miracle properties, touted by Brown himself, are a fraud and that those miracle properties do not exist.
QUOTE
Water being broken down into hydrogen the engine using the hydrogen and re assembling it into water to then go BACK into the fuel tank to be reused
That would be nice, but remember that it takes energy to break water into hydrogen and oxygen. Electrolysis requires electricity, hence the name. So, it's like putting the energy in when you electrolyze water, and taking the energy out when you run it through a fuel cell. If the energy you're putting in is about the same as you're getting out, there's no energy gained for moving a car.
I never said hydrogen needs oxygen to burn
But hydrogen testing shows it gives off water-H2O
Meaning oxygen must bind to the hydrogen
This site has a lot of physics info but ive noticed a serious lack in chemistry skills, chemistry and physics tie in very closely with each other
But hydrogen testing shows it gives off water-H2O
Meaning oxygen must bind to the hydrogen
This site has a lot of physics info but ive noticed a serious lack in chemistry skills, chemistry and physics tie in very closely with each other
Blame it on Canada! roflmao 
Best scam I have seen in ages.
Thanks for the laugh.
If it were easy to extract hydrogen from water...never mind.
All the quotes in quotation marks were from the site, only the last one in which I used quote tags was from you.
If only pulling a scam like this weren't so easy, since the public is too ignorant and too hopeful to find miraculous breaks in science
If only pulling a scam like this weren't so easy, since the public is too ignorant and too hopeful to find miraculous breaks in science
Is there an arguement going on here, i cant tell?
The is quite a simple thing like, use energy to split the Hydrogen and Oxygen, then the same energy is released when they react again to form water.
Perhaps on the site where is says hydrogen is a fuel all on its own, thats a typo. If there inteligent enough to know about electrolisis, they must know a simple thing like that.
It wouldn't harm the enviroment. (not that im conserned with the enviroment myself). Your just breaking up water, then putting it back together. The energy for that could be from wind power or whatever. As for putting water rates up, does it not rain where you live? Hmm, salt rates then! Use urine, youd have a piss-powered car!
And theres no problem with petrol engines running on fuels other than petrol. I had my lawnmower engine running on butane. It was even easier to start as well. Ofcouse gas was leaking out everywhere, but i only did it for the crack.
did that answer anything? i donno
The is quite a simple thing like, use energy to split the Hydrogen and Oxygen, then the same energy is released when they react again to form water.
Perhaps on the site where is says hydrogen is a fuel all on its own, thats a typo. If there inteligent enough to know about electrolisis, they must know a simple thing like that.
It wouldn't harm the enviroment. (not that im conserned with the enviroment myself). Your just breaking up water, then putting it back together. The energy for that could be from wind power or whatever. As for putting water rates up, does it not rain where you live? Hmm, salt rates then! Use urine, youd have a piss-powered car!
And theres no problem with petrol engines running on fuels other than petrol. I had my lawnmower engine running on butane. It was even easier to start as well. Ofcouse gas was leaking out everywhere, but i only did it for the crack.
did that answer anything? i donno
looks like magnesium/sodium in those cans, which would indeed give off hydrogen. however you need to source the metal.
The problem is that the energy required to extract the hydrogen from water is equal to the energy to run the engine.
I am just trying to open up a dialog here about this technology.The people who have been rude about it and saying it is a scam also don't seem to have the technical knowledge to really even have an opinion so they should shut up. This technology is past the stage of ridicule and is compleatly self edvident . If you monkeys get it or not I
don't care.
A bit of info on the video being amature etc....This is so funny. It was shot for a tv show called Rolling Art tv. It was supposed to air on LA tv on a show that starred Ted Danson and this technology was featured next to Fords'hydrogen tech. It never made it to air . Anyhow, the problem with the video is that the backdrop is not what is normally expected and also the appearance of the prototype(s) were not great.( wear and tear from constant demonstrations)
To hold the inventor responsable for everything said in a journalistic article is unfair.
The inventor did not write the article and yes there are a few errors in the article.
So what ,does the invention work or not lets get to the crux.
Thank you to professor Andy for your rebuttal ...
don't care.
A bit of info on the video being amature etc....This is so funny. It was shot for a tv show called Rolling Art tv. It was supposed to air on LA tv on a show that starred Ted Danson and this technology was featured next to Fords'hydrogen tech. It never made it to air . Anyhow, the problem with the video is that the backdrop is not what is normally expected and also the appearance of the prototype(s) were not great.( wear and tear from constant demonstrations)
To hold the inventor responsable for everything said in a journalistic article is unfair.
The inventor did not write the article and yes there are a few errors in the article.
So what ,does the invention work or not lets get to the crux.
Thank you to professor Andy for your rebuttal ...
Captain Obvious reporting for duty again.
Guys (girls), we seem to forget that somehow we need to store this stuff. It cannot leak, it cannot rot, and it has to survive a head-on, and a rear-on.
We also need to store this stuff in bulk. The storage and dispensing needs to be made retard-proof.
We also need to develop cost effective means of extinguishing this crap when it burns. Sorry, cars catch fire. Whatever that solution is, it'll need to somehow fit on my engines and trucks, and the application needs to function from a distance. It also needs to suppress reignition.
We also need to develop training for the million+ firefighters who'll be dealing with this crap, and train them.
Making an engine run on this stuff is not the issue. Things go wrong, in the worst way possible - screw it up, and you just wiped out 20 guys. You need to mitigate these failures before they occur, not after.
Guys (girls), we seem to forget that somehow we need to store this stuff. It cannot leak, it cannot rot, and it has to survive a head-on, and a rear-on.
We also need to store this stuff in bulk. The storage and dispensing needs to be made retard-proof.
We also need to develop cost effective means of extinguishing this crap when it burns. Sorry, cars catch fire. Whatever that solution is, it'll need to somehow fit on my engines and trucks, and the application needs to function from a distance. It also needs to suppress reignition.
We also need to develop training for the million+ firefighters who'll be dealing with this crap, and train them.
Making an engine run on this stuff is not the issue. Things go wrong, in the worst way possible - screw it up, and you just wiped out 20 guys. You need to mitigate these failures before they occur, not after.
QUOTE
The people who have been rude about it and saying it is a scam also don't seem to have the technical knowledge to really even have an opinion so they should shut up.
I don't see you mentioning science at all, but who am I, who can use a few, simple facts about chemistry and physics, to refute a scammer?
I posted another thread in conjuction with this thread about BMW's hydrogen cars. As for the satefty you can be ensured that the layered titanium hydrogen container would be very safe almost safer than any other fuel injection unit ever built.
As for the argument by some that application of oil is necessary to subtract hydrogen from water or other sources, this can be shown to be not of importance. One, reason is that many reactions that release hydrogen can be modified to limit the oil consumption and most important of all, the use of nuclear energy would always benefit you , once the state uses it to convert water to hydrogen that will be securly moved to a nearby hydrogen station and you can use it. This technology is de facto a reality in Europe (at least in Germany and Nederlands) in about 4 to 5 years.
http://www.bmwworld.com/hydrogen/h2r_racer.htm
As for the argument by some that application of oil is necessary to subtract hydrogen from water or other sources, this can be shown to be not of importance. One, reason is that many reactions that release hydrogen can be modified to limit the oil consumption and most important of all, the use of nuclear energy would always benefit you , once the state uses it to convert water to hydrogen that will be securly moved to a nearby hydrogen station and you can use it. This technology is de facto a reality in Europe (at least in Germany and Nederlands) in about 4 to 5 years.
http://www.bmwworld.com/hydrogen/h2r_racer.htm
I was not attempting to be rude but this would be similar technology to running a nuclear power plant.
1. You must continue a chemical reaction to obtain hydrogen from water
How do you maintain this chemical reaction?
Where are the salts coming from?
Where are the salts going?
How much is required to keep a car going?
Would the reaction be able to keep up with the fuel requirements of a real auto engine?
2. If it were easy to provide Hydrogen and Oxygen from water, then that in itself would solve the worlds energy problems.
What is the reason that this has not occurred?
The effort to extract energy requires energy.
How much energy is required to make this a continuous reaction?
Demonstrating a small engine and a car engine are two different things.
Just because the engine started does not mean it is a success.
1. You must continue a chemical reaction to obtain hydrogen from water
How do you maintain this chemical reaction?
Where are the salts coming from?
Where are the salts going?
How much is required to keep a car going?
Would the reaction be able to keep up with the fuel requirements of a real auto engine?
2. If it were easy to provide Hydrogen and Oxygen from water, then that in itself would solve the worlds energy problems.
What is the reason that this has not occurred?
The effort to extract energy requires energy.
How much energy is required to make this a continuous reaction?
Demonstrating a small engine and a car engine are two different things.
Just because the engine started does not mean it is a success.
...This thread is talking filling a car tank up with water and converting that water to hydrogen within the car.
This is different from going to a hydrogen gas station.
This is different from going to a hydrogen gas station.
Hi Guys,
Thank you for your astute observations. When I said that people were being rude it was
in response to to one member in particular and not the whole group. Sorry.
I have someone who can answer your technical questions far better than I can so I will get him to post soon. I can answer to some points brought up here.
I think it is fairly obvious that it is possiable to produce hydrogen using alloy(s) and an electrolyte soloution . Anybody who would like to see this can look at the University of
New Brunswicks web site and take a boo at their hydrogen production using alloys with electrolyte. Notice how fast the reaction is on their video and what they are using as alloys. UBC had a simmilar programme ,they did produce hydrogen but in amounts so small that it isn't even worth talking about.
It can be done. It's just a matter of what is practical eg. what temp. is required for reaction, are the alloys non toxic, readily available ,is the electrolyte pratical ,cheap,
available in large quantities ? How long will the alloy last ?etc...Can you use it to power an engine etc...
This hydrogen is produced on demand .There is no need to store the hydrogen,it is used as it is made.The idea of storing hydrogen in tanks underneath a vechile will never fly.Too dangerous.
Have you ever seen the plans for these fueling stations? You wouldn't even be able to stay in your car while it is being filled ! How safe would you feel with 100psi of high explosive under your butt? A little nervous? That is why it is called the nervous system of the vechile.
The other tech. on the webpage( the electiric cell) is actually better for vechiles. The chemical method used by the inventor is just one way of producing hydrogen to run an engine. He has run a fuel cell golf cart with the hydrogen as well, allthough the fuel cell part was pointless ,why bother if you don't need it.
As I said above I have someone who can explain more in depth if need be.This has
also been calculated into dollars and cents. eg production costs, depleation rate of water and alloys etc ..and it works out being way cheaper than what is avaliable
now.
Thank you for your astute observations. When I said that people were being rude it was
in response to to one member in particular and not the whole group. Sorry.
I have someone who can answer your technical questions far better than I can so I will get him to post soon. I can answer to some points brought up here.
I think it is fairly obvious that it is possiable to produce hydrogen using alloy(s) and an electrolyte soloution . Anybody who would like to see this can look at the University of
New Brunswicks web site and take a boo at their hydrogen production using alloys with electrolyte. Notice how fast the reaction is on their video and what they are using as alloys. UBC had a simmilar programme ,they did produce hydrogen but in amounts so small that it isn't even worth talking about.
It can be done. It's just a matter of what is practical eg. what temp. is required for reaction, are the alloys non toxic, readily available ,is the electrolyte pratical ,cheap,
available in large quantities ? How long will the alloy last ?etc...Can you use it to power an engine etc...
This hydrogen is produced on demand .There is no need to store the hydrogen,it is used as it is made.The idea of storing hydrogen in tanks underneath a vechile will never fly.Too dangerous.
Have you ever seen the plans for these fueling stations? You wouldn't even be able to stay in your car while it is being filled ! How safe would you feel with 100psi of high explosive under your butt? A little nervous? That is why it is called the nervous system of the vechile.
The other tech. on the webpage( the electiric cell) is actually better for vechiles. The chemical method used by the inventor is just one way of producing hydrogen to run an engine. He has run a fuel cell golf cart with the hydrogen as well, allthough the fuel cell part was pointless ,why bother if you don't need it.
As I said above I have someone who can explain more in depth if need be.This has
also been calculated into dollars and cents. eg production costs, depleation rate of water and alloys etc ..and it works out being way cheaper than what is avaliable
now.
QUOTE (blondie+May 25 2005, 12:26 AM)
The other tech. on the webpage( the electiric cell) is actually better for vechiles. The chemical method used by the inventor is just one way of producing hydrogen to run an engine. He has run a fuel cell golf cart with the hydrogen as well, allthough the fuel cell part was pointless ,why bother if you don't need it.
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
QUOTE (Phoenixz33+May 25 2005, 05:41 AM)
QUOTE (blondie+May 25 2005, 12:26 AM)
The other tech. on the webpage( the electiric cell) is actually better for vechiles. The chemical method used by the inventor is just one way of producing hydrogen to run an engine. He has run a fuel cell golf cart with the hydrogen as well, allthough the fuel cell part was pointless ,why bother if you don't need it.
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
oh ya!!it's still a free country over here!!
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
oh ya!!it's still a free country over here!!
QUOTE (Phoenixz33+May 25 2005, 05:41 AM)
QUOTE (blondie+May 25 2005, 12:26 AM)
The other tech. on the webpage( the electiric cell) is actually better for vechiles. The chemical method used by the inventor is just one way of producing hydrogen to run an engine. He has run a fuel cell golf cart with the hydrogen as well, allthough the fuel cell part was pointless ,why bother if you don't need it.
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
Phoenixz33 > What ? Are you trying to say that if one were to run a gas genarator with hydrogen that for some mysterious reason it would not be able to produce electrical power? Give me a break . You sound just like the guy at toys r'us who told me I could not use a 12v car battery to run my kids ride on jeep. You do not need a fuel cell to run an ICE engine on hydrogen. You do not need a rocket engine either.
PS is anyone else paying attention to this topic? I am wasting my time with this guy, I can show some cool physics elsewhere- not to do with hydrogen, other things.
Look at the technology, I think it is self edvident. I am aware this is a physics fourm and there has to be some educated people who read these posts. If this was a scam why would I show it to people who just might understand a thing or two about hydrogen?
(I am not including you in this group phoenixz33,you don't know squat)
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
The energy you get back when recombining the H2 with O will be LESS than what you put in to break them apart.
I do hope you're talking on a practical sense where with todays technology such would be true because chemically this isn't true.
2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + Energy
Energy + 2H2O = 2H2 + O2
Energy in equals energy out.
What I'm curious is would it be possible to break the bonds using sound? High frequency sound waves sent into a specially designed drum to reflect a high % of the sound energy back and forth. Sound is a compression wave and with enough extremely high compressions converging this could generate enough kinetic energy to break the bond but happen fast enough so not to cause the water exposed to the kinetic energy to boil.
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
I do hope you're talking on a practical sense where with todays technology such would be true because chemically this isn't true.
2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + Energy
Energy + 2H2O = 2H2 + O2
Energy in equals energy out.
What I'm curious is would it be possible to break the bonds using sound? High frequency sound waves sent into a specially designed drum to reflect a high % of the sound energy back and forth. Sound is a compression wave and with enough extremely high compressions converging this could generate enough kinetic energy to break the bond but happen fast enough so not to cause the water exposed to the kinetic energy to boil.
Energy in does not always equal energy out. There is energy used to break bonds or form them. You also have enthalpy change.
Chemically energy in will equal energy out. It takes energy to break bonds and energy is released when bonds form however in the case of burning hydrogen you have two molecules of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Energy must be used to break the bonds of these molecules. Then the hydrogen will bond with the oxygen to produce two molecules of water and the energy released by this bond formation will sum up to be greater than what is required to break the bonds in the first place. This makes it an exothermic reaction. Now if you do the reverse (break the bond of the two water molecules and reform the two hydrogen and one oxygen molecules) then it will require an input of energy that is equal to what was net left over. This makes this process endothermic.
Fuel cells are needed to use the hydrogen to produce electrical energy. Just look it up on any site and you'll find a great description (and there's a really cool animation of the process as well out there) of how fuel cells work. You can't get electricity with hydrogen in a combustion engine. Combusting hydrogen is akin to how rockets work - combining hydrogen with oxygen to produce explosive thrust. I don't think you'd like to power your golf cart, or car, with a rocket engine.
Phoenixz33 > What ? Are you trying to say that if one were to run a gas genarator with hydrogen that for some mysterious reason it would not be able to produce electrical power? Give me a break . You sound just like the guy at toys r'us who told me I could not use a 12v car battery to run my kids ride on jeep. You do not need a fuel cell to run an ICE engine on hydrogen. You do not need a rocket engine either.
PS is anyone else paying attention to this topic? I am wasting my time with this guy, I can show some cool physics elsewhere- not to do with hydrogen, other things.
Look at the technology, I think it is self edvident. I am aware this is a physics fourm and there has to be some educated people who read these posts. If this was a scam why would I show it to people who just might understand a thing or two about hydrogen?
(I am not including you in this group phoenixz33,you don't know squat)
i think problems would arise with a regular engine running on hydrogen. For instant, i read in a school text book, engines running on ethanol in south america dont last very long. In a diesel and petrol engine, the fuel is a lubricant in itself. The only product in a hydrogen oxygen reaction is water, and this wouldn't good for an engine.
I think they'd have to design a better engine, possibly out of material that arnt effected too much by water.. Either that or acctually squrt a little oil in with the fuel, which kinda defeats the object of it.
Just thinking, would it be possible to make a ceramic piston!?
I think they'd have to design a better engine, possibly out of material that arnt effected too much by water.. Either that or acctually squrt a little oil in with the fuel, which kinda defeats the object of it.
Just thinking, would it be possible to make a ceramic piston!?
Pistons and cylinder walls are routinely ceramic coated. In this regard see:Ceramic Coating
Other engine parts including manifold and exhaust system may be made of stainless steel to minimise oxidation effects.
One Liter 400kW wholly ceramic engines have been test-run for 20 000 hours (the equivalent of two-million km driving) without intermediate maintenance. See more detail at: Ceramic Engines
You might also be interested in 'Apparatus for Producing Orthohydrogen and/or
Parahydrogen' US Patent 6126794, uspto.gov (Stephen Chambers)
'Method for the Production of a Fuel Gas' US Patent 4936961,
uspto.gov (Stanley Meyer)
Although success has been claimed in these conversions which do not use conventionally generated "standard" hydropower such as the record-setting BMW H2R, but a pulse-modulated electolysis process, one would expect that if this prototype technology was truly efficient and proved long-term feasibility, that you would see more of it implemented on a commercial basis.
Anyway, standard engine technology with all its linear-to-rotational power conversions must seem obsolescent by now. At present there are at last materials that can withstand the frictional forces and which can conform to the gas-tight sealing requirements of alternative engine technologies such as the Wankel rotary engine which suffered short working lifetimes due to frictional wear when these were first made publically available. Hydrogen Components, Inc. (HCI) converted Wankel engines to hydrogen burning. There is also the proprietary H2 conversion method in the so-called Erren Engine which was already established in the 1920s. See among others: Hybrid gas-power plants
GE has proven that turbines can use hydrogen combustion. The mechanical elegance of turbines, their compactness and high efficiencies are a consideration in developing a power-source that could serve for a long transitional phase until we manage to perhaps finally steer away from combustive processes altogether.
This might sound rather revolutionary, there are however proven "overunity" technologies such as the Kawai Motor (and others) which deliver a higher output power than their (initially starting) input power, and can therefore be used in a closed-loop "free energy" mode. For those that are sceptical, I suggest that you look at the authentic research data and verified patents and convince yourself of the integrity of the principles involved. Scientifically, and in their mathematical modelling these check out well but are far from simple - the proof lies in the empirical power measurements of the actual machinery. Take care here though - there are really plenty of fly-by-night rip-off artists and fraudsters exploiting gullible believers in this area - this does not however dismiss the authenticity of the actual achievements at all, the real value, or the scientific integrity of the technology and the researchers involved.
Comparing the development of these truly revolutionary technologies to an earlier phase of technological evolution, we are perhaps in the same state with these as the Wright Brothers were just before their first true heavier-than-air flight at Kitty Hawk. In those days there were plenty of ridiculous designs of proposed "flying machines" with enormous flapping wings, multiple rotors, steam engines, rail-tracks for guidance etc. Orville and Wilbur got it right though, despite all the sceptics - their scientific modelling was correct, all defeated all the dilletants, disprovers and disbelievers.
FV
Other engine parts including manifold and exhaust system may be made of stainless steel to minimise oxidation effects.
One Liter 400kW wholly ceramic engines have been test-run for 20 000 hours (the equivalent of two-million km driving) without intermediate maintenance. See more detail at: Ceramic Engines
You might also be interested in 'Apparatus for Producing Orthohydrogen and/or
Parahydrogen' US Patent 6126794, uspto.gov (Stephen Chambers)
'Method for the Production of a Fuel Gas' US Patent 4936961,
uspto.gov (Stanley Meyer)
Although success has been claimed in these conversions which do not use conventionally generated "standard" hydropower such as the record-setting BMW H2R, but a pulse-modulated electolysis process, one would expect that if this prototype technology was truly efficient and proved long-term feasibility, that you would see more of it implemented on a commercial basis.
Anyway, standard engine technology with all its linear-to-rotational power conversions must seem obsolescent by now. At present there are at last materials that can withstand the frictional forces and which can conform to the gas-tight sealing requirements of alternative engine technologies such as the Wankel rotary engine which suffered short working lifetimes due to frictional wear when these were first made publically available. Hydrogen Components, Inc. (HCI) converted Wankel engines to hydrogen burning. There is also the proprietary H2 conversion method in the so-called Erren Engine which was already established in the 1920s. See among others: Hybrid gas-power plants
GE has proven that turbines can use hydrogen combustion. The mechanical elegance of turbines, their compactness and high efficiencies are a consideration in developing a power-source that could serve for a long transitional phase until we manage to perhaps finally steer away from combustive processes altogether.
This might sound rather revolutionary, there are however proven "overunity" technologies such as the Kawai Motor (and others) which deliver a higher output power than their (initially starting) input power, and can therefore be used in a closed-loop "free energy" mode. For those that are sceptical, I suggest that you look at the authentic research data and verified patents and convince yourself of the integrity of the principles involved. Scientifically, and in their mathematical modelling these check out well but are far from simple - the proof lies in the empirical power measurements of the actual machinery. Take care here though - there are really plenty of fly-by-night rip-off artists and fraudsters exploiting gullible believers in this area - this does not however dismiss the authenticity of the actual achievements at all, the real value, or the scientific integrity of the technology and the researchers involved.
Comparing the development of these truly revolutionary technologies to an earlier phase of technological evolution, we are perhaps in the same state with these as the Wright Brothers were just before their first true heavier-than-air flight at Kitty Hawk. In those days there were plenty of ridiculous designs of proposed "flying machines" with enormous flapping wings, multiple rotors, steam engines, rail-tracks for guidance etc. Orville and Wilbur got it right though, despite all the sceptics - their scientific modelling was correct, all defeated all the dilletants, disprovers and disbelievers.
FV
There is no problem with running a gasoline engine on hydrogen. Remember that it is not the water that is going through the engine but the hydrogen gas. The exaust would be h20. It really doesn't matter what the school text books say, the people who write these books don't know everything (if they did they wouldn't have such a crappy job) I am not saying there aren't better engine designs, there are.That is not the point ,the point is that you can run an ICE engine on hydrogen. This is shown in this video.
There seems to be a mad dash for some people to find out what this alloy mixture is.
I mentioned some Universitys in Canada and it has just been discovered that a former colleague of the man who invented this process is going to the University of British Columbia to apply for a job as a hydrogen expert. So, if their hydrogen project all of the sudden starts getting attention and they have somthing that actually works, you know where it is comming from. The video on the internet pre-dates anything they will come up with.
This is a Wright brothers kind of situation. There are all kinds of thevies out there. Lucky for the inventor he never puts his best work first. Even if some people steal the technology he can still better it and in the long term ,who are people going to go with?
a)con man who has stollen someone elses life work to make gross profit or
the person who invented the whole thing and knows what he is doing?
My guess is
There seems to be a mad dash for some people to find out what this alloy mixture is.
I mentioned some Universitys in Canada and it has just been discovered that a former colleague of the man who invented this process is going to the University of British Columbia to apply for a job as a hydrogen expert. So, if their hydrogen project all of the sudden starts getting attention and they have somthing that actually works, you know where it is comming from. The video on the internet pre-dates anything they will come up with.
This is a Wright brothers kind of situation. There are all kinds of thevies out there. Lucky for the inventor he never puts his best work first. Even if some people steal the technology he can still better it and in the long term ,who are people going to go with?
a)con man who has stollen someone elses life work to make gross profit or
the person who invented the whole thing and knows what he is doing?My guess is
HI hydrogen running cars have been around on and off here. in Australia two guys have done it for around six years.One is in Sydney the other is in Adelaide a four wheel drive that is registered as a hydrogen running 4wd.The two guys have also a legal hydrogen making plant in their homes and solar system together and have been goin fine for some time now.
Now you ask why is it not wide spread ---$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ OIL-OIL-OIL-
ohhhhhhh!!!!!!!! you say of course we would create unemployement in the oil industry and that is not good for any ones country.
Well the four wheel drive needed $2,000 spent on the motor for anti rusting and chemical reaction to burning the Hydrogen and a complete Stainless steel exuast system for the same reason.
The home Hydrogen plant runs fine after some small hassles and another$4,000 to set up and actually run efficiantly as time showed some smaller problems.
So you need money to spend to save money and as one said you have to research as much as possible and that cost another $3,000 in using wrong marterials or wrong design faults on his own behalf.Still no problems sniffing their vehicles exust pipes hahahahaha .
Now you ask why is it not wide spread ---$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ OIL-OIL-OIL-
ohhhhhhh!!!!!!!! you say of course we would create unemployement in the oil industry and that is not good for any ones country.
Well the four wheel drive needed $2,000 spent on the motor for anti rusting and chemical reaction to burning the Hydrogen and a complete Stainless steel exuast system for the same reason.
The home Hydrogen plant runs fine after some small hassles and another$4,000 to set up and actually run efficiantly as time showed some smaller problems.
So you need money to spend to save money and as one said you have to research as much as possible and that cost another $3,000 in using wrong marterials or wrong design faults on his own behalf.Still no problems sniffing their vehicles exust pipes hahahahaha .
What i think mista Pheonix is on about is the currant hydrogen fuel cell technology which i know nothing about. What i think some of you others are on about is the supposed conspiricy in which the technology by which to produce an electrolysis reaction of such efficiency that only a small amount of electricty is needed to produce a vast amount of hydrogen/oxygen gas mixture. As a kid i remember seeing on the TV a device that looked like a glass beaker full of metal(copper?) Tubes. Gas was belching out of this contraption like you wouldn't believe and i don't think there was a great amount of power going into it. I remember thinking at the time, 'this is the next big thing and then it just disappeared. i imagine is was brought by some petroleum company and chucked in the bin but god knows. those of you who bothered to go to chemistry at school will remember what an insipid experience the electrolisis experiment was then. now i know sod all about the process so if some one would like do elucidate for us all the process i would love to try to re-create the device cos this really did look like a viable possibility for being able to fill your car up with water and run a 'perpetual motion' type system where an alternator runs a battery, which in turn charges a battery which then powers the electrolysis reaction. BLINDING! It sounds unlikely and probably is but someone, how do you do electrplysis? i can't be arsed geting out the chemistry books.
hydrogen can be used in an ICE with a few modifications. the biggest problem is in the cylinder walls were condensing steam can wash off the oil which causes some major problems. I know that different piston rings are used in this situation, but im not sure of the specifics. also, the air/fuel supply system has to be changed. since hydrogen is a gas, and a very light one at that, it takes up too much space to create a stoichiometric mixture at ambient pressures. this is ok though because, unlike gasoline, hydrogen combustion is still controllable at very lean mixtures, also alowing the engine to run very efficiently on very little fuel. however, because of the lean mixture, power production of the engine will be signifcantly less unless you use a compressor of some sort. using a turbocharger or supercharger allows you to compress the intake charge and then inject the hydrogen at a stoichiometric ratio to net the most power.
This has been done many times and i even know of an aftermarket car company that makes hydrogen powered ford small block V8s for their kit cars. however, the main problem still remains: how to get the hydrogen? using hydrogen for fuel is dead simple. either use it in a hydrogen ICE like above, or my prefernce would be to use a rocket turbine to power a generator and then have electric motors at the wheels. storing hydrogen is not even that difficult. sure, the tanks are more expensive and bulkier but are about as safe as carrying gasoline. the main problem here is the high pressures required to get the same energy density as with gasoline. this requires an exremely strong tank and supply/fill lines; those are the dangerous parts that can cause damage if ruptured. hydrogen itself is not that dangerous because it disperses so quickly in air that its almost impossible to ignite if it leaks out. the only way to explode a hydrogen tank is to apply heat directly to it; it's no more dangerous than any other compressed gas.
electrolosis works by putting two electrodes in water and applying current. the hydrogen will gather around the positive pole, and oxygen will gather around the negative pole (if memory serves correctly) and will for gasses and bubble out. the problem is this process requires too much electricty unless it can be eased by a catalyst or special electrode.
This has been done many times and i even know of an aftermarket car company that makes hydrogen powered ford small block V8s for their kit cars. however, the main problem still remains: how to get the hydrogen? using hydrogen for fuel is dead simple. either use it in a hydrogen ICE like above, or my prefernce would be to use a rocket turbine to power a generator and then have electric motors at the wheels. storing hydrogen is not even that difficult. sure, the tanks are more expensive and bulkier but are about as safe as carrying gasoline. the main problem here is the high pressures required to get the same energy density as with gasoline. this requires an exremely strong tank and supply/fill lines; those are the dangerous parts that can cause damage if ruptured. hydrogen itself is not that dangerous because it disperses so quickly in air that its almost impossible to ignite if it leaks out. the only way to explode a hydrogen tank is to apply heat directly to it; it's no more dangerous than any other compressed gas.
electrolosis works by putting two electrodes in water and applying current. the hydrogen will gather around the positive pole, and oxygen will gather around the negative pole (if memory serves correctly) and will for gasses and bubble out. the problem is this process requires too much electricty unless it can be eased by a catalyst or special electrode.
Hey Blonde,
Can you give me a URL on that University in canada that did those experiments with seperating water with a metal alloy(s) and an electrolite. I am EXTREMELY intrusted in this prosses and would like to know more. Also, Does any body know what in the world this alloy is..... Ive been looking all over and i cant fing anything on it.
THANKS!
Can you give me a URL on that University in canada that did those experiments with seperating water with a metal alloy(s) and an electrolite. I am EXTREMELY intrusted in this prosses and would like to know more. Also, Does any body know what in the world this alloy is..... Ive been looking all over and i cant fing anything on it.
THANKS!
I have read recently that adding pure zinc powder will lower the temperature of water for electrolysis and release hydrogen at around 350 degrees C.
Yeah but how do you acheive that kinda heat. Im still trying to look for a way to get hydrogen from an alloy water and an electrolite alone, But i appreciate the responce.
THANKS!
THANKS!
Here is an interesting inventor who uses Potassium Hydroxide in his own device that produces
continuous electrolysis to get hydrogen and then mixes it with gas. It seems like the only energy input is a car battery.
www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=cfeb17de-d945-4db4-87a6-090911200e96
continuous electrolysis to get hydrogen and then mixes it with gas. It seems like the only energy input is a car battery.
www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=cfeb17de-d945-4db4-87a6-090911200e96
Cool, I've seen simular stuff but i like how he's thinking short-term, while everybody else is thinking more long-term. I've developed an arcive of favorite links on hydrogen production and mainly Internal Cumbustion engine that run off hydrogen feal free to check them out:
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=36544
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004...rogenfromWater/
http://www.cleanwatts.com/technology/default.asp
http://www.cmu.edu/PR/releases05/050127_hydrogen.html
(the bad think about that one is that rhinium costs $250/troy oz)
http://energiparken.hia.no/HydroDoktor.htm
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Hydrogen_from_Water
(that ones realy good)
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_review05_delivery.html
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review..._26_hopkins.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/hydrogenpower1/ex...ents_index.html
http://www.nature.com/materials/news/news/.../m020829-2.html
(gotta register 4 that one)
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm
http://www.azom.com/details.asp?newsID=3857
http://gtalumni.org/Publications/magazine/...1/hydrogen.html
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=N...rticle&sid=1279
http://folk.uio.no/ravi/publications.htm
http://icubenetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.ph...70200513048654a
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2005/...ng_an_auto.html
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=36544
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004...rogenfromWater/
http://www.cleanwatts.com/technology/default.asp
http://www.cmu.edu/PR/releases05/050127_hydrogen.html
(the bad think about that one is that rhinium costs $250/troy oz)
http://energiparken.hia.no/HydroDoktor.htm
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Hydrogen_from_Water
(that ones realy good)
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_review05_delivery.html
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review..._26_hopkins.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/hydrogenpower1/ex...ents_index.html
http://www.nature.com/materials/news/news/.../m020829-2.html
(gotta register 4 that one)
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm
http://www.azom.com/details.asp?newsID=3857
http://gtalumni.org/Publications/magazine/...1/hydrogen.html
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=N...rticle&sid=1279
http://folk.uio.no/ravi/publications.htm
http://icubenetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.ph...70200513048654a
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2005/...ng_an_auto.html
I don't see what the problem is here. If you split water cleanly (Get pure hydrogen and oxygen) then you can burn them and make only water as the result. You couldn't run an engine on this mixture as it would be the equivalent of ruining in a pure oxygen atmosphere at full mixture (BOOM). In the video he is only getting hydrogen as the oxygen must be combining with whatever he is using to obtain the hydrogen. Curiously I didn't see where the hydrogen was being mixed with air to obtain the correct mixture unless it was sucking in from the very end of the tube and mixed as the hydrogen was added by the smaller pipes.
For your information you can run engines of various sorts on a load of crazy fuels.
Petrol engines can run on. Any flammable gas,methane,butane,hydrogen and I expect you scientists can think up some moor. Alcohol is another good fuel. Engines will run on whiskey or any strong spirit. Brew your own fuel although the art is in the distilling. (Wooops illegal distilling. Moonshine powered car
)
With a vaporise paraffin can be burned but you need lower compression too or it will knock like hell.
Diesels will burn almost anything. I saw one once on TV being run on very very very finely ground coal dust. But paraffin with a bit of lube oil mixed in will burn just fine. Cooking oil will burn fine also. I've herd of coconut oil being used as well. In fact any oil that is not too flammable can be used to run a diesel. It is not inconceivable to run it on gas (Like hydrogen) but a method of injection for it would have to be thought up.
Now use your imaginations for once and see just how easy it is to find fuels.
For your information you can run engines of various sorts on a load of crazy fuels.
Petrol engines can run on. Any flammable gas,methane,butane,hydrogen and I expect you scientists can think up some moor. Alcohol is another good fuel. Engines will run on whiskey or any strong spirit. Brew your own fuel although the art is in the distilling. (Wooops illegal distilling. Moonshine powered car
) With a vaporise paraffin can be burned but you need lower compression too or it will knock like hell.
Diesels will burn almost anything. I saw one once on TV being run on very very very finely ground coal dust. But paraffin with a bit of lube oil mixed in will burn just fine. Cooking oil will burn fine also. I've herd of coconut oil being used as well. In fact any oil that is not too flammable can be used to run a diesel. It is not inconceivable to run it on gas (Like hydrogen) but a method of injection for it would have to be thought up.
Now use your imaginations for once and see just how easy it is to find fuels.
You've got a good point. I myself have either seen or heard of many different fuels capable of running engines. The problem is, finding a fuel that is renuable and wont screw up our atmasphere in the prosess. Hydrogen is just plain PERFECT for that kind of a fuel. As for the oxygen problem that you were talking about, it in the alloy that they used. My theory is that that alloy (whatever it is) separates water by soaking up the oxygen and just leaving the hydrogen to bubble out. Zinc will do that but you got to heat it to like 650 degrees F. Im still trying to figure out what that alloy they used is. I emailed the guy from Spirit of Maat and he never replied.
Well I would keep it a secret to if I were him. I think i may have a play with this electrolysis lark for a bit of fun. Something I haven't done before.
Hmmm Bubble on.
Hmmm Bubble on.
yeah, your probably right maby ill just have to wiat till the technology is known to the public.
This inventor, John Hutchison, may have the answer for you. If he has an idea, please share it with the rest of us.
john@johnhutchison.com
john@johnhutchison.com
All hail, Captain Obvious!
If there's something interesting going on here, do tell. Everyone seems to have the chemistry well in hand.
Look, if the guy has "over 50 patents" - quote from the website - then where are the details of the patent on this device or process???
still waiting while spinning my solids
If there's something interesting going on here, do tell. Everyone seems to have the chemistry well in hand.
Look, if the guy has "over 50 patents" - quote from the website - then where are the details of the patent on this device or process???
still waiting while spinning my solids
ok now im confused...
who is solidspin talking about? and Ron Szerlong, where did you here about John Hutchison? I would like to know before i email him. Does he have a web site?
Thanks.
who is solidspin talking about? and Ron Szerlong, where did you here about John Hutchison? I would like to know before i email him. Does he have a web site?
Thanks.
Woops.... Found the web site! i was just over looking the fact that his web site was in the message that u sent.. and that must be who solidspin is talking about!
Dan,
I became interested in John Hutchison several years ago after checking out a video at our local library titled, "Race to zero point energy". The new concepts of energy do not follow any traditional knowledge, but presented documentation of several inventors and their woking models.
John Hutchison was one of these way out thinkers using high frequency and other factors. Many of his ideas were based upon the electronic genius, Tesler (spelling?).
The other ideas presented showed a self contained unit extracting hydrogen from water to power a 5 hp motor. This method may be similar to your inquiry and experimentation. I remember that the hot air exhaust was returned immediately back to and surrounding the water source to heat it up (?); kinda like a heat exchanger set up.
Keep in mind that I saw this film about 8 to 10 years ago before fuel cells were the buzz word.
At that time I talked to one our Colorado House Reprensentatives about hydrogen and he brushed this off stating that the Hindenburg blew up and making the inquiry as foolish? Actually hydrogen does not support combustion by itself.
There were other interesting working models such as magnetic devices. At a later date this movie was removed from the library. I could never understand why.
I became interested in John Hutchison several years ago after checking out a video at our local library titled, "Race to zero point energy". The new concepts of energy do not follow any traditional knowledge, but presented documentation of several inventors and their woking models.
John Hutchison was one of these way out thinkers using high frequency and other factors. Many of his ideas were based upon the electronic genius, Tesler (spelling?).
The other ideas presented showed a self contained unit extracting hydrogen from water to power a 5 hp motor. This method may be similar to your inquiry and experimentation. I remember that the hot air exhaust was returned immediately back to and surrounding the water source to heat it up (?); kinda like a heat exchanger set up.
Keep in mind that I saw this film about 8 to 10 years ago before fuel cells were the buzz word.
At that time I talked to one our Colorado House Reprensentatives about hydrogen and he brushed this off stating that the Hindenburg blew up and making the inquiry as foolish? Actually hydrogen does not support combustion by itself.
There were other interesting working models such as magnetic devices. At a later date this movie was removed from the library. I could never understand why.
kool, I'll have to give john hutchison an email, and i will share what he tells me with the rest of you. I strongly support people who are willing to give thier ideas out to the public for their free use. and with all of these huricains (i feal so bad for those who are strongly effected by them) and with gas prices expected to soar to $4/gal we need at least a quick fix to get things back to order.
The email has been sent! I will notify you with any further details
HEY GUYS!,
I think i finaly found it!!!! There are some patents out there that, by the grace of God, I just happened to stumble upon. The patents discribe a reaction between water, sodium hydroxide, and aluminum! One guy has even rigen a system to his car (although it still mostly runs on gas i guess it improves milage). Check 'em out:
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/PatentListing...702,491,00.html
http://www.techno-preneur.net/new-timeis/N...on/hydrogen.htm
http://www.h2gen.info/
(they dont make a smiley with a big enough smile to discribe my happyness)
I think i finaly found it!!!! There are some patents out there that, by the grace of God, I just happened to stumble upon. The patents discribe a reaction between water, sodium hydroxide, and aluminum! One guy has even rigen a system to his car (although it still mostly runs on gas i guess it improves milage). Check 'em out:
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/PatentListing...702,491,00.html
http://www.techno-preneur.net/new-timeis/N...on/hydrogen.htm
http://www.h2gen.info/
(they dont make a smiley with a big enough smile to discribe my happyness)
Hey... When I first saw the video I thought wow thats amazing....
the question isnt whether hydrogen engines work.. of course they do....
The problem has always been storing and extracting it.
These guys claim to have an alloy with a catylist (that they do not name either one or their chemical composition) that releases the hydrogen in water.... All fine and good...
Lets assume that this "alloy" and catylist that they havent provided us with any information about works.... it should be the main focus of this video... it would be the only real breakthrough.... I have a simple question... does this allow and catylist cost less to manufacture that the equivilent amount of gasoline, or for that matter obtaining hydrogen through electrolesis? If not then we havent really gained any practical ground.
Secondly it is more likely that it is some type of acid in the container and a metal like zinc reating with it....
Please give me some feedback and enlighten me
damonkost@hotmail.com
the question isnt whether hydrogen engines work.. of course they do....
The problem has always been storing and extracting it.
These guys claim to have an alloy with a catylist (that they do not name either one or their chemical composition) that releases the hydrogen in water.... All fine and good...
Lets assume that this "alloy" and catylist that they havent provided us with any information about works.... it should be the main focus of this video... it would be the only real breakthrough.... I have a simple question... does this allow and catylist cost less to manufacture that the equivilent amount of gasoline, or for that matter obtaining hydrogen through electrolesis? If not then we havent really gained any practical ground.
Secondly it is more likely that it is some type of acid in the container and a metal like zinc reating with it....
Please give me some feedback and enlighten me
damonkost@hotmail.com
yeah, all of your facts were strait. but if you go back one page on the forum you'll see some links that i gave that suggest that hydrogen can be produced from a reaction with water and aluminum, in the presence of sodium hydroxide as a catylist. I just bought a container of "red devil" lye, which consists of 100% sodium hydroxide. This container cost me about $5.50 so it would not be economical to constantly refil your car with this. But that defeates the purpose of a catylist, which is NEVER chemicaly used up in the (any) process. So essentialy you could just keep the same water to sodium hydroxide ratio in a container which would be refiled with water (like one of those dog food dispencers with an upsidown container feading the food into the tray). that way you always had the same ratio and you wouldnt have to worry about refiling your car with sodium hydroxide all of the time.
Ahh, Briliant!
Ahh, Briliant!
Thanks for the web links Dan.
I thought that the hydrogen devices and the fact of using "Drain-O" or "Red Devil Lye" was most unusual. The Aluminum foil or Aluminum pop cans were very creative and is much less cost than using a Silver mesh.
Hope to hear of your success.
I thought that the hydrogen devices and the fact of using "Drain-O" or "Red Devil Lye" was most unusual. The Aluminum foil or Aluminum pop cans were very creative and is much less cost than using a Silver mesh.
Hope to hear of your success.
I did an experiment last night..
I had aluminum foil in a Styrofoam bowl with water and Red Devil for about 15 min. The hydrogen production rate was vary high, about as much as seen in the "spirit of maat" video. It took a little bit longer for the reaction to start than i had expected, but it wasn't long, a couple seconds at most. it did give off heat, but yet that wasn't as much as i had expected. I thought i might have burnt my hand by touching it, but that wasn't the case. It was just enough heat to warm up my cold hands (due to the fact that it was 50 degrees outside, where i was conducting the experiment). But I suspect if you were to put more aluminum foil balls in the solution than the reaction would both produce more heat and more hydrogen. but the weird thing was that the color of the once clear sodium hydroxide/water solution slowly began to turn a brownish color. I theorized that this was due to the fact that the reaction, which involved oxidizing the aluminum, was flaking aluminum oxide off of the aluminum, also after i drained the solution i found that there was a blackish substance left. I thought that this was probably the left over sodium hydroxide, which may have contributed to the brown color in the water/ sodium hydroxide solution.
In this experiment i used about 1 tbsp sodium hydroxide, with about 1 cup water, and two medium sized aluminum foil balls.
I hope to conduct more experiments, then when I'm comfortable with the reaction i will probably attempt to run my lawn mower on hydrogen ,and do some experimenting with that. and once all of that experimenting is done i hope to have my car running on hydrogen alone.
I had aluminum foil in a Styrofoam bowl with water and Red Devil for about 15 min. The hydrogen production rate was vary high, about as much as seen in the "spirit of maat" video. It took a little bit longer for the reaction to start than i had expected, but it wasn't long, a couple seconds at most. it did give off heat, but yet that wasn't as much as i had expected. I thought i might have burnt my hand by touching it, but that wasn't the case. It was just enough heat to warm up my cold hands (due to the fact that it was 50 degrees outside, where i was conducting the experiment). But I suspect if you were to put more aluminum foil balls in the solution than the reaction would both produce more heat and more hydrogen. but the weird thing was that the color of the once clear sodium hydroxide/water solution slowly began to turn a brownish color. I theorized that this was due to the fact that the reaction, which involved oxidizing the aluminum, was flaking aluminum oxide off of the aluminum, also after i drained the solution i found that there was a blackish substance left. I thought that this was probably the left over sodium hydroxide, which may have contributed to the brown color in the water/ sodium hydroxide solution.
In this experiment i used about 1 tbsp sodium hydroxide, with about 1 cup water, and two medium sized aluminum foil balls.
I hope to conduct more experiments, then when I'm comfortable with the reaction i will probably attempt to run my lawn mower on hydrogen ,and do some experimenting with that. and once all of that experimenting is done i hope to have my car running on hydrogen alone.
there are a few things that everyone needs to understand about the storage and use of hydrogen as a fuel. First of all the storage of it in any form is way safer than gas even if you were to have a leak. Dont believe me go outside and open the valve of a 2000 psi hydrogen tank ... what happens the gas discharges and goes for the upper stratosphere very quickley. now poke a hole in a full gas can and what happens. it spills all over the ground. wait for both tanks and throw matches at the now empty tanks. FYI BMW has tested their liquid storage tanks by pointing tiger torches at them for hours on end. and shooting them with high powered guns.
Ford tested what would happen if they lit the fuel while it was still leaking out of a hydrogen tank on 1 of their prototype H2 vehicles ( the Model U to be specific) ..... the interior of the vehicle only reached a max temp of 40 celcius. I dont think i need to tell you what a burning car looks like when its a gas tank.
To clarify the exhaust/intake/power issue being discussed...
the exhaustas a result of any Hydrocarbon will have an ammount of water = to the ammount of hydrogen entering the engine ie the Hydrocarbon / hydrogen enters the engine and reacts with oxygen forming water. yet as a result of the Heat produced it leaves as water vapor / steam. no changes to the exhaust are needed however as a result of the lower energy density of the Hydrogen use as a fuel the engines intake will need to be intercooled and supercharged to be able to produce the same ammount of power.
Ford tested what would happen if they lit the fuel while it was still leaking out of a hydrogen tank on 1 of their prototype H2 vehicles ( the Model U to be specific) ..... the interior of the vehicle only reached a max temp of 40 celcius. I dont think i need to tell you what a burning car looks like when its a gas tank.
To clarify the exhaust/intake/power issue being discussed...
the exhaustas a result of any Hydrocarbon will have an ammount of water = to the ammount of hydrogen entering the engine ie the Hydrocarbon / hydrogen enters the engine and reacts with oxygen forming water. yet as a result of the Heat produced it leaves as water vapor / steam. no changes to the exhaust are needed however as a result of the lower energy density of the Hydrogen use as a fuel the engines intake will need to be intercooled and supercharged to be able to produce the same ammount of power.
what im woundering is what does pure hydrogen, not exposed to oxygen, produce as a by-product. I've heard that it produces nothing at all, and ive also heard that it produces water as a by-product, but that doesnt make any cence to me because water must have oxegen in it. so does any body know the answer?
oh.... and i still think that hydrogen on demand is the best way to go. I base my opinion on the fact that you are still posing a risk when storing hydrogen, it is still flamable, and while it would accend to the upper levels of the atmassphere, you could still have a scenerio where the car caught on fire and then the storage tank was ruptured, which would cause a big boom!.... I am not as educated on hydrogen storage as i would like to be to make my oppinion more clear, and i know im saying a bunch of if's, but it could still happen, along with many other simular scenerios. please correct me if im wrong.
you would probably be interested to know that there are hydride tanks. They store Hydrogen bonded to other materiels through pyrodynamics and the hydrogen is released by heating the material hence the pyro in pyrodynamics. these tanks can store massive ammounts and you can literally take a full tank and cut it in half with a chainsaw and not worry 1 bit about anything even catching on fire, let alone exploding.
kool, I had heard about hydride storage tanks, but looked over them, thinking that they weren't able to store that much hydrogen. Do you know how much heat it takes to release the hydrogen?
I did some more experiments last night. i found that in about a minute, a 16''^2 piece of aluminum foil can produce approximately 1 liter of hydrogen. But, i noticed that there was also a strange smelling gas coming from the reaction. I knew that hydrogen gas is orderless and colorless (for i could also see this gas, it had a light gray color) and hypothesized that this gas was a form of sodium, and, that if in-fact this was the case, the sodium hydroxide wouldn't be a catalyst at all, but more of a reactant.
So this morning i talked to a chemistry teacher, who confirmed my accusations. I will now spend a little bit of time to continue my research on a hydrogen producing alloy, but if i am unable to find another alloy with these properties then i will begin to study/research a frequency enhanced electrolysis system.
I did some more experiments last night. i found that in about a minute, a 16''^2 piece of aluminum foil can produce approximately 1 liter of hydrogen. But, i noticed that there was also a strange smelling gas coming from the reaction. I knew that hydrogen gas is orderless and colorless (for i could also see this gas, it had a light gray color) and hypothesized that this gas was a form of sodium, and, that if in-fact this was the case, the sodium hydroxide wouldn't be a catalyst at all, but more of a reactant.
So this morning i talked to a chemistry teacher, who confirmed my accusations. I will now spend a little bit of time to continue my research on a hydrogen producing alloy, but if i am unable to find another alloy with these properties then i will begin to study/research a frequency enhanced electrolysis system.
Hey Dan, I have been doing a little research on the subject and I too was interested in the video of the guys with the 13 little tanks. Before I discovered there video I was trying to produce hydrogen with regular electrolysis. I do believe that it is pure aluminum they are using with sodium hydroxide in water. I built a 4' long pipe 1" wide to use for electrolysis but it wasn't building up enough pressure to run a car. Well it just so happens that my electrode I was using in the 4' pipe was a 4' solid aluminum rod. It is a sealed pipe with a water opening that allows water in but not out to refill it without opening it up. I have a 7 gal air tank at the other end to fill with hydrogen. Well good news today I filled it up with water and sodium hydroxide (Drano) and in 2 min. my pressure gauge began to rise. After 30 min I had close to 20 lbs pure hydrogen pressure in 7 gal tank . The pipe alone would generate 100lbs PSI in about 3 min This I believe is enough to produce a "on demand" system to operate a combustion engine. Tomorrow I will be testing it with a little more NAOH to see if it is faster production. If u have anymore info on how they where making there hydrogen so fast let me know. I have a '78 chevette in near mint condition from my grandma and I will be using it for my hydro car experiment. I believe it is a perfect candidate being a 1.6 liter engine. Also I cant believe people say its not possible to run a car on water....ARE WE ALL BLIND. LETS NOT ALL BE SOCIETY DRIVEN MORONS, We can make this work
Dan in Ohio
Dan in Ohio
Hey Dan.
thought it was kool how you were creating hydrogen. As you may have read from my previous entries, i to have been playin' around with creating hydrogen from aluminum, and water in the presance of NAOH. But i ran into some problems. I had the reaction contaned in a milk jug, with a boloon on top to measure the amount of hydrogen being produced. But as i took off the boloon some wierd gas came out, other than hydrogen (which is colorless, tasteless, and doesnt smell). I asked my Chemistry teacher and he told me that it was a form of sodium gas (which if i recall right, is vary harmful to inhale). It is also improtant to note that any wast products form this reaction should be carefuly discarded (because it has all been in contact with NAOH, which is Highly corosive). Right now i'm researching what i like to call "frequency enhanced electrolysis". So far my main web site that im researching is http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm This guy has plans and all. If you have any ideas on what the NAOH/H20/AL mysterious gas is, or if it will effect the engine running, please tell me. Keep trying to find ways to produce hydrogen (expecialy "on demand") and DONT STOP! Its people like me and you who will eventualy get ourselves out of the energy scare and make a difference.
thought it was kool how you were creating hydrogen. As you may have read from my previous entries, i to have been playin' around with creating hydrogen from aluminum, and water in the presance of NAOH. But i ran into some problems. I had the reaction contaned in a milk jug, with a boloon on top to measure the amount of hydrogen being produced. But as i took off the boloon some wierd gas came out, other than hydrogen (which is colorless, tasteless, and doesnt smell). I asked my Chemistry teacher and he told me that it was a form of sodium gas (which if i recall right, is vary harmful to inhale). It is also improtant to note that any wast products form this reaction should be carefuly discarded (because it has all been in contact with NAOH, which is Highly corosive). Right now i'm researching what i like to call "frequency enhanced electrolysis". So far my main web site that im researching is http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm This guy has plans and all. If you have any ideas on what the NAOH/H20/AL mysterious gas is, or if it will effect the engine running, please tell me. Keep trying to find ways to produce hydrogen (expecialy "on demand") and DONT STOP! Its people like me and you who will eventualy get ourselves out of the energy scare and make a difference.
Dan,
I do believe from what I have dicovered over the past couple days that the vapor is actually steam from the reaction and it would be a steam that has sodium hydroxide and water in it. The reason I am almost positive that thats all it is because there is only 3 things created in this reaction hydrogen ,aluminum oxide and steam. Also I have been trying hydrochloric acid with aluminum it reacts simular with NAOH but its much faster I mean superfast. Also I have discovered in the past few days that I think the guys in the video are using aluminum with the oxide layer taken off somehow. Look into that.
I do believe from what I have dicovered over the past couple days that the vapor is actually steam from the reaction and it would be a steam that has sodium hydroxide and water in it. The reason I am almost positive that thats all it is because there is only 3 things created in this reaction hydrogen ,aluminum oxide and steam. Also I have been trying hydrochloric acid with aluminum it reacts simular with NAOH but its much faster I mean superfast. Also I have discovered in the past few days that I think the guys in the video are using aluminum with the oxide layer taken off somehow. Look into that.
Dan,
It makes scence that the reaction yields a NAOH+H2O steem. is that caused from the heat of what? also, I think, if i recal right, that the reason for the reaction (NAOH+H2O+AL=H2+ALo(and H2O steem)) happening in the first place is due to the fact that the NAOH is constantly taking the AL oxide and flaking it off of the AL, so that the AL oxide layer doesn't hender/stop the reaction. The reason for this belief is that i read somewhere that AL+H2O produces a little bit of hydrogen when first combined. the only reason that the reaction doesn't continue is that an AL oxide layer forms, which provents any further reaction. I forgot to mension that my chem. teacher told me about the hydrochloric acid reaction, but i shrugged it off because he told me that it would produce hydrogen much slower, but is "safer" because it yields no toxins and produces pure hydrogen. Where did you get the hydrochloric acid. i recall that my chem. teacher told me that it could be found in car battories. Have you notesed any heat from this reaction? any strange gasses, or steem? I'm intrusted in testing this one out for myself.
Meanwhile, ive been researching microwave pulse enhanced electrolysis (previously refered to as "frequency enhanced electrolysis") and it looks promising.
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/water.html
http://oupower.com/phpBB2/
http://www.fourwinds10.com/news/12-science...n-on-water.html
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4100
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...4&RS=PN/6126794
those are some links that i found helpful.
hope to hear from you soon
It makes scence that the reaction yields a NAOH+H2O steem. is that caused from the heat of what? also, I think, if i recal right, that the reason for the reaction (NAOH+H2O+AL=H2+ALo(and H2O steem)) happening in the first place is due to the fact that the NAOH is constantly taking the AL oxide and flaking it off of the AL, so that the AL oxide layer doesn't hender/stop the reaction. The reason for this belief is that i read somewhere that AL+H2O produces a little bit of hydrogen when first combined. the only reason that the reaction doesn't continue is that an AL oxide layer forms, which provents any further reaction. I forgot to mension that my chem. teacher told me about the hydrochloric acid reaction, but i shrugged it off because he told me that it would produce hydrogen much slower, but is "safer" because it yields no toxins and produces pure hydrogen. Where did you get the hydrochloric acid. i recall that my chem. teacher told me that it could be found in car battories. Have you notesed any heat from this reaction? any strange gasses, or steem? I'm intrusted in testing this one out for myself.
Meanwhile, ive been researching microwave pulse enhanced electrolysis (previously refered to as "frequency enhanced electrolysis") and it looks promising.
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/water.html
http://oupower.com/phpBB2/
http://www.fourwinds10.com/news/12-science...n-on-water.html
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4100
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...4&RS=PN/6126794
those are some links that i found helpful.
hope to hear from you soon
Umm... what about the LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. As a closed system, it will be impossible for you to use electrolysis to produce an efficient system.
Dan
Yes the guys in the video are using alluminum with the oxide layer off, I am currently and exaustingly search on how to do this. I will let you know idf we find anything. Also I have done several experiments this week That I think you would love to hear about. I really dont want to discuss them in this forum do to the fact that I would like to make a little money off this idea. If you want email me at my own Email address. DDanvos68@aol.com
Yes the guys in the video are using alluminum with the oxide layer off, I am currently and exaustingly search on how to do this. I will let you know idf we find anything. Also I have done several experiments this week That I think you would love to hear about. I really dont want to discuss them in this forum do to the fact that I would like to make a little money off this idea. If you want email me at my own Email address. DDanvos68@aol.com
O.k.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but i think i know a thing or two about the LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. Here's how i see it. You've got your water that is separated with the help of the car battery, which gives you hydrogen and oxygen, which goes into the car engine and recombines creating water again. But there is a little bit less water coming out of it than there was going into it, because of heat energy that is released due to the combustion of the gasses. This is the in-efficiency that every body is saying doesn't exist in this system (which would make it perpetual motion). The engine then drives the alternator, recharging the battery and thus the cycle begins again. Also note that I heard somewhere that there would be a little bit of left-over, un-combusted oxygen, resulting in even more in-efficiency. But the system would still be far more efficient than a gasoline system, that doesn't use nearly all of its potential energy, due to the fact that only the gasoline vapors combust. the rest of the energy/gasoline is put through the catalytic converter.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but i think i know a thing or two about the LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. Here's how i see it. You've got your water that is separated with the help of the car battery, which gives you hydrogen and oxygen, which goes into the car engine and recombines creating water again. But there is a little bit less water coming out of it than there was going into it, because of heat energy that is released due to the combustion of the gasses. This is the in-efficiency that every body is saying doesn't exist in this system (which would make it perpetual motion). The engine then drives the alternator, recharging the battery and thus the cycle begins again. Also note that I heard somewhere that there would be a little bit of left-over, un-combusted oxygen, resulting in even more in-efficiency. But the system would still be far more efficient than a gasoline system, that doesn't use nearly all of its potential energy, due to the fact that only the gasoline vapors combust. the rest of the energy/gasoline is put through the catalytic converter.
Hi guys, the guy in the video isn't using Al. like you think. It is an alloy...a blend of metals.I can tell you that there are some more demonstrations in the works and you will be able to view them soon. I will give out the website as soon as it is finished.This inventor also has a website at www.waveenergymachine.com.
There isn't much of the hydrogen on it right now. But feel free to check it out!
There isn't much of the hydrogen on it right now. But feel free to check it out!
QUOTE (drewnick+Oct 7 2005, 01:37 PM)
Umm... what about the LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. As a closed system, it will be impossible for you to use electrolysis to produce an efficient system.
Bingo~ While the efficiency may be enhanced, what comes out (potential to do work) must first go in
Bingo~ While the efficiency may be enhanced, what comes out (potential to do work) must first go in
So Blondie.....
Do you know the alloy that the guys in the video are using?
if so please tell us...or at least give us a hint.
Also, I would like someone to explane, in whole, and in detail, an oppinion contrary to mine on why this system http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm goes against the LAWS OF THERMALDYNAMICS. I'm intrusted to hear what you have to say..(and argue with it)
Do you know the alloy that the guys in the video are using?
if so please tell us...or at least give us a hint.
Also, I would like someone to explane, in whole, and in detail, an oppinion contrary to mine on why this system http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm goes against the LAWS OF THERMALDYNAMICS. I'm intrusted to hear what you have to say..(and argue with it)
[FONT=Geneva]
Dan,
There seem to several Aluminum Alloys and it seems that a reocurring metal is copper.
For example :
Aluminum 93.5 % by weight
Copper 4.40 %
other metal by much less weight:
Mg .5%
Mn .45%
Since copper is fairly cheap ( only a penney's worth ha ha) I would vote for Al= Cu
If I were doing the experiment, I would also try copper and nickel ! How to blend these together?
Dan,
There seem to several Aluminum Alloys and it seems that a reocurring metal is copper.
For example :
Aluminum 93.5 % by weight
Copper 4.40 %
other metal by much less weight:
Mg .5%
Mn .45%
Since copper is fairly cheap ( only a penney's worth ha ha) I would vote for Al= Cu
If I were doing the experiment, I would also try copper and nickel ! How to blend these together?
OK you guys are on the right track, the reaction will produce steam as it is a exothermic reaction hence you will get some of the lye coming off with the water in a gas state. bubble this through water and you will cool the steam and then get a pure form of hydrogen.
i note that nobody mentions that if you put a piece of copper in the lye with a piece of aluminum then you get a voltage, with a piece of aluminum wire and a piece of copper pipe i got a voltage of .9v if you then reverse this and force electricity you will also have a form of electrolysis hence speeding up the hydrogen production.
if you use the dog feeder style to top up your water then bubble the gas through the water to reclaim the lye.
the lye is a catalist that removes the oxide off the Al that then allows the h20 to react
i note that nobody mentions that if you put a piece of copper in the lye with a piece of aluminum then you get a voltage, with a piece of aluminum wire and a piece of copper pipe i got a voltage of .9v if you then reverse this and force electricity you will also have a form of electrolysis hence speeding up the hydrogen production.
if you use the dog feeder style to top up your water then bubble the gas through the water to reclaim the lye.
the lye is a catalist that removes the oxide off the Al that then allows the h20 to react
WOW!
Thanks, that was realy helpful! I was kinda wondering what the heck a "bubbler" was, because i had seen it in other web sites, now i finaly know!...
By the way, Marc, have you done this experiment, and if so, have you run your car off of it? As far as the voltage thing goes, I had never even heard about it, it sounds kool, but how much would it actualy help in the production of hydrogen.. When i did my electrolysis experiment, last year, I had vary slow hydrogen prodiction(took me about a week to get 8oz), and absolutely no oxygen production. that was with a 6 volt duricell durable battery. I still dont like the idea of having lye in you car.. What if you get in a serious accident, and it gets on you or some one else. That stuff causes serious chemical burns. My bet is on "Microwave pulse electrolysis".
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...4&RS=PN/6126794
(theres alot of other sites out there, just do a google search)
Thanks, that was realy helpful! I was kinda wondering what the heck a "bubbler" was, because i had seen it in other web sites, now i finaly know!...
By the way, Marc, have you done this experiment, and if so, have you run your car off of it? As far as the voltage thing goes, I had never even heard about it, it sounds kool, but how much would it actualy help in the production of hydrogen.. When i did my electrolysis experiment, last year, I had vary slow hydrogen prodiction(took me about a week to get 8oz), and absolutely no oxygen production. that was with a 6 volt duricell durable battery. I still dont like the idea of having lye in you car.. What if you get in a serious accident, and it gets on you or some one else. That stuff causes serious chemical burns. My bet is on "Microwave pulse electrolysis".
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...4&RS=PN/6126794
(theres alot of other sites out there, just do a google search)
Hey guys,
I did a test (red-neck style) with the NAOH+H2O+AL reaction again... I put my hand over a cup, containing the reaction, and I fount that the reaction produces steam with NAOH in the steam in a vapor state (that acumulated on my hand). I also put copper in along w/ the reaction. I didn't test for voltage, but to see if copper would react simularly to AL, but it didn't. It produced a couple of small bubbles, but nothing realy. I still like the idea of using ordinary tap water, rather than H2O+NAOH+AL to produce hydrogen.
You do realize though, that if you were willing to take a chance with getting yourself chemicaly burned in a car accident using this system. And if you were willing to "invest" in a cerimicaly coated engine treatment, and a couple of valves, tanks and stuff, then you could be running your car on H2O and AL right now!
Just a thought.........But I wouldn't do it, theres better systems out there.
I did a test (red-neck style) with the NAOH+H2O+AL reaction again... I put my hand over a cup, containing the reaction, and I fount that the reaction produces steam with NAOH in the steam in a vapor state (that acumulated on my hand). I also put copper in along w/ the reaction. I didn't test for voltage, but to see if copper would react simularly to AL, but it didn't. It produced a couple of small bubbles, but nothing realy. I still like the idea of using ordinary tap water, rather than H2O+NAOH+AL to produce hydrogen.
You do realize though, that if you were willing to take a chance with getting yourself chemicaly burned in a car accident using this system. And if you were willing to "invest" in a cerimicaly coated engine treatment, and a couple of valves, tanks and stuff, then you could be running your car on H2O and AL right now!
Just a thought.........But I wouldn't do it, theres better systems out there.
Some of you may know of the Gardner Watts Thermal Energy Cell: using electrolysis, Platinum Anode & Tungsten Cathode w/ high voltage high frequency pulsed DC currents in water& potash; claimed to create more energy than put in: see www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Organizations/GardnerWatts/
The most valid points I see is that it takes energy to split water by electrolisis. You don't need to understand any chemistry, except, just like all mass is conserved, so is energy. The energy needed to produce the hydrogen is the same as the energy that the hydrogen gives. Where are you going to get that energy? From a battery? yea. So what is gained? It would be more efficient just taking the power from the battery and putting it into a electric motor.
Assuming the cost and efficency of producing photovoltaic collectors improves, then would the cost of producing hydrogen via electrolysis from the sun's energy be less costly and a cleaner source of energy evaluated over the life period of the collectors?
Long time no talk...answer=probably.
But for now we must rely on what we have, and do what we can with it. I really found this site helpful, and have been posting there for a little while under the name "Dan Dan". It takes a little while to figure out what every one is doing.
http://www.oupower.com/
As far as the point that everybody keeps bringing up (thermodynamics), I look at it as "processing" water. Water is made up of Hydrogen and Oxygen, two combustible gasses that can be used in a combustible manner if you break water apart. There are MANY ways to do that. Find an efficient way, build it, make it happen, and BOOM. so whats the fuel? where are the losses? WATER is the fuel, you lose WATER in the process. Its like popping a balloon. it takes allot of energy to blow it up to get a full balloon (water) at first. water is the balloon that has already been blown up for us, we just got to pop it (separate the bonds to get H and O) to get energy from it. So how does a popped balloon recombine to form a blown up balloon again (like burning H and O to get water again)? To answer this I must give you an illustration:
1). take a balloon, blow it up (this represents water).
2). tie it.
3). Now put that balloon in a container as small as you can find, that will still hold the blown up balloon.
4). somehow attach a nozzle on the container w/ the balloon in it.
5). Attach another balloon to the nozzle (this balloon must fit TIGHT onto the nozzle).
6). Find a way to pop the blown up balloon while it is in the container (there are MANY ways to do this).
7). notice that as soon as you pop the balloon, the other balloon blows up.
The container arrangement represents a closed system. Then extra space represents losses of that system (the more extra space, the less the balloon attached to the nozzle will blow up). And of course as I mentioned before, the blown up balloon represents water. The more efficient your closed system is, the less water you lose.
I know that that was a somewhat complicated illustration, but i think the "water fuel critics" needed it.
But for now we must rely on what we have, and do what we can with it. I really found this site helpful, and have been posting there for a little while under the name "Dan Dan". It takes a little while to figure out what every one is doing.
http://www.oupower.com/
As far as the point that everybody keeps bringing up (thermodynamics), I look at it as "processing" water. Water is made up of Hydrogen and Oxygen, two combustible gasses that can be used in a combustible manner if you break water apart. There are MANY ways to do that. Find an efficient way, build it, make it happen, and BOOM. so whats the fuel? where are the losses? WATER is the fuel, you lose WATER in the process. Its like popping a balloon. it takes allot of energy to blow it up to get a full balloon (water) at first. water is the balloon that has already been blown up for us, we just got to pop it (separate the bonds to get H and O) to get energy from it. So how does a popped balloon recombine to form a blown up balloon again (like burning H and O to get water again)? To answer this I must give you an illustration:
1). take a balloon, blow it up (this represents water).
2). tie it.
3). Now put that balloon in a container as small as you can find, that will still hold the blown up balloon.
4). somehow attach a nozzle on the container w/ the balloon in it.
5). Attach another balloon to the nozzle (this balloon must fit TIGHT onto the nozzle).
6). Find a way to pop the blown up balloon while it is in the container (there are MANY ways to do this).
7). notice that as soon as you pop the balloon, the other balloon blows up.
The container arrangement represents a closed system. Then extra space represents losses of that system (the more extra space, the less the balloon attached to the nozzle will blow up). And of course as I mentioned before, the blown up balloon represents water. The more efficient your closed system is, the less water you lose.
I know that that was a somewhat complicated illustration, but i think the "water fuel critics" needed it.
Hydrogen has been used in industry for well over 100 years it is currently transported on highways and freeways very safely. Hydrogen firefighting is standard training as with all gas fires.
If you will consider hydrogen is lighter than air in the event of a hydrogen leak the GAS goes up and away from potential fuels. Unlike the liquid fuels currently used which flows in, around and under things whether or not it is burning. Consider how much worse the Hindenburg could have been had it been filled with liquid gas!!
Yes normal liquid gas piston engines can burn hydrogen gas with very little modification the same as a liquid gas engine can be modified to burn propane. The only problem with burning hydrogen in an Iron block engine is what is called hydrogen embrittlement.
This can be easily remedied by using stainless steel linings in the piston chambers. Much the way that manufacturers changed from Iron valves to stainless steel valves when they shifted to unleaded fuels.
P.S leaded fuel had the lead added to them by the refiners and made us believe they took it out. In reality they just turned off a valve.
If you want further info catch me on the Lou Epton show KKVV 1060 AM. Or go to Lou's site at http://www.loueptonshow.com/ and ask your questions.
If you will consider hydrogen is lighter than air in the event of a hydrogen leak the GAS goes up and away from potential fuels. Unlike the liquid fuels currently used which flows in, around and under things whether or not it is burning. Consider how much worse the Hindenburg could have been had it been filled with liquid gas!!
Yes normal liquid gas piston engines can burn hydrogen gas with very little modification the same as a liquid gas engine can be modified to burn propane. The only problem with burning hydrogen in an Iron block engine is what is called hydrogen embrittlement.
This can be easily remedied by using stainless steel linings in the piston chambers. Much the way that manufacturers changed from Iron valves to stainless steel valves when they shifted to unleaded fuels.
P.S leaded fuel had the lead added to them by the refiners and made us believe they took it out. In reality they just turned off a valve.
If you want further info catch me on the Lou Epton show KKVV 1060 AM. Or go to Lou's site at http://www.loueptonshow.com/ and ask your questions.
Hydrogen generation in huge amounts for the purpose of powering engines is indeed a major problem in the debate of hydrogen powered cars. Borrowing from history, what was the source of the immense amounts of hydrogen gas needed to fill the German blimps of the 20’s and 30’s era (Remember the “Hindenburg”)?
They used an ingenious catalyst reaction of metallic silicon & water. Silicon is plentiful and could be extracted from abundant quartz sand (SiO2). The reaction:
Si + 2H2O -> 2H2 (gas) + SiO2 (solid)
Large quantities of hydrogen gas were liberated in this manner to fill these huge “lighter-than-air” crafts. While this is probably one of the best (and safest) methods to get hydrogen fuel in sufficient quantities (much safer and more efficient than the alkali metal reactions with water mentioned), there are some inherent problems with this method.
The energy consumption to extract Si from quartz sand or similar earth materials is high (12,000 kWh/ton Si), plus large amounts of CO2 are released in the extraction reaction. Similar scenarios play out when alkali metals or their metal hydrides are used for hydrogen creation. Using Aluminum as a catalyst for generation of the desired fuel is even worse since its extraction from bauxite ore requires around 23,300 kWh/ton Al.
Using solar panels and splitting water into H and O constituents appears as a feasible environmentally friendly alternative, but it is slow and does not create large quantities in one application. However, the gas could be collected in Mylar coated bladders over time & stored for later use.
Fuel cells are also often hailed as a viable alternative, relinquishing electric cars of heavy battery banks. While fuel cells are definitively environmentally friendly, creating indeed electricity and water vapor as exhaust, there is also a serious problem present when trying to power a vehicle with them. Those who have never driven an electric car may be unaware that the energy requirements for the initial acceleration to a comfortable cruising speed of 35 mph in a reasonable amount of time, requires an immediate battery draw of 20,000 to 40,000 Watts depending on vehicle weight and payload. While trusted lead acid batteries can provide such extremes, a fuel cell would be hopelessly overwhelmed; hence a fuel-cell / battery combination would be required, which in turn will add weight to the vehicle. The fuel cell may also have trouble keeping the batteries charged, especially in heavy stop & go traffic.
In summary, all these great methods mentioned for cleaner transportation contain bugs and drawbacks that need to be worked out. Some only will appear to be environmentally friendly while producing the raw materials required for their operation may create the pollutants, we are so desperately trying to avoid.
They used an ingenious catalyst reaction of metallic silicon & water. Silicon is plentiful and could be extracted from abundant quartz sand (SiO2). The reaction:
Si + 2H2O -> 2H2 (gas) + SiO2 (solid)
Large quantities of hydrogen gas were liberated in this manner to fill these huge “lighter-than-air” crafts. While this is probably one of the best (and safest) methods to get hydrogen fuel in sufficient quantities (much safer and more efficient than the alkali metal reactions with water mentioned), there are some inherent problems with this method.
The energy consumption to extract Si from quartz sand or similar earth materials is high (12,000 kWh/ton Si), plus large amounts of CO2 are released in the extraction reaction. Similar scenarios play out when alkali metals or their metal hydrides are used for hydrogen creation. Using Aluminum as a catalyst for generation of the desired fuel is even worse since its extraction from bauxite ore requires around 23,300 kWh/ton Al.
Using solar panels and splitting water into H and O constituents appears as a feasible environmentally friendly alternative, but it is slow and does not create large quantities in one application. However, the gas could be collected in Mylar coated bladders over time & stored for later use.
Fuel cells are also often hailed as a viable alternative, relinquishing electric cars of heavy battery banks. While fuel cells are definitively environmentally friendly, creating indeed electricity and water vapor as exhaust, there is also a serious problem present when trying to power a vehicle with them. Those who have never driven an electric car may be unaware that the energy requirements for the initial acceleration to a comfortable cruising speed of 35 mph in a reasonable amount of time, requires an immediate battery draw of 20,000 to 40,000 Watts depending on vehicle weight and payload. While trusted lead acid batteries can provide such extremes, a fuel cell would be hopelessly overwhelmed; hence a fuel-cell / battery combination would be required, which in turn will add weight to the vehicle. The fuel cell may also have trouble keeping the batteries charged, especially in heavy stop & go traffic.
In summary, all these great methods mentioned for cleaner transportation contain bugs and drawbacks that need to be worked out. Some only will appear to be environmentally friendly while producing the raw materials required for their operation may create the pollutants, we are so desperately trying to avoid.
I haven't seen the Canadian video yet but I did see fuel cells this morning at the NAB that were powered by pint size cylinders that contained hydrogen gas. These fuel cells put out 12volts and rated at 100 watts were able to power my laptop and webcam.
I asked how does one get the hydrogen? The engineer for the company replied "at any welding supply store or station that sells hydrogen". I thought to myself that since all it takes is sea water or even urine and an electrolytic catalyst and energy, why not make ones own hydrogen to fill the cylinders and then use the stored energy when it was most needed . . . like out in the wilderness.
I thought of my little RV as sort of a rolling Hydrogen still. So whats crazy about this? There's plenty of sun where I come from and plenty of sea water. On a practical level, since carrying water has always been the number 1 occupation in the world, why not just drink it and make hydrogen out of the waste? Better than pissing in the wind. Y/N?
bobkiger@vidiots.us
I asked how does one get the hydrogen? The engineer for the company replied "at any welding supply store or station that sells hydrogen". I thought to myself that since all it takes is sea water or even urine and an electrolytic catalyst and energy, why not make ones own hydrogen to fill the cylinders and then use the stored energy when it was most needed . . . like out in the wilderness.
I thought of my little RV as sort of a rolling Hydrogen still. So whats crazy about this? There's plenty of sun where I come from and plenty of sea water. On a practical level, since carrying water has always been the number 1 occupation in the world, why not just drink it and make hydrogen out of the waste? Better than pissing in the wind. Y/N?
bobkiger@vidiots.us
Thank you Dr. Kackstaetter for your summary of the alternate forms of energy and their current development.
Which direction of research would you pursue ?
It appears that the answer for now, anyway, may be the flex fuels such as Ethanol and a lower percentage of gasoline, hopefully less than 10%. Pollution however, remains in this equation.
Which direction of research would you pursue ?
It appears that the answer for now, anyway, may be the flex fuels such as Ethanol and a lower percentage of gasoline, hopefully less than 10%. Pollution however, remains in this equation.
i have just found away to run an engine on hydragen and oxyegn but is only a 50cc engine as i could not produce enogth browns gas to produce to run a higher cc engine i was visited by shell asking to buy my idea the tearms are that i never speak of this again the big plot it this idea can be done very easy with platnuim as electrodes ok it is a bit expansive or u could use grphite ever way u have to make enogth cells to produce the amount of gas needred for each cycle of the engine now i found 4 stroke engine to run better then 2 stroke as 2 strokes are a pass over system unlke a 4 stroke that uses valves and timing the simple elctrolersis idea works but does take a lot of cells to produce enogth browns gas to work i use sea water yes u herad me right sea water has a natrol salt content with is used in electrolersis distelled water will not work also u may have seen the save fuel in ur car this kit does not work why because it still pulls the same amount of fuel and air into the car adding extra hydragen would just make the engine run ritcher
So, I read about the hydrogen energy by Rothman Technologies.
I can tell you that I will not invest a cent is this kind of stupidity.
To summarize their finding:
- you buy a certain salt
- you buy a certain chemical
- you forget about the energy that was needed to produce these two products
(really you forget about it)
- you throw that in water and run an engine with brown gas
- you advertise on the net
- you hope to make people believe that you have an energy solution for the US
- you wait for an opportunity to get investors spoiling their money on your finding
Of course it some fun to produce brown gas. But writing this is really a shame, or at least it is stupid:
To produce H2 you need to provide the dissociation energy of water.
Doing that with a salt and a metal means bring the energy in a chemical way, because these products have a potential energy. To understand that clearly, take it the other way around: once the salt and metal have been used, can they be recycled to produce brown gas again? The answer is yes, if you provide the necessary energy. The energy to regenerate the original salt and metal is the energy necessary to compensate what has been given to the brown gas. Moreover, the chemical regeneration will not have a perfect efficiency (thermal losses for example) and therefore the regeneration will cost more that the energy recuperated in the brown gas.
The physics lesson: to evaluate a potential energy source, consider what it costs to maintain the earth in the same state as it was before using this energy. Otherwise you just decrease the available energy. For example: see how much energy it costs to regenerate the salt and metal.
Environmental lesson: the only sustainable energy is the solar energy because there is no need/no way to "regenerate the sun", geothermal energy is also a candidate. Fossil fuel, the main resource currently will have an end and "Rothman Technologies" cant do anything about it.
Finally, it should be stressed, because apparently it is not well know, that hydrogen is not a source of energy, it is a vector of energy. This means that it can only be used to store energy temporarilly. There is no large resource of hydrogen available (and no way to produce it cheaply, except from solar energy).
michel
Exercice:
Try to identify the real source of energy in the Rothman Technology and check if it free or cheap and what its availability is. Hint: start with common NaCl salt and any kind of electrolyte. Could some solar energy be used in this process? Finally, evaluate the possible environmental consequences: are there no other wastes than water vapor emissions, what would be the costs of environmental remediation? Assume that 10% of fuels for cars would be based on this fake discovery and evaluate the waste disposal, how hazardous they are, the costs. Evaluate also how much recycling would cost. Evaluate the benefit.
I can tell you that I will not invest a cent is this kind of stupidity.
To summarize their finding:
- you buy a certain salt
- you buy a certain chemical
- you forget about the energy that was needed to produce these two products
(really you forget about it)
- you throw that in water and run an engine with brown gas
- you advertise on the net
- you hope to make people believe that you have an energy solution for the US
- you wait for an opportunity to get investors spoiling their money on your finding
Of course it some fun to produce brown gas. But writing this is really a shame, or at least it is stupid:
QUOTE
To produce H2 you need to provide the dissociation energy of water.
Doing that with a salt and a metal means bring the energy in a chemical way, because these products have a potential energy. To understand that clearly, take it the other way around: once the salt and metal have been used, can they be recycled to produce brown gas again? The answer is yes, if you provide the necessary energy. The energy to regenerate the original salt and metal is the energy necessary to compensate what has been given to the brown gas. Moreover, the chemical regeneration will not have a perfect efficiency (thermal losses for example) and therefore the regeneration will cost more that the energy recuperated in the brown gas.
The physics lesson: to evaluate a potential energy source, consider what it costs to maintain the earth in the same state as it was before using this energy. Otherwise you just decrease the available energy. For example: see how much energy it costs to regenerate the salt and metal.
Environmental lesson: the only sustainable energy is the solar energy because there is no need/no way to "regenerate the sun", geothermal energy is also a candidate. Fossil fuel, the main resource currently will have an end and "Rothman Technologies" cant do anything about it.
Finally, it should be stressed, because apparently it is not well know, that hydrogen is not a source of energy, it is a vector of energy. This means that it can only be used to store energy temporarilly. There is no large resource of hydrogen available (and no way to produce it cheaply, except from solar energy).
michel
Exercice:
Try to identify the real source of energy in the Rothman Technology and check if it free or cheap and what its availability is. Hint: start with common NaCl salt and any kind of electrolyte. Could some solar energy be used in this process? Finally, evaluate the possible environmental consequences: are there no other wastes than water vapor emissions, what would be the costs of environmental remediation? Assume that 10% of fuels for cars would be based on this fake discovery and evaluate the waste disposal, how hazardous they are, the costs. Evaluate also how much recycling would cost. Evaluate the benefit.
So, I am not a scientist, could someone explain to me about Rothman's experiment?
Did he or did he not power a 12 hp gasoline engine off of hydrogen gas collected from canisters of salt water and a catalyst of some sort?
Is this not an achievement? I'm curious because I read earlier today that Honda has a car that runs off of fuel cells and I was wondering if it was possible to create hydrogen fuel from something other than coal.
Did he or did he not power a 12 hp gasoline engine off of hydrogen gas collected from canisters of salt water and a catalyst of some sort?
Is this not an achievement? I'm curious because I read earlier today that Honda has a car that runs off of fuel cells and I was wondering if it was possible to create hydrogen fuel from something other than coal.
Hi all
This is my first post and I am quite excited to find other people into the hydrogen technology that I am. I am starting to experiment with the so called frequency enhanced electrolosis and have done nearly ten months of research into the subject.
It really frustrates me when people shoot down our ideas before even contemplating them
so all you who don't think this will work just chill and amuse me for a moment. Yes there is the law of thermo dynamics but you must remember that other laws that were once thought true have been disproven.
The reason that the frequency improves the efficiency of the electrolysis is because of resonence frequency. The water molicule has a resonence of roughly 42.8 kHz. When you subject anything to it's resonence frequency it becomes weaker and can even self destruct. When you subject water to it's resonence frequency the bonds between the oxygen and hydrogen become weaker thus requiring less energy to break them apart. This is how the effeciency goes up. Many people when I tell them this look at me like this or this 
but just think about it for a minute.
Now if you take you DC current that goes to your electrodes and puls it at 42.8 kHz you are weakening the bonde while also pulling on them.
Happy thinking and good luck to all
cheers
Serious
This is my first post and I am quite excited to find other people into the hydrogen technology that I am. I am starting to experiment with the so called frequency enhanced electrolosis and have done nearly ten months of research into the subject.
It really frustrates me when people shoot down our ideas before even contemplating them
so all you who don't think this will work just chill and amuse me for a moment. Yes there is the law of thermo dynamics but you must remember that other laws that were once thought true have been disproven.The reason that the frequency improves the efficiency of the electrolysis is because of resonence frequency. The water molicule has a resonence of roughly 42.8 kHz. When you subject anything to it's resonence frequency it becomes weaker and can even self destruct. When you subject water to it's resonence frequency the bonds between the oxygen and hydrogen become weaker thus requiring less energy to break them apart. This is how the effeciency goes up. Many people when I tell them this look at me like this
or this but just think about it for a minute.Now if you take you DC current that goes to your electrodes and puls it at 42.8 kHz you are weakening the bonde while also pulling on them.
Happy thinking and good luck to all
cheers
Serious
Mr serious C, can we talk more with email corresponding. I'm interest about your experiment that tell frequency enhanced water electrolysis.
Hi zon
Would be more than happy to communicate with you.
I can be contacted at corgrif@hotmail.com.
Cheers
Serious
Would be more than happy to communicate with you.
I can be contacted at corgrif@hotmail.com.
Cheers
Serious
QUOTE (serious C+Feb 19 2007, 03:22 PM)
Hi all
This is my first post and I am quite excited to find other people into the hydrogen technology that I am. I am starting to experiment with the so called frequency enhanced electrolosis and have done nearly ten months of research into the subject.
It really frustrates me when people shoot down our ideas before even contemplating them so all you who don't think this will work just chill and amuse me for a moment. Yes there is the law of thermo dynamics but you must remember that other laws that were once thought true have been disproven.
Frequency enhanced electrolysis might be a MORE EFFICIENT means of breaking the bonds H from O (I wouldn't know), but its not breaking the laws of thermodynamics. The energy you get back when recombining the H2 with O will be LESS than what you put in to break them apart.
That doesn't mean its not valuable idea, there are advantages to being able to get that energy back when and where you want it.
Arthur
This is my first post and I am quite excited to find other people into the hydrogen technology that I am. I am starting to experiment with the so called frequency enhanced electrolosis and have done nearly ten months of research into the subject.
It really frustrates me when people shoot down our ideas before even contemplating them
so all you who don't think this will work just chill and amuse me for a moment. Yes there is the law of thermo dynamics but you must remember that other laws that were once thought true have been disproven.Frequency enhanced electrolysis might be a MORE EFFICIENT means of breaking the bonds H from O (I wouldn't know), but its not breaking the laws of thermodynamics. The energy you get back when recombining the H2 with O will be LESS than what you put in to break them apart.
That doesn't mean its not valuable idea, there are advantages to being able to get that energy back when and where you want it.
Arthur
QUOTE
University of
New Brunswick
New Brunswick
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| University of New Brunswick |
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
The energy you get back when recombining the H2 with O will be LESS than what you put in to break them apart.
I do hope you're talking on a practical sense where with todays technology such would be true because chemically this isn't true.
2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + Energy
Energy + 2H2O = 2H2 + O2
Energy in equals energy out.
What I'm curious is would it be possible to break the bonds using sound? High frequency sound waves sent into a specially designed drum to reflect a high % of the sound energy back and forth. Sound is a compression wave and with enough extremely high compressions converging this could generate enough kinetic energy to break the bond but happen fast enough so not to cause the water exposed to the kinetic energy to boil.
I believe that aluminum + gallium + water => hydrogen + gallium + oxidized aluminum.
QUOTE (Precursor562+Mar 23 2007, 03:39 PM)
Hey, hey. I'm just 20 min. from UNB Fredericton.
I've read some (not all since I don't have that much time) and there seems to be some mix ups.
One was already addressed and that is hydrogen cells being required to produce electricity. Although electricity can be produced by this means, a generator that runs of hydrogen will do the job.
Electrolysis is a wasteful process of passing electricity through a water/ion solution (pure water will not conduct electricity and so salt is added to create sodium and chloride ions) and most of the current will pass through. What percentage of the electricity depends on the length of the apparatus where the longer the current has to travel through the water the more likely it will contribute to the breaking of the hydrogen/oxygen bond. High frequency pulses work better than a constant DC voltage.
Now the idea of using metals and other materials is so the production of hydrogen is chemical as opposed to electrical. Hydrochloric acid and magnesium will produce hydrogen gas. Car batteries today have hydrochloric acid and will produce hydrogen gas.
I read an article in a popular science magazine that I had found rather interesting. Playing with alloys and their shapes on a microscopic level it has been found possible to pass water through a specifically shaped alloy membrane and at the same time shine UV light onto to it. This breaks the bond. The next step is to allow the use of white light. The idea is that water can be passed through a membrane in a clear container outside in the day time. Water goes in one end and hydrogen/oxygen gas will come out the other. Only energy used is to push the water in and collect the gasses on the other side.
I do hope you're talking on a practical sense where with todays technology such would be true because chemically this isn't true.
2H2 + O2 = 2H2O + Energy
Energy + 2H2O = 2H2 + O2
Energy in equals energy out.
What I'm curious is would it be possible to break the bonds using sound? High frequency sound waves sent into a specially designed drum to reflect a high % of the sound energy back and forth. Sound is a compression wave and with enough extremely high compressions converging this could generate enough kinetic energy to break the bond but happen fast enough so not to cause the water exposed to the kinetic energy to boil.
Energy in does not always equal energy out. There is energy used to break bonds or form them. You also have enthalpy change.
QUOTE
Energy in does not always equal energy out. There is energy used to break bonds or form them. You also have enthalpy change.
Chemically energy in will equal energy out. It takes energy to break bonds and energy is released when bonds form however in the case of burning hydrogen you have two molecules of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Energy must be used to break the bonds of these molecules. Then the hydrogen will bond with the oxygen to produce two molecules of water and the energy released by this bond formation will sum up to be greater than what is required to break the bonds in the first place. This makes it an exothermic reaction. Now if you do the reverse (break the bond of the two water molecules and reform the two hydrogen and one oxygen molecules) then it will require an input of energy that is equal to what was net left over. This makes this process endothermic.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.