HHO energy solution

[Raven_Leader]

Take a look at this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMovXzVOzc4
Raven Leader

[landshark]

That's pretty cool, literally and figuratively. It would be nice to come up with something that would reduce pollution and give a bit more freedom to countries to determine their own energy consumption. I am not a global warming kool-aid drinker, but I would love it if I didn't have to deal with the crappy inversion layer around here. Why hasn't this research been pushed and funded as much as others? Follow the money. Oil companies would be shut out.

[kawalekm]

It's very important to understand that this is NOT a source of energy. What the guy is doing is splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen via electrolosis. Technically this is no big deal. You produce hydrogen and oxygen every single time you hook up a battery charger to your car. It might be very valuable to a welder that doesn't want to store a lot of compressed gas cylinders in his workshop.

It's critical to understand that is takes MORE ENERGY in the form of electicity to make the hydrogen and oxygen, then the amount of energy you get from burning the hydrogen. You still have to have a SOURCE of energy to make the electricity to make the HHO.
Michael

[msta999]

Yes, that sounds right. I just went to a class last week and was suprised to find out, that in most states, making hydrogen would produce more green house gases than just driving with gas. That is because most states still use oil and coal to make electricity. How ever in States like Washington, which is powered by hydo power plants, it would produce very little green house gases. Go figure!

[MooseToo]

apparently this guy has found a way to fracture the water molecule without traditional electrolysis - what i got from the videos was that his process requires minute amounts of electrical energy and produces no heat while resulting in copious amounts of h and o -

[jott]

That would be the same as saying you found a new way of moving heavy rocks up a hill that took very little energy but moved a lot of rocks. For rocks if you move 100lb of rocks 10 foot higher it will take 1000 ft-lb it is force X distance if you wanted to have work done by those rocks, say put them in a cart and have it pull a rope as it rolled down the hill. If you added up all the “losses” and the work done you would get 1000ft-lb the 100lb force of the rocks times the 10 foot height of the hill. You would never expect to carry 10lb of rocks up a hill and have it provide 100lb of force on the way down.

It is the same way with H and O

1 mol of H2 + ½ mol of O2 => H2O and 285.8 kJ of energy

It dose not matter how you do it that is what you get. To go the other way

1 mol H2O + 285.8kJ => 1 mol H2 + ½ mol O2

There is no finding another way to do it that is just how much energy the H and O need to be in that state, if it dose not have it, it will be in a different state.

I hope I this easy enough to follow it is late so I’m just putting this together quick I can try to explain it better if someone is not following.

[kawalekm]

People at large seem to have a fantasy that someone will come along with a panacea for all our energy problems. I tired of listening to hare-brained schemes about how people will make fuel out of water. This particular fantasy has been going on forever. I still remember an episode of the Beverly Hillbillies where Jethro tried to run their truck on water. I think you can guess how that episode ended.

The real question is how this episode in American history is going to end. After the cheap oil is all used up and we resort to oil shale, liquified coal, biogas, and biofuels we will find that it still isn't enough to satisfy our flagrantly wasteful lifestyle and America is going to experience a PERMANANT reduction in standard of living. Unfortunately, I don't think Americans will go through energy withdraw nicely. The Iraq war is just ACT 1 of the play concerning our energy woes.

If you really want a limitless source of free energy, then go build yourself a solar cooker. That's the only free energy we're ever going to get.
Michael

[jott]

The problem is everyone is wishing and hoping for some new magic device that will solve all our energy needs. But the general population has such a poor understanding of math and science they can’t even tell the difference between a new breakthrough and some crackpot telling them he made a box that if they put some water in, it will met all there energy needs for the rest of there lives. People today really are that guy that just got off the boat and thinks he is making the best investment of his life by buying that bridge.

That said the technology is there for much more efficient life styles without the big reduction in standard of living everyone talks about. People need to start looking at everything as a system. I good example, when I was in college some girls lived next to me in an identical apartment. They got so mad that they turned off the lights all the time and I just left and let the lights on all day and night and never cared, but my electric bill was about half theirs. I explained that since the outside temp never got out of the mid twenties that month and we had electric heat the only thing that mattered was the temp you set the heat at, and they could not understand that. Keep that heat at 68 or 65 (mine stays at 62 but I’m not there much) and you will save a huge amount, if you get cold go for a run or put on a sweater. Combine trips since your car uses much more gas before it warms up. Take the time to fix weather striping. There is an endless list of things that could greatly reduce your use with out some fancy new box that will fix everything. As the price of fuel increases people will start to figer it out it will be a very slow process we will not run out of oil all at once. It is just going to get very expensive to do things the same way and not change

[wy0mn]

Michael-thanks for the book title; the one about the nine nations of north america... its great!

No free lunch is right. My Dad keeps fiddling with this perpetual motion machine..., if it ran on FAITH it would be working by now! KISS applied to wind, solar, hydro, maybe geo... these things work.
It amazes me how many people proudly wear the "off-grid" label while driving on asphalt to use a grid tied pump, to feed their generator! Just traded one addiction for another. Are they homesteading? Probably. Are they self-reliant? Not even close!
To quote Kermit the Frog, it ain't easy being green!

[MooseToo]

That would be the same as saying you found a new way of moving heavy rocks up a hill that took very little energy but moved a lot of rocks. *For rocks if you move 100lb of rocks 10 foot higher it will take 1000 ft-lb * * it is force X distance if you wanted to have work done by those rocks, say put them in a cart and have it pull a rope as it rolled down the hill. If you added up all the “losses” and the work done you would get 1000ft-lb the 100lb force of the rocks times the 10 foot height of the hill. *You would never expect to carry 10lb of rocks up a hill and have it provide 100lb of force on the way down.

It is the same way with H and O

1 mol of H2 + ½ mol of O2 => H2O and 285.8 kJ of energy

It dose not matter how you do it that is what you get. *To go the other way

1 mol H2O + 285.8kJ => 1 mol H2 + ½ mol O2

There is no finding another way to do it that is just how much energy the H and O need to be in that state, if it dose not have it, it will be in a different state.

I hope I this easy enough to follow it is late so I’m just putting this together quick I can try to explain it better if someone is not following.

curious to learn if you actually watched the utube episode cited ?

[jott]

yes I did watch the youtube video that provided next to no technical information but to say that they need electricity to power it. The laws of physics are simple on this topic if you put energy into something to change its state then change in back to the original state the most you could get out of it is the same amount of energy you put in. It is that simple. So what about my response makes you think I did not watch the video. If I missed something in the video that would make you think it is not turning water into H and O or free radicals of H and HO then point that out.

[MooseToo]

yes I did watch the youtube video that provided next to no technical information but to say that they need electricity to power it. The laws of physics are simple on this topic if you put energy into something to change its state then change in back to the original state the most you could get out of it is the same amount of energy you put in. *It is that simple. *So what about my response makes you think I did not watch the video. *If I missed something in the video that would make you think it is not turning water into H and O *or free radicals of H and HO then point that out.
been awhile since i've seen that video but i do remember the point being stressed that this new process was far more efficient regarding the energy required to produce usable quantities of hydrogen than is prior electrolysis processes - you are probably correct in your assessment (key word being "probably") but i found the presentation interesting enough to warrant further investigation - rules, such as conservation of energy rules, often seem etched in stone and therefore applicable in all cases - but, sometimes, a situation is incorrectly analyzed by perfunctory observation and a perfectly good, but inappropriate, rule is applied to undeservedly dismiss
the base premise -
kinda like those rules of aeronautic engineering that PROVE that helicopters and bumblebees cannot fly -

[kawalekm]

Here's my great idea to get more oil. *Since it takes about 50 million years to make a pool of oil, we'll just build a time machine to go forward or backward in time in 50 million year increments. *We simply suck out all the available oil at each time interval, and just wait for the next "50 million year" interval to get more. *This strategy is guarrantied to produce at least 10 times the amount of oil that is currently available on earth. *This is a more practical strategy than HHO!
Michael

[msta999]

Here's my great idea to get more oil. *Since it takes about 50 million years to make a pool of oil, we'll just build a time machine to go forward or backward in time in 50 million year increments. *We simply suck out all the available oil at each time interval, and just wait for the next "50 million year" interval to get more. *This strategy is guarrantied to produce at least 10 times the amount of oil that is currently available on earth. *This is a more practical strategy than HHO!
Michael

We would probably have a better chance of makeing nucleur powered batteries to power vehicles, than using HHO. or we could cover AZ and NM with solar and wind generators to provide the power, then it would be green power. Lots of empty space out there and the sun always shines/wind blows. ;)

[ryanmercer]

What I find interesting is I saw that video 4 years ago... and haven't heard anything about him since.

[msta999]

What I find interesting is I saw that video 4 years ago... and haven't heard anything about him since.

If the video is that old, then I would guess it didn't work.

[jott]

Yea I saw that video a long time ago too, but did not remember when. The thing is now that we never hear anything again there is probably people talking about how this guy was offed by some oil company and they destroyed his research.

But I really wonder how the news broadcasters could have actually carried this story. You would think they would have done a little background work. (I know that is asking way too much)

I’m very skeptical of any new “science” when the person dose not tell you how it works. Science is one person comes up with something new and then they publish what they did then others independently get the same results. If the others can’t get the same results then the world knows the first guy was a quack.

[MooseToo]

wonder what those google ads on the right margin of this page mean ?

[ChrisNam]

I understand the principle that more energy is required to produce HHO than actually exists in HHO.

I however came across these guys http://www.Water-Fuel-Online.com/water4fuel who claim to make your petrol/ diesel motorcar anything from 20-120% more efficient using, I think, the same method, but with battery power.

Another scam???

[LeatherneckPA]

Not sure that I believe the video, especially since "the oil companies offed the guy and burned all his records". *But I am also not certtain I concur with jott and others who decry the possibility that it might work.

300 years ago Galileo was a quack and 150 years ago Jules Verne was a dreaming dolt who lived in a world of fantasy and pedestry. *But nowadays nearly any school child accepts Galileo's assertion that the sun is the center of the galaxy; and Vern's aeroplanes, space travel, submarines and other creations are so common place they are unworthy of notice.

Nobody believed Einstein either, but now we have nuclear power thanks to his flights o fancy. And he couldn't even pass high school math.

The arrogance of modern man (generically, not name calling, please relax) astounds me. *We believe we have all the answers and that our laws are immutable. *And in 100 or 200 years later men will laugh at our naivetè.

Something else will come up. *It won't be cheap, and it probably won't be easy. *But mankind will generally adapt. *Even if that adaptation first requires starvation on a global scale. *The best we can do is attempt to ensure the survival of our own nucelar family/tribe.

WOW!! *I haven't had thoughts that deep in years. :-[

[jott]

What astounds me is the ignorance of modern man. I don’t know anyone that believes we have learned all there is to learn, ask anyone that has taken any physics or advanced math and they will tell you that there is a large part of the universe we don’t understand. I know several people that have made it there life’s work to research that edge of what we know and hope to make one small step forwarded. I don’t know about you but I sure would not dedicate my life to finding something that I thought was already known.



In this case the guy is not saying he is doing anything new or something that was not understood before. He is saying that he is turning water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then he is burning it to make water. He is not talking about changes at the atomic level, worm holes or different dimension, or any other possible source of energy that we don’t understand. Maybe this guy is just a simple scam artist trying to get money out of investors, or maybe he just never looked at energy in vs. energy out because he truly dose not understand what he is doing.

A professor of mine was in the army before he was a professor, he ran a research lab, his job was to analyze new “technologies” to determine witch ones to fund with federal money though the army, he said it was very common to find someone just looking for a grant and they would hide batteries or other power sources to try to fool everyone. Others where just clueless and where completely surprised when they hooked everything up to meters and showed that it did not work.

The point is I really worry about a society that is so discounted from math and science that they can’t tell the difference between someone having a new idea and someone just repackaging a scam that has been around for years.

[chrisser]

I did some poking around. This appears to be the web site for the company http://www.hytechapps.com/

They do not claim to be able to run the vehicle on water, they claim that it is a supplement to improve mileage (they claim 20-30% on both gas and diesel).

I'm a bit skeptical on the diesel side, but gas engines are pretty inefficient at converting gasoline to mechanical power - that's why you need a large radiator to dump the waste heat into the atmosphere.

If the introduction of hydrogen and oxygen into the combustion chamber when combustion occurs somehow makes the gasoline burn more efficient (and if this gain in efficiency is sufficent to exceed the loss suffered by running the alternator more often to power the system) then he may have something.

If he was claiming 5%, I'd be less skeptical.

There's also the issue of how much air moves through a vehicle. At 2500 RPM and a 2.0litre engine (just for simplicity), you're pushing 5000 litres of air per minute (over 1000 gallons). I'd assume it takes a heckuva lot of water to produce enough gas to have a significant effect on that airflow.

[SkooliesRock]

I had an interest in this after a friend showed it to me a couple months back. Seems like the stories went both ways on MPG improvement. I didn't know anyone 1st hand with any experience in adding a generator to their vehicle, so I built & added my own.

Long story short, MPG dropped dramatically, right at 20%. Needless to say.....the HHO generator is coming-off the vehicle. There' plenty of guys on the 'net spouting "doubling your mileage", and of course they're selling their homegrown kits.....losta luck