[Harold Sutton]

I came across this article on making hydrogen and thought some of you might like the idea. This site is only information in "e" book form and explains how to improve your gas milage by adding hydrogen to your gas. Go look at http://www.water4gas.com and see if you don't think the idea is sound.

 

[huffhuff]

local mechanic says it takes him 42 minutes to generate 6 oz. substituting 6 oz H for 6 oz of gas should offer some mileage improvement. where he says it's effective is the extra H tells the oxygen sensor to cut back on fuel delivery thus enhancing mileage.

 

[jbird]

I came across this article on making hydrogen and thought some of you might like the idea. This site is only information in "e" book form and explains how to improve your gas milage by adding hydrogen to your gas. Go look at http://www.water4gas.com and see if you don't think the idea is sound.

I guess I don't know what to think? Seems too good to be true?

 

[Harold Sutton]

I guess I don't know what to think? Seems too good to be true?

My son tells me that an independent outfit checked out all the sources for this technology and this site was the most credible. If all Americans did this gas would be back to about $2 a gallon in no time and lots of oil execs. would be looking for new jobs.

 

[Rich Till]

The local newspaper in Asheville, N.C. ran a similar article about an older gentleman in last weeks paper that converted his later model 3.8 pontiac FI over to hydrogen using an old pickle jar to collect it with. He was a retired engineer and said the conversion was very easy and he was getting 45 to 80 mpg on his car after the conversion. He said the conversion didn't look really good due to the pickle jar but that it worked really well. The local Pontiac dealership responded saying that the conversion would of course void any mfg's warranty covering the vehicle. The article itself was well written and listed the same website as above and seemed credible.

Rich

 

[manveru]

doubt it would void the warrenty according to the law http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60128

but on another note, i doubt it would work

Well, the electricity has to come from somewhere - energy isn't free. They downplay the amount of electricity needed to break the bond between the H and O moloecules, but I promise you it is significant. Running a generator large enough to do this will place a big load on the engine. Either that, or you will be carrying some big batteries around. Hydrogen has a very low BTU content, so burning it as a supplemental fuel will not recover the energy needed to get it from the water.

This is the main reason hydrogen fuel cells are I long way from being practical. A fuel cell takes pure hydrogen and combines it with oxygen, the by products are water and electricity. Hydrogen IS very plentiful, the problem is it isn't pure, its all locked up with oxygen in the form of water and water vapor. You take water, add electricity and you get pure hydrogen and oxygen. Sound familiar? A hydrogen fuel cell isn't really powered by hydrogen, its powered by the electricity it took to break the hydrogen away from the oxygen. When you recombine the H and O, you get the water and electricity back.

Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. Energy must first be put in before it can be recovered. Until we perfect 100% conservation of energy (not possible according to Einstein) this is a losing game. Ignoring the laws of energy conservation makes it a net zero at best. Think of the wound up rubberband that powers those little airplanes. It isn't an energy source, it only transfers the energy you put on it when you wound it up. The hydrogen, when still locked to the oxygen molecule, is just like the limp rubberband.

water vapor is also more effective greenhouse gas than is carbon dioxide.

And they call it HHO or Brown's gas. Look up Brown's gas on wikipedia, it even addresses the fraudulence of these "burning water" claims

 

[Schurkey]

This comes up every time gasoline prices jump.

And it's just as crazy now as it was then.

It's E-A-S-Y to get water to split into oxygen and hydrogen--all you have to do is run an electric current into it. My high school chemistry teacher showed the class how to do it thirty-something years ago, and it wasn't NEW then.

The problem is that it takes more energy (electricity) to split the water than you recover by burning the hydrogen and oxygen. So there is a net LOSS of efficiency. Some of these systems use electrical power from the alternator to split the water--a gasoline-wasting scheme if there ever was one.

But someone is gonna get rich by "shearing the sheep"; and then they'll split before the sheriff or the local TV news "scambuster" stops by.

But they'll be back when gas hits $6 a gallon...

 

[The_Punisher_454]

I've been curious about this for years, and have followed the progress of people attempting to use this.
Some have had some success (aparently). At oupower.com there is a fairly large community of people working on this. Some of these guys are outright wacko's so be warned.
It seems they have some hydrogen production cell designs that are getting fairly efficient. Most use stainless plates, some add KOH, and many also use a dual frequency PWM driver that breaks the bonds a bit easier and consumes less power. We all know that "over unity" is not possible, but many are claiming levels of gas production that would indicate over 200% Efficiency. I suspect that the baseline assumption of how many watts it takes to split water may be incorrect.

So far none of the people posting on that board seem to really know much about engines at all, and none of them seem to try to re-tune to compensate for the additional fuel. Tuning with the O2 sensor is a bad idea, your just screwing with your BLM's all the time. And some of them are getting mileage increases from water vapor rather than browns gas. Some of the mileage increases could have been accomplished with some basic re-programming of the fuel and ignition tables anyhow, as well as seting up a decent "highway mode" in the computer.
Anyhow with fuel prices being what they are I would expect that more people are going to be exploring this, hopefully some of them will know alot more about making engines run than these Hippies do.

But do watch out for anybody trying to sell anything along these lines, Its almost sure to be some sort of scam.

 

[The_Punisher_454]

I just checked that link above and I'd say the gas production cell is WAY too small to get any really usable gas production, if their kit did in fact increase mileage any it would be from the MAF translator leaning out the fuel mixture (factory tuning is almost always really rich) and the xylene.

Their site claims one gallon of water can be converted to 1833 gallons of brown's gas. Well 1833 gallons (US Liquid) = 245.036 ft³. Not very much volume when you think about how much air your engine moves per minute, even while cruising.

 

[kirkwoodken]

This is my answer to this ad I sent to a friend in Colorado Springs a few days ago:

Quote: Tom,

If a person can patent electrolysis, there is something terribly wrong at the patent office. Wouldn't surprise me.

The Laws of Thermodynamics state that any time you convert a compound into its constituent parts, you will lose some energy. You can't get something for nothing, and you will always get less out than you put in.

Or, as The Laws of Thermodynamics are stated in Murphy's Law:

1: You can't win.
2: You can't break even.
3: You can't get out of the game.
4: Mother nature is a blank.

The real problem we are having is the inefficiency of the IC engine. Over 2/3 of the energy burned goes out the exhaust pipe and the cooling system. I've even seen numbers as high as 80% for some engines. Is it any wonder why the oil companies love automobiles?

The Tesla Society in your neighborhood, Colorado Springs, does something they call "disassociation of water molecules". You should stop by there and see what you can find out about that process so you can explain it to me.

Ken Unquote.

If the process was cheap and viable, people would have been doing it 100 years ago.

Interestingly, the Hydrogen Fuel Cell was invented in about 1850!!! It can be used on space vehicles, but it just isn't efficient enough for automobiles or houses. Keep that 20% efficiency IC engine number in mind when you think about fuel cells.

 

[daveseitz]

Here is something for ALL OF YOU WHO THINK CARS USE SO MUCH GAS.
If you never used another drop of gas in a car would we never need oil again?
Would the oil industry shut the doors within days, weeks, months or years? I will let you think about that and then give you the answer. Post your thoughts so I can show my points of what is wrong.
REALLY GETTING TIRED OF THE UNEDUCATED MASSES ON ECONOMY.

 

[The_Punisher_454]

You May give some thought to higher compression ratios, with combustion chambers that take advantage of a tight quench stirring the mixture.
In the past, is you wanted economy on the street the additional tuning benefits of higher octane grades didnt offer enough of an advantage over the 10-20 percent (10-20 cents per gallon). 91 (or 92) octane gas is still only 20 cents per gallon higher than 87 (or 88). But those twenty cents are a much smaller percentage of the fuel price now. The mileage benefits of more compression, a little more timing, and possibly slightly leaner mixture may offer better economy than a lower octane optimized setup.

 

[The_Punisher_454]

If you never used another drop of gas in a car would we never need oil again?
Would the oil industry shut the doors within days, weeks, months or years?

No of course not, We still need lubricants, jet fuel, tires, plastics, all sorts of essential products come from oil, gasoline is just one.

 

[kirkwoodken]

When I was a kid, plastic was a cheap substitute for glass. Now, glass is a cheap substitute for plastic.

Oil is the perfect business! When it is cold here, it is hot somewhere else. Oil companies never have "Going Out of Business" sales. There is always a demand, even if Americans use none of it.

In my opinion "speculation" is not the same as "supply and demand".

 

[Mikeys69]

Now don't get upset..ok..
The high cost of fuel has increase are work here in Alberta. There is so much work here we can't get people to help. We are importing workers from around the world. There is hardly a place in town that doesn't need some one.

 

[Bob West]

My son tells me that an independent outfit checked out all the sources for this technology and this site was the most credible. If all Americans did this gas would be back to about $2 a gallon in no time and lots of oil execs. would be looking for new jobs.

Its not the oil execs Harold. Its the environmentalist whackos that wont let us drill in Alaska or off the coasts to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil, and we havent built a new refinery since 1976. Oil dropped 5.00 a barrel today.

 

[Harold Sutton]

doubt it would void the warrenty according to the law http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60128

but on another note, i doubt it would work

Well, the electricity has to come from somewhere - energy isn't free. They downplay the amount of electricity needed to break the bond between the H and O moloecules, but I promise you it is significant. Running a generator large enough to do this will place a big load on the engine. Either that, or you will be carrying some big batteries around. Hydrogen has a very low BTU content, so burning it as a supplemental fuel will not recover the energy needed to get it from the water.

This is the main reason hydrogen fuel cells are I long way from being practical. A fuel cell takes pure hydrogen and combines it with oxygen, the by products are water and electricity. Hydrogen IS very plentiful, the problem is it isn't pure, its all locked up with oxygen in the form of water and water vapor. You take water, add electricity and you get pure hydrogen and oxygen. Sound familiar? A hydrogen fuel cell isn't really powered by hydrogen, its powered by the electricity it took to break the hydrogen away from the oxygen. When you recombine the H and O, you get the water and electricity back.

Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. Energy must first be put in before it can be recovered. Until we perfect 100% conservation of energy (not possible according to Einstein) this is a losing game. Ignoring the laws of energy conservation makes it a net zero at best. Think of the wound up rubberband that powers those little airplanes. It isn't an energy source, it only transfers the energy you put on it when you wound it up. The hydrogen, when still locked to the oxygen molecule, is just like the limp rubberband.

water vapor is also more effective greenhouse gas than is carbon dioxide.

And they call it HHO or Brown's gas. Look up Brown's gas on wikipedia, it even addresses the fraudulence of these "burning water" claims

You might peddle your "fuel cell isn't viable" here, but Honda is starting to produce them in Japan and some are coming here later this year. Look on Yahoo as they just released the information that some hollywood celebs will get the first ones to cross the pond. It would seem that it's not so far fetched afterall.

 

[Harold Sutton]

Its not the oil execs Harold. Its the environmentalist whackos that wont let us drill in Alaska or off the coasts to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil, and we havent built a new refinery since 1976. Oil dropped 5.00 a barrel today.

No Bob, it's not the enviromentalists either. It's not because of the non-availability of crude, it's the uncontrolled commodity traders that are now getting the press they deserve. Same greedy b*stards that are ruining the rest of our economy as fast as they can. There was a article recently on oil reserves in North Dakota that has since been hushed up by the eternally greedy speculators. There is more oil in northern Alberta, Canada than the whole middle east, it's just hard to get out of the sand it's in. There is a group of speculators called ICE, or something like that, that has cornered the futures market that is now going to get the scrutiny they deserve. If a few of them were to go to jail the price will go right back down as fast as it has gone up.

 

[JOHN WILSON]

where he says it's effective is the extra H tells the oxygen sensor to cut back on fuel delivery thus enhancing mileage.

Without trying to sound like a smart-a$$.......That sounds like a good way to burn-up a motor. Are these factory fuel injected cars running so fat that that much fuel can be cut out of the tune-up???

Look on Yahoo as they just released the information that some hollywood celebs will get the first ones to cross the pond. It would seem that it's not so far fetched afterall.

This is giving me flashbacks of Danny DeVito in "Get Shorty". LOL

 

[Harold Sutton]

When I was a kid, plastic was a cheap substitute for glass. Now, glass is a cheap substitute for plastic.

Oil is the perfect business! When it is cold here, it is hot somewhere else. Oil companies never have "Going Out of Business" sales. There is always a demand, even if Americans use none of it.

In my opinion "speculation" is not the same as "supply and demand".

If you knew what they put in plastic you'd never drink or eat another thing packaged in it. Look up "Bisphenol-A" and see if you still think its good packaging medium. Give me good old glass any day. Least you think it's all bunk they recently pulled it out of baby bottles, it's real dangerous and is a contributor to diabetes.