A friend of mine sent me this video footage link. I am confident that it will make you start asking some very tough questions of your elected officials and the oil and motor vehicle industry leaders. The first one that comes to my mind is:
Why don’t we know more about this?
The second question is:
Who is to blame for keeping this kind of technology quiet?
For all the times we might curse the Information Age, this is a case when it’s definitely good to have sites like YouTube available on the Internet. I’m no scientist, but this definitely looks like viable technology to me, and if it can put the Islamic Oil Barons (i.e. OPEC) out of business, let’s get it moving!
Podcasts Archive
I enjoy your blog, and am surprised that you would be taken in by this kind of nonsense. Water is not a fuel - you can’t get energy out of it without putting more energy in first (unlike say, oil and coal, which already contain a significant amount of stored chemical energy which can be released by oxidizing them). Water is not even a terribly good energy storage medium- the inefficiencies of electrolyzing water to obtain hydrogen and subsequently oxidizing the hydrogen to recapture the energy put in are far greater than the inefficiencies of modern batteries and fuel cells. See, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Efficiency
I’m all for finding alternative fuels to middle eastern oil - the current strategy of saving our own supplies of oil and draining the arabian oil reserves dry first (and thereby enriching our enemies in the house of Saud) might have long term benefits, but they’re clearly outweighed by the short term problems of giving radical Wahabbis too many petrodollars for anyone’s good. Still, this kind of shabby reporting on “new technologies” (water was first electrolyzed in the 1800s) that doesn’t mention anything about the energy _input_ (i.e., from the wall socket), shouldn’t be lent any further legitimacy by endorsing it here.
Josh,
I don’t recall ever calling water a fuel. Hydrogen itself utilized in the correct chemical process obviously can fuel an engine and has. If adding electricity to this process is the catalyst, as seems to be the case, then it doesn’t take much scientific knowledge to understand that all that needs refining is the amount of electricity required to produce the necessary amount of hydrogen to power an engine efficiently.
It so happens that there are other videos floating around that claim this idea is actually much closer than most of the Big Oil folks would like any of us to believe.
People once believed that an airplane would never fly. I find it far easier to believe that the greedy rich that make billions each year from selling oil-based products are going to do everything in their power to find ways to strap us to a new alternative to gas and then call it a step forward, just as long as they hold the leash. Hydrogen fuel cell-powered hybrid vehicles, etc. are a poor excuse for an alternative to the current gas-guzzlers when far more efficient change is available if only we actually put our minds and monies towards making it a reality.
Point is, just as the Presidential/Political campaigning seems to be a rigged farce, so too seem to be the Medical, Pharmaceutical and Scientific industries. Who wants to find a cure for anything when they can make so much more money pumping out “band-aids”?
Very interesting. I’d like to learn more about this! I’ll be on the look out for more information…
Sorry FH, but Josh is correct. You can only obtain hydrogen by using energy. The physics law that dictates you cannot create energy (hence no perpetuum mobile exists) also dictates you will never reach 100% efficiency, no matter the process. So you end up with less energy in the hydrogen than you put in. When using the hydrogen as an energy source you again have losses, and you cannot store hydrogen very well. But even if technology finds ways to minimize the losses and store H2 properly (losslessly), you’ll effectively need more energy to travel the same distance. OK, you can use other fuels than fossil to create the H2, reducing dependency on oil, but it still would be (very) inefficient.
Plus, you’d be adding lots of water vapor to the atmosphere, undoubtedly creating more rainfall. And water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas.
If you’re really interested in taking OPEC out of business, or at least break their monopoly, you should take on the environment mob in the US, that inhibits the US to explore its own vast fossil resources.
This second video explains further the dramatic possibilities of HHO. Now, I’ve seen this technology get poo poo’d a couple of years ago, because of the above stated concerns - energy is consumed (electricity) to create this new gas:
HHO Gas
No toxic fumes
No Ultra-violet
Not explosive
No soot
Odorless
Colorless
Up to 30% faster than acetylene
I am not a scientist.
However I do know that many years ago an elderly couple invented a battery for cars which was impressive. All the patents were bought out by car and/or oil companies so we never saw it come to fruition.
Yesterday I saw Senator Bradley on “Martha”. He made an interesting point that if people stopped using SUV’s (4 wheel drive monsters that are a threat to smaller cars and pedestrians, and consume copious amounts of fuel), and car makers produced more efficient cars the US would be able to be self-sufficient in oil.
I’m sorry, this is O.T. but I just have to blow off some steam. I must say that it made me pretty sick to see McCain win in SC and FL. I live in SC and did not vote for McCain in the primary. I can’t believe he took this state when we rejected him once before. While I’m at it, we don’t want his cohort Lindsey Graham either. They would both sell us down the road for their own political gain. With Fred, Rudy, et al, dropping out it leaves us with only McCain and Romney. I’d rather see Romney get the nomination. I just wish someone with some testicular fortitude when it comes to Islam, was in the running. I’m ready to do whatever it takes to take back this once great country of ours, before it is too late. Let’s do try to ban Islam…
Foehammer, I thought you would be more analytical and suspicious of such things. I worked for a company that indeed did produce hydrogen & oxygen from water through electrolysis. But that was for specialty uses. Unless there has been a change in rules of thermodynamics, it takes about three times as much energy to break down water into hydrogen and oxygen than you can recover. Sorry to burst your HHO bubble. Same old scam. Do a Google guy.
BTW, same argument goes for hydrogen powered cars. Plus, the explosion of hydrogen gone awry is awsome. It also has the atomic number of 1, which means it can escape through almost any container eventually.
I land somewhere between being an optimist and a paranoid.
Hmmmm….interesting claim. I would like to find out more about the technology involved and what exactly is being done here. The process using water to generate power to move a vehicle and then in the process producing water again ( assuming it is the SAME amount of water) is a circumvention of Hess’s law…which would have to be running with 100% efficiency for the electrolysis process to be self sustaining let alone extracting energy to move the vehicle from the cycle.
I can understand that, through electrolysis, he is producing Hydrogen on hand to use in his torch. But I do not see the difference between producing it on hand and ordering a tank of hydrogen. I have used hydrogen in a torch for heating before myself…along with other gasses for the same purpose.
I can agree that producing hydrogen on the spot to use in a torch and producing only the amount that is needed at the moment would be safer…no Hydrogen storage on the site.
I need to have the difference between HHO and H2O explained to me in terms of chemical bonding.
As for the gas and water hybrid vehicle…using hydrogen in the fuel mix with gasoline could produce a higher energy output in the burning process. An analysis of the burning of the fuel mixture would tell us this. Weather it is actually produces and economic advantage over the current method of combustion is also a question.
I would be interested to see a detailed explanation of the chemistry involved in the process including the enthalpy of reaction for all the reactions involved in the process.
Hi - I just ran across this post and thought I’d share with you my experiences with this. I didn’t believe this could really work, but four years ago my son was able to start his car using Brown’s Gas (a.k.a. HHO) - he was trying to use 100% Brown’s gas so his car didn’t run for long, but it was enough to convince me the possibilities. I didn’t think I was smart enough to pursue it and he moved away so we didn’t do anything about what we knew - and life went on. In the last few months, I have seen, in person, no less than a dozen cars fitted with hydrogen-on-demand systems. I had a hydrogen on demand system installed on my SUV this afternoon and my mileage went from 13 MPG to 26 MPG - I am dead serious about this! I will post pictures tomorrow on my website. This technology works - whether it makes sense or not, whether you want to believe it or not - HHO with gas makes an amazing difference - I noticed that my SUV has much better response and power - I didn’t believe I’d even notice anything like that - until I nearly rear ended the car in front of me at an intersection because I’m so used to my SUV having hesitation. SERIOUS GUYS - go learn this - try this - look at it for real - before you make any judgements. Base your decisions on facts folks! Its the only way you can be totally positive!
Thx for your information.Visit my blog friend Video Technology Good bye friend.i will come again