Electrolsis of H2O and processes to disassociate it molecularly

Do you have some purpose in mind or is this just an interesting experiment?

Dear Gary, Yes there are several methods that produce an effective yield.

Try 9 to 12VDC at .5 to 3 A. Most important: 17K to 23K Hertz.

The variations are because of variations in local water dilutions of minerals and electrode composition.

Regards Dragon

Water takes a certain amount of energy to dissociate a molecule of water into 2H2 and O2. Magnetic fields are usually looked on askance in such applications and varying frequencies of the applied d.c. current would likely be of little if any benefit.

Stirling Stan, You wrote "varying frequencies of the applied d.c. current would likely be of little if any benefit." Actually they are of great benefit. I am currently in the process of modifying a 4.3 liter engine to run on H₂ split in just this method. The modification is necessary because I nearly burnt the rear tires off of the vehicle unmodified!!

By my calculations the BHP went from 198 on petrol to 321 BHP on H₂.

Cordially Dragon

i want to know how you did that dragonsfarm i am working as hard as i can on this stuff. i don't believe faraday and the rule about energy production from association and disassociation.

Hi Dragonsfarm

Please note that the "neutral" electrode, if placed between anode and cathode is not truly neutral. There will be anodic reactions on the side facing the anode and cathodic facing the negative electrode. With neutral you probably mean with out electric charge. It also depends on how far the electrodes are spaced because there is a distance were the gases form that quickly, that they prevent water from touching the electrodes and make the apparatus less efficient. Try wave less DC.

Hope you succeed with what you are trying. KY.

Hi Dragon

Jack's post was not only lower than a snakes bottom but was totally unqualified. I am surprised that you even reacted to it. He is one of a kind of people, that when new developments in hydrogen fuel becomes successful and excepted he will say that he discussed these matters on CR4 years ago and always knew some thing would come out of it. Wave less is brainless for some. So be it! Please keep posting.

To be honest, I have stopped throwing any new thoughts into the discussion because the feeling to be laughed at is not a good one. I am preparing a new thread that can explain a few things and bring up a few more questions and hopefully answers. I will avoid the term "Free energy" at all cost so not to wake the Hyenas. They are a weird mob and live on dead meat. The do not fight a living thing and wait for others to do the deed. Lets keep hunting for the real thing. Ky.

What do you expect?

many claims on different threads, nary a wiff of proof?

I'll keep following to see something real!

Post detailed methods & results! All the doubters will fade.

Stomp off in anger if you wish.

right on dragonsfarm i just made a lawton style gated pulse generator and it is amazing. i have been struggling with a voltage increasing circuit. i don't know coil basics have you used a vic?

thanks a ton will do could you tell me what an isolated ground is? i know i can't ground to the mains.... i am making another pwm with an ampmeter in it right now would appreciate any more help :) thanks again

Flobro, My original ground was a 12 gauge wire run to a ground rod 10 feet away. I later found that I was using far more current than was necessary. Frequency is the key.

Dragon

Dragon, I am working on a drawing which is a multi tiered chamber that addresses a possible idea and or solution regarding my introductory question and I would appreciate any input you might have. I will be in touch.Thank you. Gary Karm out...

The modification is necessary because I nearly burnt the rear tires off of the vehicle unmodified!!

By my calculations the BHP went from 198 on petrol to 321 BHP on H₂.

What source of energy did you use to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen?

So the energy required to electrolyze the water ultimately comes from the gasoline powering the vehicle, correct? (or does the vehicle allegedly run off of just water?)

Svengali, In the unit we have constructed, when you turn on the power switch, you wait approximately 5 seconds and the water hydrogen cell will produce enough fuel to start and run the engine. From that point on the cell produces more than sufficient hydrogen and oxygen to run the engine.

So, no gasoline is used. Thanks Dragon

Pull the other one. It's got bells on.

Sounds great Dragonsfarm.

Just what every mothers son of us needs, and given the price of petrol, requires.

You must realize how those of us who remember when gasoline was 15 cents a gallon desire such.

Nonetheless, I don't believe you. It could be that I have been brain-washed by Faraday and such like people, but I don't believe you because what you are saying is that you can put in piss-ant energy and get a huge return, far more than the laws of conservation of energy and matter permit.

But then again maybe they are only man made laws and not truly the stuff of nature. Nonetheless, I still don't believe you.

I'm in Atlanta. Where are you at? Are you close enough for me to come look. Or could you supply photos and drawings so we can see if we can duplicate your work?

j.

sir dragon. i'm a bonified heritic! and i say keep on 'keepin' on

the anon.heritic [nont affolliated with "anything!"

So let me see if I understand what you are saying:

The energy for electrolysis is supplied by the alternator. The engine runs on the generated h2 (and perhaps the generated O2, as well). The engine drives the alternator.

Does the battery loose its charge as the engine runs, or are you saying that you've created a perpetual motion machine?

BTW, as you become more familiar with driving, you will find that the rear tire burning problem will disappear. I've driven cars with well over 400 hp with not even a momentary squeak from the tires. It's just a matter of learning to control your feet.

I did 5 attempts of Na-OH electrolysis using different electrodes at the positive battery terminal, and stainless steel at the negative side.

It results in:

1 – Significant corrosion rates at the positive side, first a sheet of stainless steel eroded, second a polished round bar of ½ inch getting eroded in only 30 minutes, third: a spoon of silver going black in 2 minutes, Copper wire also very damaged in 10 minutes and at last a gold wire disappeared, at that point I am able do disregard chemistry books saying that gold is inert! Simply there are no materials!

2 – Less then 4 ml/s produced of both 02 and H2 combined… We need a lot more for an engine, "just" 20 times.

3 – No change in shaft work

4 – Battery positive terminal getting corroded ( Cu green salts )

5 – Electrical consumption of 14-ampere.hours! ( enough to dry a battery in 5 hours )

So it is all false, until a permanent device could be built. fcedrola@yahoo.es

"I did 5 attempts of Na-OH electrolysis using different electrodes at the positive battery terminal, and stainless steel at the negative side."

Na-OH? Try distilled water with one or two grains of salt per quart.

... a gold wire disappeared, at that point I am able do disregard chemistry books saying that gold is inert!

True. Many undergraduate chemistry books oversimplify when mentioning the inertness of gold. One could get the impression that gold never reacts with anything. Gold is the certainly the least reactive (most "noble") metal (maybe tied with platinum for that distinction), but it forms several compounds including halides and oxides. These are not very stable compounds -- they must be protected from heat and light (but they are stable enough to bottle and sell). Likewise, even noble gases can react to form compounds, e.g., the reaction of xenon with fluorine to give XeF₆, and with oxygen to give XeO₃.

I too have seen gold electrodes disappear during electrochemical experiments.

"TVP45: LOL " This entire thread can best be described by one word!

My word, "how ABSURD"

OK, Gary Karm. PROVE IT! The forum is all ears....

Crabtree,

Are you referring to the chlorine unit for the pool? As for the product that I described in my introduction into the forum that is what brought out this incredible group of people who all have dabbled or are showing some interest in what I described as a puzzle. When I initially entered this forum I was unable to find a group or results in my initial search for Electrolsis of H2O. At that point I asked a question and that has led to quite a list of responses which I hope is a good thing as I am not a frequent user of this forum or any forums. My work has been a singular project until a few days ago and this too is a good thing as I will be prototyping my latest idea and sharing the results here for some constructive criticism. Thank you for your interest. Gary Karm out...

Electrolytic chlorination is used to produce chlorine from seawater on ships and oil platforms so as to keep drinking water bacteria-free. It is established technology.

http://www.wallace-tiernan.com/mainsite/frame-process.html

As a chemist with some electro-chemistry experience, I agree that pulsing the DC current should not help electrolysis (according to both practice and well-accepted theory). But applying electromagnetic waves might help if the frequencies match water's O-H bond vibration frequencies. Actually, there was quite a bit of publicity about this approach recently. Remember all the excitement (especially among the "free energy" crowd) about energy from "burning salt water"? Yes, intense radio waves can facilitate electrolysis -- even to the point of eliminating the need for any applied electrical current! Unfortunately, the energy consumed by the radio-wave generator exceeded the energy content of the hydrogen gas produced by this process. The best that we can reasonably hope for is that careful application of electromagnetic waves at very specific frequencies *might* improve the energy efficiency of electrolysis. This would not achieve over-unity energy efficiency (assuming the 2nd law of thermodynamics holds true), but any improvement of efficiency would still justify some basic research.

Sort-of-like doing electrolysis within a modern microwave oven, then? So, how are the microwaves prevented from melting the conductors, then? I think we should be told...

So, how are the microwaves prevented from melting the conductors, then?

Not a problem since the device (used for "burning saltwater") has no electrodes -- electromagnetic waves supply all of the energy for the electrolysis. This process works, but results in a net loss of energy since the EM wave generator consumes more energy than the energy content of the hydrogen gas (H₂) product. Of course conversion of energy from one form to another always occurs at less than 100% efficiency (as predicted by thermodynamics), so the question becomes whether or not this approach achieves higher energy efficiencies than previous approaches.

But in any case I seriously doubt that anyone will find a way to violate thermodynamics, so I think that over-unity claims result from mistakes and/or misrepresentation. But if anyone proves me wrong, I will gladly congratulate them.

SS:

I interpreted the issue as having a portable source of fuel for a personal transit vehicle to be used on existing streets.

The H2 concept possibly could function of the electrical energy source was renewable, as needed, from an outside electrical source (over night?) permitting the vehicle to travel until the stored energy was exhausted..........Dr. Brown had a Chevet..pancake motor.... he claimed to run on his system.....but limited range...ie: had to have supply of stored energy that last 'till X.... same as all electrics are now.

The "stored" energy in the H2...tank...was usable on demand...subject to above...

I never saw it run but he so claimed....

As in many things...I have followed that which popped up for many years...I feel it still could be done when we understand the ramifications of, as yet, un measurable energies influencing the results which are beyond our present knowledge or ability to measure them.

MR. GUY

pure water molecules

Electrolysis will not work with pure water. You need conductivity. The less conductivity, the more power is required to separate O H2. The more conductivity the more electrochemical byproducts. Magnetism? Not sure Mate. Ky.

Hi Gary

You say: you really have not researched the various processes involved in my original list.

You are right, not all of the list. (My understanding of a list differs a bit from yours, the best lists I have ever seen were created by sparkstation). This jig saw puzzle of yours has a few missing pieces and you should avoid squeezing some parts in were they do not belong. They could fit for a while but in the end will take up the space of the intended bit. Does that sound confused enough? All will fall into place.

I have researched and developed a functional prototype from scratch using the principle of electrolysis and it took 10 years of my life. I do not regret one second of this steep learning curve. Back then I could not rely on the internet for help but only on books and friends in the know of electronics who helped me greatly. In the end it was not mass produced for reasons to complex to mention here.

To avoid the same happening with your idea I suggest you change your attitude just a fraction to avoid the disappearance of good will which is so much the signature of the people at CR4. Please do not under estimate the potential of any one with good will and let us reflect off each other. Between the lines I can detect that you know all the answers and just need confirmation that what you are doing conforms with what we can't dispute. Brushing off Sterling Stan, like you did, is like throwing a piece of jig saw puzzle out of the window because it didn't fit. You should follow up on other comments he has made in the past on the same or very similar subjects.

Even with out your suggestion I would have read on because learning is like breathing to me. Hope all goes well. Ky.

what would be a good catalyst to add to the water that would not form a dangerous or corrosive by-product. If you add salt to the water you product sodium hypochlorite or chlorine bleach.

My chemistry is not that good. What compounds are produced when using sodium - or potassium hydroxide to increase conduction in the water?

Hi rustyh2o,

sodium or potassium hydroxide will not produce any byproducts that is their charm.

If the sodium or potassium is converted to metallic status by the current it will immediately react with water to form new hydroxide.

Commercial electrolysis is using parallel plate reactors with many cells in one pressurised vessel. The plates (graphit) separated by nonconducting material (alumina-fibers) and channel-structures that can give way to the generated gas.

RHABE

When using sodium chloride to increase current flow the sodium chloride becomes sodium hydroxide, chlorine and hydrogen. the hydrogen escapes as gas, the sodium hydroxide and chlorine reunite to form sodium hypochlorite. I do not know how much if any oxygen escapes as gas.

this batch has enough sodium hypochlorite to clean up drinking for 100,000 people for one day

You're not trying to develop another "water for gas" system, are you?

The energy for the electrolyser no doubt comes from the car's alternator?

Alternative Energy Boom?

For what it's worth!

A short quote from a prominent internet investors site, "The Motley Fool"

"this legendary Internet investor believes the alternative energy boom
will be 10 to 100 times bigger than the Internet revolution!"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis

"Please contact me if you can elaborate on this topic and or process."

You will find quite a bit of information new to you and many posters to CR4 and this thread at:

The Water Fuel Cell -- Facts and Fictions

Numerous patents listed.

deionized water does have some strange properties. I have heard of it "eating up" peoples shoes over time when spilled on the floor and giving you the stomach ache when drinking it. It is also a very poor conductor of electricity.

To all, My apologies for taking so long to reply. I was doing research on another project.

The claim that using the electrical system already installed on a modern automobile violates one of the laws of thermodynamic exchange is not quite right. It does push the exchange limit. However nature pushes it a lot closer several billion time a day.

Sunlight is all that is needed as a power source. The raw materials are CO2 and water. Oh, yes that little catalytic crowbar known as Chlorophyll.

It takes no part in the actual chemical formula, and it approaches nearly %100 efficiency. Plus its byproducts seem to add up to more than the sum of it's parts.

You see, nature has very little respect for man's "laws". Perhaps to nature, they are more like guidelines.

According to the known "laws" of aerodynamics bumblebees can't fly. What that says to me is perhaps the "laws" need to be revised.

Regards Dragon

Dragonsfarm,

That's an old urban legend about bumblebees not being able to fly. I've seen the aerodynamics equations/explanation applied to them.

The claim that using the electrical system already installed on a modern automobile violates one of the laws of thermodynamic exchange is not quite right.

No one in this thread claimed such a thing. However, splitting water into H2 and O2 using a generator for the energy source, and then burning the hydrogen to run a heat engine to turn that generator... to split the water, etc. clearly violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics. You cannot get enough energy out of the burning hydrogen to run the engine to drive the generator to split the hydrogen. (In fact, with today's engines you can't even come remotely close.) One can make up a new belief system in which these laws do not apply, but such a belief system is not science.

The basic chemistry is such that even if you had an electrolysis system which was 99% energy efficient, and you had and engine that was 99% efficient, and a generator that was 99% efficient, you still would not be able to run the process continuously, let alone drive anything other than the generator (such as making a car move). In fact, 75% in electrolysis would be very good, 25-30% in the engine would be very good, and 90% in the generator would be excellent (a typical car alternator is only 65% efficient).

Sunlight is all that is needed as a power source. The raw materials are CO2 and water. Oh, yes that little catalytic crowbar known as Chlorophyll.

It takes no part in the actual chemical formula, and it approaches nearly %100 efficiency. Plus its byproducts seem to add up to more than the sum of it's parts.

There is nothing in the photosynthesis process or the Krebs cycle that violates thermodynamic laws. It is fairly complex but straightforward chemistry.

According to the known "laws" of aerodynamics bumblebees can't fly. What that says to me is perhaps the "laws" need to be revised.

That's simply untrue. An urban legend. Some nitwit in the 1930's claimed that a bumblebee could not fly based upon wing area/weight ratios for a fixed wing aircraft. Obviously, bumblebees are not fixed wing.

Hi Ken and all

Any one who has ever done experiments with electrolysis will have noticed the pungent smell of ozone. You know it's ozone when it smells like a photo copier, back then. We know that ozone is a very short lived molecule. It combines and oxidizes readily with anything in it's path. The cell that I had developed back then had a specially designed space (which was the bases for the patent) which encouraged the production of 03 not only increasing the disinfection rate but also raising the combustibility of the, what I described as "MILK".

From the outset of this discussion there was only talk of molecules, where as at the interface of the anode there is atomic Oxygen created as well as other very short lived by-products created at the cathode inter face. These have so far not been mentioned. I will not go there at the moment but mention the following.

I would be happy to be advised that 03 has less exothermic potential than 02. I have not mentioned any details of this cell and am not willing to give too much away. Maybe later. Because the traumatic experience back then I had stopped all further refining (you can always refine). Some people call it R&D and they are the ones wanting money and more of it.

Gary, I hope your still with me. Getting into utilising the by-products of the water purifying system I had developed was stooped and since funds ran out I decided to get over it. Just stop chasing windmills Ky, was the order.

Ozone can not be created in an aqueous system was the standard reply by the people in the know (1994). Only in dry air and with high currents can 03 be created. Well I could prove them wrong and still have the documentation (Uni Quest, University of Brisbane). They are a very stiff bunch.

I have, back then, withdrawn all patent applications to avoid publication but I am still on the case, whatever anyone tells me. Only in my head that is. I have stopped pestering the neighborhood with loud explosions. (Nice indicator for combustibility differences)

I will not go any further for the time being but to say that H2 in combination with 03 is not the same as H2 and 02. This in combination with other wanted by-products can tip the equation, a bit. Splitting water is not even an issue any more. Ky.

file:///Users/garykarm/Desktop/d9-2.pdf

Look this over if it is possable Gary Karm out...

" Gary Karm:

file:///Users/garykarm/Desktop/d9-2.pdf

Look this over if it is possable Gary Karm out... "

Both links result in "Page not found, 404 error"

A non responsive link is as bad as no link at all. Try again and test before finalizing.

The over unity guys are back, the original poster has a reasonable question. on this new thread http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/19608

hello guys new here very interesting this disscussion i to have been in to electrolysis and cold plasma and some others for a while it has become an obssesion of mine now what types of cells are you guy running tube or plates or other i have been doing this for a while and getting some good results but nothing like dragonfarm is getting how are you doing it i looks like your using a dr stiffler 3 electrode recycle charge system would i be correct what is you gas output from this do you use an additive like koh thank you james

Hello, This is Gary Karm responding. Yes KOH is the catalyst I have been experimenting with and 316L-SS plates. In several other forums entire systems which the groups go into great detail on how to fabricate and install small hydroxy assist units (SMACK BOOSTER) which improve your overall gas mileage and lower your cars thermal output and in-turn reduces internal carbon build up and existing exhaust pollutants substantially. The following is an important insight from an important scientist who has studied greatly on the subject of Hydrogen and its benefits to internal combustion engines:

Hydrogen Enhanced Combustion

History, applications and Hydrogen supply by plasma reforming Georgios Pechlivanoglou University of Oldenburg PPRE 2005-2007 Abstract Since the early years of internal combustion engine development, many researchers have been trying to optimize the combustion process in the engines' chambers. The utilization of hydrogen as a combustion enhancer have also been investigated during the years of the machine- dominated era, but the results were dubious. Therefore Hydrogen Enhanced Combustion (HEC) is not yet being commercially used. The aim of the following document is to present the milestones of the results on the HEC research, as well as the potential applications and the present state of the art on this field. Finally the possibility of on board hydrogen production with plasma reformer is also briefly presented and investigated.Historical Reference
Chemical Hydrogen Additives After the mobilization of the army in the 1st World War, the production of internal combustion engines rapidly increased. The engines became vital for many applications and the utilization of motorized vehicles became everyday reality. Therefore it was not a surprise that at the end of the first decade of 1900 a significant shortage in petroleum production was noted. Although many countries suffered from this shortage, the ones that had no oil reserves but highly developed industry came to a point where they could not meet the oil demands by any
means. In Germany, a solution to the problem was the development of synthetic
liquid fuels using the enormous amounts of coal available. The results of the German reports and the lessons learned from the experience of synthetic fuels were translated in English from the researchers of NACA (National Committee of
Aviation) and presented in the form of NACA Report No.133 in 1923. The following paragraphs present and analyze the most important information of this report.
NACA Report No.133
The German synthetic fuel was a mix of benzol and alcohol in an 1:1 ratio and it was
initially distributed at the military authorities. The term "fuel substitute" was replaced with the terms "improved" or "enhanced" fuel, for the purpose of better promotion of the fuel. This "enhanced" fuel was also accompanied with some "secret" fuel additives in the form of powder, which were supposed to enhance the engines performance. The addition of those substances was done just before engine start and it was taking place in the fuel tank of each vehicle. Those enhanced fuels were extensively used from military airplane pilots as well as racecar drivers during the late '10s and the results were surprisingly disappointing. Without exception, all the drivers or
pilots were complaining about the performance of their engines when they used the "improved" fuels. In addition to the power deterioration, significant corrosion effects were noted at the moving parts of the engines that consumed "improved" fuels.
The obscure effect of the power deterioration and the complaints of the pilots and the drivers led to some more thorough investigation of the chemical structure of the enhancing substances and the results showed that the prevailing ingredient was potassium permanganate which was also combined with some other acidic substances of insignificant quantity. However, the existence of potassium permanganate in the fuel additives revealed the reason of the sever corrosion of the metal moving parts and this corrosive behavior of the "enriched fuel" was one of the reasons for its
rejection from the German government. However, the revelation of the corrosive effects of those fuel additives and the immediate rejection of those fuels "prevented" the investigation of the power deterioration of the engines and the correlation of this power loss with the chemical or thermodynamical behavior of the enhancing substances. Mechanical Hydrogenation Right after the failure of the chemical enhancement of synthetic fuel, researchers tried the solution of mechanical hydrogenation of the benzol-alcohol mixture in order to improve the combustion properties of the synthetic fuel. The level of sophistication in the enrichment of the
liquid fuels with hydrogen was really impressive despite the lack of high-tech equipment. The final result was a homogenous liquid fuel, which contained significant quantities of hydrogen, having a chemical composition similar to gasoline coming from distilled oil. It is also important to note that this chemical bond of hydrogen gas and benzol-alcohol liquid fuel was so strong that in room emperature there was no sign of free hydrogen gas. The thermodynamic tests, like the chemical ones, showed that the behavior of the hydrogenised benzol-alcohol fuel was close to the behavior of the normal fossil gasoline. The practical application of that fuel however revealed some other interesting results. The experiments,
conducted at the Motor Vehicle Testing Lab of the Berlin Technical Highschool showed that the calorific value itself couldn't fully describe the behavior of a fuel when this fuel is about to be burnt in a cylinder of an Internal Combustion Engine. Actually, the results of the experiments showed that the engine output of an internal
combustion engine decreases proportionally to the amount of hydrogen, which was introduced to the fuel at the enrichment procedure. In addition to the reduction of the engine's output, there was also a notable increase at the fuel consumption of the engine and really obvious signs of combustion irregularities, which are realized as long and intensive flames at the exhaust system. - The highest possible compression ratio (depending on the fuel) in order to achieve high
thermodynamic efficiencies. - Small piston – cylinder gap and carefully calculated designed and manufactured sealing piston rings for minimized pressure losses.
- High velocity of the entering air-fuel mixture in order to achieve complete vaporization of the fuel and high swirl for homogenized fuel mixture (not valid for the Fuel Stratified Injection [FSI] technology. - Carefully designed and manufactured metal parts (valves, spark plugs, cylinders, pistons) in order to avoid the "hot spots", which are responsible for the fuel pre-ignition and the reduction
of the power output of the engines. All those parameters and mostly the last one are responsible for the severe pre-ignition of those engines of the dawn of the 20th century and even more for the pre-ignition of the engines that consumed hydrogen enriched synthetic fuels. (for further information about the engine design and combustion characteristics please refer to Appendix I) The modern approach to HEC
Recent Development During the years of oil prosperity, almost nobody was interested in researching the HEC phenomena and to prove the initial experimental results, held by the Technical High-school of Berlin in the 1910s. However, after the oil-crisis of the 70s, some researchers decided to focus again on this forgotten issue and investigate it thoroughly. The paragraphs bellow, present a small synopsis of the key-points on the Hydrogen Enhanced Combustion investigation and
experimentation, during the last 30 years. - 1974. John Houseman and D.J/Cerini of the NASA Jet Propulsion Lab, produced a report for the Society of Automotive Engineers entitled "On-Board Hydrogen Generator for a Partial Hydrogen Injection Internal Combustion Engine". - 1974. F.W. Hoehn and M.W. Dowy of the NASA Jet Propulsion Lab, prepared a report for the 9th Inter society Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, entitled "Feasibility Demonstration of a Road Vehicle Fueled with Hydrogen Enriched Gasoline." - 1980. Prof. George Vosper (ex-professor of Dynamics and Canadian inventor), designed and patented a device to transform internal combustion engines to run on hydrogen. There is much more on this subject check out some of the other forums. Gary Karm out...

Jack Jersawitz,

The idea of this historic point of Hydrogen being used to mix with other fuels/ chemicals and in this case potential fuels was the original idea of combining hydrogen in even small quantities to the majority of fuels used today (this common fuel being gasoline) has proven to be beneficial in making the combustion process in an internal combustion engine ICE less wasteful. By adding Hydrogen in small quantities the fuel burns completely. Thus burning the fuel in an ICE completely reduces the majority, if not all of the poisonous emissions normally released as unburned exhaust in the standard ICE, that are in fact ruining the air we have breathed yesterday, today and will breath tomorrow along with a catastrophic list of long term industrial manufacturing and production combustion waste from coal burning generators which have and will continue to lead in producing the highest levels of these various pollutants and also will continue to be so if small steps like implementing devices that can and do eliminate or significantly reduce these levels. Moreover, by implementing devices to completely burn the fuel to produce energy may even begin to reverse the pollutants produced by these forms of energy conversions. If small amounts of hydrogen are introduced into large and small ICE units that are used daily this will be a big step in reversing the pollution problems of the world. This is straight forward information. Gary Karm out...

Dear Gary,

(I just found this topic and have not read all the contributions. Sorry if I double up!)

There are dozens of companies who offer electrolysers for ICE's, all claiming fuel savings of 10 to 50% (typically 15%) and impressive reductions of emissions. New companies turn up every few months.

But none so far have ever provided independent testreports, at least none that were done properly.

The only well documented tests of hydrogen enhanced combustion (HEC) I ever saw were done at MIT and indeed had the above mentioned great results. But they added 5% (weight ) hydrogen, which is 20% energetically. The hydrogen was produced on-board from fuel, not from water, by a so called plasmotron.

If you would produce that amount of hydrogen from water, by using the alternator of the engine, powering an electrolyser, that would take app. 50% of the engine power. Clean emissions would become very expensive and fuel consuming that way!

If you have found solid and favourable testreports of HEC fuelled by electrolysis, please give me the URL's. I would be very grateful!

Theo

Some reference sources of information on atomic hydrogen.

Electrolysis generates hydrogen.

Electrolyzer The device where Electrolysis takes place.

Dr William A Rhodes Common Duct Electrolytic Hydrogen

Dr William A Rhodes Brown's/Rhodes Gas -- (Oxy-Hydrogen) Multi-industry Miracles From Water.

"It's a Gas" Hydrogen Library More than anyone would want to know about hydrogen.

Yull Brown & Brown's Gas From Yull Brown himself.

Some may be too old or new information to you as well as the pros and cons. There seems to be strong indications that atomic hydrogen quickly returns to its normal diatomic state.

By the way, John Kanzius, the guy who was trying to kill cancer and accidentally set salt water on fire with RF, is going to be on 60 Minutes. That should get lots of threads going again.

But is the juice worth the squeeze?

Hi Gary,

getting energy from water looks like a wonderful and promising project.

One question crosses my mind: perhaps it is not possible to get more energy from dissociated water than we put into the molecule to dissociate it.

That is a bit different from nuclear material because the way to collect that nuclear material from the earth is very different from the way we use it in a nuclear power station.

If we find a way to dissociate water molecules that is not very demanding on energy to break them perhaps we could get an economical yielding.

Hope my thought is not too much silly...

rainbow

Gary, Rainbow:

"If we find a way to dissociate water molecules that is not very demanding on energy to break them perhaps we could get an economical yielding."

IF and WHEN you dissociate water and later recombine it to realize more energy output than the input to dissociate it you will have disproved the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

Just when you think you have done so carefully measure both inputs and outputs again and again to be sure.

When you are absolutely sure publish the full details of your apparatus, methods and data for others to reproduce the same results and BECOME WORLD FAMOUS.