Previous in Forum: Mystery Photo: Large (6' X 20') Metal Cylinder With Holes   Next in Forum: Why are Website Password Rules so Complicated?
Close
Close
Close
49 comments
Rate Comments: Nested
Anonymous Poster

Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 1:38 PM

I came across several sites that mention a new technology to run

an internal combustion engine with Water, after an electrolysis step. (on demand)

The owner of the technology claims that he is using a Hybrid car that mixes

the HHO mixture with gasoline improving the BTUs but he claims that it is possible

to run exclusively on the HHO mixture. My question is :

The energy to perform electrolysis is less or more than the energy produced by burning the mixture?

It sounds to me that this would be like trying to make a perpetual motion machine. However, I would like to get an experts opinion.

I am copying here one of the articles:

Though the developer of a technology that uses water to produce a flammable gas says it provides a solution to high gas prices plaguing the nation, detractors claim the businessman's idea is a scam.

Denny Klein is president of Hydrogen Technologies Applications in Clearwater, Fla. His patented machine uses an electrical charge to separate the atoms of H2O into HHO, a gas he calls "Aquygen."

"You get a huge energy response," Klein told the Tampa Tribune. "But this gas is very, very safe."

He first used the fuel to power a welding tool, but soon tried it out in a hybrid automobile.

The flame, though on its own registers just 259 degrees Fahrenheit, heats up to the melting point of whatever substance it touches, explained Steve Lusko, project manager for Hydrogen Technologies Applications.

"For example, when you ignite our flame and touch it to steel, it will cut right through it at 1,400 degrees," Lusko told WND.

"It will melt a hole right through a brick at 4,500 degrees. ? It reacts to whatever it touches."

So, Lusko says, the gas has the ability to bond to whatever fuel it is mixed with, like gasoline in a hybrid car.

"Upon combustion, you get a dramatic increase in energy BTUs," he said, "and you get an equally dramatic decrease in emission pollution, because the burn is so highly efficient, what would have come out of the tailpipe as an emission ends up getting burned up and used."

An "electrolyzer" in Klein's 1994 Ford Escort uses electricity from the alternator to initiate the electrolysis process to make the HHO gas out of water, explained Lusko. That gas is then pumped to the manifold and into the gas tank.

"The gas then bonds with the gasoline in the gas tank," Lusko said, "and then upon combustion, that's when you get the reaction, giving you higher gas mileage and cleaner emissions."

Why not run a car with exclusively HHO gas?

"We have combustion engines here that have run completely on our Aquygen," Lusko said, "but it would be a matter of engineering."

Lusko says in tests the mileage of the hybrid vehicle has improved anywhere from 25 to 53 percent.

Hydrogen Technologies Applications has a patent on its generator and has one pending on Aquygen.

Lusko says the company has already talked to some auto companies about using the technology in new vehicles.

Not everyone in the tech world is cheering for Klein and his process.

Writing on peswiki.com, Ken Rasmussen stated: "[Klein] may have an efficient way to break down water for pure hydrogen and oxygen to run an engine. Several of us are on the verge of perfecting the process, but none of us want to make fools of ourselves with TV claims until ALL the bugs are exterminated."

Rasmussen was referring to a TV news story that ran about Klein on Fox affiliate KRIV-TV in Houston, Texas.

"Gases are dangerous and hard to store and hard to compress ? they do not do an efficient job of temporarily storing energy," wrote Eric Kreig on the same site. "The gas produced by separating water is dangerous and has been called many things. ? It has been available for years from many sources. These machines are heavy and suck in a lot more power than you ever get out of them by burning the gas back into water."

Wrote a message board participant at peakoil.com: "Overall, [the technology is] rather pointless, as it wastes lots of energy. Just a simple charge-and-go electric car sounds like a much better idea."

Yet another opined: "Some scamsters have claimed that their miracle electrolyzer produces a magical mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, that is somehow different from other mixtures of hydrogen and oxygen in that it is not explosive and contains three to 10 times as much energy as hydrogen. Historically, scammers have given their magical mixtures all sorts of names. HHO or Klein gas appears to be nothing more than the latest name given to this nonsense."

Lusko was adamant the technology is real and the company has nothing to hide.

"We are what we are," he said. "The technology is what it appears to be. Do you think we would expose ourselves on Fox News if it were a scam?"

Added Lusko: "The only fools that would [call the technology a scam] are people who haven't seen it. It's not possible to make that statement if they have any idea what they're talking about. ? I witness the technology every single day of my life."

Lusko says he became an investor in the company a year and a half ago and told Klein at that time he "must be a part of this." That's when Lusko began working for the firm.

"This technology is going to end up being in the mainstream eventually," he predicted, "and then the critics are going to look absolutely foolish."

Klein says he plans to take Hydrogen Technology, which now has private investors, public this year.

Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Guru

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Reno, NV (USA)
Posts: 608
Good Answers: 66
#1

Re: For a chemical engineer: What do you think about running a car on Water sites?

03/04/2008 2:12 PM

Trust your nose - if you think it stinks, it's probably rotten.

The energy required to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen is exactly the energy you get back by burning - ignoring any losses. In practice you will never get 100% efficient conversion.

As to the claim that the gas will burn at the melting temperature of whatever material it touches - if that is so (and I would love to see the thermodynamics behind that!), how does he propose to contain it within an engine (unobtainium, perhaps)?

Those are only the most glaring problems - there are many more (mixing water with fuel, for example) that beg to be challenged. This guy is trying to use the fear of an energy shortage to dupe investors.

__________________
Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem.
Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Interested in everything- see my Profile please APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Civil Engineering - Member Hobbies - Musician - Autoharp and Harmonica Hobbies - Hunting - Member Hobbies - Fishing - Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christchurch, (The Garden City), South Island, New Zealand
Posts: 4395
Good Answers: 230
#2
In reply to #1

Re: For a chemical engineer: What do you think about running a car on Water site

03/04/2008 6:49 PM

Hello CSM Engineer

Yes, that engine and all it's parts need to be made from that expensive element: Unobtanium.

The Topic headline: Too Good to Be True, tells it all.

Kind Regards....

__________________
"The number of inventions increases faster than the need for them at the time" - SparkY
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Milky Way galaxy, Sol solar system, Earth (not Giaha), USA, WA, N.E.
Posts: 691
Good Answers: 13
#3

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 6:58 PM

As an auto mechanic for over 30 years I have investigated many of these schemes. Some have shown some promise but due to the costs involved did not amortize out. The only one that worked in a cost efective maner is a modified water injector I built after looking at another design. I still use this on my vehicles. I first used it on a 1973 Ford station wagon that was getting 10 miles to the gallon. The mileage increased first to 13 and finally 15. It is a very simple device consisting of a 1 gallon plastic jug, a length of vacuum line, a vacuum line "T" connector and a vacuum restrictor. The vacuum line is tee'd into the line running the vacuum advance on the distributor. This source gets it's vacuum mostly during acceleration. The restrictor goes in the line on the water bottle side of the "T". I tried plumbing it into direct manifold vacuum with no restrictor the first time with very poor results (used the water up in a hurry and bogged the engine down). Next I installed the restrictor and it was better but still had a net negative effect. I then decided to try the ported vacuum side and installed it in the vacuum advance line. Success at last. The only problem then was when I put alcohol in the water to try to improve it more. That did give marginally improved mileage but ate up the diaphram in the vacuum advance.

__________________
They that do not learn from history and apply those lessons to the present are bound to repeat its failures.
Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1084
Good Answers: 54
#6
In reply to #3

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 11:11 PM

I've never understood how these water injection machines are supposed to work.

If you inject the water as steam into the combustion chamber it will just behave like any other gas PV=nRT. So there's no advantage there.

If you inject the water as a liquid, it will vapourise, taking lots of energy from the combustion gases, reducing the temperature rise and hence the pressure. So no advantage there

That's simplifying it a bit, but is it a reasonable approximation? What am I missing? ffeJ

__________________
If there's something you don't understand...Then a wizard did it. As heard on "The Simpsons".
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Milky Way galaxy, Sol solar system, Earth (not Giaha), USA, WA, N.E.
Posts: 691
Good Answers: 13
#10
In reply to #6

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 12:47 AM

The water injector I referred to in my post was not the machine this thread is based on. I mentioned it because it worked for me. Had I used it as I first saw it I might have also had poor results. The device I made only allowed a small amount of water into the combustion chamber. It took about a week to use a gallon of water. I would not recommend putting anything on one of todays computerized gasoline engines. They are apples to oranges to the older carburated jobs. I believe mine worked for a couple of reasons. 1)It put a more dense mixture in the combustion chamber allowing for better combustion. If you've ever seen flame spread analysis then you know that in order to have the most complete burn the spark has to be able to reach as many of the fuel molecules as possible with the optimal amount of oxygen. Todays engines are computer controlled using an oxygen sensor, three different temp sensors, knock sensor, throttle position sensor, manifold absolute pressure sensor ad nauseum. Adding water vapor to this is going to be of little or no value and probably detrimental. 2) The water vapor probably helped remove the carbon deposits from the valves and combustion chamber which would explain why the mileage became incrementally better.

I totally agree with the hypothesis about the machines that supposedly make some new gas from the water vapor. It sounds like a scam to me. That doesn't mean, however, that there aren't a number of ways to increase fuel mileage in the newer cars. Computer chips can be purchased to enhance the performance and or economy. Cams, headers and entirely new fuel systems can be had. Where I personally draw the line is with a cost benefit analysis. Will it pay?

I currently own and drive a 1999 Dodge Durango. When I bought it (used) it averaged 12 miles to the gallon. Doing some research I found the thing which would give me the most bang for my buck was a 1in throttle body spacer. I am now averaging 16 miles per gallon.

__________________
They that do not learn from history and apply those lessons to the present are bound to repeat its failures.
Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1084
Good Answers: 54
#11
In reply to #10

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 1:22 AM

Thanks, that's the most sensible answer I've received yet. ffeJ

__________________
If there's something you don't understand...Then a wizard did it. As heard on "The Simpsons".
Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 8777
Good Answers: 376
#4

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 7:18 PM

Stick with your first instinct, you have answered your own question in the title. This old chestnut just keeps coming back. You would think that we humans would learn from our mistakes and scams and just get on with life.

..... I was going to write more but, quite frankly I have said it all before. See my previous posts written by a REAL engineer that actually bothers to take the time to impartially investigate virtually every free energy device that he finds both here and on the web to see if there really is any potential (no I don't know why the hell I bother either ). None found so far. The search continues.

<re-reads the articles>......... Oh God why won't we learn from our mistakes.

Anyone want to talk about real science.

__________________
jack of all trades
Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Environmental Engineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Anywhere Emperor Palpatine assigns me
Posts: 2774
Good Answers: 101
#8
In reply to #4

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 11:50 PM

"See my previous posts written by a REAL engineer that actually bothers to take the time to impartially investigate virtually every free energy device that he finds both here and on the web to see if there really is any potential (no I don't know why the hell I bother either )."

Hey, everyone's gotta have a hobby . And your's certainly a lot more constructive than mine is. (That's enforcing Emperor Palpatine's will, if you're wondering.)

__________________
If only you knew the power of the Dark Side of the Force
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 8777
Good Answers: 376
#19
In reply to #8

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 12:49 PM

Hell, we forgive you, you did after all turn out alright in the end (and what a ride it was).

__________________
jack of all trades
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Environmental Engineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Anywhere Emperor Palpatine assigns me
Posts: 2774
Good Answers: 101
#5

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 10:28 PM

The best way to shut these "water-for-gas" scammers up would be to challenge them to perform a live demonstration of their so-called "revolutionary technology" to a panel of experts who should then be allowed to examine the car. On this forum, I once issued just such a challenge to a guy who challenged the members of CR4 to witness him demonstrating his "magnetic-drive perpetual motion device" on Youtube, to demonstrate it to just such a panel. As everyone here expected, he didn't bite. Come to think of it, we never heard from him again, either. I guess that, more than anything that anyone here can say, better proves just how truthful these "free energy" claims really are.

The amount of electrical energy required to break water down in sufficient quantities to propel a car is so high, you can run a few electric cars on it. That'll be a lot cheaper and more efficient too, since you eliminate an additional step or two.

__________________
If only you knew the power of the Dark Side of the Force
Reply
Associate

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41
Good Answers: 3
#7

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/04/2008 11:28 PM

My brother bought one of these and stuck it on f-150. Probably not from the same company. I really don't know if they work. His worked when first hooked up and seemed to improve mileage. Then it looked like it went down to about the same or maybe even worse mileage. We finally blew it up for fun. No beer was involved.

It would be great if they worked. I know someone else that is trying one. He called me all excited and said that he got 50 mpg the first day. Then it went to 25 and now he is saying he is getting the same and maybe even worse mileage. I can't wait to blow his up too. Seriously though, it might have something to do with the computer and oxygen sensors resetting the fuel mixture. I saw some of those youtube things too. Most notable on all of them was no real cars being used in real everyday life. I don't drive my lawn mower or a little briggs and straton to work. And also for it to work, you can't have 110-220 juice to run a little motor.

Like I said, I hope it works, I just haven't seen it. I have seen one blow up and that was worth the money. Have you looked at GEET?

Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 8777
Good Answers: 376
#20
In reply to #7

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 1:03 PM

The GEET is a variant of one of the other common scams. It is unique however in that it's efficiency is given as up to 300% that of standard petrol, up to 99% reduced emissions AND will run on the following fuels (althou at the time no tests were actually conducted. At all.).

  1. Battery acid mixed with water
  2. Crude oil
  3. Various solvents
  4. The soft drink, Mountain Dew (no I am not joking. Those bubbles are like hydrogen or something man, its like pure power coming off, or somethin)

Those are some wacky magnets.

Steer clear of this as you would a case of crotch rot.

__________________
jack of all trades
Reply
Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8
#9

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 12:04 AM

One quick word, HOAX!!

The laws of thermodynamics and chemical bonding are not getting changed any time soon. H2O is very chemically stable and while it takes a lot of energy to break the bond the BTU release when it burns if not as high as gasoline. One of the advantages of diesel is high BTUs per gallon, one of the big scams of alcohol is low BTUs per gallon. That is why E85 gives you horrible mileage.

You won't get enough electrical energy onboard to make this work as the requirement is very large and is greater than what you can get net from the reaction due to losses from resistance in the wiring, electrical generation, etc...

Back in the 60's the big thing was 200 MPH carburetors. They worked so well that a friend of mine installed one on his engine and probably received pretty close to this mileage as he was on a tow truck hook all the time, until the engine blew up. He finally wised up after that.

It would be easier if cold-fusion worked and you could carry a reactor on board but then why use an internal combustion engine at all? You would have more than enough energy to run an all electric car with no emissions.

So none of this makes any sense in any manner until we can find some big holes in known physics.

Reply
Participant

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4
#12

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 6:52 AM

Hello respected comrades in engineering, this is the first time I have ever joined a forum & posted so please forgive me for any etiquette faux pas.

Regarding electrolyser technology, it seems to me that running a car on water is pure fantasy. However, is there not some merit in using small amounts of hyrogen, taken in with the charge, to improve efficiency in relatively inefficient (or not highly tuned) engines by way of improved flame propagation, leading to more complete combustion?

I believe there is a commercial version available here in the UK (from a respectable company BTW).

Also, for those who have tried this technology or investigated it, are there any issues with damage to engine components?

Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 8777
Good Answers: 376
#21
In reply to #12

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 1:15 PM

Welcome to CR4.

In regard to your question, tests have been done but it was found that you needed quite a lot of Hydrogen to make a difference (as in scientifically measurable difference). Yes it is possible but only if you strap a gas cylinder with compressed Hydrogen into your car and feed it into the engine. Looking at the OVERALL system efficiency (including the power necessary to obtain and compress the Hydrogen) you find that you will always LOSE more energy than you would gain in any benefits to your vehicles power or millage increases.

No electrolysis using the alternator to produce bubbles of Hydrogen won't work, never has never will (plenty of explanation on why can be found on CR4 and the internet).

Many of the miracle MPG increasing systems don't actually harm the engine but some of the miracle fuel-additive scams can case major damage to seals and fuel systems over a period of time.

__________________
jack of all trades
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sheboygan, WI USA
Posts: 372
Good Answers: 13
#13

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 7:07 AM

As I recall some WWII propellor driven Navy fighter planes had a water injection scheme, used only briefly for power burst.

The water flashing to steam will absorb BTU's and provide instant power as the steam expands. Maybe the rate of expansion of water flashing to steam vs aviation gasoline burning was worth the loss in combustion heat.

__________________
"I believe we are masters of our lives - we hold all the cards and it is up to us to use them right." Vesna Vulova - survived 33,000ft fall
Reply
Participant

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4
#14
In reply to #13

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 7:28 AM

I know that some commercial jets use water injection to provide extra power but I believe the way it works is to cool the charge so that more fuel can be burnt, much like an intercooler.

Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#15
In reply to #13

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 11:17 AM

German warplanes did use it too for cooling when under heavy boost!!

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#16

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 11:26 AM

Dear Folks

I have read the article and I have my suspicions. Mixing fuel and water will work but the burn temprature increases to permeate whatever it touches? I have my doubts.

However, an engine that runs on water is not far fetchd as I have buildt one back in collage and have discussed it on this forum once before. I used a Chevrolet 194 ci engine and retrofitted it with injectors to use steam and its recaptured vapors. That proved to be successful but the amount of water and the start up time was not conducive for mass production. I then came up with the idea to place a mathematically equlvilent water reactor on the engine and by using a neuclear rod (which I could not get) for instant (faster than heating it by electricity) heat to boiling it would have worked.

I gave up on the project at the end of the semester.

Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 8777
Good Answers: 376
#22
In reply to #16

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 1:24 PM

Well I am glad you did, atomic cars are literally a disaster waiting to happen. You are not the first to think along those lines thou.

"The Ford Nucleon" - Atomic concept car

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003004.html

No, perfectly safe. No I am sure there will never be a core breach, I mean, how many car accidents occur really.

Good to start thinking outside the square thou.

__________________
jack of all trades
Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1084
Good Answers: 54
#29
In reply to #16

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 8:37 PM

You did all this at "collage", you must have been very busy. ffeJ

__________________
If there's something you don't understand...Then a wizard did it. As heard on "The Simpsons".
Reply
2
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Indeterminate Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In the bothy, 7 chains down the line from Dodman's Lane level crossing, in the nation formerly known as Great Britain. Kettle's on.
Posts: 32175
Good Answers: 839
#17

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 11:30 AM

Perhaps a Nigerian with $1M to get out of the country would invest in it?

__________________
"Did you get my e-mail?" - "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856
Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#24
In reply to #17

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 3:51 PM

This question came up at least once before in another thread, but I don't recall there ever being a conclusive answer - does a scam pulled on a hoaxer cancel each other out?

Inquiring minds want to know!

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply Off Topic (Score 4)
5
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#18

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 12:34 PM

The energy to perform electrolysis is less or more than the energy produced by burning the mixture?

It's more. (2)H2O -> (2)H2 + O2 is a reversible chemical reaction. To split water, you must expend energy, and recombining water returns that energy. The splitting is not 100% efficient, but even if it were, the energy output can be no more than the energy input*. Therefore, even in the best possible case, you'd be better off using the alternator energy to drive an electric motor -- itself an idiotic idea because the link from flywheel to wheels is 95% efficient, or so, whereas the alternators on cars are only 65% efficient (remarkably low for an electric machine, and something which is only starting to improve to values more typical of electric machines used in industry.)

One legitimate proposed use for hydrogen generated on board is for emission reduction in diesels (search MIT Plasmatron). Injecting this H2 upstream from a catalytic converter can be, the promoters suggest, slightly more efficient than enriching the mixture to provide the fuel for running the catalytic reaction. (This extra fuel is very slight.) Unfortunately, several scams claim the MIT project is proof that their scheme works.

You are right, that for the vast majority of schemes on the net, the proposed system is like a perpetual motion machine: the energy extracted from the alternator to run the electrolysis is far more than the energy gained by burning the H2. The idea of actually running the car on H2 (or Browns gas, etc) alone is insanity: it takes a huge electrolysis machine to supply the H2 in real time. (Most of the scams add H2 to the intake air stream, ostensibly improving performance.) Sadly, there is support for the idea of injecting small amounts of H2 (and other gases) to improve efficiency slightly in diesels. (This idea is also used to support scams.) However, the legitimate systems (which are few) do not generate the H2 on board. Trucking companies would be using such systems (using H2 generated economically off-board, rather than inefficiently on board) routinely if they had merit. Imagine the competitive advantage if you could reduce fuel consumption by even 5%, let alone the phenomenal numbers quoted by scammers.

The PICC and HAFC are among the worst (but apparently most successful) scams, with the promoters able to take out full-page ads in magazines like Newsweek. Dennis Lee is behind the PICC, and has done plenty of jail time, but is perfectly happy to "expose himself" for a buck.

The EPA tests these devices and would be happy to test Klein's as well. That would offer simple proof to "naysayers" such as me.

* Imagine if that were not the case. We'd simply run reversible reactions back and forth to solve our energy woes. Unfortunately, 95% of the population (probably more) is woefully ignorant of basic chemistry and physics. Suppose we could do such a thing (run the reaction back and forth and extract more energy than we put in energy). The worst possible use for such technology would be in an automobile engine, which is about 25% efficient. A simple combination of the electrolyser and a fuel cell (at about 50-60%) would make you an instant billionaire.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Reply Good Answer (Score 5)
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#26
In reply to #18

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 4:42 PM

Ken, super answer, I have given you a GA. I would have given more, but CR4 stops me!

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#23

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 3:40 PM

"The flame, though on its own registers just 259 degrees Fahrenheit, heats up to the melting point of whatever substance it touches, explained Steve Lusko, project manager for Hydrogen Technologies Applications.

"For example, when you ignite our flame and touch it to steel, it will cut right through it at 1,400 degrees," Lusko told WND.

"It will melt a hole right through a brick at 4,500 degrees. ? It reacts to whatever it touches.""

Intelligent flame! That's even better than perpetual motion, over-unity energy production, or free soup! Why, humankind has been trying to tame fire with only limited success for tens of thousands of years. And now, these guys have done it - completely tame!

Cool enough to simmer soup (even the free kind) at 259°F, but I'll bet it gets even hotter than the 4,500° that refractory brick takes. I'll bet if you turned that flame on a sample of unobtanium it would even melt THAT stuff! WOW! I want one of them things!!!

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#25
In reply to #23

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 4:06 PM

If the flame can be as low in temp as 259F (well below the temp of anything we ordinarily think of as "burning") then I'd bet it could go even lower. My guess is that this flame, which "knows" what temperature it should be, could be used to cure fevers. Applied to a forehead, it would know the temperature should be 98.6F, and reduce the fever temperature accordingly. I wonder if this might be used in the summer for air conditioning?

It only makes sense.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#27
In reply to #25

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 5:09 PM

Say - you may be on to something there! Medical applications, lower utility bills, WOW! The mind boggles...

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
2
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 442
Good Answers: 32
#41
In reply to #23

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

05/22/2008 11:04 AM

I've read an explanation of how some of these claims came about.

They use an optical pyrometer to measure the flame temperature. Pyrometers indicate temperature based on IR/visible radiation from objects, utilizing black-body theory.

A hydrogen flame is about as far from a theoretical black-body as you can get, so the pyrometer gives an incorrect (very low) reading.

At the other extreme, claims are made that it "reacts to whatever it touches". Claims are made that it can melt tungsten, which has the highest melting point of any element, over 3,000C. Well, not exactly. What happens is that it oxidizes the tungsten and the oxide has a much lower melting point.

Using correct measuring methods would just be crazy. Calling it Brown's gas, or HHO or whatever is much more fun than calling it a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen. Apparently, O2 and H2 produced by electrolysis has magical powers.

Tad

Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#42
In reply to #41

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

06/23/2008 11:39 AM

Awww - these daggone logical explanations take all the fun out of it, don't they?!? And here I had it figured that they were using a snake oil injection system to achieve those stunning results... Phooey!

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1753
Good Answers: 59
#28

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 6:14 PM

Thumbs up for you Ken, from me too! I think, we should contemplate the inventor of the Intelligent Flame for the Noble Peace Prize, as it is so wide ranging, as not fit into just any single discipline. That way he could share the limelight with illustrious world shaker and mover of same caliber preceding him.

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Earth. England/America -the birthplace of the C. S. A. - anywhere I imagine -home.
Posts: 773
Good Answers: 33
#30

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 10:22 PM

There is a net loss of energy which has to be made up from some other source. The only practical engine to use water to operate is the steam engine, which by using proper technology can be more efficient than an internal combustion engine to operate a vehicle. In stationary use where all of the heat energy can be used for useful purposes a steam installation can be 90% efficient.

This efficiency and its lower pollution is a good reason to re-evaluate using steam power updated by modern technology as a power source in vehicles. The most practical way would be as a steam-electric hybrid. It would operate as a plug-in electric vehicle for the first 50 miles and the steam engine would then start to run a generator to keep the batteries charged.

e-mail - beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk - for more info

__________________
No technology is so obsolete that it won't work. A stone knife still can kill you as dead as a laser.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#31
In reply to #30

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 10:33 PM

I thought steam's low power-to-weight ratio makes it a poor choice for mobile applications. Am I mistaken or has the technology improved?

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Earth. England/America -the birthplace of the C. S. A. - anywhere I imagine -home.
Posts: 773
Good Answers: 33
#32
In reply to #31

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/05/2008 11:09 PM

Mistaken. Do the research. Steam can produce about the same as IC engines plus other advantages. e-mail - beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk - for some info

__________________
No technology is so obsolete that it won't work. A stone knife still can kill you as dead as a laser.
Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#33
In reply to #31

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/06/2008 8:59 AM

So called "Flash Steam Boilers" can start up in quite a short time and are relatively small and light. The "Stanley Steamer" was doing over 100MPH in the 1930s....

I feel that with a modern approach, it could be revived and improved.....

Checkout the following link for further infos:-

Stanley Steamer

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#34

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/07/2008 10:50 AM

you don't run the water sasguaches

Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#35
In reply to #34

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/08/2008 2:54 AM

Speaking as a dumb European, could you explain that please?

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Interested in everything- see my Profile please APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Civil Engineering - Member Hobbies - Musician - Autoharp and Harmonica Hobbies - Hunting - Member Hobbies - Fishing - Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christchurch, (The Garden City), South Island, New Zealand
Posts: 4395
Good Answers: 230
#36
In reply to #35

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/09/2008 5:49 PM

Hello Andy Germany

It's not just you that could not understand the ????? statement.

I'm about as far from Europe (or anywhere else for that matter), and I still don't understand it, either.

Kind Regards....

__________________
"The number of inventions increases faster than the need for them at the time" - SparkY
Reply
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#37
In reply to #35

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/10/2008 10:48 AM

Ummm...being about halfway between y'all here in the USA, I thought it WAS a European comment. You sure it's not? (why no emoticon scratching its head I wonder???)

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#38
In reply to #37

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/10/2008 11:05 AM

It would appear that NOBODY understood what was meant.

I hope he keeps taking the pills, maybe we will get an answer eventually or "HEY I WANT SOME OF THAT STUFF TOOO!!!"

Maybe it was only "Wakky Bakky".....

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#39
In reply to #38

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/10/2008 12:50 PM

Perhaps he was calling us "Sasquatches" w/o knowing how it's spelt? Admittedly a spel chequer wouldn't help much on THAT one...

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#40

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

03/13/2008 9:38 PM

A couple of weeks ago I saw an announcement on www.PhysOrg.com that some uni has developed a process for making hydrogen using bacteria. Interesting. It was supposed to be presented at the Miami convention mentioned above.

Reply
Guru
United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gone to Alabama with my banjo on my knee...
Posts: 5595
Good Answers: 20
#43

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

06/23/2008 12:35 PM

Just in case anyone is thinking of hydrogen as fuel yet, here's something more to consider:

Michigan's Rules for Hydrogen Storage Go Into Effect

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) issued new rules regarding storage and handling of gaseous and liquefied hydrogen systems in both aboveground and underground storage containers. The rules, promulgated pursuant to the Fire Prevention Code, are the result of the cumulative efforts of the DEQ, local fire chiefs, industry experts, and other stakeholders are the first of their kind in the nation.

These rules will apply to all gaseous and liquefied hydrogen storage systems and will regulate the storage and handling of hydrogen for industry and commercial operations. The DEQ's goals are to develop rules for regulating and promoting the infrastructure necessary to support the expansion of fueling stations to accommodate hydrogen as an alternative fuel for the automotive industry.

Questions regarding these rules may be directed to the Storage Tank Unit, Storage Tank and Solid Waste Section, Waste and Hazardous Materials Division, DEQ, P.O. Box 30241, Lansing, MI 48909-7741, at 517-335-2690; or contact Andrea Zajac at 517-335-7294 or by e-mail at zajaca@michigan.gov.

__________________
Veni, vidi, video - I came, I saw, I got it on film.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#44

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

10/22/2008 7:19 PM

In my opinion, this technology is quite possible. People are saying that it cannot work since the energy to seperate it will be the same as that one it will generate. First, the motor itself cannot run on its own but there are many technologies that help it and that imply taking care of the car. Batteries like alwas will help the motor start and will be used to provide the energy to seperate the water molecules. There are already a bunch of products available to make it worth while. There is even a japanese company that has released a car that can run up to 80km/h with simply tap water!

I don't feel like I need to say more...

Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Interested in everything- see my Profile please APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Civil Engineering - Member Hobbies - Musician - Autoharp and Harmonica Hobbies - Hunting - Member Hobbies - Fishing - Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christchurch, (The Garden City), South Island, New Zealand
Posts: 4395
Good Answers: 230
#45
In reply to #44

The Challenge: Prove what you say.

10/25/2008 11:31 PM

OK Guest,

Prove it please.

If you can prove what you say, I will purchase a hat so I can eat it, and publicly apologize to you here at

Consider the gauntlet well and truly thrown down, after smiting you on the cheek with it.

Let's see what sort of proper proof you are able to offer.

However, should the "proof" you offer, or you are not able to offer proper proof to back up what you state, then I expect your public apology here at

Kind Regards....

__________________
"The number of inventions increases faster than the need for them at the time" - SparkY
Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#47
In reply to #45

Re: The Challenge: Prove what you say.

10/26/2008 4:48 AM

Ga and Perfectly well put!

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Near Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 50.390866N, 8.884827E
Posts: 17996
Good Answers: 200
#46
In reply to #44

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

10/26/2008 4:47 AM

You wrote:-

I don't feel like I need to say more...

You are correct, you do not need to say more!!! We fully understand where your position is and your knowledge level, but thanks anyway for clearing that up completely for us all!

__________________
"What others say about you reveals more about them, than it does you." Anon.
Reply
Anonymous Poster
#48

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

06/25/2010 11:41 AM

Very good article! I have been doing research for a few years on the electrolysis development and related vehicle installation/ use of HHO.

There are many big diffrences from the "Get Rich Quick" versions with technical details not frequently mentioned. Browns gas alone will burn the lowest temp material it comes into contact with.

Electrolysis without an electrolyte can be done at low energy input levels and will not degrade engine parts like lye on aluminum will do.

Fuel savings is done with a very small percentage and more developes power but not economy.

Direct injection provides a better reaction as compared to simply dumping into the air flow

To date, no one has completed the various related technology required before this is safe and praticle for the "Soccer Mom". It actually does work when done correctly however I am not ready to release a product for all climates and all conditions.

I do enjoy the 40% economy improvment but the 15% power increase has me hooked plus two two college/ universities can not find any hydrocarbon emissions in the thirty vehicles I have experimented with.

Tom Parker tparker_aec@yahoo.com

Reply
Participant

Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4
#49

Re: Too Good to Be True? Engines that Run on Water

07/20/2010 12:29 PM

hi y'all:))

new here to group. just an ole fart who tries something new.

as far as hho; see also last paragraph:

THIS IS FACT

i have not made large improvements, but have a 36 sq. inch cell made of 3 inch x 12 inch stainless (7) plates in 4" pvc. there are 5 (neutral=no connections) plates in cell in series with other two. negative and positive connections on outer plates. mixed in enough potassium hydroxide to bring amperage up to 20 amps. average voltage drop across each plate to another, 2 volts+-. installed on 1996 f150 302 v8 . before installing hho, truck was getting average 17 mpg. don't know whether this good/bad. after building an 02 signal adjuster: merely adding .3 volts to original o2 signal , then sending modded signal back to computer. hho is injected into air throat after the MASS AIR FLOW sensor. after 1700 miles on highway, average gas mileage increased to 21.5 mpg. i messed up (foundoutlater) by increasing amperage to 50 amps, and iron started leaching out of stainless. afraid of shorting out so, do not use that cell anymore. am building (6"x6") by seven plate unit to be installed in 10" pvc pipe. not supposed to force more than half of square inch area in amps. still 36 sq. inch cell, so will not go over 18 amps.. an hho cell in my opinion, at this time, would have to big as a my pickup bed to TOTALLLY run v8; AND NOT have a computer controller on it.

BOTTOM LINE= even with added 20 to 50 amp load unto alternator, added weight of cell , water,etc., i did increase my gas mileage. that being said, my increased gas mileage came from hho+gas injected by computer. the 02 signal (ford) was changed to tell computer it was running to rich. (ford says less than .4v is too lean[polluting]; greater than .6v is too rich[need to give less fuel]. i realize this is brute electrolysis, but it did improve my mileage. have not tried pulsating/variable voltages to cell...

i believe this answer/opinion applies to the subject of thread, i hope so. any new ideas from anyone, will help, and I'll read every thing sent. i also, have a short video of the initial install, injecting hho through bubbler into air throat.

dont know how to add video.

thanks for listening,

gerald b.

Reply
Reply to Forum Thread 49 comments

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

316204 (1); abdulh (2); Andy Germany (7); Anonymous Poster (6); Blink (2); CoronaCameraMan (1); Cowboyss (1); CSM Engineer (1); DVader1000 (2); EnviroMan (7); ffej (3); jack of all trades (5); leveles (1); PWSlack (1); Ron H (1); Shadetree (2); Sparkstation (3); Tad (1); Taganan (2)

Previous in Forum: Mystery Photo: Large (6' X 20') Metal Cylinder With Holes   Next in Forum: Why are Website Password Rules so Complicated?

Advertisement