It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Car runs on water?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I had just recently received the following link from my father, which purports that you can learn to make a simple device that you can put under the hood of your car and make your car run on water and a a bit of baking soda. I myself am not much of a scientist. So I wanted to post this here and ask any ATSers and see if this is actually possible (they do have a video in this link as well) and if so. Why hasn't the oil co's come down on these guys?

www.water-4-fuel.com...

NOTE: I will add that I didn't feel too attracted to the fact that, apparently you might have to buy a manual on how to make this device and installing it (I say might because I'll make you a bet that someone somewhere probably already did a video and posted it on YouTube already)

If this is for real... how many of you are going to go back to learning some basic chemistry and car mechanics to install this? I know I wouldn't mind
I'm not a mechanic, but my brother is, and I'm sure I can learn to pick up easilly what I learned back in high school and college.




posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   
no answer? no one here knows if there's a simple guide to take a look at? I myself don't know if it's a scam or not, but I don't want to run the risk of buying the guides only to find out they stole my credit card information later on. I'm sure someone out there has had to try this... I'll keep googling it and see if anything comes up.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
complete BS...... sorry


the closest thing that ive found thats real (still in R&D) is www.switch2hydrogen.com...



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   
that smug but cool actor known as jack nicholson had a hydrogen powered car (impala i think?) back in 78'

imagine where the technology would be today if it was more supported and had further research

i seen a video of him driving it around to prove it in front of a small group of media.

ok, just found it..

here it is, jack's hydrogen powered car which uses solar power to convert water to hydrogen




[edit on 15/1/08 by Obliv_au]

[edit on 15/1/08 by Obliv_au]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Thanks for that video on Jack Nicholson... it really makes me weep to think that we had this technology already working 30 years ago (and god knows how long even before that) and we still didn't bother listening, we still bought the stupid oil company propaganda and only now 30 years afterwards is this idea re-surfacing. It's so sad.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   
I do definitely believe car can run on water, but this website doesn't seem to be legit, it's most likely a scam. Look at the poor design, everything, and all.

Oh and by the way, if you hadn't heard of cars being able to run on air, check the information below on my signature!



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TheoOne
 


See that was my major concern :| I wasn't too sure if the device they were selling was legit, or it was just a scam to get my credit card. That's why I'm asking if anyone around here does know of an online guide proving it works (without me having to risk my credit card number online). Does anyone know if I'd be able to find this info on the patent office free or for a fee?



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 02:13 AM
link   
well most likely it is a lagit cell....but it takes huge amounts of energy to produce a cupple bubbles.....the myth busters did an experiment with this tech....... but its still a long way off from being able to brake the bonds of water so efficiently...



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Believe it or not, WATER is the most flammable fuel on the face of the planet. Although you need to prepare it first.

Water = H2O.

2 Hydrogen 1 Oxygen. If you got rid of the oxygen part of water, or just separated it from its bond, the hydrogen is very flammable. They use liquid hydrogen to power NASA's shuttle!



It can burn through anything, yet is cooler then normal. After being burned it turns back to WATER! This is VERY REAL.

The catch? People just don't believe water is flammable because we use it to put out flames!! What they don't understand is that water is hydrogen!!

God gave use an entire planet of water, because he know we would use it as fuel some day!

Also I wanted to add, turning water into hydrogen, or a mix of hydrogen and oxygen is SIMPLE!!!! All you need is a battery, wires, and two metal plates. Put the plates very close together without touching, and connect the negative battery terminal to one plate, and the positive to the other plate. Then, just add water. You will see bubbles, these are oxygen and hydrogen bubbles. You can light them with a lighter as the reach the surface of that water, and you will hear snapping sounds like mini explosions.

Many people are trying to perfect their design, and the amount of electricity to use. So many people are experimenting still.

As of now, most people can't produce enough hydrogen on the fly to run 100% hydrogen with 0% gas. Right now your best bet is to only make enough hydrogen to make your gas millage decrease.

You can run a gas/hydrogen mix. Just add like 10% hydrogen and you will use less gas! Which means you don't need to fill up as often. It can be used just to increase gas mileage.

[edit on 16-1-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Believe it or not, WATER is the most flammable fuel on the face of the planet. Although you need to prepare it first.


ya BIG catch though you need so much more energy to make hydrogen gas from water then we can get out of it. right now its completely inefficient.

next, how do you plan on mixing gasoline and pure hydrogen anyways with out causing a saturation effect of the octane? also Hydrogen is DANGEROUS as a gas any spark could detonate your tank. next you would have to have a system of tanks with hydrogen dissolved in a substance (probably a metal base) b/c liquid and gas cylinders don't hold as much as you would think.

o yes if you use a 10/90 mix with hydrogen if it could work it would cause detonations so bad it would kill your pistons and probably put a hole in them totaling your car in seconds...if you didn't kill yourself trying to get to that point!

Additionally a dual gas/liquid fuel would be extremely complex to carborate b/c of the difference in there properties.


Originally posted by ALLis0NE
It can burn through anything, yet is cooler then normal.

ummmm.....no if that where true it would melt the space shuttles engines that would be bad. Also check out Silica Aerogel its neat stuff!

sense im started, if you did get hydrogen and wanted power from it you would be stupid to combust it in the normal sense. two reasons A...Hydrogen and air when compress love to explode VERY violently. B......the maximum efficiency of the combustion engine is under 10% b/c most energy is lost to heat.

you would use a fuel cell because it is so much safer and far far more efficient.

ok water is NOT flammable!!!..... thats like saying sodium and chlorine are nontoxic b/c they make salt!

ok so to recap it is a BAD idea to burn hydrogen and again the tec. for Hcars is still a bit off to be mass produced.(along with the lacking fuel infrastructure)



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
the oxyhydro torch is neat but it still is not a viable power source for the same reason hydrogen currently isnt.(see laws of electrolysis #1) its not new weve known about this sence the late 1970"s as Klein gas and has been used in industry for glass polishing.....besides if there was such a thing as cheap clean energy in use....why isn't it all over.

[edit on 17-1-2008 by engenerQ]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by engenerQ
 


Because im nice, I edited out what i said in this post for engenerQ. Disregard this post.

[edit on 17-1-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by engenerQ
ya BIG catch though you need so much more energy to make hydrogen gas from water then we can get out of it. right now its completely inefficient.


WRONG.

With ELECTROLYSIS yes, it does take more energy, because they use an OUT DATED method of bond speration. Welcome to the year 2008 where people know the process of DISSOCATION OF WATER. You use a method of molecular "pulling", untill the molecules are seperated.

It takes very little power to stretch water molecules. Stretch them quickly 5-6 times in a row, each time with more distance, and the molecules will then be forced to seperate. It's totaly different then electrolysis, because electrolysis is trying to stretch the molecules 1 time, for a long time. Compared to many times in split seconds, with dissociation.



Originally posted by engenerQ
next, how do you plan on mixing gasoline and pure hydrogen anyways with out causing a saturation effect of the octane?


You don't mix hydrogen with gasoline. LOL!!! You mix the gasious hydrogen with gasoline FUMES. Gasoline by itself is not flammable, in order for a car to use gasoline, the car must first add AIR to turn it into fumes, these fumes are what is flammable. Instead of using oxygen air to turn the gas into fumes, you can use hydrogen air. Making the explosion more powerful! That means you use less gas. You can inject hydrogen gas directly into the air intake of a car!


Originally posted by engenerQ
also Hydrogen is DANGEROUS as a gas any spark could detonate your tank.


Thats why you make it "on the fly". Then you don't have a "tank".


Originally posted by engenerQ
next you would have to have a system of tanks with hydrogen dissolved in a substance (probably a metal base) b/c liquid and gas cylinders don't hold as much as you would think.


Nope totaly not necessary.



Originally posted by engenerQ
o yes if you use a 10/90 mix with hydrogen if it could work it would cause detonations so bad it would kill your pistons and probably put a hole in them totaling your car in seconds...if you didn't kill yourself trying to get to that point!


Wow you have no clue what you are talking about LOL!



Originally posted by engenerQ
Additionally a dual gas/liquid fuel would be extremely complex to carborate b/c of the difference in there properties.


Once again, you have NO CLUE what you are talking about. Carborators turn gasoline liquid into fumes by adding air. Hydrogen is in the form of AIR.


Originally posted by engenerQ
ummmm.....no if that where true it would melt the space shuttles engines that would be bad. Also check out Silica Aerogel its neat stuff!


ummmmm.... THE SPACE SHUTTLE DOESNT HAVE ENGINES!!! LOL!!!!!
The space shuttle has ROCKETS.



Originally posted by engenerQ
ok water is NOT flammable!!!..... thats like saying sodium and chlorine are nontoxic b/c they make salt!


Actually, salt is toxic.
Google "salt overdose".

Man, don't try so hard to be smart, it doesn't work.




[edit on 17-1-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   
There are different ways to disassociate water molecules and use the resultant gas to augment combustion or replace gasoline all together.
Old fashioned electrolysis, where current was pushed through water via brute force, was indeed quite inefficient. Nobody in the waterfuel community uses that method.
A method that is used, which is close to the old fashioned method, incorporates a set of series connected stainless steel plates in a strong electrolyte solution (using lye or a similar substance). Using series plates takes advantage of the very low voltage required to separate water.
A more efficient method involves driving the plates with DC pulses at a resonant rate of the water. Often 3 different frequencies are used together and mixed through a specially wound toroidal transformer.
Stan Meyers pioneered this technology back in the late 80's, early 90's. He had a dune buggy that ran on nothing but water. He drove across the country on water alone.
He was just getting ready to go into production when he died very suspiciously through poisoning.
Daniel Dingle was a guy who lived in the Phillipines and had a car that ran on a different type of water fuel cell. No other fuel was used in this car.
There are many examples of highly efficient disassociation of water. Water is an amazing carrier of energy.
The problem is not the technology. The problem is the goons who come around and threaten any inventor of a device that replaces gasoline as a fuel. Suppression of new forms of energy has been going on for a hundred years.
BTW, the gas produced by a WFC is fed directly into the air intake of the engine. The hydrogen and oxygen are not separated. As dangerous as this seems, this gas is apparently quite benign. Most cells have a bubbler to prevent blowback, but even those who don't haven't voiced any problems.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
It takes very little power to stretch water molecules. Stretch them quickly 5-6 times in a row, each time with more distance, and the molecules will then be forced to seperate.


well lets start ^this is called a NMR(nuclear magnetic resonance) machine and it is EXTREMELY hard to pull water apart is aprox ~463 kJ/mol nod no you cant just simply keep pulling them apart there like magnets not liek a piece of taffy if you stretch taffy it gets easer each time while a magnets force stays relatively constant and you can pull and pull and it doesn't get much easer.




Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Gasoline by itself is not flammable


err...if your in a vacuum then your correct but on earth O2 is present.

when you mix any gas with your intake thats flammable you need a control system...like NOS you cant just put a tube in to your intake and expect it to work long and your car to survive.




Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Once again, you have NO CLUE what you are talking about. Carborators turn gasoline liquid into fumes by adding air. Hydrogen is in the form of AIR


actually it atomizes the gasoline making it still a liquid not a gas. Also i believe you mean gas not AIR b/c air is what you breath. it's a common mistake don't worry.



Originally posted by ALLis0NE
ummmmm.... THE SPACE SHUTTLE DOESNT HAVE ENGINES!!! LOL!!!!!
The space shuttle has ROCKETS.


ok, go to a dictionary and look up Rocket Engine, A Rocket is a type of Engine....but thats ok its another common mistake.


Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Man, don't try so hard to be smart, it doesn't work.


Direct insults to members is usually frowned upon.



As for the water cars its a total load, there is a funny lack of proof for either design. i believe that Mr. Meyers was also in court from an employee accusing him of fraud. It was kind of funny that he was poisoned though.

Ive never heard of any "goons" threatening anybody, if anything they would want to buy the tech to corner the market, there is so much more money in it that way.

If any of this WFC or "on the fly producton" are even posable and you have PROOF
let me know well make alot of money, sadly these are just people who make outrageous claims with no backing.... case in point Orbo, they talked of making free unlimited power, the scientific commonalty said ok but at each demonstration it doesn't seem to work.....



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 02:53 AM
link   
I was under the impression that you could just add nitric acid to water in order to seperate the hydrogen. Maybe a mix of 2(HNO3) + 2(H20), the reaction should result in 2(H2) + 2(N2) + 4(O2), introducing a spark to this should combust the hydrogen and nitrogen gases. Am I stating the obvious or am I just wrong?



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 04:47 AM
link   
i think im going to put this tread into my favorites with the heading
"don't go there, don't post there". Incidentally
Carborators = Carburetors


[edit on 5-2-2008 by ST SIR 86]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cthulwho
(HNO3) + 2(H20), the reaction should result in 2(H2) + 2(N2) + 4(O2)


well your close its HNO3+H20---->(H30+)+(NO3-) ...... though if you pour water in to concentrated nitric the acid pulls the water apart and there is alot of heat an bad things happen. you can get hydrogen many ways but the problem is that you end up putting much more energy in to the reaction then what you get out. say you added 1L of 5-6M to some metal say magnesium,you would only get out ~5-moles of H2.... thats not all that much , but then you look at the cost of nitric acid and what to do with the byproduct its totally not worth it.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join