Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
Was just thumbing around videos on youtube and found this:
This is a video of someone demonstrating an HHO torch.
I'm mostly interested in how he was able to touch the torch tip right after use of the torch.. if the temperature of the flame is indeed just warm to
the touch, where is the added heat coming from when it's applied to an object?
Still quite confused as to whether hydrogen and oxygen can exist together in a 'monatomic' state.
I'm surprised more people have not posted. I'm definitely dense on this subject, I'm no chemist.
In this video, at 5:15, it is stated that the flame of "HHO" is only 259 to 279 degrees but 'reacts' quickly to whatever it is applied to..
Am I the only one who finds that intriguing?
Where is all the scientific commentary?
[edit on 13-4-2008 by ViewFromTheStars]
The flame is around a good 2800 degrees C. The tip doesn't get all that hot because it's not the tip that's on fire, and it's spraying out gas
that's very cold, having just undergone adiabatic decompression. It's ballsy to touch it, but I've welded oxyacetylene, which gets up to 3500 C and
the tip doesn't get very hot. I never tried touching it with my bare hands, and I doubt it's recommended, but the tip is certainly nowhere near the
temperature of the flame.
Basically, they're full of crap. HHO doesn't stay that way, certainly not long enough to be bottled and used, let alone long enough to bubble up off
the electrode. You can't keep hydrogen monatomic. It violently and spontaneously combines with other hydrogen to form diatomic hydrogen. That
reaction is extremely energetic, but it can't be harnessed, because it'll occur whenever you put two hydrogen atoms near each other.
The same is true of oxygen, only a bit less so.
The claims are generally exaggerated, if not blatantly false, not least of all by brown himself. Sure you can run cars on it, but not altogether very
well, and it's not a very efficient process at all. Between generating the gas, compressing for storing it for use in a car, and burning it, I
wouldn't expect to get more than 1/10th of the energy that was in the electricity that went into it.
It works out a fair bit better in stationary applications, but you'd still be lucky to get 1/3. But if you're doing on-site, you're not going to be
using it as a fuel for an engine, you'd damn well be using it for welding, where there isn't any waste heat, since heat is what you're TRYING to
make. It does have some nice welding properties if you plan on welding underwater.
It might be a great idea in, say, France, where everything is nuclear, but in america, where the majority of power comes from coal, it's probably
just as bad for the environment as petrol.
It wouldn't get hotter in contact with a material, unless it's burning incompletely, in which case it would start oxidizing the metal, in effect,
burning that. Which makes it exactly the same as a very crude version of oxyfuel cutting, which has been a standard practice for many decades. It
doesn't work well on metals besides steel, though.
Basically, browne's gas is dangerous stuff, that shouldn't be messed with lightly. It can and will explode at low tank pressures, and shares all the
problems with storage in common with pure hydrogen. You can run cars off of it, you can weld with it, though oxyacetylene is more popular for good
reason, and you can use it in a fuel cell.
Fundamentally, it's no different than the whole craze about hydrogen, only it's less safe, considerably easier to make fuel cells for, and
surrounded by a bunch of bull# hype and scams.