Why can't water be used as fuel

Originally posted by playswithmachines
reply to post by Demoncreeper

 

Quote;
"And the use of electricity to separate molecules, on demand seems very far fetched. It works for plumbers, but needs distilled water, with baking soda or something...I dunno. And requires A LOT more energy than a car would be capable of producing with just a battery and alternator. A higher output alternator would be the key...maybe. "

What is your source for this?
Have you taken the effects of high voltage & resonance into account?
Yes, if you shove 12 volts at 100 amps through salt water you het hydrogen, also you get hydrogen chloride and/or sodium dioxide both of which are poisonous.Also you get hot, salty water.
No good for tea at all..........

Source: www.youtube.com... There was a more in depth thing on that machine...but this will do. I watched it a while ago, with my dad. We both laughed...but there it was.

Also, I didn't take anything into account. Like I said, I'll let the nerds figure that stuff out. When I can put it in hot rods, will do.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
If anyone ever comes up with a way to extract hydrogen from water and use the hydrogen as energy (fuel) that requires 20% or less of that energy to do it... The oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy corporate giants would move in to buy them out, kill them all off and make it go away.

You can't have clean, cheap, abundant energy... It will destroy the economy.

Yes, definitely. Look at what happened when they first discovered oil and it was next to no cost, abundant and "limitless" (at the time).

Man, I don't know how the economy recovered... Oh wait... Cheap/almost free energy built the economy...


What was I thinking.

reply to post by Demoncreeper


I know this,
Yes it's all real, only note at the end they say 'it's currently rigged to run on water & gasoline'.
That's because it's almost impossible to run a car on pure HHO without melting the engine.
This guy may or may not have done it, but it can be done, we're working on it
I guess that makes me one of the nerds

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by autowrench

A corporation has already patented the HHO gas, don't you see where this is going? Within a few years it will be commercial.

 

Do you mind linking us to the patent as apposed to advertisement? It looks like a registered trademark, not a patent...

Oh, because it is trademark, they patented a generator and trademarked "HHO" because it's not real.

Easily done, all you have to do is click on "Intellectual Property."
hytechapps.com...

Issued Patents HTA has 3 issued patents in the United States: US 6,689,259 - Mixed gas generator US 6,866,756 - Hydrogen generator for uses in a vehicle fuel system US 7,191,737 - Hydrogen generator for uses in a vehicle fuel system

Pending patents
HTA has 7 patents pending in the US, 3 co-patents with RAI pending in the US with 1 pending in Romania, and 3 PCT applications filled with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Patents publically available include: US 11/112,541 - Anti-rust treatment using Klein™ gas flame

US 11/274,736 - Apparatus & method for the conversion of water into a new gaseous and combustible form and the combustible gas formed thereby

US 11/274,813 - Apparatus & method for the conversion of water into a new gaseous and combustible form and the combustible gas formed thereby

US 11/502,040 - Thermal spray coating processes using HHO gas generated from an electrolyzer generator

US 11/709,603 - Apparatus and method for the conversion of water into a clean burning combustible gas for use as an additive with other forms of fuels

US 12/307,402 (PCT/RO07/000013) - Method of using lean fuel-air mixtures at all operating regimes of a spark ignition engine US 12/307,409 (PCT/RO07/000012) - Process of brazing/soldering by flame of metallic and non-metallic materials

US 12/307,393 (PCT/RO07/000015) - Procedure of obtaining automotive fuels and the modified fuels obtained by means of this procedure

US 12/354,003 (PCT/US2009/031597) - Method to enhance and improve solid carbonaceous fuel combustion systems using a hydrogen-rich gas

hytechapps.com...

Originally posted by playswithmachines

I guess that makes me one of the nerds

I meant no offense by that. I'm just an old grease head. My kid (9) just got back from nerd camp (science camp)...Couldn't be more proud of him. He is ridiculous with his 'stuff"...the questions he asks, make me believe he will come up with something very cool.
I just wish I could answer some of them. Hence, nerd camp.

The whole HHO thing is very interesting. I can't wait for some new tech. haha.

reply to post by autowrench

Easily done, all you have to do is click on "Intellectual Property." hytechapps.com...

So three patents which have nothing really to do with "HHO" but then another 7 patent applications (not approved) dating to as far back as 2001....

Anything to distract from the device, is that it? Well, like I said, man, I don't care, slam it all you like. Know deep down in your heart that it will never work, science does not support it, it breaks the laws of physics, and the man posting that it works must have taken drugs to think something as simple as this will actually get him better mileage and a clean engine. Know that everything I said is a scam, I just posted it to get a rise out of people, and to scam them out of their money. Nothing to see here, move along.


(If you think it just may work, and want to build your own gas saver, see my thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...)

Not really sure how this could be done, but if you had a machine that somehow separates water into Hydrogen and Oxygen, the hydrogen could be ignited and the oxygen could be used to increase the flammability. That explosion could then push the pistons which would turn the gears and eventually the tires.

reply to post by autowrench

Anything to distract from the device, is that it?

Just pointing out two possibilities. You are either are flat-out lying or pay close to no attention in detail and are/or ignorant to specifics and detail.

In either case, for anyone to believe your system operates as it does would be foolish. Because as I said, you showed that you do not discern subtle differences, or obvious ones...

reply to post by Demoncreeper


No problem
I just hope the free energy revolution breaks before the civil one.
Patents, blah! when the next 'energy crisis' hits, people aren't going to be too worried about who invented it, if it works, it works. All this should be just 'open sourced' so no patents will be given......

reply to post by autowrench

Lets take everything you say at face value for a second. So you've broken the laws of physics. When do you intend on picking up your Nobel prize and joining the immortal ranks of the likes of Newton and Einstein?

I worry about companies then restricting water use to have for fuel. If you can just pour water from the tap into your 'tank', then I can bet our rates will skyrocket.

Since a fuel is only a source of power then it already has: the movement and flow of water can be used as a source of power.Although this could be said to also be power from gravitational force pulling the water.

reply to post by john_bmth


That's not really fair.
A bumblebee breaks the laws of physics by flying, do bees have Nobel prizes?
A tree uses highly advanced photo-chemical reactions to create cellulose, a highly flexible, strong fibre.
Bacteria that can survive in total darkness or cold, make use of radiation, sugars, minerals, to stay alive.
We can't do any of this, only by using less efficient machines.
Hydrogen is the most abundant & perfect fuel in the universe, otherwise stars would not be using it
Nature always chooses the easiest & best solution, copying nature is not worth a nobel prize IMO.
The other problem is the demigod status of the aforementionend scientists

The answer is simple. We can't use water as fuel from the same reason we cant drink petrol. Because this have no sense. Water is not a fuel. We need more energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water than we could poses in burning it into water. I can't understand how after decades of studies and numerous explanation people still don't understand this. This is not a high science. This is primary school.

reply to post by odyseusz


Maybe you should read all the posts first

Originally posted by playswithmachines
reply to post by john_bmth

 

That's not really fair.
A bumblebee breaks the laws of physics by flying, do bees have Nobel prizes?
A tree uses highly advanced photo-chemical reactions to create cellulose, a highly flexible, strong fibre.
Bacteria that can survive in total darkness or cold, make use of radiation, sugars, minerals, to stay alive.
We can't do any of this, only by using less efficient machines.
Hydrogen is the most abundant & perfect fuel in the universe, otherwise stars would not be using it

Nature always chooses the easiest & best solution, copying nature is not worth a nobel prize IMO.
The other problem is the demigod status of the aforementionend scientists

edit on 5-9-2011 by playswithmachines because: Typo

Bumblebees do not break the laws of physics. Trees do not break the laws of physics. Bacteria do not break the laws of physics. Hydrogen does not break the laws of physics. Nature does not break the laws of physics. Scientists aren't demi-gods, they are practitioners of scientific method in search of knowledge. My question is fair because what you propose does break the laws of physics.

reply to post by john_bmth


You are correct, they don't
I see you avoided my answer about stars.
This technology does work, thermodynamics has nothing to do with it.
If you read all the posts, you will know that most of these devices function only as a fuel additive, giving anywhere between 25-40% better mileage.
If you have read the posts, you will see why it's so difficult (but not impossible) to run a car 100%
Try this thread
And, if you really feel up to it, here's the full Stan Meyer patent and the Report
As you can see,the Mythbuster's 12vDC setup, with some conducting material such as soda, is nothing at all like Meyer's setup.
You want more?

reply to post by playswithmachines


Stars don't break the laws of physics, either. Unless you are using fusion to generate your power, then stars unfortunately have nothing to do with it.

If you are splitting the hydrogen before putting it in your car as fuel then obviously that does not break the laws of physics, but you will use more energy splitting the hydrogen than you will get by using it as fuel. However, using the car's energy to split the hydrogen to be then used as fuel will not run solely on water (at least not very far) as you will use more energy splitting the hydrogen than you would get from using it as fuel.

reply to post by rigel4


Water doesnt need to be turned into fuel...only steam. Its called a STEAM engine! As in the trains that crossed America and built this country in the 1800's and early 1900's.

You didnt know this? It doesnt have to be made into anything other than what it is.

Oh...and you can also turn salt-sea water into drinking water.