Plans for a water powered car.

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by EmilNomel
 




someone here suggested that it would be cheaper to just use an "electric car" (battery only powered car) that maybe true...


Electric cars are not that much cheaper. To charge the batteries, you have to plug into the Grid, which was built in the 1950s, and it in bad need of an upgrade. Even if 1/3 of Americans ran electric cars, the entire grid would have to be rebuilt. Who would have to pay for that? Right, you, Joe Taxpayer, that's who.




posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


So if you're not achieving over unity, how exactly are you saving money? Even with a 100% efficient conversion (never gonna happen), you'd end up using the same amount of gas. The fact that you won't achieve anything close to 100% efficiency means you're losing money with a pointless conversion.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Sytec
 




i also found that a car which has a computerised engine management system doesn't work properly with hydrogen fuel cells as the computer is programed to only allow the car's engine to run at specific air/fuel ratio's i.e the computer fights against the increased fuel economy gained by the fuel cell. you would therefore have to install your hydrogen fuel cells on a car which is rather old and doesn't have a computerised control system managing air and fuel mixes.


You are partially right. I use a MAP Sensor Enhancer with dual adjustments to accomplish this. You wire it into the ECM feed wire. then you unhook the Oxygen Sensor, for it will sense excess Oxygen in the exhaust, and would enrich the mixture. On a GM vehicle, you can unhook your ECM for 30 minutes, and hook it back up, this clears the PROM, and it re-learns again. The MAP Sensor Enhancer is part of the package, without it your mileage will not go up that awful much. Also, just the MAP Sensor Enhancer will vastly improve mileage, once you learn how to use it properly.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Why are you avoiding discussion? As someone who's prepared to take people's money to hook them up, aren't you going to answer some basic questions about your "product"?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by autowrench
 

Why would you need any other energy source if you are achieving over unity?


OK, here is my plan to run my 350 Chevy V-8 on HHO alone. First, a plate style reactor that will produce five liters of HHO per minute. Seven plate design. Use a power inverter off the 105 Amp GM type 3 alternator, to power a 85 amp Transformer that I have. Throw those 85 amps across those stainless plates, and I believe this can be accomplished. Use a surge chamber, constructed of 3" PVC, one foot long, this will account for the extra HHO needed for take off and passing. The plates will be 6" X 6", placed 1/4" apart. positive and negative. I do not know at this point if this will in fact run the truck, but I am willing to try, which is better than some of you are.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by autowrench
 


So if you're not achieving over unity, how exactly are you saving money? Even with a 100% efficient conversion (never gonna happen), you'd end up using the same amount of gas. The fact that you won't achieve anything close to 100% efficiency means you're losing money with a pointless conversion.


I save money by not buying so much gas, what is so hard to understand about that?
You are most obviously not the least bit interested in the technology. Why are you even here posting? Getting paid by Big Oil, or something? So you think it is impossible, OK, then go somewhere else and troll. I would bet I can take what you know about the internal combustion engine and fit it in a coffee cup.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


So how are you saving gas when you're splitting hydrogen with a less than 100% efficiency?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by autowrench
 

Why would you need any other energy source if you are achieving over unity?


OK, here is my plan to run my 350 Chevy V-8 on HHO alone. First, a plate style reactor that will produce five liters of HHO per minute. Seven plate design. Use a power inverter off the 105 Amp GM type 3 alternator, to power a 85 amp Transformer that I have. Throw those 85 amps across those stainless plates, and I believe this can be accomplished. Use a surge chamber, constructed of 3" PVC, one foot long, this will account for the extra HHO needed for take off and passing. The plates will be 6" X 6", placed 1/4" apart. positive and negative. I do not know at this point if this will in fact run the truck, but I am willing to try, which is better than some of you are.


Beware... (It's a sales pitch)

psuedo-science: "HHO".



(2HO) At best you can improve the burning of the hydrocarbon fuels like a nitrous oxide system. But you are not running on "hydrogen fuel". Nor is what you describe a "hydrogen fuel cell"

auto.howstuffworks.com...

.
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I'm in involved in the energy industry, specifically financing and investing, however I have a solid education regarding its mechanics and the physics as well, and keep myself involved with as many different aspects as I can.

In order to run an automobile off of pure water, first of all, that water needs to be distilled water or else you're going to have some issues. Through electrolysis you can split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen. In order to do this you would have to introduce an electric current, this could be accomplished by a solar panel integrated into the roof of the vehicle, and an electron membrane, which is where the reaction takes place and the water splits into Hydrogen and Oxygen. You would then store both in some sort of tank and then you would then recombine by using a fuel cell. The reaction creates an electric charge which in turn powers your car. This is sort of a watered down (no pun intended) version of what actually happens, but in essence it is extremely possible. The biggest obstacles lay in the cost of these membranes and introducing enough electricity to perform electrolysis. Both, however, are really only a few years away. Solar panels, for instance, only operate at a level that about 14% - 15% efficient, meaning that it is only able to take that much of the suns energy and turn it into electricity. However, I'm involved in research that has already gotten efficiency past 60%, the implications of that alone are huge.

I attended a conference on sustainable and renewable energy technologies and this was covered. The company Air Products is working on building cars that run completely off of Hydrogen. In fact, they rolled up in a Chevrolet Equinox that ran off of Hydrogen (I took a test drive in it, the first thing I noticed is that it was silent, it sounded like a bicycle). They're developing the fuel cell technology and logistics (pipelines, fueling stations, etc.) whereas GM will manufacture the vehicles. They signed an agreement to release vehicles like the Equinox, but also other lines as well, by 2015 at the same price as its regular gasoline engine models. As of now, the fuel tanks, which are made out of extremely durable carbon fiber, hold a little over 2.5 kg of Hydrogen. To fill the tank with Hydrogen at one of these fuel stations, you're looking at anywhere from $5 - $7/kg. Each kg of Hydrogen will yield approximately between 75 - 100 miles.

So yes, it is still based on a system where you will pay for the input every time, but Hydrogen can be taken from water and unlike oil, it returns to water after the Hydrogen fuel interacts with Oxygen, which creates the charge and is actually what your car is running off of. Your "exhaust" is H2O. Eventually, though, and it's really not that far off, you will be able to run a car off of pure water alone. It's really not that far off, and is definitely already in the works.

(I'll expand on everything in depth in the future, so stay tuned)
edit on 30-9-2011 by Resonant because: NOTE



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Wrong. No "sales pitch." this is mine alone. You can copy, but you cannot buy one from me, no way, no how. Too much responsibility involved, and this is not for ignorant, lazy, or stupid people. It takes some intelligence, and automotive/electronics knowledge, not to mention daring, to build and configure the units, wire everything, and maintain the reactors. Plus, you have to explain how it works for people.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
("resonant") You've just described the "fuel cell cycle...
" Electricity is put in splitting water molecules.
The molecules (hydrogen and oxygen) are reintroduced toeachother and and recombined in the permeable fuel cell membrane and the original electricity drops backoutto beused to run an electric traction motor..

Hydrogen is NOt an "energy source" it is an energy carrier!;

( in this case solar-generated electricity).

The hydrogen atom is also incredibly hard to store as it is so small and simple it tends to pass through most materials,and it makes steel brittle.
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Sorry doublepostdeleted...(impatience + slow computer today)
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


I always hear that grid excuse. I'm not talking about getting tens of millions of electric cars on the road I'm talking about the physics. The best deal is probably electric/gas hybrids.

Honest question. Do you have to charge the battery from the grid or is it charged by the alternator?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Resonant
 


That you, friend, for your intelligent input in this thread full of armchair scientists and mechanics. We need some real tech here, but please be aware that no matter what you say, or how much you prove it can, and is being done, there are people who just delight in trolling these threads, and Big Oil is no doubt paying at least a few of them.

I have but an average education, but am well schooled in automobiles, my first love is cars and engines, and I worked in service garages and dealerships for 38 years. I know a little electronics, the kind found in cars, and this HHO tech is somewhat new to me. but it does work, beyond my wildest dreams. I used distilled water for awhile, it is OK, but of late i just use tap water, works just as good, and there is very little stuff in it. Running the flow through a bubble device, which mine is a Mason jar with outlet and inlet, the inlet has a tube that goes down under the water.

Please! Post your comments, I am all ears. Anything to save gas is helping me, and helping my family.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by autowrench
 


I always hear that grid excuse. I'm not talking about getting tens of millions of electric cars on the road I'm talking about the physics. The best deal is probably electric/gas hybrids.

Honest question. Do you have to charge the battery from the grid or is it charged by the alternator?


On my truck? By the alternator, of course. Unless I leave the reactors on and run it down, then I too have to hook up to the grid with my battery charger.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by Resonant
 


That you, friend, for your intelligent input in this thread full of armchair scientists and mechanics. We need some real tech here, but please be aware that no matter what you say, or how much you prove it can, and is being done, there are people who just delight in trolling these threads, and Big Oil is no doubt paying at least a few of them.

No one in this thread is denying that hydrogen can be used as fuel. Not one single person. The point of controversy is claims that more hydrogen can be split in situ by using energy derived from hydrogen (or gas). What Resonant has said does not in any way validate any of the claims you have made.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


I LOVE IT!!!

It doesn't matter that you are saving REAL money!
It doesn't matter that your car gets DOUBLE the gas milage!!!!

All that matters is that it hasn't been peer reviewed by "scientists"!

If it hasn't been peer reviewed by scientisrs then it doesn't exist!


Nevermind that you and several others are actually DOING it!!!
I say it can't be done and therefore it becomes so!

Does that sound about right?
WOW the willfully ignorant never cease to amaze me with their unbelieveable ability to refuse to look at something because it hasn't been tested by "scientists".

Here you have a guy who says he is actually doing it and offers to help you do it too and all you can say is more or less "not interested no matter how much money you can save me because it hasn't been peer reviewed!!!

UN-FREAKIN-BELIEVEABLE!!!

I have seen ignorance creep into threads before but never like this.
THIS takes the cake!!!!



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Screwed
 

Yet another anonymous internet user making unsubstantiated claims. "Double your mileage? Sign on the dotted line! Just don't press too hard about the details and measurements cos that's all a bit to sciencey, and we don't do sciency". Forgive my scepticism but why not get the claims independently verified by a lab? Oh that's write, those darn "scientists" with their pesky "scientific method" and foolish "evidence-based, objective research". So what evidence for his claims have you seen, seeing as you're such a staunch supporter?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
("resonant") You've just described the "fuel cell cycle...
" Electricity is put in splitting water molecules.
The molecules (hydrogen and oxygen) are reintroduced toeachother and and recombined in the permeable fuel cell membrane and the original electricity drops backoutto beused to run an electric traction motor..

Hydrogen is NOt an "energy source" it is an energy carrier!;

( in this case solar-generated electricity).

The hydrogen atom is also incredibly hard to store as it is so small and simple it tends to pass through most materials,and it makes steel brittle.
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)


Right, and that's what I was trying to break down, how fuel cells work and how they could be applicable in developing a vehicle that would run on water.

Sorry, it's not a "source" but a "carrier", honestly though, I don't think that one word really makes my argument all that different, but it would be good to specify the difference, I suppose, when explaining the implications it has in regards to energy.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Big deal. He is either not telling the truth or not measuring correctly. The armchair scientists are right. All it takes is a very basic understanding in chemistry - topic: bond energy.





top topics
 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join