This has nothing to do with politics.

[buzzcon]

This is just common sense.

Dodge Pickup Burns 100% Water as Fuel! - YouTube

Auto makers are clever and could put this into production in no time. I guess the only problem is if you live where it gets below 32 degrees often and the water freezes.

Could you imagine if each house had an emergency generator that ran off of water. The folks on the east coast would not be in the pickle they are in now.

 

[syi]

Oil money bro.

 

[ylexot]

Could you imagine if each house had an emergency generator that ran off of water. The folks on the east coast would not be in the pickle they are in now.

Hint...it takes electricity to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen and it is impossible to get more electricity out of the reverse reaction. Therefore, you're better off hooking whatever you want up to the battery instead of running a "water generator".

 

[buzzcon]

Hint...it takes electricity to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen and it is impossible to get more electricity out of the reverse reaction. Therefore, you're better off hooking whatever you want up to the battery instead of running a "water generator".

Very true, you need a battery to start the process, but once you are up and running, you could have the system charge that battery while running the generator. You could get way more power from a few gallons of water verses a fully charged deep cycle battery.

 

[ylexot]

Very true, you need a battery to start the process, but once you are up and running, you could have the system charge that battery while running the generator. You could get way more power from a few gallons of water verses a fully charged deep cycle battery.

What you describe is perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is impossible.

 

[buzzcon]

That Hydrogen generator in the video takes 5 amps to run. That is the same as a trickle charger. If you ran a charger that charged at 10 amps it would not run the generator, just keep the battery that is running it fully charged.

Perpetual motion is impossible, but in this case, you only have Hydrogen as long as you have water. It's the same as a gas engine but with one more process in the mix (running the Hydrogen generator creating the combustible gas). A gas engine still requires a battery to run because it needs a spark. There is no difference here.

 

[ylexot]

That Hydrogen generator in the video takes 5 amps to run. That is the same as a trickle charger. If you ran a charger that charged at 10 amps it would not run the generator, just keep the battery that is running it fully charged.

Perpetual motion is impossible, but in this case, you only have Hydrogen as long as you have water. It's the same as a gas engine but with one more process in the mix (running the Hydrogen generator creating the combustible gas). A gas engine still requires a battery to run because it needs a spark. There is no difference here.

Just a little incorrect...it takes 55 amps to run it.
Directory: Hydrogen Hog by Future Energy Concepts, Inc. - PESWiki.

And during the video, their amp gauge was showing 80 amps.

 

[buzzcon]

I must apologize for that error. I watched several videos on the subject and the 5 amp draw was from a smaller homemade version made of Aluminum. I still think there is a use for such technology.

 

[ylexot]

I must apologize for that error. I watched several videos on the subject and the 5 amp draw was from a smaller homemade version made of Aluminum. I still think there is a use for such technology.

Possibly, but it's not the panacea people seem to think it is. It could be useful for turning current vehicles into hybrid vehicles.

 

[buzzcon]

Plus the problem for people in colder areas. It would be a problem if/when the water freezes

 

[A.Nonymous]

Did a quick google search and came up with a few auto blogs and science mags who claim this is just another bunk claim.

Edit: Further reading seems to indicate that the reason why this fails is that the kW needed to start the reaction and keep it going are more than the actual energy output.

 

[buzzcon]

The first time I noticed anything about a Hydrogen generator was on the TV show Doomsday Preppers. One of the featured preppers was planning on using it to start fires.

 

[Bob Maxey]

This is just common sense.

Dodge Pickup Burns 100% Water as Fuel! - YouTube

Auto makers are clever and could put this into production in no time. I guess the only problem is if you live where it gets below 32 degrees often and the water freezes.

Could you imagine if each house had an emergency generator that ran off of water. The folks on the east coast would not be in the pickle they are in now.

Some of the tech is old hat, patented by many people and usually ends up being far less than the casual observer might think it is. Lots of YT videos showing how "great" this idea is while misunderstanding what some inventors actually did is simple physics, showmanship to raise investments or BULL S..

I remember an old magazine article about a small engine called the Loud Mouth. To increase power, water was injected. This added mass which increased speed of the little go-kart this engine was attached to.

Do your research before you start jumping for joy. Chances are, you will read about the people that will kill, kidnap or pay you off doe daring to hurt Big Oil. Big Oil has nothing to fear from some of these master inventors.

 

[ElasticNinja]

It would make a lot more sense to run the vehicle on liquid hydrogen. Of course, energy generation would need to be from a clean source too.

 

[A.Nonymous]

The biggest hurdle for any alternate fuel is the infrastructure thing. Even if you rolled out a hydrogen powered vehicle tomorrow and sold it for $5k brand new people wouldn't really line up to buy it because the infrastructure isn't there to fuel the thing. Not sure how you roll out the infrastructure when the vehicle isn't there and I'm not sure how you roll out a vehicle if the infrastructure isn't there to fuel it. It's a catch-22.

 

[ElasticNinja]

The biggest hurdle for any alternate fuel is the infrastructure thing. Even if you rolled out a hydrogen powered vehicle tomorrow and sold it for $5k brand new people wouldn't really line up to buy it because the infrastructure isn't there to fuel the thing. Not sure how you roll out the infrastructure when the vehicle isn't there and I'm not sure how you roll out a vehicle if the infrastructure isn't there to fuel it. It's a catch-22.

Yup that sure is a big problem. What we would want is to have the government get involved, help cover the cost of the infrastructure, and make the vehicles more financially attractive. And of course, replace the power generation infrastructure. Should be costly, but sure, how much is Sandy going to cost? A couple of dozen MW of possible nuclear capacity anyway.

 

[Gmash]

Yup that sure is a big problem. What we would want is to have the government get involved, help cover the cost of the infrastructure, and make the vehicles more financially attractive. And of course, replace the power generation infrastructure. Should be costly, but sure, how much is Sandy going to cost? A couple of dozen MW of possible nuclear capacity anyway.

Problem with that is half of our country thinks the government shouldn't do anything. Besides, that would be "picking winners and losers", right? But to be fair, we are pretty broke right now. A good start for hydrogen would be fleet vehicles, like police cars, trash trucks, taxi cabs, where they could have their own fueling facilities. That would at least get the technology out there in the real world.

 

[ylexot]

Problem with that is half of our country thinks the government shouldn't do anything. Besides, that would be "picking winners and losers", right? But to be fair, we are pretty broke right now. A good start for hydrogen would be fleet vehicles, like police cars, trash trucks, taxi cabs, where they could have their own fueling facilities. That would at least get the technology out there in the real world.

Here's how you invest in new technology with guaranteed results and no picking of winners and losers...X-Prize.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Problem with that is half of our country thinks the government shouldn't do anything. Besides, that would be "picking winners and losers", right? But to be fair, we are pretty broke right now. A good start for hydrogen would be fleet vehicles, like police cars, trash trucks, taxi cabs, where they could have their own fueling facilities. That would at least get the technology out there in the real world.

Fleet vehicles are exactly the place to start! The effort just has to be put in. The investment now will save a lot of money in the long run, its capital expenditure, not current.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Fleet vehicles are exactly the place to start! The effort just has to be put in. The investment now will save a lot of money in the long run, its capital expenditure, not current.

Here locally they use quite a few fleet vehicles that run on natural gas and have for decades. I can't say that it's made any impact on the general public's desire to own and operate said vehicles.

 

[buzzcon]

Here locally they use quite a few fleet vehicles that run on natural gas and have for decades. I can't say that it's made any impact on the general public's desire to own and operate said vehicles.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Natural Gas burning vehicles emit somewhat cleaner emissions? Plus it's cheaper?

 

[ElasticNinja]

Here locally they use quite a few fleet vehicles that run on natural gas and have for decades. I can't say that it's made any impact on the general public's desire to own and operate said vehicles.

Well half the point is the direct reduction in emissions, the other half is getting the infrastructure out there to reduce emissions further.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Natural Gas burning vehicles emit somewhat cleaner emissions? Plus it's cheaper?

Natural Gas is a more efficient fuel with less impurities alright. Still quite a bit of CO2 mind, but yeah. Its a good testing ground for hydrogen, which is more volatile.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Natural Gas burning vehicles emit somewhat cleaner emissions? Plus it's cheaper?

I think both of those statements are correct. Nevertheless if the point of deploying fleet vehicles is to drive the general public to adopt said vehicles I merely present our fleet locally as an example where that isn't happening at all.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Did a quick google search and came up with a few auto blogs and science mags who claim this is just another bunk claim.

Edit: Further reading seems to indicate that the reason why this fails is that the kW needed to start the reaction and keep it going are more than the actual energy output.

These stories have been around for a long time. Usually, the laws of physics is what kills the process and the dream. Somewhere along the chain, you will discover why these schemes never work.

Along with claims that the government will try to kill it or big oil or something like that.

I fondly recall the excitement when KSL TV--a local affiliate--reported on Ponds and Fleischman (SP?) and their breakthrough in cold fusion. Amazing breakthrough and it was a huge deal at the time.

So far, still not workable.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Natural Gas burning vehicles emit somewhat cleaner emissions? Plus it's cheaper?

There is a local car program sponsored by a large dealership. The show tries to help people select a car, fix the one they have and so forth. They devote lots of time to natural gas fuels and how you convert your car.

They like these conversions because the cost savings is quite good.

Many people are looking at hydrogen a a fuel, but it is not free because you need a way to produce the gas. Storage is a problem, so many are researching 'hydrogen sponges' to hold the gas.

Here in Utah, we have lots of gas available and the cost is cheap compared to dino juice. We also have a number of places to fill hydrogen vehicles.