As I said, if splitting water with the generator applies no more drag to the engine than normal use, this will work. How much power you get I don't know, but this could all be shortcutted by using the electricity to run an electric motor that drives the car in addition to the gas engine. The whole issue is in the question of how a car generator works, does it supply a constant and maximum drag to the engine at all times or only while charging. If constant and maximum then there is an inefficiency that could be tapped, but more efficiently by an electric motor than hydrogen conversion. But even greater efficiency would be had by freewheeling the generator when not in use.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,599
- 19
- 81
Per unit volume, yes, hydrogen does have fairly low energy, at least in the gaseous state. You're trying to compress the least-dense element in the Universe into a small enough space to be useful, without producing enough pressure to be insanely dangerous.Originally posted by: Vic
Energy is produced when water is formed. It's quite a stable molecule. You're not going to get energy out of it by turning it into hydrogen and oxygen. Simple as that.
If you've got a certain number of hydrogen and oxygen atoms, and react them to get 100W, you'll get a certain quantity of water. If you want to separate that water into hydrogen and oxygen, it's going to take at least 100W to do it.
Stupid people....."Duh, gee, gasoline is a clear liquid, and so's water! We should be able to use it in engines to produce energy!"
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Uh, well, I'm not sure their claims are true about mileage and such but you can do this. The issue that people seem to forget about is that alternators are usually oversized(duh) and thus have excess generation capacity. It'd be interesting to note the increase "drag" on the engine by using 100% of the alternator instead of ~75% though to see if the potential energy released by the water in the form of oxygena and hydrogen would make up for that extra usage. But yes, it does "work" to an extent - meaning that you can build this, put it in your car and it will run. A guy at work did just that. He never did realize any milage increase but we were surmizing that his system was too small and/or he had significant oxy/hyd leakage so it wasn't being sucked into the intake. I will also note that there are many FREE sites that discuss this so anyone who would PAY for this type of information is a gullable putz
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,307
- 136
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Per unit volume, yes, hydrogen does have fairly low energy, at least in the gaseous state. You're trying to compress the least-dense element in the Universe into a small enough space to be useful, without producing enough pressure to be insanely dangerous.Originally posted by: Vic
Energy is produced when water is formed. It's quite a stable molecule. You're not going to get energy out of it by turning it into hydrogen and oxygen. Simple as that.
If you've got a certain number of hydrogen and oxygen atoms, and react them to get 100W, you'll get a certain quantity of water. If you want to separate that water into hydrogen and oxygen, it's going to take at least 100W to do it.
Stupid people....."Duh, gee, gasoline is a clear liquid, and so's water! We should be able to use it in engines to produce energy!"
I recognize all this. It's just that hydrogen is so readily combustible that I wouldn't call it a "low energy fuel," especially when measured per unit mass.
The problem is not hydrogen as a fuel, but that almost all the hydrogen on earth is already locked up in water (and other compounds).
I think what Harvey meant is that hydrogen is not a fuel (or energy) source. It could, through fuel cells, possibly be a good form of energy storage, but that technology is still very expensive and a long long ways from being affordable.
CADsortaGUY
Do you think that the excess electrical capacity of a car charging system would produce hydrogen at any useful rate? I would think any production would be quite small.
I live in Ohio, and I am sure I know what would happen to my water tank in the winter.
Do you think that the excess electrical capacity of a car charging system would produce hydrogen at any useful rate? I would think any production would be quite small.
I live in Ohio, and I am sure I know what would happen to my water tank in the winter.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,307
- 136
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Uh, well, I'm not sure their claims are true about mileage and such but you can do this. The issue that people seem to forget about is that alternators are usually oversized(duh) and thus have excess generation capacity. It'd be interesting to note the increase "drag" on the engine by using 100% of the alternator instead of ~75% though to see if the potential energy released by the water in the form of oxygena and hydrogen would make up for that extra usage. But yes, it does "work" to an extent - meaning that you can build this, put it in your car and it will run. A guy at work did just that. He never did realize any milage increase but we were surmizing that his system was too small and/or he had significant oxy/hyd leakage so it wasn't being sucked into the intake. I will also note that there are many FREE sites that discuss this so anyone who would PAY for this type of information is a gullable putz
Tuners use underdrive crank pulleys all the time. It's not that big of a difference.
An alternator is an AC generator and one I also think it kicks which makes this hydrogen idea stupid.
The real idea of using water as a fuel is based upon the oxidation of aluminum metal in water.
rxn: 3 H2O + 2 Al --> Al2O3 + 3 H2 this reaction is extremely exothermic. So yes you produce hydrogen from water by dropping in some aluminum powder.
However... several huge problems:
Tons of energy is required to reduce Al2O3 back to pure aluminum so, in truth, Al and water would only a 'an energy carrier'... not an energy source.
When cheap energy is available from solar, hydro, geothermal, nuclear, etc. the aluminum water system could be used as a energy carrier.
But by the time solar is major contributor to world energy landscape... other superior energy carriers will be incredibly improved such as electric via ultra-capacitor batteries or compressed air (as mentioned above).
rxn: 3 H2O + 2 Al --> Al2O3 + 3 H2 this reaction is extremely exothermic. So yes you produce hydrogen from water by dropping in some aluminum powder.
However... several huge problems:
Tons of energy is required to reduce Al2O3 back to pure aluminum so, in truth, Al and water would only a 'an energy carrier'... not an energy source.
When cheap energy is available from solar, hydro, geothermal, nuclear, etc. the aluminum water system could be used as a energy carrier.
But by the time solar is major contributor to world energy landscape... other superior energy carriers will be incredibly improved such as electric via ultra-capacitor batteries or compressed air (as mentioned above).
I think what Harvey meant is, it would take more energy to separate free hydrogen from oxygen than the amount of potential energy in the hydrogen gas you'd get. Assuming we haven't transcended the laws of physics, there is no "pill" or other chemistry that will separate the hydrogen and oxygen comprising water and deliver a large quantity usable potential energy... even if you include all the power of all the wishes and all the fairy dust in the known and imaginary universe.
In other words, I smell bullshit. Those jokers belong in jail.
I meant that, as well. As Jeff7 noted, hydrogen doesn't have that much potential energy per unit volume. Fuel cells are a more efficient conversion process than burning it, and that makes hydrogen fueled vehichles possible, but adding some mystery oil to water in a conventional internal combustion engine is pure fantasy, and anyone selling it as such can only be a fraud.
If you believe this crap, I'd like to tell you about some time shares in a bridge someone's selling.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,307
- 136
Anyone who has actually read through the thread would know that I don't believe in the Brooklyn Bridge being sold here.
H2 gas per unit volume is a relatively low energy source, but per unit mass is quite good. And it's highly reactive with zero carbon emissions. It would be a near perfect fuel except for the fact there hardly isn't any naturally available on earth.
I'll quit split hairs here though, because what you meant is that H2 from water is a negative energy fuel.
H2 gas per unit volume is a relatively low energy source, but per unit mass is quite good. And it's highly reactive with zero carbon emissions. It would be a near perfect fuel except for the fact there hardly isn't any naturally available on earth.
I'll quit split hairs here though, because what you meant is that H2 from water is a negative energy fuel.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Actually, there are but three basic forms of energy in the Universe.
There are the basic nuclear processes of fusion or fission which involve converting mass to energy. And that process is basically a one way process
Then there are basic chemical reactions which can occur at only temperatures below where electron orbitals exist can around a atomic nucleus. And such chemical reactions can be driven either way in what amounts to a zero sum game.
Then there are a special set of chemical reactions where energy from the photons create chemical reactions which can power a life form. And where the beginning product of a plankton cell is important and the end product of a pig or a human is a parasite in that very process. As far is yet known, planet earth is the only known place in the universe where life in any form exists.
And there we must consult the higher life forms such as humans because they are assumed to be best able to think. And there was no higher thinker than someone like Einstein who has quite correctly pointed out that there is nothing in the entire universe known to be infinite except for one thing.
And that quantity is human stupidity itself.
So there you have it folks, we need a human stupidity engine and anandtech is a good place to start. We can thus generate infinite power.
There are the basic nuclear processes of fusion or fission which involve converting mass to energy. And that process is basically a one way process
Then there are basic chemical reactions which can occur at only temperatures below where electron orbitals exist can around a atomic nucleus. And such chemical reactions can be driven either way in what amounts to a zero sum game.
Then there are a special set of chemical reactions where energy from the photons create chemical reactions which can power a life form. And where the beginning product of a plankton cell is important and the end product of a pig or a human is a parasite in that very process. As far is yet known, planet earth is the only known place in the universe where life in any form exists.
And there we must consult the higher life forms such as humans because they are assumed to be best able to think. And there was no higher thinker than someone like Einstein who has quite correctly pointed out that there is nothing in the entire universe known to be infinite except for one thing.
And that quantity is human stupidity itself.
So there you have it folks, we need a human stupidity engine and anandtech is a good place to start. We can thus generate infinite power.
And it was either Harlan Ellison or Robert Heinlein who tied them together by observing, " The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity."
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
That is the issue at hand here, is the added fuel(oxy and hyd) to the mix more than the extra engine load.
However, there are other considerations since you are changing the oxygen content of the intake air - potentially making for better or more efficient burning of the liquid fuel. OR potentially changing it enough to confuse the "computer".
But yes, you have to deal with water freeze but if it's located in the right place, it will use the engine heat to warm/melt and then start the process. It wouldn't work for short commutes in that case.
But again, you'd have to run tons of trials just to get some good repeatable data, and lastly you'd need long term trials to make sure corrosion isn't a factor due to browns gas and any other gases released(due to not using PURE water), etc.
ericlp
Diamond Member
- Dec 24, 2000
- 6,133
- 219
- 106
why did it take 4 dollar per gallon gas to come up with this? Sheesh, I would think IF this were true we would see water powered cars hitting the markets like next week.... Unless your government wants you to continue to pay for high gas prices???
Maybe there is a conspiracy going on. Money talks and BS walks, I guess when you see the guy dead taken out by big oil industry then you will know he might have had a pretty good idea. What about the car that ran on air? I still don't see any reason why we are still selling cars that get less then 40MPG. But....I'll let you do the math.
Maybe there is a conspiracy going on. Money talks and BS walks, I guess when you see the guy dead taken out by big oil industry then you will know he might have had a pretty good idea. What about the car that ran on air? I still don't see any reason why we are still selling cars that get less then 40MPG. But....I'll let you do the math.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
SlickSnake
Diamond Member
- May 29, 2007
- 5,237
- 2
- 0
I developed a car that runs on piss.
There is a retractable attachment for male and female drivers.
"Never stop for piss breaks again!" is my slogan.
Comes with built in toilet paper dispensers located right below the cup holders.
The leather seating option is strongly recommended.
There is a retractable attachment for male and female drivers.
"Never stop for piss breaks again!" is my slogan.
Comes with built in toilet paper dispensers located right below the cup holders.
The leather seating option is strongly recommended.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 11K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter