Specialists required HHO to power the engine

J

Jamesuk

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 Apr 2007
Messages
2,522
Visit site
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a74uarqap2E

So Oil prices are going up, problems with The middle east and Scottish compassion, just need some billionaire to invest in this HOO principle and we should be sorted right? This subject goes completely over my head. The engineer tried to tell me about it and I got the rough gist but this is only day one learning about it.


Anyway I need to read up a lot more about this electrolysis of water.
 
Last edited:
Jamesuk said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a74uarqap2E
Click to expand...

Stanley Meyers? Complete rubbish. His supposedly water powered car never ran in front of witnesses and he was done for "gross and egregious" fraud on the investors he suckered.

His claim was basically that by electrolysing water with AC at the resonant frequency of the water molecules he could break it down with far less energy than it produced when recombining. This is so scientifically illiterate on so many levels and across so many fields that I find it hard to believe that anyone could be that stupid.
 
Ubergeekian said:
His claim was basically that by electrolysing water with AC at the resonant frequency of the water molecules he could break it down with far less energy than it produced when recombining. This is so scientifically illiterate on so many levels and across so many fields that I find it hard to believe that anyone could be that stupid.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the cold fusion nuts ever tried using the resonant frequency?
 
Ah well back to the future. Has anyone copywrited Mr Fusion yet? ;)
Added to compressed air car
asynchronous generator
perpetual motion machines

Still not sure about Tesla's energy tranmission system or tethered space stations with space lifts
makes you wonder who was the most insane Tesla or Edison
 
Hi again,

Just read the snakes oil comments and ++ I think the chap on the yacht I am on (Delivery Engineer) basically trying in simple terms to tell me all about it was showing me a car kit he bought 10 years ago.

http://www.schooluniforms.com/628710.html

And the idea instead of using solar was to use an alternator to give the power - requiring some sort of Starter motor. Anyway once again way over my head Day 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDCEvQegpug

Just after posting this I remember an engineer on a sunsail holiday telling me last Summer that Fuel Cells were terribly underfunded but they were slowly getting there in making them more effiecent.
 
Last edited:
Hi James

The confusion arises over the use of the term "fuel cell".

A genuine fuel cell converts a fuel into electricity. There has been a lot of development into cars using hydrogen as the fuel as this can be obtained on an industrial scale from the electrolysis of water. Fuel cells using alcohol or lighter fluid are also produced.

The electricity used to produce the hydrogen can be from a power station or from solar power.

Meyer's version of a "fuel cell" was impossible because the energy used to produce the electrolsis to generate the hydrogen was produced by the fuel cell itself, not by an external solar panel or power station.

Hope this helps

Richard
 
RichardS said:
Hi James

The confusion arises over the use of the term "fuel cell".

A genuine fuel cell converts a fuel into electricity. There has been a lot of development into cars using hydrogen as the fuel as this can be obtained on an industrial scale from the electrolysis of water. Fuel cells using alcohol or lighter fluid are also produced.

The electricity used to produce the hydrogen can be from a power station or from solar power.

Meyer's version of a "fuel cell" was impossible because the energy used to produce the electrolsis to generate the hydrogen was produced by the fuel cell itself, not by an external solar panel or power station.

Hope this helps

Richard
Click to expand...


Yes

and my understanding is that the total energy required to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen is greater than can be obtained by burning them to produce water, so its a bit of a waste of time. Like all those devices sold in 1960's to improve fuel consumption, if you fitted all of them the fuel tank should overflow as you drive . . .
 
Marsupial said:
and my understanding is that the total energy required to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen is greater than can be obtained by burning them to produce water, so its a bit of a waste of time.
Click to expand...

The opposite, oddly enough. As long as you keep the voltage reasonably low, electrolysis of water is endothermic, so it takes in heat from the surroundings (feeling cold as a result) and uses that as well as the electrical energy to do the cracking. You can therefore end up with more stored chemical energy than the electrical energy you put in.

I don't think you can get the benefit of it, though, as fuel cells are exothermic ...
 
Ubergeekian said:
The opposite, oddly enough. As long as you keep the voltage reasonably low, electrolysis of water is endothermic, so it takes in heat from the surroundings (feeling cold as a result) and uses that as well as the electrical energy to do the cracking. You can therefore end up with more stored chemical energy than the electrical energy you put in.

I don't think you can get the benefit of it, though, as fuel cells are exothermic ...
Click to expand...

yes its the benefit bit that lets it down, the higest quoted efficientcy is a theoretical 80% when considering the process and this includes the " free energy" component but the most probable is 35% when taking all losses into account (read my post above). so it is a bit of a waste of time and energy. Actually slightly less efficient than an electric car put at around 40% (average over all electricity generation and distribtion methods) when compared to a petrol car at 75%.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top