Hank [BS/MSEE,
MSM $$$, Ph.D. Mgmt] teaches Entrepreneurship
&
Innovation and Marketing
@ Purdue University, W. Lafayette, Indiana USA.
His interests include students, anything involving technology, Social
Marketing,
brain-computer interfaces, and boomers as
entrepreneurs. He is also coordinator of Purdue's Certificate
in Entrepreneurship Program. Hank can be
reached 24/7 here: hank -at-entr200-dot-com.
My BIL Jerry recently sent me a wmv, a YT version of which is at the bottom of this blog. You sort it out for me - fact or fiction? Do a Google on “HHO” and you’ll see plenty of links. Air-powered cars, now water-powered cars. I guess the last link is “no power” cars. Hank
This is completely fact. To sum up what HHO is, or least my take on it, HHO can simply be an additive that increases octane of gas to a higher level or it can be a fuel all on itself.
The question is - how long is it going to be before we see mods for cars that include this and other energy saving or aiding technologies? If done right, modifications like this
Of course, if oil companies do really have a strong pull on what technologies come out regarding energy consumption, then it easy to assume that this technology won’t be readily available straight from the factory.
For me, knowing that it’s fact, and personally able to understand technology, I have already started looking at other sources out there on the topic of HHO. If interested yourself, there is one user on YouTube that comes to mind that definitely is for the newbie at this.
Check him out:
http://www.youtube.com/user/sm0ky40
It is fact, like quartermann said, but the the water-powered car is fake. It requires more energy to break the bonds than it would provide so it is not viable at the moment.
here is a link on snopes [check out Jimmy101’s comment):
http://msgboard.snopes.com/message/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/56/t/002848.html
It is similar to this:
http://yourerie.com/content/fulltext/?cid=2424
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwughofIC2s&mode=related&search=
They conveniently leave out how much energy it takes to run the machinery which happens to be much more than what it would finally output.
It’s obvious to anyone that has taken basic chemistry courses that nothing comes for “free”. The main point about this technology is that it is easier to control, environmentally friendly, and another alternative to fossil fuels. The more resources we pull together on technologies like this one and the one that my group presented on, Swift Enterprises, then the more likely we are going to become less dependent on the oil cartel and that in my opinion is critical for American security and business.
Amit is correct from what I have read.
I also agree with Amit, although I’m not chemical engineer. I know that it can be done but I also don’t believe it’s as simple as they make it seem. There’s obviously more to the process then just simply rigging up his ‘91 wagon and pouring water in the tank. This is something that I would literally have to see in person before I would completely believe it.
However, if this is a possibility, I’m with Gregory that it could be something that makes us less depended on the oil cartel. Anything that would make us less dependent on fossil fuels is something that should be researched as our time will eventually run out.
Amit has it. A few basic principals that this would violate (as being a practical fuel). First off is nothing in this world is 100% efficient, there MUST be losses. In Internal combustion engines (ICE) the MAX efficiency you can get is 33%, most are much closer to 20%. Because this would be applied to an ICE, it would still be horrendous. and because all this is really doing is taking Water, screwing with it a bit and then making water again, the only energy that you can use from it is what you put in it. It might work just fine for a torch, because the advantages that were described were so drastic, but for a car, it would require you to produce energy elsewhere to put into it, I.E. big waste of time.
Oh and on my note about ICEs being 33% efficient MAX, Electric motors in operation today have efficiencies greater than 98%. Now as yourself why the hell you still drive a car with an ICE in it.
Jim
You might be able to save on gas running in “hybrid” mode, but he never says what it costs in electricity to generate this, and he never said what he gets for MPG in hybrid mode. Seeing as he will have to pull energy from a storage device (battery) why not just use a god damn electric motor at 90 % efficiency???
(and before you make a comment that he can pull electricity from the battery in the car/alternator, remember that you can’t get something for nothing, that would end up giving you worse gas millage than not including his electrolysis machine.)
Wow, Mr. benzmacx has put his foot down on this one…
I completely agree, nothing will get 100% efficiency
there are some major points that must be taken into consideration:
Gas mileage MPG
electric efficiency
feasibility
cost efficiency(buyback rate)
environmental uplift
and mostly importantly will major dealers reform to a new source anyway?
I agree that its a fact, but it still seems to be ‘hypothetical’. This way of harvesting energy from water sounds great. The most potential value of this kind of fuel is not that it produces free energy, its that it produces minimal pollution and is renewable. However, as has been pointed out, it takes too much of energy in separation of water molecules, so it may be a not be the most efficient and convenient way. Also, safe storage of this kind of fuel is a question for me. I feel biodeisels and other biofuels like methane would be comparatively more acceptable!
HHO sounds too good to be true, and in life usually when it sounds too good - it is. Hydrogen is still very explosive, and my question for the inventor as related to cars would be, are you going to store it as HHO or store it as water to be converted before final use? If he intends to store it as HHO, can that explode in the engine? Also, if it is so great why did he make a hybrid and not a car that runs solely on water.
Now, for more positive things: anything that starts and ends as water cannot hurt the environment. And, water is abundant, so if we can figure this out there is a potential for unlimited energy resources.
I think HHO would be cool but I am cautiously optimistic like Kadi. I remember high school experiments where we made hydrogen gas and had to put a blowing stick in the jar and watch the gas combust. Not sure i want to be driving with that reaction going in front of me. I am curious to see if car companies are still pursuing this as Mary Rusek said a few major car companies have abandoned research into hydrogen powered cars.
That little pop that the hydrogen made is NOTHING compared to the violent, dirty explosion that is currently going on thousands of times per minute under your hood right now. The loud noises from cars have to come from something.
Just because is uses water, does NOT mean that is is green, at all. You go from water, to something with a higher energy content by ADDING ENERGY. All this is doing is putting energy into a more convenient container. You still have to account for where that energy comes from. In todays world its probably oil, coal, nat. gas or nuke. To which I say none are green.
?Q = mc?T
Change in energy = Mass of the object being heated * specific heat of object * Change in temp
for the 10,000°F (5927°C) tungsten matter, lets see how much energy would be needed to heat it. (Assumes 100% efficiency, which I have beaten to death cannot happen, so results would require more energy)
Call the mass 1g, which is basically nothing.
Specific heat of Tungsten is 0.134
assume room temp is 25°C (Generally Accepted I believe)
?Q = 1g * 0.134 * (5927 - 25)
?Q = about 590J
It took what looked like much less than a second to do that, so we will call it .5sec.
That means it takes 1.18 Kilowatts to heat a Gram of Tungsten (At earth’s surface, there is 453g in 1 pound).
To put that in perspective, my computer (Laptop) has a 75Watt power supply.
Also, a note about Tungsten, it has a pretty low specific heat - Water at 25°C is 4.18 and Iron is .45. Using either one of these would result in a drastic increase in the amount of energy required.
Needless to say, thats is quite a bit. Factor in the fact that is not 100% efficient, probably closer to 20 to 50% on a good day.
This means that a lot of energy has to come from somewhere to use this. WATER IS NOT THE FUEL! Water is a fuel delivery system!
That was probably more than most care about, but one thing that irritates me is people claiming they have found a new fuel “source” and construe it as the most ideal thing ever, when in reality its not a fuel source at all!
Jim
Question marks in odd places are Delta symbols, guess the forum doesn’t support them?
The chemistry is far beyond me, but apparently not beyond benzmacx. I agree with the comments made about efficiency; it cannot be 100% efficient because no system functions like that. On top of that the water is being used only as a fuel delivery system and not as fuel, as stated above, which really highlights how misleading this report is.
That’s the news for ya…
After looking up HHO gas on google I came across many websites that are selling these car kits that seem to be
easily installed in your car and they make it capable to run on HHO gas. Here is one of the many I came across.
If they work they are worth it because these kits are really cheap!
http://www.squidoo.com/hho-gas-car-kit-browns-fuel
ah, Hank. I’m sorry to see so much skepticism from your students. I’ve heard about HHO gas just over a year ago and, thanks to ‘Andrew Jobs’, I have a kit in the mail for my ‘98 Explorer. I know it has to work because they cited using a ‘98 Explorer as a test subject. I’d like to set some things straight. The video at the end of this file adds more if it helps.
First, HHO is H20 rearranged. Instead of the HOH structure of water, there is an HHO structure. This causes it to become a gas. This is not the same as Hydrogen, H2. Some comments displayed for concern because of Hydrogen’s highly flammable, compressed state when bottled in your car. This is true, but that is Hydrogen, not HHO.
Also, the second video points out some things. The reporter says the car can be 100% running off of HHO, but the man chose to make it a hybrid. In addition, the video below tells you that ‘as we drive, it is making the fuel on demand from water’.
Lastly, the company estimates it costs 70 Cents to make 1500 Liters! The reporter says that the HHO gas has hydrogen power with water’s stability. Personally, I don’t know how it works. It’s possible that it takes little energy to rearrange the molecules to HHO, while giving off much more energy when a flame and oxygen are added. It is possible considering energy from atomic sources. All mass has rest energy. Hydrogen has a lot of energy when at rest. Oxygen has some, but not as much as Hydrogen. It is possible that the HHO exploits this energy, but I don’t know the mechanics behind it, nor do I think they’re anxious to tell.
Hank, please let your students know if they’re still skeptical about HHO, check out the video below, or Hydrogen Technology’s website:
http://hytechapps.com
If the video doesn’t work, follow this link:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=02Lwea2JXdQ&feature=related
I say fact. But, will the public accept it as a fact? That is one of the biggest issues that I see. Another issue would be would this HHO fuel be able to work in all engines and replace every type of gas? Will diesel engines be able to run on this type of fuel? I also see this as being very dangerous for the user because you will be mixing water and electricity. If there is a defect in your car, or the user does not know how to properly use this new fuel system, then it could be a potential danger hazard.
I really have a hard time convincing myself if its a fact or fiction. I am leaning towards the fact side because of the research and experiments carried out in this particular field. It merely depends on the way you look at it.
What are the costs?
What are the costs? What are we going to have to pay for something like this?
For clarity, I am not writing this off as absolute BS. As I stated it is probably very good for welding, torches… It might also even be a valid way to power a car, only to get off of oil.
I am calling into question the logic of using this in a car. You need to have an extra batter that is not charged by the car. So it would come down to something that is probably less efficient/practical than a hybrid. You would have all the down sides of the ICE world (Massive energy loss due to inefficiencies of the ICE) and the downsides of the fully electric world (have to plug in your car every night, not being able to travel if your battery dies… Thats not really the case in hybrid mode tho).
Ashir brings up another good point about it working in all cars. The switch from leaded fuel to unleaded fuel was a big issue. The lead in the fuel provided padding for the valves and valve seats, so if you ran a car that required lead in the fuel on unleaded fuel without replacing the valve and valve seats (almost impossible until recent C&C machines) it would kill the head in no time. Same thing with this recent ethanol crap. Ethanol burns too “dry” and will have the same impact on cars that were not made for it. I do not know the repercussions (if any) on engines, but I would not be surprised if there were some.
And in the movie the inventor calls his machine an electrolysis machine. Electrolysis is the conversion of H20 to H2 and O2. So no, this technology does not create some “re-arranged” water molecule to burn. There is a pretty basic explanation for this, but I don’t feel like getting into the chemistry. Look up Covalent and Polar bonds, then figure out how H2, O2 and Water are bonded. Then try to figure out two Hs bonded together and then to an O.
Jim
I came back to check to see if anyone responded, and noticed hanks comment to google HHO. So I did. According to Wikipedia HHO is simply a gaseous mixture of H2 and O2. Exactly what I have been saying. They also mentioned the prevalence of Water powered car scams, as well as reiterating my points about how water cannot add any extra power on its own. You can sort of think of it as a catalyst…
2H2O Energy –> 2H2 O2
2H2 O2 –> 2H2O Energy
Thats the reaction taking place.
So before you go out and put one in your car, make sure its not a scam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyhydrogen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car
I am not knowledgeable enough about energy saving technologies to comment on the viability of this, however I will take it for granted that its legit based on what i’ve read from others with technical expertise in the field. I think it is of the utmost importance to promote all forms of energy independence in order as right now the U.S. is helplessly dependent on duplicitous and despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia and this is terrible for national security. This is commonly stated but I feel like people don’t really understand the scope of the problem, It is one of the greatest ironies that Saudi Arabia is practically the epicenter of global terrorism and yet we cannot stand up to them or take a hard stance against them diplomatically because of oil.
This is not energy independence!!! This technology needs to get energy from somewhere! I say, what is the point of using this to power an ICE?? There are two energy conversions there, one of which is just about the least efficient thing we have.
If you are going to change the world, change the world.
Jim
is it just another scam?
http://www.water4gas.com is one site that shows how to put things together.
I drive a Nissan Titan and everytime I put gas it costs me $100. If it would save me $20-$30 on each fill-up I would probably spend $200 to get this system.
Of course all their claims on the website cannot be taken as a fact. I would have to see one installed, drive the car and see how much money it saves. No company offers money back if your efficiency does not go up and most companies sell only Info on how to make your own. No mass production from any big name company yet.
Why doesnt any big company make it?
Too risky. They would have to sell it at $400-600 installed and if gas prices go down nobody will buy them, therefore all investment in the production line will go through the window.
My friend just got a system and will install it on a Toyota truck. I will let you know in two weeks how it works.
The theory behind hho is simple.I’m not a chemical engineer but in my years of RnD in mechanical engineering I at least can figure this theory out at a glance. (to protect my company and my rep I’m not revealing 100% of the info but you can figure it out)First you use electroXXXX to seperate the molecules(h-h-o)you use metal plates in the water and run a charge from your battery to basically fry the h gas out of the water(it bubbles releasing ?(you guessed it!! Gas) thats 2parts hydrogen one part being h gas that is seperated and feeds into the intake vacuum caused by your moter. 2) the gas is burned in the fuel mixture just like adding nitrous to race cars for more horsepower.thus achieving better gas mileage.Very simple consept.You have to use more then water in the water reservoir and since your bypassing the oxygen fuel mixture YOU HAVE TO ADJUST THE OXYGEN INPUT to get optimal fuel efficincey.Thats where everybody does wrong.So to some it up YES YOU CAN GET 20% TO 50% MORE EFFICINCY.Due to the fact that I’m starting to make kits that are safer with relay switches and valves becouse it is dangerous ,becouse it is a flammable gas but so is gasoline!!!The car companies dont wanna mess with better gas milage bet you didnt know that imports get better mpg becouse they recycle the gas combustion!!Thus getting better exhaust emmisions as well.Well Im making my ford windstar run on it and Ill let you people know the results and like Stanley Meyers Ill make the info to tweak free so we can end our dependenced on FOSSIL fuels (MMM THAT WORD SOUNDS LIKE A LIMITED SUPPLY)but for now, Im designing as we speak, a safer system so I’m not responsible for what happens becouse there are alot of stupid people in the world( if you dont consider yourself stupid, then I’m not talking about you).IE;I’ll be installing them through a franchised garage service and I bet people will forget to check and fill the water reservoir as they refuel.P.S. the water needs to be a mixture, so picture charging a battery and the s acid boils and you have to release that gas or vent it.So to some it up for benzmacx ,the energy first comes from your battery, charging the water then the h gas is sucked into your fuel, air, and now hy gas mixture,and operates you ICE motor.saves petor gas becouse in theory gas,air,and liquid takes up space in your intake thus IT WORKS.Dont forget youll have to tweak the fuel mixture for optimal performance.By the way hy gas turns into WATER as emission, (chemistry 101,gas from liquid returns to its prior state when enclosed) .Maybe bypass a recycle collecter in the exhaust MMM I better get back to my project ( If your going to reply, keep it simple especially you students,I have engineering books to but it rolls of my head,so that other people can understands). The Law of Change
“A law of Physics establishes a proven function based on “preset” conditions…
Change anyone of the conditions and the law no longer applies”
Stanley A. Meyer
Ive been looking into this “HHO” device for a few hours now. I am a natural born sceptic and love reading all the posts from my fellow scientific minds. I know nothing about Chemistry but a lot about mechanical and Electrical theory.
my first point, You are to focused at the H’s and O’s Look at the whole Chemical reaction of the Atmosphere/gasoline Mixture (input and output) and then with the Extra H’s and O.
My point being say our atmosphere was made of argon? a gas motor would not work at all, right? Hook up the HHO devise in this circumstance could combustion take place? resulting in an infinite power increase over no reaction at all. I don’t think this Devise can work burning its bi products as a standalone fuel source and be efficient. But I think Bettering the atmosphere side of the equation of the air fuel combustion reaction COULD result in a better burn adding more power or mpg. I can change the equation of the reaction taking place in my motor with additives like nitrous of water-methanol injection, and the result is more power. (but yes I am Adding stored Fuel) but wait…
I currently (like ten of thousands of other motor heads) Inject Water with a 30 methanol into my motor, I see 195hp gain on a 180 hp 2.0l motor when injecting water/meth mix. I still see a HP increase when just injecting pure water!!!!! All your old school Hot Rodders who’ve played with Superchargers now what I’m talking about. I know why this is possible. I’m lowering the chamber temps and increasing the compression ratio of the motor (water doesn’t compress like Gasses do ) So all chemist you need to look at all the variables .
Your right, in a test tube this doesn’t work but in a motor it might. look at all the variables.
Whose to say God gave us the most efficient atmosphere to burn gasoline in?
I get better gas mileage in the summer but make more power in the winter, I also make more power at sea level? Temperature, pressures are some variables to the MPG question. look at everything they are doing. not just the equations of this stupid device with a match.
My other point…. Has anyone ever analyzed the tailpipe emissions of a car equipped with this to see if the output is indeed ‘different’, meaning a meaningful reaction is taking place?
or to see just what the emissions are?
The auto makers can make REALLY High mpg cars, but they cant make them comply with EPA emission standards. (Chinese made scooters that get 80mpg but pollute more than a 100 suv’s, http://wweek.com/editorial/3240/7867 .)
what if I generated electricity off my brakes to split water?
I read the discussion with interest as the oil price is sky high. Hi Toni, how was the result from your friend on his test?
I was very intrigued at first at the pssibilities of HHO gas for vehiculiar transporation as a way to convert or modify existing ICE’s, however, the more I reserched (Youtube, Google, myspace), most of those people performing these experiments are one guy in his garage trying to work out the possibilities with little scientific training or knowledge of chemical exchange, combustion or mass. I feel that the possibilities are availabe and it is possible that someone in the future may come up with a means of working out the various problems associated with this new technology. Yes, if it were possible today, some company (GM, Ford, etc.) would already be hard at work producing such vehicles and getting the jump on the competition instead for filing record breaking losses each quarter. This technology is new, and will require much in the way of reaserch and development before you can go to your local filling station and say “fill ‘er up” with a quart of H2O. Who knows, what the future holds… as for myself I am crrently conducting research and exerimentation on this technology.
There is research paper by JPL from around 1972 in which HHO was used as a combustion exciter.
What was done was that when a small quantity of HHO was added to a very lean mixture, the H2 and 02 became free radicals and fully migrated into the combustion mixture and allowed a more complete burn with much lower emissions.
Use as a complete fuel doesn’t seem practical, again, as stated by others, because of the conversion energy requirements. It would seem to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
I believe the address for this information is http://www.paneacauniversity.com I’m not sure of that address, or the spelling, so a Google search is probably in order.
Ok, I didn’t realize there was still a discussion on this…
Stanley, I just attempted to point out that the energy has to come from somewhere. And you attempted to say that it comes from the battery. Well sure it does! But what happens when you do not recharge your battery? Well suddenly there is not more stored energy in it and your little Hydrolysis reaction can no longer work. Solution - the alternator in your car draws rotational power from the engine and turns it into electric power.
You CANNOT get something for nothing. Think an alternator’s draw is insignificant? My 70amp alternator draws about 2HP. A modern alternator draws over 5HP. Any amount of power the draws must be added to that. It is significant enough where BMW is putting larger batteries in their cars to reduce the time the alternator needs to be on which in turn saves gas. Consider that while cruising at highway speeds your are only using 20-25HP. You now want to bring that to 30-35HP, a 40 to 50% increase in needed power. Then factor in the inefficiencies of the ICE and it is even high losses. I am not saying that this will negatively impact your fuel millage, I am saying that it is probably not worth the investment. Someone before me figured out some fiancees of the situation but left out set up costs. Either your time or your money paying someone else to install it.
And you will NEVER break the max. efficiency of an ICE, no matter what games you attempt to play with the fuel/air ratio.
If you would disclose who you worked for for some many years in R&D that would be great.
EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation) does absolutely NOTHING to improve fuel economy! It is a technology to reduce emissions by running burt fuel/air back into the cylinders to ensure a complete and more ideal burn of the exhaust gasses.
and relying on the big companies to do everything for us is ridiculous. I think the point of this blog is to show how UNTRUE that is. Big companies have one thing in mind - What next quarters numbers look like.
Oh, and your MPG is not effected by temperature or altitude as today’s cars (going back to the early 80s… anything with any type of fuel injection really) have Intake Air Temperature (IAT) and Altimeter sensors for metering how much fuel and how much air should be put in the car at any altitude and air temperature. Your max power will decrease slightly, but MPG will not change in any discernible manner unless you are still sporting a carburetor in which case I must ask why you brought that to a discussion on efficiency?
Jim