Journalism & The Media Television, radio, movies, newspapers, magazines, the Internet and more.

What do you think? Too good to be true?

Old 06-01-2006, 12:10 PM
Energy Independence!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Texas
Posts: 310
Default What do you think? Too good to be true?

I sincerely don't know what to make of this.
Is it for real? Or is it just another hoax like cold fusion?
Old 06-01-2006, 01:07 PM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New England
Posts: 1,518
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

Well... they are not telling you how the electricty is being produced... so it's not that the car runs on water. It run on water with electricity... but they don't tell you the electric source.
Old 06-01-2006, 01:20 PM
no more oil
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Palm Bay Florida
Posts: 230
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?


read the article. If this isnt a full blown hoax, then it could be an enormous breakthru. I wonder if water can become the hybrid source to couple with the plug in.

Old 06-01-2006, 01:54 PM
Pravus Prime's Avatar
Prof. of Hybridology
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,069
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

Very Interesting.
Old 06-01-2006, 01:59 PM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 955
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

The sticker on the side of his car said something about hydrogen. Certainly it's possible to use hydrogen for fuel, and it's also possible to make hydrogen gas out of water.

So it's kind of plausible, aside from the logistical problems, but there's a big catch: Energy efficiency. It takes more energy to make hydrogen gas out of the water than you get by burning the hydrogen gas as fuel. It's called conservation of energy, and it's a natural law. I'm not saying he couldn't do it- sure he could, if he can solve the logistics. It's just wasting some energy- because he must be burning gas to get the electricity to make the water into hydrogen gas (and OH-). Still- it sounds kind of fun. I just don't buy that this is some kind of miraculous breakthrough.
Old 06-01-2006, 02:35 PM
brick's Avatar
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 441
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

Hydrogen gas injection with gasoline has shown some promise for reducing NOx emmisions and allowing lean-burn operation. But a car that can run "exclusively" on hydrogen without some external fuel source...that doesn't make any sense. It works as an energy transfer mechanism, which is a completely different concept.

"Atomic Power of Hydrogen?"

No, it's just chemical. You consume energy to split the water molecule ino H2 and 02, you recombine them later and get your energy back (minus inefficiencies in whatever systems you use.)

"Chemical Stability of Water?"

No, once you split H2 and O2 you get an explosive gas. The ignition energy requirement is lower than any other gaseous mixture I can think of.

"100 miles...consumed 4 ounces of water"

Sure, why not. But it didn't supply the energy to get that 100 miles.
Old 06-01-2006, 02:52 PM
Delta Flyer's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lewisville (Dallas), Texas
Posts: 3,155
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

I'm waiting for a breakthru on anti-matter for propulsion.
Old 06-01-2006, 02:53 PM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Severna Park, MD
Posts: 1,089
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

yes. electrolysis, providing hydrogen either for injection to mix with gasoline or H2 combustion alone. Not a hoax at all, but highly misleading. 100 miles on four ounces of water...and how much gasoline was the H2 mixed with?

Like Leah said, electrolysis of water is energy-negative at the end of the day- whatever provides the electricity to split the H20 has to be replenished after driving- my guess is a load of batteries provides the energy to do it. Sure he can drive all day on water, but then he's gotta recharge them batteries! There's the rub.

As for the "HHO" gas, that's been sort of mysteriously claimed for a few dceades by several folks as being not-quite-a-water-molecule. This stuff is a bit like palladium in cold fusion- real enough of a material, but of dubious value in the way he claims.

Money-wise, it can still work at the personal level- water and wallsocket electricity is far cheaper than gas. But he sure isn't helping GHG emissions by using more juice from the powerplant. Unless he happens to have a PV or wind farm...

As for the torch, they've been around forever, including the onboard H2 generator. Not too effective for all but basic brazing or sweating pipe. H2 burns very clean (clear to pink-blue flame) and cool and the torch looks to be set up so all combustion is well away from the tip (no venturis in the nozzle). So the torch tip doesn't get very hot.

due diligence, following the links:

"Klein also has outfitted a 1994 Ford Escort station wagon with a smaller electrolyzer that injects his HHO into the gasoline in the car's engine. He said he has increased his mileage per gallon by 30 percent.

I suspect (but don't know) that, like acetone or high-octane fuel claims, the H2 acts as a sort of detergent in the cylinder, cleaning it- which can give impressive FE gains if one starts with a gunked engine initially. 5% or so I would buy on its own, but if he has data showing 30%, that is likely from cleaning the engine.
Old 06-01-2006, 04:56 PM
brick's Avatar
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 441
Default Re: What do you think? Too good to be true?

In order to see significant FE gains you need an engine that's designed for hydrogen injection. Small amounts of the stuff can stabilize combustion of lean mixtures, allowing an engine to burn mixtures that would have otherwise caused poor running conditions (and particularly high NOx output.) I have seen hydrogen-fed combustion experiments on a research engine that had an exhaust gas analyzer, and it really is impressive.

The problem is that a typical engine won't know to take advantage of this effect. The FI system will do the same thing it always does, which is to run close to stoichiometric. You might go very slightly lean due to hydrogen burning up a little of the oxygen, but only if you inject the hydrogen and throw away the oxygen. Injecting "HHO" would be oxygen neutral as far as the ECU is concerned.
Old 06-01-2006, 05:38 PM
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 521

Another perpetual motion machine.
It take energy to split-electrolysis-water in to H2 and O2.In fact it take a little more to split it, then they will produce when they recombine.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: What do you think? Too good to be true?

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.