Using water for fuel
- Thread starter The_Architect
- Start date
What do you think of this technology?
New process generates hydrogen from aluminum alloy to run engines, fuel cells
I think it is very interesting.
I seem to recall hearing about research into new nuclear plants that heat steam even hotter and can be used for Hydrogen generation... though I'm drawing a blank on the details... either way I agree a car just doesn't generate the power, and even if it did it'd probally be more efficient to use the power to directly power electric motors rather than fighting the chemical bonds.
The amount of energy required to produce Hydrogen is one of the major obsticals for the technology.
Thats different from electrolysis... I'm not sure about the details of your rocket there but if it's Acid you are putting in there, the Hydrogen comes from the Acid, not the from the Water in your rocket. The electric current would just help to move the system equilibrium in favor of free Hydrogen, or maybe to help the hydrogen combine (Hydrogen gas is diatomic - 2 hydrogen molecules together)
Point is - the hydrogen comes from the acid (which dissolves in water), not the from water itself, where as the ad claims to use your car battery or whatever to seperate the oxygen and hydrogen from water molecules
And of course there is no such thing as a perfect engine, so you will lose energy to heat and the like.
No such thing as energy for free...
This is legit IMO. I've seen this before online and on TV. Unfortunately, they are being virtually ignored due to oil interests and biofuel interests.
I happen to believe Hydrogen power is the alternative fuel future. Just need to get some more money behind it.
The concept of biofuels is not even close to as viable and clean for the environment as Hyrdrogen is. In fact, an argument could be made the biofuels are worse for the environment than oil. Not to mention, your engine doesn't get near the MPG with ethanol.
I think biofuels are VERY over-hyped, however there are still issues with Hydrogen too.
One of them being it takes a lot of energy to seperate it from water, and if that electricity is being supplied from coal/oil, you aren't really helping anything, you're just shuffling around where the pollution comes from
Same is true of the biofuels - you have to look at how much oil goes into growing the corn/processing it (fertiliziers, diesel for tractors, trucks to transport the biomass, power for the plant, ect)
One of them being it takes a lot of energy to seperate it from water, and if that electricity is being supplied from coal/oil, you aren't really helping anything, you're just shuffling around where the pollution comes from
Same is true of the biofuels - you have to look at how much oil goes into growing the corn/processing it (fertiliziers, diesel for tractors, trucks to transport the biomass, power for the plant, ect)
I bet this product works as well as the "tornado" that goes in your intake system. Pure snake oil! Keep that stuff far far away from my vehicles.
H2 fuel cell technolgy is legit but THIS technology is a load of crap. Your can produce this gas one of two ways: catalysts or electrolysis. Electrolysis requires electricity. Catalysts are consumed and you need free catalyst (e.g., catalyst recycle) and catalyst recycle consumes energy. Where will this extra energy come from?
All your doing is shifting energy from oil to another source like coal, nuclear, etc.
All your doing is shifting energy from oil to another source like coal, nuclear, etc.
Last edited:
What Brian means is that it takes more energy to make the hydrogen from water than what is used when it is burned. You would have to introduce additional hydrogen just to keep the generator running.
In your example, it would take more energy to run the cars generator to make the hydrogen than the burnt hydrogen would produce.
In other words, the generator running to make the electricity could not run off the hydrogen it is creating. It would need additional hydrogen. This all = a net usable energy loss.
I agree that hydrogen has the most upside of all the current alternative fuels, but there are laws of chemistry and thermodynamics that make this gimmick just that, a gimmick.
That's very true but most reputable studies show a positive energy balance, especially when cellulosic ethanol is used.
The problem is there is no ONE solution. It's possible the West coast predominantly will use hydrogen tech while we use biofuels in the midwest. Ultimately the consumer will decide.
Personally, I love the GLASS jar sitting under your hood. One speed bump and "crash". That jar is toast. That website was the longest sell I have ever looked at....scam.
What we really need is a cheap sustainable and non polluting form of electricity generation. And love it or hate it, the only thing available to use right now, is nuclear. But the environmentalists go wacko about that.
This thread makes me laugh.
My first thought, What a bunch of nerds we have here. (myself included)
Secondly, I believe they tested this thing on Mythbusters. Busted.
My first thought, What a bunch of nerds we have here. (myself included)
Secondly, I believe they tested this thing on Mythbusters. Busted.
