Water for fuel. Is this really possible ?

[RED78]

Who is gonna be the first to run their JEEP on water ?
http://www.runyourcarwithwater.com/?hop=watertt
Is this for real or just smoke and mirrors ?

[Cave Gimp]

SMOKE and MIRRORS!!!!

It takes more energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water that you get by burning the hydrogen.

[BushDawg]

.

[brian lujan]

if it works it works

[brewmeister dan]

They actually did a MythBusters on this once! They found that there was no way any of the products could work the way they said they would. The only way to get any kind of benefit from hydrogen they found was to use a tank of hydrogen blowing into the intake. All the other products were pretty much scams:001_9898:, they concluded.

In the video, he talks about HHO gas. It's also known as Brown's Gas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO#Klein.27s_design

[Andrew F]

I have been looking into this for a while. They don't want you to run the car on just hydrogen, just supplement hydrogen and oxygen for some of the gas.

I have a copy of the book if you want to see it. PM me and I will get it to you to look at. I may try it this summer because I have most of the materials needed to do it. There is a whole conspiracy theory behind the guy who is famous for using this.

SMOKE and MIRRORS!!!!

It takes more energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water that you get by burning the hydrogen.

I don't understand charging systems completely, but if the alternator is spinning, it is spinning, right? So it is making energy no matter what, even if you don't use all of it. Maybe I am wrong?

[KennethS]

The alternator is being driven by the engine, so the energy used to run the engine is what is powering the alternator. When the alternator has to output more current, as when there is a larger load attached to it (such as this system), it takes more engine power to drive it, thus more energy consumption by the engine.

You don't get "free energy" out of the alternator.

[Andrew F]

Is there anything in the alternator that causes a physical load on the engine to change? So is there a difference in the load on the engine when it is just running and when I have all my lights on and my radio is running? How exactly does an alternator work, doesn't it have a coil type setup that has a magnet spinning in it? I know that is a lot of questions, but I really want to know how this all works.

[CJ5_Jeff]

This is quite old but check the video out and Google this guys name "Stan Meyer"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6yRn4IAsrU

He was murdered, or at least that is the story. His inventions mysteriously disappeared, I am sure its being looked after by "Top Men" right next to the arc of the covenant.

[ob1jeeper]

Is there anything in the alternator that causes a physical load on the engine to change? So is there a difference in the load on the engine when it is just running and when I have all my lights on and my radio is running? How exactly does an alternator work, doesn't it have a coil type setup that has a magnet spinning in it? I know that is a lot of questions, but I really want to know how this all works.
Basically what this clown is trying to convince you of, is that he has found a way to trans-mute the laws of physics... Specifically the laws regarding the conservation of energy, which in effect states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only change forms...

Cave Gimp gave it to you straight... This is nothing more than BS smoke & mirrors, and an attempt at creating energy from nothing... Which is simply NOT possible...;)

[Curly]

Is there anything in the alternator that causes a physical load on the engine to change? So is there a difference in the load on the engine when it is just running and when I have all my lights on and my radio is running? How exactly does an alternator work, doesn't it have a coil type setup that has a magnet spinning in it? I know that is a lot of questions, but I really want to know how this all works.

Yes the alternator has a spinning magnet in it, the Rotor. The strength of the magnetic field determines the output of the alternator, along with speed. The magnetic Field is controlled by the regulator on older vehicles, and by the computer on the newer cars.
The field creates electricity in the stator which is output to the battery and other electrical devices.

The magnetic field of the Rotor can create quite a drag. The best example I can give is if you have ever jump-started someone with a dead battery. If your engine is running when the connections are made (bad idea,by the way) you will hear your engine slow as the alternator tries to up its output to charge the dead battery.

Curly

[Andrew F]

Basically what this clown is trying to convince you of, is that he has found a way to trans-mute the laws of physics... Specifically the laws regarding the conservation of energy, which in effect states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only change forms...

Cave Gimp gave it to you straight... This is nothing more than BS smoke & mirrors, and an attempt at creating energy from nothing... Which is simply NOT possible...;)

Don't worry, I have a pretty good understanding of the conservation of energy. I am still wondering how an alternator works.

[Andrew F]

Yes the alternator has a spinning magnet in it, the Rotor. The strength of the magnetic field determines the output of the alternator, along with speed. The magnetic Field is controlled by the regulator on older vehicles, and by the computer on the newer cars.
The field creates electricity in the stator which is output to the battery and other electrical devices.

The magnetic field of the Rotor can create quite a drag. The best example I can give is if you have ever jump-started someone with a dead battery. If your engine is running when the connections are made (bad idea,by the way) you will hear your engine slow as the alternator tries to up its output to charge the dead battery.

Curly

Thank you!

[TanTJJim]

Basically what this clown is trying to convince you of, is that he has found a way to trans-mute the laws of physics... Specifically the laws regarding the conservation of energy, which in effect states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only change forms...

Cave Gimp gave it to you straight... This is nothing more than BS smoke & mirrors, and an attempt at creating energy from nothing... Which is simply NOT possible...;)

x2, and doesn't anybody watch Mythbusters?

[Andrew F]

x2, and doesn't anybody watch Mythbusters?

As much as I love that show, some of their procedures can be pretty far off, which is pretty evident by the fact they have entire shows dedicated to retesting myths with better methods and sometimes even changing their decisions.

[Turtle]

Funny to read about this here! I saw the claims about this and was wondering myself...

It seems the consensus is that it is bogus and no way it works... However, some claim it will work... So lets do this...

Can anyone tell me WHY or HOW running this setup could cause any harm to the motor of your vehicle?? If there is no negatives, I will take the bait and try it... I have been lookin' for people that have ACTUAL first hand experience with it, but its far and few online.

Andrew... lets give it a shot! We'll build systems for our rigs, run em' and report results to prove it once and for all... at least on the VJC!!

I am really curious!

Turtle

[Andrew F]

Andrew... lets give it a shot! We'll build systems for our rigs, run em' and report results to prove it once and for all... at least on the VJC!!

I am really curious!

Turtle

I am all for it. We either win with better millage, or we learn something and can give proof to others it doesn't work.

[TanTJJim]

Hey guys, have fun trying. If nothing else it will be a lesson in physics and chemistry. But as others have said on here, it won't work as intended. Will it break down the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen? Yes. Will it be in sufficient enough quantities to run your engine? No.

I do have a question for you Andrew. With your knowledge of the conservation of energy will you please explain to the rest of us exactly how this will work without defying the laws of physics?

[Andrew F]

Hey guys, have fun trying. If nothing else it will be a lesson in physics and chemistry. But as others have said on here, it won't work as intended. Will it break down the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen? Yes. Will it be in sufficient enough quantities to run your engine? No.

I do have a question for you Andrew. With your knowledge of the conservation of energy will you please explain to the rest of us exactly how this will work without defying the laws of physics?

Sure, it's called magic. I pull out my book of magic spells, a few ingredients, and let the mystical actions take over.

j/k

Everyone in the world knows it takes more energy to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen than what you get converting it back to water. I never asked for a lesson on the conservation of energy, I ask for a lesson on how exactly an alternator works, and how it could cause a varying load on a motor because I wasn't sure. From what it sounds like, I can get better gas millage by turning off my radio and only running one headlight. Probably still be more effective to just drive my brothers car at 33mpg when I need to go across town.

[TanTJJim]

No, I was asking YOU for the lesson on conservation of energy as I obviously don't know :D

[TanTJJim]

Everyone in the world knows it takes more energy to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen than what you get converting it back to water. .

You also might want to re-think that statement because the EXACT amount of energy that is used to separate a certain amount of water into hydrogen and oxygen is EXACTLY the same amount of energy that you will get when that certain amount of hydrogen and oxygen is converted back to water. Think about it before you tell me I'm wrong.

[Andrew F]

No, I was asking YOU for the lesson on conservation of energy as I obviously don't know :D

haha :D,

There is actually a system out there that some company makes that is suppose to separate the hydrogen and oxygen from the "HHO" gas, and then make the car run more efficiently with it. I'm not sure how that is suppose to work because I didn't look into it, so I can't explain what difference it makes. They did want $500 for it, so I imagine the only difference anyone would see is in the manufactures pocket. Sure was a spiffy website, though.

I really don't see hydrogen ever being a practical gas to run a vehicle on, and I have very little faith my gas millage will go up. But, I have all summer to do nothing except work and waste time, so I can at least try this since I won't have to buy many parts for it because I have a lot of the supplies laying around.

[JTsJK]

The alternator is being driven by the engine, so the energy used to run the engine is what is powering the alternator. When the alternator has to output more current, as when there is a larger load attached to it (such as this system), it takes more engine power to drive it, thus more energy consumption by the engine.

You don't get "free energy" out of the alternator.

Is the alternator always making just enough power or does it create more than is needed? If that is the case and the power needed to separate H2O is less than the extra power generated by the alternator, at leatst that part of the myth might be true. (Putting aside the laws of physics for the rest of the problem that is.)

[Andrew F]

You also might want to re-think that statement because the EXACT amount of energy that is used to separate a certain amount of water into hydrogen and oxygen is EXACTLY the same amount of energy that you will get when that certain amount of hydrogen and oxygen is converted back to water. Think about it before you tell me I'm wrong.

Looks like you loose energy in heat during the electrolysis.

From wikipedia (I know, not a good source)

Efficiency

Water electrolysis does not convert 100% of the electrical energy into the chemical energy of hydrogen. The process requires more extreme potentials than what would be expected based on the cell's total reversible reduction potentials. This excess potential accounts for various forms of overpotential by which the extra energy is eventually lost as heat. For a well designed cell the largest overpotential is the reaction overpotential for the four electron oxidation of water to oxygen at the anode. An effective electrocatalyst to facilitate this reaction has not been developed. Platinum alloys are the default state of the art for this oxidation. The reverse reaction, the reduction of oxygen to water, is responsible for the greatest loss of efficiency in fuel cells. Developing a cheap effective electrocatalyst for this reaction would be a great advance.

The simpler two electron reaction to produce hydrogen at the cathode can be electrocatalyzed with almost no reaction overpotential by platinum or in theory a hydrogenase enzyme. If other, less effective, materials are used for the cathode then another large overpotential must be paid.

The energy efficiency of water electrolysis varies widely with the numbers cited below on the optimistic side. Some report 50–70%[2], while the theoretical maximum efficiency of the electrolysis of water is between 80–94%.[3] These values refer only to the efficiency of converting electrical energy into hydrogen's chemical energy. The energy lost in generating the electricity is not included. For instance, when considering a power plant that converts the heat of nuclear reactions into hydrogen via electrolysis, the total efficiency may be closer to 30–45%.[4]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Efficiency

[TanTJJim]

I knew you were going to have to go to the internet for that one. :) I hope you know I'm just giving you a hard time with this, but you're over thinking my statement.

You stated that there is an energy loss in the form of heat. If you really knew the laws on conservation of energy you would realize that you cannot create or destroy energy, only change the form. Therefore the energy "loss" in the form of heat is not an energy "loss" at all because we know it is possible to "loose" energy. Simply stated, it was merely a change in the form of energy.

[Andrew F]

I knew you were going to have to go to the internet for that one. :) I hope you know I'm just giving you a hard time with this, but you're over thinking my statement.

You stated that there is an energy loss in the form of heat. If you really knew the laws on conservation of energy you would realize that you cannot create or destroy energy, only change the form. Therefore the energy "loss" in the form of heat is not an energy "loss" at all because we know it is possible to "loose" energy. Simply stated, it was merely a change in the form of energy.

I know this is all in friendly banter. I was approaching the problem from the aspect that I can't use any energy that I don't have. After you quoted my statement, I realized I didn't qualify my statement. I have made no statement about being an expert on this, and when I said I have a "pretty good understanding", I meant that to be literal. I have a good enough understanding to see what is going on at the level we are discussing, and probably to understand most of the science that works (or doesn't work) in this process, as long as we don't do too many math proofs because that is where I start to get my but kicked. I was just trying to make the point that a lot of people jumped in here and gave a one sentence answer with no explanation, or tried to answer a question that wasn't asked and have that be the final word.

Anyways, I learned some more about this process tonight that further makes me believe that is won't work, so it's not like this was a waste or anything. This is probably the most techinical thread this board has seen in a while, lol.

[TanTJJim]

Hey, it's nice being able to have a discussion about something like this with people who can grasp the concepts behind them. That's most of the reason I posted what I did is for the few that understand where I was going with that will be able to relate that to the discussion and realize that the "water for fuel" thing just plain won't work.

I'm with you on the fact that I couldn't give you the exact equations to be able to prove my point but I found a good quote that supports my thoughts. And I've been dying to use it for the past couple weeks so here you go.

"I consider that I understand an equation when I can predict the properties of its solutions, without actually solving it."

P.A.M Dirac, physicist

[Andrew F]

"I consider that I understand an equation when I can predict the properties of its solutions, without actually solving it."

P.A.M Dirac, physicist

I like that quote a lot.

[TanTJJim]

I like that quote a lot.

Me too, I bookmarked it as soon as I saw it. Found it on a website that goes pretty in depth into electronics. All the way from Ohm's law to integrated circuits and EVERYTHING in between. If you're at all interested here is where I found it. http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_7/4.html

[Andrew F]

Me too, I bookmarked it as soon as I saw it. Found it on a website that goes pretty in depth into electronics. All the way from Ohm's law to integrated circuits and EVERYTHING in between. If you're at all interested here is where I found it. http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_7/4.html

Thanks. I bookmarked the page, but as I started scrolling down, I decided it was way to late to start reading that, lol. I'll definitely start taking a look through that tomorrow.

[BushDawg]

.

[Cave Gimp]

OK, I know I left a 1 line comment, mainly because I'm lazy and didn't want to get into an in depth conversation about the subject. It was very nice to read the conversation this morning. And of course since this is the INTERNET I need to add my own bit. :)

The issue here is efficiency. If you have a system that is 50% efficient, you "loose" 50% of the energy. Actually the energy is converted to another form that can't be used for the purpose, like the heat energy in our engines. If we could better capture that energy the simple internal combustion engine (Otto Cycle) would improve in efficiency. The real issue with the water to hydrogen thing is efficiency. We start with gas and convert it to mechanical energy. This process is pretty inefficient. )sorry I can't recall the numbers but its like 40% efficiency) Next our alternator takes the mechanical energy and converts it to electrical energy, again with loss, or an efficiency of less than 100%. After that the water to hydrogen system would use the electrical energy to get the hydrogen, again a loss would occur. Then this hydrogen would be burned, turning into mechanical energy, at a loss. So in the end you have several energy conversion processes that have efficiencies less than 100%, so the total efficiency would be less than 100%. This is why the system fails. You would end up loosing so much energy (mainly due to heat, but friction is a player here as well) that you wouldn't see a mpg drop.

Now if your alternator is producing more electricity that the Jeep is using, this might work. I'll let the electrical and car guys answer that one.

Now as far as using hydrogen as a fuel source, it would be good, pollution is nearly nonexistent. The issue is where do we get the energy to convert water to hydrogen? From a gas power power plant, a coal plant, a huge solar array, nuclear power? Thats the bigger debate that I think BushDawg was referring to.

Also keep in mind our gasoline powered engines use the Otto Cycle (OK is sort of a combination of the Otto and Diesel Cycles). These cycles can only get so efficient, heat loss is a big reason, but so is the friction losses, as well as things not being ideal. The Brayton Cycle (think jet engines here) is a better thermo cycle to design around. Efficiencies get much higher, but there are other issues.

If you guys do decide to spend some spare time and money on trying this I would love to see the results.

[06GrnRubi]

After all, what better motivation to create something new then a wheeler who can't afford gas to go wheeling ! :)

Hey! Leave me out of this.

[BushDawg]

.

[Fire Ball]

Our best bet for the future is nuclear or plasma furnaces. Plasma furnaces produce heat at temps in the millions of degrees. Right now the small prototypes use more energy than they produce but future larger units could produce billions of joules of energy with no emissions. This technology is possibly 30 - 50 years away but research is promising.

As far as splitting H20 into H2 and O2 then reusing it, not a winning prospect. On paper there would be no net difference in the separation and recombining stages but there are losses in both directions due to loss of heat, conductor resistance etc.

Nothing is free. Even in exothermic reactions where heat is produced, it is using energy to make heat so there are losses. I ran big power plants for years and it is amazing how we tried to save energy. Heat exchangers were used everywhere. If something had unwanted heat, we used it to heat something else. We even use big air heaters to heat the inlet air to the boiler using the stack gas to cut down on fuel burn. Even the water content in the coal was closely monitored because the BTU content of the coal would change on an hourly basis.

The big problem right now with electric cars is that electricity has to come from somewhere. The batteries have to be recyclable (current Ni batteries are an environmental nightmare)

I know I'm rambling and probably off topic but hey, that's me :D

[KennethS]

Is the alternator always making just enough power or does it create more than is needed?

It generates the amount of current that is needed by the electrical components. You can not "force" more current though a system than it needs, so the alternator "senses" the load demand and adjusts its output accordingly. As the electrical demand goes up, as when the headlights are turned on, the alternator's output increases to supply this increased demand, then when the lights are turned off, the alternator's output decreases.

As to Andrew F's question of how an alternator works, here is a site with a good explanation:
http://www.alternatorparts.com/understanding_alternators.htm

[Andrew F]

As to Andrew F's question of how an alternator works, here is a site with a good explanation:
http://www.alternatorparts.com/understanding_alternators.htm

Thank you. That is the best explanation I have read so far.