This has to be the gratest invention ever - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

89transam · 05-17-2006, 03:59 PM

This is a link and I would post it in the other forum , but I think if this is real it is pretty important.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImGaraPrEo8

Edit: Ah.

http://digg.com/technology/Water_Fuel_-_HHO_Gas

Not really shocking , basically its bs

fresnelly · 05-17-2006, 04:28 PM

That was pretty fricken amazing, but that report was grossly simplistic - patronizing even. If this is the only kind of coverage the inventor is getting, we won't be seeing mass production for a long time.

shakran · 05-17-2006, 05:03 PM

They're skipping a step. They say the car, the welder, etc, runs on HHO, which is made from water. But other than saying it's a special electrolosys process, they fail to say how water is converted to HHO. How much energy does that conversion process use? Where does that energy come from? If it's so revolutionary, why doesn't the car run on pure HHO? Why bother making a hybrid?

There are too many questions, and frankly this report anyway makes it look like either junk science or a snakeoil salesman.

Willravel · 05-17-2006, 05:40 PM

4 OZ OF WATER FOR 100 MILES?! I can literally spit my way from here to L.A. I'd kill to get my hands on the specifics (not so I can steal them, but so I can learn).

Mantus · 05-17-2006, 06:51 PM

if something sounds too good to be true....

Seaver · 05-17-2006, 11:48 PM

Ugh. Move along here people, nothing to see.

Why you ask?

Because no process can ever be 100% efficient, it will take more energy to break apart the H2O molecule (using electricity) than you get out of burning it.

Thus your car will have to have not only 0 friction in any moving parts/ground/air/etc, but have negative resistance (riding with the wind, downhill, on ice) just to break even on the process.

Maybe if they blend with a process of plugging a car in overnight to recharge batteries, but dont mistake this process as practical anytime soon.

CSflim · 05-18-2006, 11:07 AM

Cool video.

Just so everyone understand what's going on here: (This was a post on Digg)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digg

Water is not the fuel--it's not the source of energy. Electricity from your local power plant is your source of power. Electrolysing water and then burning the result gets you around the simple problem that electricity itself doesn't burn. You can burn hydrocarbons, like butane or gasoline, but then you have to store the fuel (which can be dangerous).

Instead, you store water, a very stable substance. You use electricity to turn that water into fuel, then immediately burn the result, turning it back into water. You can even take that waste water and run it back through the system. You always get less power out of the system than you put into it (laws of thermodynamics in effect here); but you've effectively found a way to burn hydrogen without having to store the hydrogen and oxygen, which can be very dangerous to store.

A water-powered car isn't really powered by water. It's battery-powered. However, puting water into the system allows you to still use a combustion engine, rather than electric motors. It's not nearly as efficient, which is why this route isn't being pursued by auto makers. But there can be advantages, depending on your needs.

Cool technology, but it's not a potential alternative to oil - it's not supposed to be. However it could be a useful way to allow alternative fuels to be used. For instance you could have oil replaced with nuclear power. Obviously having cars which literally run on nuclear power is out of the question. But this way, we could have cars running on electricity, which could be from nuclear sources, rather than fossil fuels.

Of course electric cars are nothing new. But the traditional cars which run on electric motors were plagued with plenty of well known problems making them completely impractical for the vast majority of people. It would be interesting to know how these "HHO" cars compare to regular electric cars.

stevo · 05-18-2006, 11:14 AM

Why does this remind me of that 70's show episode where they're all sitting in a circle and hyde is going on about government conspiracies about how this guy invented a car that runs on water but the evil corporations and government keep it hidden. Then Kelso says, if it runs on water its not a car its a boat. And then he cracks up laughing.

Sorry, thats just what came to mind when I read this thread.

Stiltzkin · 05-18-2006, 04:34 PM

HHO? Hydrogen gas bonded to an oxygen atom? ... sounds fishy to me. You'd think that that thing would instantly rearrange itself to water.

CSflim · 05-18-2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stiltzkin

HHO? Hydrogen gas bonded to an oxygen atom? ... sounds fishy to me. You'd think that that thing would instantly rearrange itself to water.

I think he means Hydrogen and Oxygen not bonded to each other at all.
Like so:
2H20 -> 2H2 + O2

Martian · 05-18-2006, 05:53 PM

Something doesn't jive here.

I grabbed a paper off the guy's website on the nature of this new gas and am reading it now - so far as I'm able to tell, it's all based on this HHO gas. This isn't a mix of H2 and O2. If it were it wouldn't be anything revolutionary, since the idea of electrolysis (converting water into hydrogen and oxygen gas) has been around for a very long time now.

Rather, he seems to suggest a new structure; instead of H-O-H, which is water, he suggests H-H-O. the problem is that this isn't stable; It would quickly break up into H2 and O, with the oxygen atoms bonding together and forming O2.

He seems to suggest that this doesn't happen due to something called a 'magnecular bond.' It's been a long time since chemistry class but I don't remember ever hearing the term, and google isn't turning up much in the way of useful information. Regardless, I'll read through the paper and see what I can find out.

EDIT - Well, I'll be the first to admit that chemistry is not my forté, but this paper doesn't seem to make any sense. The author suggests that structuring the gas as H-H-O is oversimplifying, as it is in actuality a mixture of H2, O2, H-O and H2O bonded in some non-valent magnetic fashion. The problem here is that all bonds as to my understanding are valent in nature - that is to say, an atom with a full valence orbit is unable to accept a bond with another atom. Masybe someone with a better understanding of these things can clear this up, but as far as I can tell this isn't actually possible.

05-17-2006, 03:59 PM	#1 (permalink)
89transam Psycho Location: Central California	This has to be the gratest invention ever This is a link and I would post it in the other forum , but I think if this is real it is pretty important. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImGaraPrEo8 Edit: Ah. http://digg.com/technology/Water_Fuel_-_HHO_Gas Not really shocking , basically its bs __________________ I'd rather be rich than stupid. Last edited by 89transam; 05-17-2006 at 08:16 PM..

05-18-2006, 11:14 AM	#8 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	Why does this remind me of that 70's show episode where they're all sitting in a circle and hyde is going on about government conspiracies about how this guy invented a car that runs on water but the evil corporations and government keep it hidden. Then Kelso says, if it runs on water its not a car its a boat. And then he cracks up laughing. Sorry, thats just what came to mind when I read this thread. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

05-18-2006, 04:34 PM	#9 (permalink)
Stiltzkin Junkie	HHO? Hydrogen gas bonded to an oxygen atom? ... sounds fishy to me. You'd think that that thing would instantly rearrange itself to water. __________________ The most important thing in this world is love.

05-18-2006, 05:53 PM	#11 (permalink)
Martian Young Crumudgeon Location: Canada	Something doesn't jive here. I grabbed a paper off the guy's website on the nature of this new gas and am reading it now - so far as I'm able to tell, it's all based on this HHO gas. This isn't a mix of H<sub>2</sub> and O<sub>2</sub>. If it were it wouldn't be anything revolutionary, since the idea of electrolysis (converting water into hydrogen and oxygen gas) has been around for a very long time now. Rather, he seems to suggest a new structure; instead of H-O-H, which is water, he suggests H-H-O. the problem is that this isn't stable; It would quickly break up into H<sub>2</sub> and O, with the oxygen atoms bonding together and forming O<sub>2</sub>. He seems to suggest that this doesn't happen due to something called a 'magnecular bond.' It's been a long time since chemistry class but I don't remember ever hearing the term, and google isn't turning up much in the way of useful information. Regardless, I'll read through the paper and see what I can find out. EDIT - Well, I'll be the first to admit that chemistry is not my forté, but this paper doesn't seem to make any sense. The author suggests that structuring the gas as H-H-O is oversimplifying, as it is in actuality a mixture of H<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>2</sub>, H-O and H<sub>2</sub>O bonded in some non-valent magnetic fashion. The problem here is that all bonds as to my understanding are valent in nature - that is to say, an atom with a full valence orbit is unable to accept a bond with another atom. Masybe someone with a better understanding of these things can clear this up, but as far as I can tell this isn't actually possible. __________________ I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said - Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame Last edited by Martian; 05-18-2006 at 06:11 PM..

05-17-2006, 04:28 PM	#2 (permalink)
fresnelly Functionally Appropriate Location: Toronto	That was pretty fricken amazing, but that report was grossly simplistic - patronizing even. If this is the only kind of coverage the inventor is getting, we won't be seeing mass production for a long time.

05-17-2006, 05:03 PM	#3 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	They're skipping a step. They say the car, the welder, etc, runs on HHO, which is made from water. But other than saying it's a special electrolosys process, they fail to say how water is converted to HHO. How much energy does that conversion process use? Where does that energy come from? If it's so revolutionary, why doesn't the car run on pure HHO? Why bother making a hybrid? There are too many questions, and frankly this report anyway makes it look like either junk science or a snakeoil salesman.

05-17-2006, 05:40 PM	#4 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	4 OZ OF WATER FOR 100 MILES?! I can literally spit my way from here to L.A. I'd kill to get my hands on the specifics (not so I can steal them, but so I can learn).

05-17-2006, 06:51 PM	#5 (permalink)
Mantus lascivious	if something sounds too good to be true....

05-17-2006, 11:48 PM	#6 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	Ugh. Move along here people, nothing to see. Why you ask? Because no process can ever be 100% efficient, it will take more energy to break apart the H2O molecule (using electricity) than you get out of burning it. Thus your car will have to have not only 0 friction in any moving parts/ground/air/etc, but have negative resistance (riding with the wind, downhill, on ice) just to break even on the process. Maybe if they blend with a process of plugging a car in overnight to recharge batteries, but dont mistake this process as practical anytime soon.