water power..

Holy shitmonkey

I'm gonna remain skeptical though. This seems way too easy, it should have been doen and mass-used by now.
 
Whoa.......... If that is for real.......

It would be nice if Uncle Sam + the auto industry.......

Would give this guy some help in develoment......
 
It's horseshit.

Hydrogen is not a source of energy. It's a means of storing energy, but that is all. It takes considerably more energy to separate the molecules than they generate when they recombine.
 
So is gasoline, diesel, etc. It just took longer to generate it.

I skimmed this a bit, and the gas generation is a common thing. The company is patenting an electrolysis process and claiming that they have a novel method of getting this gas for a lower than normal energy cost. HHO is evidently commonly used in welding, jewelry, and glass polishing (if you trust wikipedia). They are selling a portable electrolysis device, anything more is due to stupid marketers/reporters/etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO (The discussion page for this article is interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Oxyhydrogen_flame

http://hytechapps.com/aquygen/science
They claim to be published, but I'm not sure what I'm reading (and don't have time to wade through this).
http://hytechapps.com/aquygen/international_journal.pdf
 
hobie said:
So is gasoline, diesel, etc. It just took longer to generate it.
Click to expand...

Sure, but because it's exists in the environment in a state that allows for quickly and efficiently extracting the energy stored within, it's a *source* of energy. More energy comes out of it than goes in. We don't have massive caverns full of hydrogen that we can just tap into and burn.

No matter how efficient the process of splitting water molecules becomes, it's still a net energy loss. Physics, plain and simple.

Also, contrary to the claims of its advocates, it's not a clean source of energy. Cradle to grave, it requires considerable amounts of relatively rare (read:expensive) toxic materials in order to generate the hydrogen in the first place.

Think of hybrid cars: yes, they use fewer fossil fuels, but they're mobile toxic waste dumps that regularly get hurtled down the freeway at 80mph. While the potential benefits to the environment are debatable, it's clear the technology is anything but "clean".
 
saf-t scissors said:
It's horseshit.

.
Click to expand...
then you need to see my buddies car that has been running on it for the last several months..it doesn't appear to be horseshit on his. He's using it in conjunction with gasoline and is averaging about 60mpg. I looked at the whole set up, it's pretty simple but looks like it could be pretty damn dangerous too. It's a cool concept but I don't now how I'd feel about driving a mini bomb around.
 
BIGWOODY said:
then you need to see my buddies car that has been running on it for the last several months..it doesn't appear to be horseshit on his. He's using it in conjunction with gasoline and is averaging about 60mpg.
Click to expand...

And what does it cost him per mile?

Edit: I ran some quick numbers. It costs him between $3-4 per "gasoline gallon", assuming 100% efficiency (which we know isn't the case), in electricity costs alone. Equipment costs and such would be in addition to that.

Industrially-produced hydrogen costs about $8 a kilogram.... roughly equivalent to a gallon of gasoline, although I based my numbers on energy density conversions from hydrogen to gasoline.

So, yeah.... bullshit. He'd be better off building a boiler and burning coal.
 
pm Greenlandmonster he'll put some fat on your head about hydrogen power. He's been fooling with it for quite sometime now. I don't claim to be any sort of expert on it.
 
Same here Greg... coworker messes with the "dark fuels" too... pretty wild stuff!

That's what I like about this place... a bunch of mental midgets trying to explain why the real smart folks (Tesla, Einstein, etc.) are wrong/idiots and devices like Tesla's "Black Box" and the "Joe cell" are BS :rolleyes: ..
 
Caver Dave said:
trying to explain why the real smart folks (Tesla, Einstein, etc.)
Click to expand...

I suppose you've never heard of a fella named Newton, huh?

Geez... some people's kids. :lol:
 
Yea, if that was for real, the oil companies would have knocked on his door, and said "either that thing comes with us, or you do." And he'd never be heard from again.
 
I read that before. The Joe Cell seams to work. what it all comes down to is the I.C. engine is old technology. It will only be around for another 10 years if that. Ford, GM, and Toyota have all made vehicles that do not need any gas at all. They just dont want to put them out because of BIG OIL COMPANIES. They will soon because it is the only way. Pressure from the goverments will most likely push this issue with the up and raising cost of gasoline. It is almost like the only companies see this coming so they are raising the profits to offset the fact they may not be needed in the future. What I think will happen is as soon as the hydro/battery/hybrid car does take over demand will drop which will make supply increase, lowing the cost of fuel down to nothing. At that time I think the I.C. engine will start to be used again. (IMHO) :flipoff2:
 
saf-t scissors said:
Sure, but because it's exists in the environment in a state that allows for quickly and efficiently extracting the energy stored within, it's a *source* of energy. More energy comes out of it than goes in. We don't have massive caverns full of hydrogen that we can just tap into and burn.

No matter how efficient the process of splitting water molecules becomes, it's still a net energy loss. Physics, plain and simple.

Also, contrary to the claims of its advocates, it's not a clean source of energy. Cradle to grave, it requires considerable amounts of relatively rare (read:expensive) toxic materials in order to generate the hydrogen in the first place.

Think of hybrid cars: yes, they use fewer fossil fuels, but they're mobile toxic waste dumps that regularly get hurtled down the freeway at 80mph. While the potential benefits to the environment are debatable, it's clear the technology is anything but "clean".
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic...

If I REALLY wanted to get your goat, I'd go advocate this. If that thing was real, you could create a closed system and have it power something, and be done with scepticism very quickly. I don't even have to know the quantum physics they claim cause the "phenomenon".

J
 
Back
Top