Water Power!

[632 Regal]

The next fuel for the next generation, its been suppressed since the 70's..
People have ended up dead over working units in America once they go to the
Energy commission.
Japan has been making commercial welding units for years.. On demand hydrogen and oxygen in a gas state(BROWNS GASS), what's the cost
of water? OPEC cant stop the rain.

The technology is relatively simple,

FACT: ONE GAL water= 1300 GAL OF HYDROGEN, 680 GAL OF O2

http://www.bimmer.info/~regal632/WaterFuel.wmv

[Paul in NZ]

but the energy to split it comes from?

[tgrandahl]

a neat idea but as you pointed out, old news. Hydrogen burns a lot cleaner but a combustion engine is so ridiculously inefficient that almost worthless unless your a member of green peace. Although one should gain a considerable HP increase burning straight Hydrogen. Its too bad that ford doesn’t have a stainless exhaust or ceramic coatings too...

Im not trying to come off as some jerk saying H2 isnt the future because its the exact opposite. It is genious medium for transfering our energy but the problem has been sience the 60's, where on this earth are we going to find all that electricity?

[632 Regal]

Electricity that can be charged back into the power source.

Idonno, I is possible and I believe this knowledge has been suppressed.


but the energy to split it comes from?

[Paul in NZ]

this is the Hydrogen economy that every one has talked dreamed about for decades....Nuclear Fusion ??? is the key

[632 Regal]

as it says, people have been killed knowing the technology. I do not have the brains to even grasp what is being done here but I believe it to be real...100km on 4 oz water.

[Javier]

To get the hydrogen from the water requires as much energy as you will get burning it back.

Javier

[DaveVoorhis]

I do not have the brains to even grasp what is being done here but I believe it to be real...100km on 4 oz water.

And it's based on ALIEN TECHNOLOGY that they got from the ROSWELL CRASH, the moon landing was a FAKE they filmed in HOLLYWOOD, and Elvis is STILL ALIVE and living in Lubbock, Texas. Etc.

Damn, where'd I put my tinfoil hat? Without it, they can CONTROL MY THOUGHTS, too.

[ThoreauHD]

Least Painful, least permanent: E85 Alcohol

Most Self-Sufficient, most permanent: Zero Point Energy
Sea of electricity harnessed via solid state hardware. http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe3.pdf

Most Dependent, 30 year lifespan: Element 115->116 oscillation gravity wave(not naturally occuring on earth)

Most Suicidal: Moon god 'Cult of Death' owned oil.

Hydrogen can be gotten from 2 electrodes placed in water with a low electric current, which will break the bonds of water. It's slow, but it works. And it can be run from solar, hydro, or wind based power. Doesn't take alot. Hydrogen is a bit rediculous to contain though. And as a technology, it isn't solid state which means it's another bandaid.

We need to harness energy that is present everywhere and via a solid state device. Otherwise, we will end up right back here 100 years from now. Gravity.. zero point.. electrostatic.. whichever. In the interim, I would suggest alcohol. We can make all of it ourselves. After that, we can move to a more permanent solution.

[Javier]

Isn't it typical of nature? Better efficiency, better storing, and even more efficient consumption.

Javier

[tgrandahl]

And it's based on ALIEN TECHNOLOGY that they got from the ROSWELL CRASH, the moon landing was a FAKE they filmed in HOLLYWOOD, and Elvis is STILL ALIVE and living in Lubbock, Texas. Etc.

Damn, where'd I put my tinfoil hat? Without it, they can CONTROL MY THOUGHTS, too.

The moon landing was filmed in area 51 not hollywood

[DaveVoorhis]

The moon landing was filmed in area 51 not hollywood

That's what they want you to think.

[Rigmaster]

Jeff, you better delete your avatar, that chick is sending me subliminal messages and I'm having trouble keeping them suppressed!! Maybe those secret government agents can help me???


Bret.

[jplacson]

Damn that signature is distracting! Hahahaha.

To have a self-contained H2 splitter in your car is still a long way away. I believe that by then, a more efficient form of power will be discovered. Hydrogen cars are only practical in their current form, like the current BMW 7 that's being sold in Germany.

IMO, electric cars are the future...more so than H2. Not the over-sized golf carts we have now... but cars similiar to the T-zero... but with a better power supply. Right now, BMW has the technology on a per-wheel electric hybrid that generates more torque than 2 X5s. Their only problem is battery technology. Charging technology is getting better... the great thing about electric vehicles is that it doesn't need only ONE way to charge it. Your electric car can have a solr panel on the roof, a charging plug on the side, a fuel cell back-up, dynamos by the braking system, and a cordless charging system that could be built into the roads themselves. So basically, with an electric vehicle... you can power it in almost any way imaginable. Hand crank it if needs be!!! (Hahahah... back to the old days of the front crank!)

**Added... here's another nice story about electric cars... ELECTRIC CAR (http://www.drive.com.au/editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=8754)

[F4Phantom]

There are two problems which will make hydrogen never work as we currently understand it.
1, you cant make hydrogen
meaning, it results in a net energy loss. You have to use huge amounts of electricity to split it up. then once you have the gas, do you drive around with a hot air ballon on your roof full of H? no, you compress it into a tank or even liquid H. This compression takes stacks more energy finally pushing H to crappyness. There was a guy in QLD charging his massive car batteries overnight to split the H on the fly to power his 5L v8 chev powered car. you would be way better off running the batts right into an elec motor to power the car.

2, you cant store H
the mercedies H car had a tank which was the whole under floor of the car, pressured at 10,000psi. range? 150km, what crap
a modern electric car can double that easily + its more efficient, simpler, cheaper, more reliable, less maintenance, quieter and way way way way fassssster. electric all the way gentleman


hyrogen/water is not a power source, its an energy carrier and not a great one at that if you look at energy density.

check these links for friggen fast electric vehicles
http://www.commutercars.com/
http://www.evehicle.com.au/racing_pocket.shtml?openmenu=10
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_home.htm

i would love to make an e34 a very fast electric

[sKilled]

Back to the future had it right - Mr. Fusion. Running off rubbish = two fat birds with one mighty stone.

[zygoteer]

... energy from ...

Electricity that can be charged back into the power source.

Idonno, I is possible and I believe this knowledge has been suppressed.

Well theres always one who believes in 100% efficiency I guess !

Cheer up Jeff, it is as bad as you think and they are out to get you.

[632 Regal]

Jeff, here is a note from my friend Rick who owns Firestik Antenna Co. out in Phoenix. here is what he has to say about it.

Subject: Water Car




This is the 2nd time I found this process interesting. About 20 years ago the father of the guy I use for computer work had the distribution rights for a patented machine called the "Water Welder". I had one in the Firestik factory and was testing it to see if I could use it for soldering antennas (but ended up being too hot and would pop the epoxy glue between the antenna base and the fiberglass). In the clip they mention "patent" and I wonder how this can be patented again. Would have to be a different control method or something that makes it unique.

The process of seperating hydrogen and oyxgen from water is really old. Lately, the system has received more press when used in hydrogen fuel cells (the threat to electric producing businesses). One thing for certain ... if it starts growing legs ... you can bet that there will be bazzilions of dollars being spend by the big oil and electric companies to stiffle its use in vehicles. You'll hear plenty about the volitility of hydrogen ... scare tactics no doubt will abound. And then what ... $3.00/gallon water? Oil is a huge business and when there are billions of dollars at stake and hunderd of thousands of jobs .. the fight will get VERY dirty and then soon thereafter ... the HHO idea will seemingly evaporate ... kinda like water on a July day in Phoenix.

Let's see where this is in 3 years
http://www.bimmer.info/~regal632/WaterFuel.wmv (http://www.bimmer.info/%7Eregal632/WaterFuel.wmv)[/quote]

[DanH]

I'd like to see his electric bill after separating the water into hydrogen gas. Funny they never mentioned that it costs more to drive his car with H20 than gasoline at $3/gal. They'd hate to ruin a good news story with the facts.

[Jay 535i]

To get the hydrogen from the water requires as much energy as you will get burning it back.

Javier

That's exactly right.

This technology doesn't reduce the amount of energy consumed. It just relocates that consumption from your car to the power plant.

If you make the hydrogen yourself at home, it will cost you a fortune in electricity, which is made in power plants that do pollute. If you want to fill up at the pump like with petrol, then you have to deal with the logistical and safety nightmares of transporting hydrogen.

It has potential, but it's no magic bullet. And it hasn't been "suppressed". It's unpopular and slow to take off because there are so very many problems with it.

IMHO, it will be some time before zero-emissions-vehicles surpass hybrids as the most rational power source.

And, all that aside, I'm highly skeptical of anything on Fox "news".

[632 Regal]

One thing for certain ... if it starts growing legs ... you can bet that there will be bazzilions of dollars being spend by the big oil and electric companies to stiffle its use in vehicles. You'll hear plenty about the volitility of hydrogen ... scare tactics no doubt will abound. And then what ... $3.00/gallon water? Oil is a huge business and when there are billions of dollars at stake and hunderd of thousands of jobs .. the fight will get VERY dirty and then soon thereafter.


I'd like to see his electric bill after separating the water into hydrogen gas. Funny they never mentioned that it costs more to drive his car with H20 than gasoline at $3/gal. They'd hate to ruin a good news story with the facts.

[Hallmark]

They had a press release a few months back. It will be a dual fuel model. You fill it with hydrogen and that tank will run it for a little less than 200 miles. Then you flip a switch and the gasoline on board will run it another 300 or so.

They said BMW plans to start marketing the thing in 2008.

On a related note, a group has found a way to store hydrogen in a porous solid much the same way acetylene is stored now.

[rob101]

might like to point out that something like 90% of the hydrogen that is produces is extracted from fossil fuels, so basically the environmental benefits from the hydrogen economy are ********, they just push the emissions down the line to the power stations instead of your car. And if you were to get Hydrogen from water the amounts of power you'd need would make it more like a "nuclear fission powered hydrogen economy". not that we care, come get your uranium americans and chinese plenty of it to dig up over here.
the greenies will kill us all because if the greenhouse effect is true the only socially and environmentally sound source of power will be nuclear fission. since every time you suggest putting wind turbines anywhere all the locals get an accute attack of not in my backyard syndrome.

[Jay 535i]

the only socially and environmentally sound source of power will be nuclear fission.

Ford's engineers are waaay ahead of you:

http://modelstories.free.fr/histokits/A-plane_P/img15.jpg

[Rustam]

but the energy to split it comes from?

Electricity... via electrolisys. They say that his process of electrolysis is "unique" so i dont know how he does that.

Essentially h2o can be split to hydrogen and oxygen by submerging two contacts into a container of water mixed with salt and application of voltage.

Some dude on the internet sold specially designed canisters for automotive application under the premise of increase in MPG. Hydrogen - flammable gas, Oxygen - gas aiding combustion.

I believe that its possible to significantly increase MPG by basic electrolysis.

[Rustam]

To get the hydrogen from the water requires as much energy as you will get burning it back.

Javier

Which you've got to admit is a very efficient process, if it is only so. VIrtually all the time some energy is lost in transfer.

[Rustam]

a neat idea but as you pointed out, old news. Hydrogen burns a lot cleaner but a combustion engine is so ridiculously inefficient that almost worthless unless your a member of green peace. Although one should gain a considerable HP increase burning straight Hydrogen. Its too bad that ford doesn’t have a stainless exhaust or ceramic coatings too...

Im not trying to come off as some jerk saying H2 isnt the future because its the exact opposite. It is genious medium for transfering our energy but the problem has been sience the 60's, where on this earth are we going to find all that electricity?

well, if he can cover 100 miles using a few ounces of water I accept the setup as "efficient enough"

[Rustam]

There are two problems which will make hydrogen never work as we currently understand it.
1, you cant make hydrogen
meaning, it results in a net energy loss. You have to use huge amounts of electricity to split it up. then once you have the gas, do you drive around with a hot air ballon on your roof full of H? no, you compress it into a tank or even liquid H. This compression takes stacks more energy finally pushing H to crappyness. There was a guy in QLD charging his massive car batteries overnight to split the H on the fly to power his 5L v8 chev powered car. you would be way better off running the batts right into an elec motor to power the car.

2, you cant store H
the mercedies H car had a tank which was the whole under floor of the car, pressured at 10,000psi. range? 150km, what crap
a modern electric car can double that easily + its more efficient, simpler, cheaper, more reliable, less maintenance, quieter and way way way way fassssster. electric all the way gentleman


hyrogen/water is not a power source, its an energy carrier and not a great one at that if you look at energy density.

check these links for friggen fast electric vehicles
http://www.commutercars.com/
http://www.evehicle.com.au/racing_pocket.shtml?openmenu=10
http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_home.htm

i would love to make an e34 a very fast electric

I would never think of making e34 electric. M30 was a big part of my decision to geth this car.

[rob101]

Ford's engineers are waaay ahead of you:

http://modelstories.free.fr/histokits/A-plane_P/img15.jpg
lol
i might elaborate a bit on that statement, i think hydrogen fuel for cars is a good idea, however if the power generation facilities are burning fossil fuels etc. in order to facilitate the electrolysis of the water. what's the point? you're just shifting emissions somewhere else rather than reducing them significantly.

[Rustam]

Electricity that can be charged back into the power source.

Idonno, I is possible and I believe this knowledge has been suppressed.

I believe it is possible too, but I don't believe the knowledge has been supressed. The physics now are not so advanced as to envision 100% efficiency.

[Zeuk in Oz]

the only socially and environmentally sound source of power will be nuclear fission

Agreed ! So how many nuclear power stations does Australia have ? None ? That must be because we have uranium. You can't put import levies on raw materials you already have ! :D

We need some statesmen to actually make some decisions in this country !

[F4Phantom]

If we realise that direct electric cars are more efficient that H cars, then there is only 2 questions to answer. How do we make clean electricity, and how to we make batteries higher density. If we solve those, we will all be driving transmissionless cars that do 0 - 100 in 4 secs and getting 500km range while charging up at home and work. Also they are building a fusion power station in france for somthing like 6 - 9 billion euro's. If that works then we will get power from water but hydrogen is just politicians comment to say "hey look over here, we are making hydrogen cars!" all the while knowing it wont actually work so we can eventually decide it was not right, in the mean time not having to change anything right now. We all should have experianced by now that when large private sectors want rapid change, they make it happen.

[rob101]

If we realise that direct electric cars are more efficient that H cars, then there is only 2 questions to answer. How do we make clean electricity, and how to we make batteries higher density. If we solve those, we will all be driving transmissionless cars that do 0 - 100 in 4 secs and getting 500km range while charging up at home and work. Also they are building a fusion power station in france for somthing like 6 - 9 billion euro's. If that works then we will get power from water but hydrogen is just politicians comment to say "hey look over here, we are making hydrogen cars!" all the while knowing it wont actually work so we can eventually decide it was not right, in the mean time not having to change anything right now. We all should have experianced by now that when large private sectors want rapid change, they make it happen.
the problem with electric cars is that the current cell technology to power a car for the needed distance is too heavy to compete with petrol etc. this is why they are looking at fuel cells as you can put your high energy fuel in yet use electric motors etc. otherwise i'd expect there would be alot more purely electric cars on the road, it is why hybrid cars exist too, because the electric motors are more effecient however you need something that can use a high yeild fuel like petrol and thus have a decent range. hence the hybrid

[Javier]

Water is not the power source, Hydrogen is, not the same. ...

To get the hydrogen from the water requires as much energy as you will get burning it back.

Javier

an energy source, but the combustion residue of some other energy source. To fill the tank with water is comparable to filling the tank with all the exhaust gases of your tail pipe and pretend to drive 300 km with them, trough a process that reproduces the gasoline from the gases, and burn it back in the engine.

Javier

[Rustam]

[/SIZE]

an energy source, but the combustion residue of some other energy source. To fill the tank with water is comparable to filling the tank with all the exhaust gases of your tail pipe and pretend to drive 300 km with them, trough a process that reproduces the gasoline from the gases, and burn it back in the engine.

Javier

I got an idea that the energy source is the car's battery in this case, not the water that he puts in.

Alas, the supply of electricity to the battery is provided by the generator, which gets energy from the engine, which gets energy from the hydrogen, which gets "energy" from the water, which gets energy from the battery, which happens to be driven by the generator...

This is impossible, not yet anyway.
Unless, his car is a time machine...