Crackpot idea or not?

[HRH]

Okay, so I got a guy who came into NAPA the other day who was a complete moron. He was looking for a valve to tie into his hydrogen fuel generating dingus to pipe hydrogen into his carburetor. And I explained it's physics, if you're generating hydrogen using the electrical energy of the car, it takes that much more energy to make it. He blew me off and then wouldn't accept that there wasn't a nut for a pipe thread fitting. And I explained it's tapered, it seals in whatever is cut to match it, but they don't make a pipe thread nut! (Or at least I've never seen one and I know we don't sell it)

 

Anyway, I started looking into it and found quite a bit of crap on it. Run your car on water and all that. I still fail to see how this doesn't cost/use just as much energy to build/maintain the system, much less how far you'd be able to get driving the same speed using only hydrogen which is low power, or water, the latter of which doesn't burn! I understand how introducing hydrogen gas would help the combustion process, but only if you're driving some old piece of shit which can't burn the fuel/vapor mix correctly.

 

And if everyone started using WATER to make hydrogen to power their cars, what do you think would happen to the water supply? Yeah. So I think it's a load of shit for a number of reasons, but I want to make sure, so weigh in. Here's the link to the crackpottedness.

 

http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=927

[HRH]

Read the one about the 400 mpg 1992 Geo Storm! I wonder if it could work at steady state throttle, but I can't imagine it would be an ideal way to drive around town. And I like how they say avoiding dangerous gasoline explosions! WTF, did they not see the hindenburg?!

 

Something else to notice, all these success stories are saying x drove 14-15 miles and only used 4 ounces of gasoline, etc. Which then they calculate out to if he drove x more miles it would be 54983468458 mpg!

 

Back to basics, you can't get something for nothing. Or you can't get more energy out of something than what you put into it.

 

However, the gasoline vapor idea does actually work, but only at steady state throttle (cruising at highway) You can't use it around town as detonation issues and general driveability suck. But sustained highway cruising is possible and does yield an increase in mileage, though how much is debatable.

 

I think this says it all, from the website:

 

The breakthrough came after Weston, who routinely smokes cigarettes while working on his engines, needed to peer into the gas tank of a lawn mower engine. It was dark in the tank.

 

"I didn't have a flashlight at the time, so I used a lighter," he recalled.

 

Suddenly, a blast of flame blew out of the tank. Weston immediately realized the potential.

 

"I said, 'Wow, let me try this,'" he said.

 

Weston grabbed a piece of tailpipe and stuck one into a carburetor and the other into a five-gallon gas can. The engine ran for a few moments on the vapors from the can, he said.

 

In 1996, a school teacher in his hometown invested $12,000 to help Weston fashion a working prototype. The teacher, Edward Slaybaugh of Connserville, Ind., said he considered the invention "the greatest boon this century." "I hope some good comes of it," Slaybaugh said Friday.

 

In 1997, Weston sold the rights to his invention to Reg Tech Inc. and its subsidiary, Regi U.S., of British Columbia, Canada.

 

Slaybaugh said he was compensated for his investment with Reg Tech stock, which he still holds. The company is currently working to develop a lightweight rotary engine.

 

Weston's deal called for the two Canadian firms to pay him $100,000 cash, $400,000 in stock, plus royalties. If the companies never turned the device into a commercial product, the company would still have to pay Weston $24,000 per year for 21 years under the contract.

 

The company had the AVFS tested on a small engine by the firm Adiabatics Inc. in Columbus, Ind. The results showed it reduced hydrocarbons 71 percent and carbon monoxide 25 percent. The rate of fuel consumption was reduced by 15 percent to 30 percent. But the device increased emissions of carbon dioxide 12 percent and nitrogen oxides 296 percent. Those are greenhouse and smog pollutants.

 

Weston said those emissions increased because Reg Tech's engineer failed to properly adjust the vapor/air mixture. "Not all engineers are mechanics," Weston said.

 

In 2002, Reg Tech relinquished the rights to the invention back to him.

 

John Robertson, Reg Tech president, said in a phone interview last month the company's patent attorney had advised the firm that Weston's invention was "unpatentable" because it was "not unique." Apparently, a similar system may have been used in race cars in years past, Robertson said.

 

The company dropped the invention because it would have been unwise to invest in it without the protection of a patent, Robertson said.

 

"It runs, but somebody's got to have a sophisticated testing apparatus to develop it," he added.

 

BTW, can a mod move this to the general section? I meant to post it there.

[LenRobertson]

If this guy comes back in your store, be reeeal nice to him. The voices in his head may tell him to kill all the non-believers. I'll keep trying to read through the page you linked to, but I could only get through the opening paragraph so far. I can only take stupidity in small doses.

 

Or maybe this is a spoof website. Monty Python does alt energy?

 

Len

[HRH]

Hehe, yeah, it's a serious website. The gasoline vapor idea does have merit, Joe actually tested one of those and it works, but the shortcomings of only being effective at highway speeds for sustained driving make it way to cost ineffective for an automaker to ever put it into use. And I think they'll be doing it anyway before too long, just using the ECU to control a super lean burn. Just look at the MDS system on dodges. Not vapor misting, but it does shut down half the fuel requirements.

 

The guy who came in first started looking at grease zircs asking if they went all the way through, and I'm like yeah, they have a check valve, other than that they're open. And he's like, so if I cut the top off, I could just use that? Jeezus. It was just painful.

[MicroMachinery]

As far as the H2O Molecule dividing the oxygen and hydrogen, once the hydrogen has gone through the combustion process, it returns back into the atmosphere and finds an oxygen molecule to rejoin with; Water. I was concerned about this as well, but I had a discussion with a chemist in the bar over the subject, and that's what she told me. Just to put your mind at ease.

And as far as the Hindenburg.. that's a COMPLETELY different scenario altogether..

I think everyone on here can say they "know someone, who knows someone who's done this". I know I do. But as far as being around one of these and seeing it actually work, I have yet to. I've seen them in peoples' cars, but again, I haven't been around them at the gas station when they calculate up their MPGs while filling their tank. I can't say one way or the other, but if someone can "show me the money", I'd like to see it.

[hang_510]

thermodynamics, not just a good idea, its a law.

 

there is energy to be had from h2o, but its not free!!!

big industry is looking into it. all the way to refueling stations that dispense H2 right into the 'tank'

 

there is also a complany in long beach ca, making a fuel cell that runs off ammonium-NH4.

powers a bike up to 75MPH.

its very weird to drive too. the one i rode was goverend to 35mph.

not quite a MC, and def not a bike.

 

Hehe, yeah,

 

It was just painful.

working at the electronics store was much worse.

the 'crackpots' would come in 3-4 at a time, all together, and then try to explain how they knew everything, we were morons and so on...

 

these were the ones that people (like us) make up fake shit to fuck with em!

 

 

i think they werent wearing their tinfoil hats when the con trails dispersed over them :?

[dave71]

well i can be super physics man after alot of beers to lol...but what i want to see is someone build me a time machine so i can get away from theses crazy fuckers lol:blink:

[FoxyRoadster]

only way I could see it working is if you had a battery pre-charged from your starting point to generate the hydrogen.. otherwise you're just fooling yourself. But even then you are adding weight yadda yadda yadda..

 

 

Wouldnt it be better to just make the hydrogen at home, store it in a tank, then use it? :lol:

[hang_510]

Wouldnt it be better to just make the hydrogen at home, store it in a tank, then use it? :lol:

only if you dont use a lighter to confirm the volume!

 

 

using home solar cells to charge the battery that supplys the power to seperate the H+ gets a little closer to perpetual motion...

[Jayden71]

I'm just gonna put an anti-matter reactor with a couple a nacelles on the 521! See if y'all can catch me on the freeway then!! :D

[datzenmike]

What happens to the water supply??? Well when you burn hydrogen in a motor (or anywher eles) it combines with oxygen to produce H2O. Assuming perfect efficiency and no losses it would take as much electrical energy to make it as you get out of burning it. So that's out. If you generated when slowing down or braking you would be converting wasted motion into gas but that's about it. The biggest reason for mileage increases is we drive differently when using HHO or Brown's Gas. Any time we want to increase mileage we drive slower and more carefully. The amount of energy produced and used is vanishingly small. HOWEVER..... Burning this stuff may affect combustion efficiency in way we don't understand. For the most part it's snake oil and hyped bull shit.

[MicroMachinery]

... For the most part it's snake oil and hyped bull shit.

 

Until I see the proof, this is my stance on it. I'm not saying it won't work, I'm just saying I haven't seen it. All the times I've asked for proof, nobody's stepped up. Sooo.... :rolleyes:

[hang_510]

Until I see the proof, this is my stance on it.

on its own, it not gonna do much for an internal combustion gasoline engine.

 

 

 

there are others working on hydrogen powered motors (not internal combustion) with decent(marketable) results.

[yellowdatsun]

It takes a heck of a lot of energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. This is the reason that hydrogen *isn't* the revolutionary fuel everyone was hoping for. Sure it burns clean and creates water vapor, but the actual act of creating the hydrogen in the first place is so energy intensive that it kinda nullifies the whole idea.

[datzenmike]

It takes a heck of a lot of energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. This is the reason that hydrogen *isn't* the revolutionary fuel everyone was hoping for. Sure it burns clean and creates water vapor, but the actual act of creating the hydrogen in the first place is so energy intensive that it kinda nullifies the whole idea.

 

No Shit!!!!

[datrod]

I've got a couple of mad men here in my complex working on hydro shit. I just keep waiting for them to blow up the entire complex.

I've not seen them finish anything yet. Been here for a couple of years. I think they are running out of money now. But man don't get them started on that shit you'll be there all day. :o

[LenRobertson]

 

 

Anyway, I started looking into it

 

 

 

I pretty much thought about your post all day today, and I think there is more to this than meets the eye. Think about it - of all the parts stores in all the world, this guy walks into yours, and asks for pipe thread nuts (a ploy just to get your attention I suspect). He plants the hydrogen fuel idea in your head and leaves. Even though you think he's a wack job, you keep thinking about the hydrogen thing. Now here is where I think The Powers That Run Things are picking out you special - how many guys working in parts stores are doing a fuel injection conversion on one of their cars? I only know of one. So yeah, I'm convinced you have been Chosen to morph your FI project into a Hydrogen Powered 510. I've been eagerly following your FI conversion posts. I'm really looking forward to this new direction!

 

Maybe buy some "No Smoking" signs for your shop. I know this hydrogen stuff is supposed to be safe, but what if that is the one part they are wrong about?

 

Len

[mklotz70]

I love the topic of hydrogen powered cars!! :) I need to get to bed, but I had to chime in. Here's a bit of perspective....water will never run out, oil will. Let's say gas goes up to $10-20/gal...the cost of separating hydrogen will stay about the same or go down. Refining crude oil into automotive fuel isn't really any better than separating hydrogen...it's just that crude oil is in extreme demand and still really cheap.....so it's extremely profitable. If the oil supply ran out tomorrow, we'd all be on our hands and knees kissin' the butts of all these "weirdos" that are trying to make this stuff work. Running out of oil goes waaaaaay beyond you not getting to drive your dato!! If tractors can't run to harvest crops and trucks can't deliver them...you'll be too busy growing your own food to even worry about any of this. Big cities will have to decentralize. We'll go back to a completely rural lifestyle. People will have to go to the farm if the farm can't send it to the store. :) Think about the other products made with petroleum...it will be like going back to the dark ages!! :) LOL!!

 

I think I did a search for "use of hydrogen by Navy" and I came up with an extremely cool site. It was talking about a hybrid solar cell that turns sunlight into electricity, just like a normal solar cell, but it had micro chambers in it that allowed it to separate the hydrogen from the water that was put through it and also store the hydrogen. I think it was called the hydrogen sponge...which might be a better search string. Fascinating!!

 

We(USA), pretty much ran out of our cheap oil back in the gas crisis of the 70's. It's not cost effective to extract oil from shale rock, which is most of what we have left....so we got in bed with the middle east and started buying cheap oil....problem solved? They have a finite amount of oil available....how fast is that going to be used up when a billion chinese get cars?! :)

 

Sorry...but the Hindenburg is a really poor example to use against hydrogen. Most of those people died from burning fabric and fuel ....and from jumping!!! The hydrogen burned off in about a half a second and most of the heat/flame went up and away. A lot of people have died from gasoline over the years....like creating a spark on a gas can that they filled in the back of their truck.....so there will be a similar educational curve with any alternative we end up using. Electric vehicles seem great up front, until the batteries go dead and you have to figure out how to dispose of them....nasty stuff!! Not very "green" at all in the long term.

 

Anyway....chat away...I'm hoping to see some insight full info shared here since this is a topic near and dear to my heart :) Heck, if there's anyone in portland that's currently working on anything along these lines....pm me!! :)

[HRH]

Ah, yes, but as Datzenmike pointed out, water coming out the tailpipe doesn't necessarily mean it goes back where we can use it. And what's more important, water or gas? Don't forget that California buys their water from Arizona/Colorado. If we use the water like we use gas, how long would it take before no one had any water to drink and we all croak? You'd see people running a hose from their tailpipe to their mouth!

 

Anytime anyone mentions using water to fuel something, it's always a bad idea. Don't screw with the one thing you absolutely HAVE to have to live. If gas dried up tomorrow I'd be out of a job, so I'd bike to the forest and use what ammunition I had left to down a deer or elk for food. Then I'd bike to a chicken farm, and buy a hen and rooster. And I'd definitely stop paying bills. :) Of course, then we wouldn't have ratsun.net either! The horror!

[MicroMachinery]

As far as the H2O Molecule dividing the oxygen and hydrogen, once the hydrogen has gone through the combustion process, it returns back into the atmosphere and finds an oxygen molecule to rejoin with; Water. I was concerned about this as well, but I had a discussion with a chemist in the bar over the subject, and that's what she told me. Just to put your mind at ease.

 

Ah, yes, but as Datzenmike pointed out, water coming out the tailpipe doesn't necessarily mean it goes back where we can use it. And what's more important, water or gas? Don't forget that California buys their water from Arizona/Colorado. If we use the water like we use gas, how long would it take before no one had any water to drink and we all croak? You'd see people running a hose from their tailpipe to their mouth!

 

:blink:

[elmerfudpucker]

Of course, then we wouldn't have ratsun.net either! The horror!

 

:blink:

[datzenmike]

Think of seperating the H and the O2 in water as an energy storage system. You take water and invest a huge amount of energy splitting it apart into it's two parts and storing the H. When burned in a motor you get the energy back (minus the friction, heat and inneficiency losses) and produce water vapor. Which could be recovered and re used. The point is that you can't get something for nothing and need an energy source to split the H from the O2, which could be oil, coal, hydro, solar or nuclear powered. It's not creating energy just moving it around and saving it. Only hydro, wind, geo-thermal or solar, would be sustainable/free power without fosile fuel.

[mklotz70]

Maybe I should have mentioned that the Navy testing was using salt water :) I'm not too concerned about running out of water.....quick check on the net got this info...

 

A little over 2/3 of the Earth is covered by water.

 

To be more precise, the consensus is 70.8% (71%) of the surface is water, 29.2 % is land.

 

Other figures: The exact percentage of water (on Earth) is 71.11% Also the exact percentage of land (on Earth) is 28.89%

 

As for riding your bike....you won't have grease for the bearings in your wheels...there aren't too many 100% synthetics out there yet....most are hybrids of with a petroleum base.

[HRH]

Ah, but I've had the same rear hub since I bought the bike, Shimano Deore hubs are damn near indestructible! And they're sealed, so unless you do a lot of water crossings, they should last almost forever. And who says I need a petroleum based grease anyway? You can use animal fat to grease bearings no problem. Think the yellow nasty stuff when you clean a chicken. Fat is a wonderful lubricant.

 

And EVEN THOUGH the earth is covered by 2/3 water, how much does it take to contaminate it to the point of not being able to drink? Not much. Lets extcrapolate this idea even further, say everyone runs a hyrdrogen/water setup in their vehicles. So we're all spitting water out the tailpipe. So the roadways will be continually wet (dangerous) and will also probably result in sublimation and the formation of nasty rain clouds everywhere, or stiflingly hot humidity everywhere. So not only will be be squandering our water to drink, we'll be not enjoying it after it comes out of the tailpipe.

 

I think a better idea is just to sink California into the ocean, that would save a lot of driving! Just make sure LA floods out the gangbangers. ;)

[datsunaholic]

The thing is, you aren't USING the water like gasoline.

 

When you separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, it doesn't leave a direct byproduct (however, what you use for energy to do the separation does, unless it's solar or geothermal). When you "burn" the hydrogen, you get water back, as water vapor. This ends up either condensing, either immediately or going atmospheric and becoming parts of clouds, eventually it gets back to the ground as rain. And it's relatively pure water- at least, pure as rain. The only contaminants it picks up are atmospheric, as you aren't adding hydrocarbons.

 

When you burn gasoline, the byproduct is a carbon output. No matter how efficient a fossil fuel engine is, it's byproduct is always going to contain a high amount of oxidized carbon- either as Carbon Dioxide, or as carbon monoxide. Plus, because the fuel was a hydrocarbon you end up with hydrocarbon outputs. You do get SOME water output from normal gasoline engines, but it's highly contaminated with carbon. A Hydrogen burner doesn't have the carbon to contaminate the output with.

 

Plus, you don't need pure potable water to split to make hydrogen. You can use saltwater, or contaminated water, etc. And the output is relatively pure water.

 

But it's not a closed loop- you still need the energy source to split the water into hydrogen/oxygen. The best bet there is solar farms. But, the electricity generated there could be used more efficiently in other ways.

 

I know some folks disparage electric cars because of the battery disposal, but a reality- every part of a battery is recycleable to make new batteries.