Water as Fuel / HHO Technology [Merged Threads]

[theveed]

Teka....

The new and improved H2O Model 1500 Aquygen™ Gas Generator became available during the first quarter of the year 2005.

Retail price:
$6,995 US dollars
plus tax, plus shipping FOB from Cleveland, Ohio

Ahh... Ehhhh....

[CoDer]

I think we're arguing about different issues here... This guy didn't claim to have invented a water powered machine... But some sort of an additive process to help gasoline producing a hybrid automobile.

Yap... He never claimed to have invented a water powered machince. He takes water, subject it to a chemical process and viola! fuel.

Then again, the technology is young. It will be 10 more years before the science community can conclude that the technology is indeed practical.

Just don't know how pure is the water though.

[mazdamazda]

HHO is produced by spliting H2O. How it is done? I have no idea.

I've just finished re-reading the articles... and it does get weirder!

What they are proposing in their electrolysis process is that they are able to get H2, H (monoatomic!!!) & 02.

AFAIK... creation of a monoatomic Hydrogen can only be done on really low temperatures since it is very unstable.

[CoDer]

What they are proposing in their electrolysis process is that they are able to get H2, H (monoatomic!!!) & 02.

AFAIK... creation of a monoatomic Hydrogen can only be done on really low temperatures since it is very unstable.

Oh bother... Is that some form of kryptonite?

[mazdamazda]

Oh bother... Is that some form of kryptonite?

oh wait... they retracted their initial theory...

It now seems more clear; Brown's Gas is just 'expanded water molecules'. Brown's Gas is too heavy to be mon-atomic, it is even too heavy to be di-atomic; but it is exactly the right weight to be water-gas (di-hydrogen oxide in gaseous form).

I currently think that Brown's Gas is water and that it is water that has absorbed electricity like a sponge absorbs water. I think that the atomic bonds are NOT broken, so Brown's Gas is STILL WATER; just in a high energy gaseous form that is NOT steam.

expanded water molecules? hmmmmmmmm...

[CoDer]

just in a high energy gaseous form that is NOT steam.

Hehehe... Anong klaseng gas kaya yan?

[ghosthunter]

oh wait... they retracted their initial theory...

expanded water molecules? hmmmmmmmm...

Must be related to PI-Water.

[ghosthunter]

HHO is produced by spliting H2O. How it is done? I have no idea.

When you split H2O (water), you get H2 & O2 and not HHO. There is no such thing as HHO.

The best part of this technology is, when you burn the HHO gas it turns bak into water. That is a perfect green technology!

But it would be more than 10 years before we can get an affordable comercial form of this technology into our cars.

You missed one very vital thing. In a ideal world, the energy you get from "burning" H2 & O2 should be the same to split H2O. But in the real world, you have to deal with entropy, frictional losses and system inefficiencies.

As a system to power anything by itself, it will never happen. The proposed system is like trying to make a perpetual motion machine.

[CoDer]

The technology is too good to be true as of this moment. Maybe 20 more years before the scientific can come-up with a very efficient alternative fuel. Maybe water is indeed a good start in looking for that alternative fuel.

When you think of it... The technology is indeed shocking. How in the world can you bond two Hydrogen Atom? With one oxygen atom? that's water!

[ghosthunter]

Oo nga. You can't produce HHO from H2O without electrolysis.

Let's clear the air.

1. We can't burn water.
2. We subject water to an electrolysis to produce HHO.
3. We need water to get HHO.
3. We can burn HHO.

This means water as an alternative source for the fuel is indeed scientificaly feasible.

You just missed one crucial point. ENERGY.

If we assume entropy to be zero at the moment, the energy used to split water is the same amount of total energy you get from combining H2 & O2.

So assuming you will need to tap into that system to move something, where will you get that excess energy to power your vehicle? If you take 1% of the total energy in the H2O to H2&O2 to H2O system, then it will only return 99% of the total energy. Taking out 50% from the total energy will make the system return 50% of total energy.

Energy assumed to be whatever form you can use: Kinetic, heat, electrical, chemical, etc.

If it takes 100 Kjoules of energy to electrolize a fixed volume of water to H2 & O2, then ideally it will release back 100 Kjoules of back when you combine H2 & O2 to form water.

[CoDer]

You missed one very vital thing. In a ideal world, the energy you get from "burning" H2 & O2 should be the same to split H2O. But in the real world, you have to deal with entropy, frictional losses and system inefficiencies.

As a system to power anything by itself, it will never happen. The proposed system is like trying to make a perpetual motion machine.

Nope, I don't.

Maybe I just sounded that I believe in the technology at point blank. I never even tried to explain it because I'm not qualified, all the more in debunking it.

I'm not that stupid, and I'm not that arrogant either. It's just that maybe we have something here, give it 20 years or more.

It's not my money.

[ghosthunter]

The technology is too good to be true as of this moment.

yup, too good to be true. Ever wonder what happened to Mr. Dingle and his water powered cars? They were in the news before.

Maybe 20 more years before the scientific can come-up with a very efficient alternative fuel.

nope, what we have right now is pretty much efficient. All we have to do is think outside the box.

Example is the current hybrid gas/electric technology used in some cars today. Ten years ago, no one would have thought of using both power systems in a single car even if we already have the technology to manufacture powerful 25hp pancake electric motors that fits inside a typical drum brake housing?

No ground breaking science behind that one, just simply finding ways to creatively use what technology we already have.

Maybe water is indeed a good start in looking for that alternative fuel.

Water is not a fuel. Water is a fluid/transport-system used to transfer energy from a source to where it can be used to do work.

When you think of it... The technology is indeed shocking.

What is shocking is how gullible you are after viewing one video and believing it to be true. If that's the case, we can all levitate ourselves to fly across the Grand Canyon without any other means of flight.

How in the world can you bond two Hydrogen Atom?
With one oxygen atom? that's water!

Yes, and the net result is water, one of the most stable molecule on the planet. Simple grade school chemistry. Nothing ground breaking about that.

[ghosthunter]

Nope, I don't.

Then how do you propose a purely "water powered machine" (car, blender, whatever) would work? How will it overcome entropy?

Maybe I just sounded that I believe in the technology at point blank. I never even tried to explain it because I'm not qualified, all the more in debunking it.

Given the effort you are giving to support your "theory", it seems that you know something we don't. Or maybe you are simply covering up for something else?

If you say it works, give us something concrete that supports your "theory".

I'm not that stupid,

...could have fooled me.

... and I'm not that arrogant either.

that remains to be proven.

It's just that maybe we have something here, give it 20 years or more.

LOL!... at first he mentions 10 years for this "technology" to mature ... and now he mentions 20 years. It seems you have no faith for your own "theory".

[ghosthunter]

...because I'm not qualified, all the more in debunking it.

So what are you QUALIFIED for? You can't debunk nor can you support your own theory. So what are you supporting in this discussion thread?

[CoDer]

So what are you QUALIFIED for? You can't debunk nor can you support your own theory. So what are you supporting in this discussion thread?

Bwhahahahahaaa... Oh my, I sudenly became Klein.

My own theory?
car, blender, or whatever?
Qualification?

Are you crazy or something moderator?

My own theory... oh my...

[ghosthunter]

Bwhahahahahaaa... Oh my, I sudenly became Klein.

My own theory?
car, blender, or whatever?
Qualification?

Are you crazy or something moderator?

My own theory... oh my...

You are just avoiding to answer my challenges to you.

[CoDer]

You are just avoiding to answer my challenges to you.

Hehehehe... Honestly bossing, take that challenge somewhere else. We're no scientist here and that includes you.

[ghosthunter]

Hehehehe... Honestly bossing, take that challenge somewhere else. We're no scientist here and that includes you.

we might not be scientists but some of us here are clearly more qualified on the subject than some others here, don't you agree, CoDer?

[theveed]

Seryoso naman sobra...

[CoDer]

we might not be scientists but some of us here are clearly more qualified on the subject than some others here, don't you agree, CoDer?

That I agree.

Sad, I'm not one of those. I might be into computer science but chemistry is way beyond my book.