Water as fuel, proof and patents!

Just found this video

www.metacafe.com...

HH0

Break water down into its composite parts and then recombine them 2 parts hydrogen to one part oxygen. I posted on this a while back but the idea was rubbished.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think the idea deserves a lot more attention! The fact that he has a patent on the idea means its for real. (To get a patent, you actually have to have a working idea, with sound science.).

I would be interested in peoples opinions and further resources if you have any.

[edit on 14-5-2006 by enslaved83]

Yeh this has been around for ages. It's simple chemistry a lot of it. Electrolysis of water from 2 H2O to H2 and 2O2. Its just the fact that the conservation of energy law stops it from being. You need power to break it into Hydrogen and Oxygen. This power won't be fully retrieved when burning it, as you will find that if you use it to power anything you will lose heat into friction and the surroundings.

When you find the way to break the conservation of energy law, fine! But until then, no free energy.

The only thing different about the electrolysed mixture is its odd properties (known as Browns Gas?) I think it has something to do with the electrolysis bit, leaving some sort of effect on the way the atoms act, maybe electron arrangements?

If you want it to power a car then where is the electirc going to come from to make this gas? Well maybe it comes from a coal power station?

[edit on 14/5/06 by Shakeyjc]

[edit on 14/5/06 by Shakeyjc]

What kind of energy requirements would you need to break the H2O molecular bond? Is this something I could rig up in my shed?

Originally posted by Shakeyjc
If you want it to power a car then where is the electirc going to come from to make this gas? Well maybe it comes from a coal power station?

While you may not break the 'conservation of energy' law, geo-thermal energy is an ultimately clean and abundant source of power that could generate the electricity to separate the Hydrogen and Oxygen

Thats a good idea, however is it not a waste of electricity? Would there not be a greater efficiency in power if it was simply transferred as electricty? Anyway i like the thinking.

All you need is some water, two electrodes and a 12 volt battery to make some h2 and o2 in the correct ratio. You might need higher powers maybe to give it the special features but the h2 and o2 mixtures is easy to make, Beer_Guy knows much on this subject, hopefully he sees this thread.

I watched the vid and the gas-generator looks like a welder power unit...could that be what it is...an adapted arc-welder power pack? It would certainly pack enough amperage to drive the electrolysis process

The big question I want answering is the way the flame is cool to the touch yet it cuts through steel! If anyone could answer this question with some sound physics I would be very very greatfull.

I think there has been another thread on this before.. its the new revolutionary velder.. with the HHO or previousley called Browns Gas.. here is some links.

check this video if you havent!
hytechapps.com...

www.energyoptions.com...
freeenergynews.com...
hytechapps.com...
bwt.jeffotto.com...
freeenergynews.com...

Originally posted by timski
What kind of energy requirements would you need to break the H2O molecular bond? Is this something I could rig up in my shed?

Sure. You can do it with a couple of batteries that you get from the grocery store:
www.energyquest.ca.gov...

The problem is, that the amount of energy or power you get from burning that hydrogen is less than the amount you spent breaking it apart into oxygen and hydrogen (in other words, you can use up a nine volt battery making oxygen and hydrogen, and when you burn the oxygen and hydrogen that you got to make water again, you get less than nine volts worth of energy.)

Originally posted by Byrd
(in other words, you can use up a nine volt battery making oxygen and hydrogen, and when you burn the oxygen and hydrogen that you got to make water again, you get less than nine volts worth of energy.)

Bad Byrd! Volts aren't energy! Joules are energy!

But conceptually, Byrd is correct. You wouldn't get as much energy out of the reaction as you put into making the reaction occur.

And yes, you should be able to do this at home. I know that electrolysis will cause water to split into H2 and 02, but I don't know what kind of power requirements are necessary, only that it can be done. I'm pretty sure it's been done with car batteries, but I wouldn't play around with that kind of current. Car batteries are a few amps, which is more than enough to kill you if you don't know what you're doing.

Volts are sort of energy....well its Joules per Coulomb right? Not technically though.
We used to do it with a 9volt battery at high school in science (one of those you find in smoke alarms). It produced enough to make a bubble underneath soapy water and then light it on your hand to make a loud pop sound. Ahh the visitors when they heard that jumped of of their skin lol We also used to light balloons filled with Hyrdogen, but that was from a cylinder. You can improve the rate of the electrolysis by adding some salt, as this will improve the conductivity of the solution. I think using platinum can also effect it but im not sure?

If you can find a catalyst that will make the breaking of the Hydrogen-Oxygen bonds easier and split the gas into hydrogen and oxygen (or maybe it wil end up as HHO, and maybe that is their way how they got it) and force it to make the usual energies when you combust it, then you could get more out than you put in. But i don't know of a catalyst.

Due to this conservation of energy law I heard that Iceland had plans to start commercial production of hydrogen for export this way for use as fuel, they have a lot of geothermal energy there, although you get less out than you put in, the energy going in isn't costing them anything.

Law of Conservation of Energy.... point closed

Ive always though about doing this, it seems so simple. Theres gota be a catch somewhere?

[edit on 16-5-2006 by Distortion]

Law of conservation is an issue here, but what if......

100j to split water into HHO (2 Hydrogen molecules to one oxygen molecule)

Mixture is fed into an engine....

100j released in energy so we have conservation of energy heat, kinetic energy etc, the question we need to ask is how far can this drive an engine?

Some other points to consider. How the heck can this gas give give off little no heat yet melt through steel like butter? I accept that this is real but I would love it if someone could explain the physics. What kind of chemistry is going on here?

One final point. When you electrolyse water you produce oxgren. If there is air available this oxygen will combine with nitrogen to produce Nitrous Oxide and we all know what that can do to engines! Hows about we mix a little bit of that in with the HHO mix! ( I know this can burn out engines but in small quantities in the presence of water vapour it does no damage to the engine and boosts performance)

and so if this type of technology was applicable and ready to use WHY THE HELL HASNT ANY GOVERNMENT OR NOTABLE PRIVATE AGENCY PUT THIS IDEA INTO A WORKABLE PROTOTYPE OR MODEL??? evidently this would be a massive accomplishment if we could have cars run on water so why has not one major governemnt or private group tried this??? just answer that question and i think you will see that A.) because of the conservation of energy it is impossible to make the car run for what it says it will and B.) if it is plausible how come no major group has used it or developed it? those are two looming questions that need to be answered before any more debate is done on the topic.

Originally posted by txdan06
and so if this type of technology was applicable and ready to use WHY THE HELL HASNT ANY GOVERNMENT OR NOTABLE PRIVATE AGENCY PUT THIS IDEA INTO A WORKABLE PROTOTYPE OR MODEL??? evidently this would be a massive accomplishment if we could have cars run on water so why has not one major governemnt or private group tried this??? just answer that question and i think you will see that A.) because of the conservation of energy it is impossible to make the car run for what it says it will and B.) if it is plausible how come no major group has used it or developed it? those are two looming questions that need to be answered before any more debate is done on the topic.

Because it's not in their intrest, every one has access to water, they would lose control OIL=CONTROL OIL= MONEY , scientists got jailed for doing it .
Oil companys would go bank rupt, the economy would go to hell, you would just grab a few buckets of water and fill the car up, everything related to oil would have to go.
Right now everything is based on oil, markets, favors, control, they make bilions of dolars.
Who has the oil is the big bad wolf, they get to dictate over others that dont have it, you dont listen, well no OIL for you

I have long sustained this thing with hidrogen fuel, the beauty of it is when it burns up it turns back to water which makes it reusable, it's clean, no polution, and the tecnology is cheap, all you need is a spliter that will split the hidrogen and the oxigen from the water, and then mix them up as 2 different ingredients and you have fuel.

Water tank=spliter=fuel=back to water after burn(reusable)
This wont get on the market any time soon, not while oil is present any way.

There is a use for it... but nobody wants to listen...

If these type of fuel stations were set up all across the nation, then our energy problems would be solved... sure it wastes energy, But if that is wind/solar energy, then that is Ok by me...

how you say...

using free energy from wind or solar generators to produce this gas... which can then be put into storage for use in cars, or trucks...
it is using the advantage of each type for its purpose...

think about it... effiency has nothing to do with it, just cleanliness...
we can waste all the energy from wind or solar that we want... if we use it to produce a storable (better than batteries) energy fuel like HHO, then we have fuel stations that operate for nearly nothing, and produce fuel all day long, for use in cars...

it is better than strapping a windmill on your car, to get comparable juice...

you guys are saying that "they" would not let it happen, because they would loose profits in oil, and loose control. dont you think that it is silly to think like that, I mean, if someone could make a car that ran on water, and everyone could afford it, they could easily offset the difference in the cost of the car, say 15,000$ car today, becomes 30,000$ car because youve included the cost of gas for such and such years. all it means is that the control will shift to other companies with other interests, and so on...

or, it could only run on a special type of water, then charge that a fuel, there could be big money to be made from dasani in the future.

either way, i dont belive that there is a feasible working model, these "free engery" devices never work.

There is nothing thats prove as free energy- and thats what this thread is basically trying to disprove that you can get more energy out of something than you put in- also once again that whole oil=money=power is a load of ____. All that would happen is that the oil companies would transfer their money into buiilding the new cars. We dont live in a communist society so i think its perfectly fine that a company could build this car. IF the opportunity was there i see NO reason why they would not jump on the opportunity!

Oil wouldn't become worthless even if all the cars in the world switched to fuel from water.. isnt just about every plastic oil-based ?

Just think of how much plastic an average household has.. sure oil would perhaps become less valued or atleast it would be sold in less quantities.. but it would still be a very useful product.