It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Nightaudit
Hi guys, very interesting topic here. Someone mentioned something about the amount of hho needed to run his 2.4l engine. Please do not forget the compression ratio. If your engine has for example a compression of 10:1, then you only need 1 part of fuel for ten parts of air.
Plus I really don´t see problem with conservation of energy here. I see it this way:
You definately CAN run a combustion engine on hydrogen, this is a proven fact.
The question is if you can get enough gas "on the fly", meaning enough liters of gas per minute.
In this example they apparently use less then one kw of power to produce the gas they need to run the engine.
...
Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by abecedarian
Lots of interesting info can be found here. Note the INSANE amperage you will need to convert quantities of water suitable for driving.
16.5 Kwatt-hours of energy are needed to convert 1 gallon of water to hydrogen. The wattage needed depends on the current flow; if an apparatus used 1000 watts, then the hydrogen could be generated in less than a day. However, the current required is too high to do electrolysis at this rate in normal households; an industrial line would most likely be needed. You could generate hydrogen at a slower rate and wattage and still get the conversion done on a 10 amp or 20 amp circuit, but it would take longer.
Originally posted by spikey
A 2000W petrol driven electrical generator, (such as this one: hondagenerator.co.uk... this model has a running time of over 10 hours per gallon of petrol @ 1/4 load) with approx a one gallon fuel capacity, this will run delivering the 1600-1700 watts required in the above 10X example, for approximately 3 hours or thereabouts on one full tank holding one gallon, correct?
Originally posted by spikey
The combustion engine returns around a 40% efficiency (+/-), the rest is lost as mechanical friction, heat and unburnt fuel. Just to reiterate, this happens with petrol and with gas, so it's an irrelevancy to the debate of evolving HHO, and running a car with it, as it effects all types of fuel.
People who know very little about this subject seem to think that one need to use water on a 1:1 ratio with petrol...this is NOT so.
When you put (for example) one gallon of water into a HHO electrolysis unit, you don't use up that gallon of water as you would use a gallon of petrol.
It doesn't work like that. a gallon of water contains approximately 1,800 gallons of HHO gas (approximately 1800:1 ratio HHO gas to water volume), i don't have the actual figures to hand, but you don't 'squirt' h2o into the cylinders like you do petrol.
Let's EVEN assume that these guys in the OP have their energy requirements to produce their stated 55LPM totally wrong, and are actually using 1000% (10X) the energy they claim to be using to achieve their stated 55LPM HHO liberation from the water.
They say they are using (from the deep cycle battery) 3 Volts and 55 Amps to create 55 liters per minute (just under 1 liter per second). So, 3V X 55A=165Watts continuous energy input required.
Let's multiply that requirement by 1000%, or put another way, times 10.
Now, we have an input energy requirement of 1650 Watts, continuous electrical input to evolve the stated 55 LPM of HHO gas from the H2O.
A 2000W petrol driven electrical generator, (such as this one: hondagenerator.co.uk... this model has a running time of over 10 hours per gallon of petrol @ 1/4 load) with approx a one gallon fuel capacity, this will run delivering the 1600-1700 watts required in the above 10X example, for approximately 3 hours or thereabouts on one full tank holding one gallon, correct?
So, in my wildly over the top example of 1000% (10X) the stated energy input, we can power the HHO reactor displayed in the OP's video, for approximately 3 HOURS on ONE GALLON of petrol, which will yeild approximately 10,000 liters of HHO gas to power the car engine (55LPM X 180 minutes=9,900 liters)
Even a car considered to be very fuel efficient, say achieving 50-70 MPG cannot compete with these figures for input fuel consumption. A direct comparison would be the HHO powered car would achieve (in my 10X example only) approx 150MPG in comparative terms.
The direct comparison would be the HHO system, using 1000% exaggerated fuel input estimates, would be roughly 3 times as efficient as a car burning ordinary petrol conventionally.
Now, at the video's stated input energy of 165Watts (3V X 55A=165W) continuous requirement of input electrical energy to generate 55LPM of HHO gas, the little one gallon petrol generator would be able to produce and supply the required electrical energy for a sustained period of approximately 15-20 hours, until the single gallon fuel tank (on the petrol generator) was used up.
IOW, a single gallon a petrol, used in a petrol generator, used to power the HHO reactor in the video to evolve 55LPM of HHO gas, at the stated efficiencies in the video, would power and run the car for 15-20 hours. EVEN at 10X the stated energy requirement to generate 55LPM HHO, the car would run for around 3 hours on a single gallon of petrol (If used in the generator, running the HHO reactor).
ONE GALLON of petrol.
Can any of you drive your car's combustion engine for more than a hour or two at the most, on a single gallon of petrol? Let alone 3 hours or even 15-20!
The information is out there, almost everywhere you care to look for it.
Or, you can listen to the likes of Buddhasystem, and sit on your hand shaking your head...up to you.
>snip
Yes the technology is very similar in Lazar's case. However Lazar makes the point I've been trying to make that these truck guys don't even mention. If you're not using solar power to create the hydrogen from water, I'm not sure how economical this technology really is. Lazar makes the point that using solar power to make the hydrogen would be a viable option even though he was using another method, as I recall. And at no point does Lazar claim he's running his car with water.
Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
Bob Lazar has one of these cars too, a corvette.
I made a thread about it, and there is a great deal of discussion of how it works, if anybody wants to take a look. (Not trying to pimp my old thread, I just thought some of you might find it interesting).
I just noticed this from the OP link:
Originally posted by buddhasystem
OK, since spikey dropped out of this particular angle of discussion, can somebody explain to me how it's possible to drive a truck with 3HP energy input, from gasoline or ANY other source? Sure you'll move, just not very fast
Why am I not surprised???
Chava Energy was present on August 21 to validate the technology. However, it turned out that the claimed technology was not in a condition to be tested during the visit and the Inventor Fred Wells was not present either, only his business partner. Therefore, none of the claims could be validated and Chava Energy generously offered to conduct a test in the future once the system is running reliably.
And at no point does Lazar claim he's running his car with water.
Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by abecedarian
See, this is just more propaganda, don't fall for it. My little Mason Jar unit operates on 5 Amps at 12 Volts from my van's 100 Amp alternator. Another thing the math guys didn't mention is the expansion rate of HHO. Hydrogen has an expansion rate of 1:848 which means the car uses 472L/Km H2 gas. Assume a nice speed of 100KPH, and you get a fuel
demand of 787 LPM. Do your research on a thing before letting people talk you out of it. I only have $145 in my system, and I wouldn't take that for it. I love the gas savings and the clean engine, and I hate big oil.