Looking for some alternative energy info and expertise , Particulary HHO Hydrogen

Originally posted by shaneR
and it is disappointing how many "experts" just quote thermodynamic "laws",
and write off this potential without discussion...

It's disappointing how so many laymen claim they have broken scientific laws they are totally ignorant of yet cannot substantiate their claims.

Originally posted by shaneR
reply to post by the2010apprentice

 

and it is disappointing how many "experts" just quote thermodynamic "laws",
and write off this potential without discussion...

anyway, from what i have learned,
one of the first problems experimenters confront is "containment", eg seals, valves etc...
eg: hydrogen is so small + light it is hard to stop it escaping...(+ exploding where it isnt meant to!)

so if U plan to use it directly from source U mite be able to bypass that problem...

one thing i would love to see stats for is this...
what is the exact way U measure how much energy it takes to seperate the water molecule to just O2 +H...
AND also the energy produced... does anyone have the info for how much energy U get from burning Hydrogen??? how do U measure stuff like that, PLEASE... ?

thanks

+seeya

The potential of hydrogen has not been written off and is the topic of many studies. As much as you may not like it, thermodynamics will give you the answers you ask for without you taking the chance of decorating your garage with your body parts.
The energy produced from reaction is exactly what is required to make the H2 + O2 mixture. Unfortunately, there are additional losses in the production; think of them as shipping and handling charges. These are mainly the heat produced by running a current through the electrolyzer. This means that energetically, this is a losing proposition unless you are using waste energy or really need hydrogen and are willing to accept the losses to get it. The other thing to note is that storing any quantity of the mix is exceptionally dangerous and will Darwinistically eliminate the backyard researcher who ignores thermodynamics and kinetics. Electrolysis is usually done such that H2 and O2 are collected separately.
You can measure the energy released in a calorimeter but this energy has been measured countless times and, given your questions, you are in no position to measure it yourself. Look up "heat of combustion" and search for hydrogen.

reply to post by john_bmth


i agree, but i was just saying
that it is easy to say "cant be done",

but us "non-experts" need to be shown why...

thanks

reply to post by pteridine


thanks pteridine,
i appreciate your thoughts and advice...

+ i didnt actually mean Hydrogen was written off, i just meant
the "seemingly" simple extraction of Hydrogen from water...

+ when U mention "waste energy" - do U mean "leftover" from some other source/reaction? or something else?

finally, when U say it takes "exactly" the same energy to get Hydrogen out, as what U end up with...
is there no way of "altering" the conditions under which the process takes place ( ie temp, pressure, or anything) to improve efficiency? or can the water be altered chemically, or in some other physical way, to make it "split" easier?

thanks again,

+seeya

Originally posted by shaneR
reply to post by pteridine

 

thanks pteridine,
i appreciate your thoughts and advice...

+ i didnt actually mean Hydrogen was written off, i just meant
the "seemingly" simple extraction of Hydrogen from water...

+ when U mention "waste energy" - do U mean "leftover" from some other source/reaction? or something else?

finally, when U say it takes "exactly" the same energy to get Hydrogen out, as what U end up with...
is there no way of "altering" the conditions under which the process takes place ( ie temp, pressure, or anything) to improve efficiency? or can the water be altered chemically, or in some other physical way, to make it "split" easier?

thanks again,

+seeya

The electrolysis of water will produce hydrogen and oxygen. The problem is that it takes more energy than it produces so if you need hydrogen and are willing to pay the energy penalty, then it makes sense. Small amounts of hydrogen are best made by electrolysis because the cost of the electrolyzer is much less than the cost of a methane reformer, for example. Large amounts of hydrogen are most economically produced by gasification or reforming reactions.
Unless you are somehow immediately using the mix of H2 and O2, you are at risk of a nasty explosion. There are stories of serious accidents so any experimentation should be done with small amounts. Wear goggles for protection against splashes. Even very small explosions will scatter the electrolyte solution and that will damage your eyes. Most of the home-grown electrolyzers use a strongly basic solution [KOH or NaOH [lye]] and this readily dissolves human tissue.
There is no way of altering the conditions to get more out than you put in. That would be getting something for nothing [see my simplified laws of thermodynamics in a previous post]. If you have some waste energy, it may pay to do it but when all the energy is totaled up, and the shipping and handling fees are added, you can't even get out what you put in.
By waste energy I mean energy that you would otherwise lose. Say, for example, your automobile has an generator/alternator that operates in a fashion where the voltage controller drops excess current to ground, converting it into heat. If you use that current to make hydrogen and feed it into the engine, you recover some waste energy. The hydrogen also may help with combustion of the fuel in a poorly tuned engine. One liter of water will produce about 889 grams of O2 and 111 grams of hydrogen or about 55.5 Moles of H2. This is about 1380 liters [about 50 cubic feet] at 77 F and 1 atm.
None of this is getting energy for free. It is only wasting less energy by using what you would otherwise waste. Trying to operate a vehicle on water by burning H2 to move the vehicle and electrolyzing water to make more H2 using alternator current isn't going to happen.

reply to post by boncho


Oh really?

So then following that logic, "water" is a HOAX?

After all, the real name for water is "dihydrogen monoxide". I guess when someone calls dihydrogen monoxide by it's nickname "water" it is then pseudoscience.

reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy


HHO is a mixture of molecular hydrogen and molecular oxygen. The use of HHO implies that it is something different.

reply to post by shaneR


In a perfect world, it takes 142 Joules of electricity to make one gram of hydrogen from water. If you burned that one gram of hydrogen you would only get 142 Joules of energy out of it. 142 Joules IN -> 142 Joules OUT. You break even.

The problem is we don't live in a perfect world, and it is near impossible to make a perfect device that is 100% efficient. ALL energy conversions systems have inefficiencies.

So, when you go to apply 142 Joules of electricity to water with your device, there is no guarantee that 100% of the 142 Joules of electricity will go directly to splitting the water. A lot of the electricity will just heat up the water, and heat other impurities in the water, and the heat will escape the water container. That escaping heat is WASTED energy. Wasted Joules of electricity. So in reality, it will take MORE than 142 Joules of energy to make one gram of hydrogen, and yet you only get 142 out when you burn it..... that is a waste of energy.

If you start with 142 Joules of electricity, there is no reason to convert it to hydrogen because you will just lose a few Joules in the process. You might as well just use the electricity for something else.

I have experimented with many electrolysis devices. I found that the electrical power itself is more powerful than the oxyhydrogen it would create.

reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy


To make the 142J of hydrogen, given the inefficiences of backyard electrolyzers, I estimate that about 200J would be necessary.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy

 

HHO is a mixture of molecular hydrogen and molecular oxygen. The use of HHO implies that it is something different.

That is the problem... You are assuming "HHO" is a chemical formula, and not just an acronym.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy

 

To make the 142J of hydrogen, given the inefficiences of backyard electrolyzers, I estimate that about 200J would be necessary.

And after all that, when it's combusted in an engine, the engine gets hot and that heat needs to be dissipated into the atmosphere via a radiator. That amounts to a huge loss in the overall process that needs to be supplied at the front end of it in terms of electrical energy. It would indeed be far more efficient to just feed that initial electrical energy directly to an electric motor.

Water or dihydrogen monoxide, I always thought of it as hydrogen hydroxide (H.OH) because of the way it behaves as a solvent.

Stanley Meyer, “Method for Production of a Fuel Gas” US Patent 4,936,961

There is already a thread on this where real mechanics are implementing and utilizing HHO.

And Not simply a group of Dis Info agents and/or arm chair theoreticians who know little about the relative science or automobiles in which to implement them in.

The US Patent Office actually awarded a patent to Stanley Meyer for his Water Fuel Cell only after he had proven to the US Patent Office that it did indeed produce Hydrogen and did work as he described in his Patent application.





www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by nh_ee


That is very nice. Many cells generate hydrogen and it is possible to put them in vehicles. The bottom line is still that they use more energy than they produce. If that energy is wasted anyway, then they may have an advantage in that their initial costs and operating costs are offset by fuel savings at some point.

reply to post by pteridine


thanks again pteridine,
i really the appreciate the trouble U have gone to here, to explain...

much appreciated

seeya

reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy


thanks again also to giftOfprOphecy...

this is the sort of stuff that i really appreciate,,,

actual numbers and stats,

plenty for me to go and try and get my head around,,,

without having to blow it off!!!

thanks

+seeya

reply to post by nh_ee


Oh come on, that guy got sued by his investors and exposed as a fraud in court.

Electrolysis. Putting a tablespoon of salt or baking soda in water greatly increases the conductivity and separation. Electrolysis:

reply to post by SelfSustainedLoner


Don't NOT use baking soda or salt.

If you use salt then you will create poisonous chlorine gas. If you use baking soda you will create poisonous carbon monoxide gas. It can kill you.

reply to post by SelfSustainedLoner


Distilled water is not conductive but the random addition of salts will produce gases that you won't like. If you do a little research, you'll find that many of the backyard electrolyzers use strong base, potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide, in solution. These should be handled carefully and kept away from air, in storage and in use, as they will react with CO2 and make carbonates, which will not work very well because of reduced conductivity.

reply to post by pteridine


KOH and NaOH in dry form are quite stable if carefully stored but NaOH is very hygroscopic (absorbs atmospheric moisture) making a highly corrosive solution of itself alarmingly quickly which gets quite hot so supplies *must* be stored in airtight containers. KOH has similar characteristics I suspect and that was a factor in me cancelling my plans to make some experimental alkaline batteries some years ago as, to get the raw material at a reasonable price, I had to buy a minimum 50kg of it (in 'flake' form) and the worries of storing so much of a highly hazardous material in my home were too great for my liking. Farmers do use quite a bit of this stuff (KOH) as it's the ultimate ph corrector for acidic soils with the added benefit of providing Potassium for plants but they have the storage and handling facilities & requirements already sorted out (and in use I hope for their sake).