anyone know about supplemental hydrogen? - Page 8

JS8531 · 07-19-2008, 07:10 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by lbridges

I didn't mix claims, you have misunderstood what I wrote. I was addressing your logic in approaching a subject for which you implied a desire for a productive discussion. And I'm not here to impress you or make you agree. I am interested in outlining some reasonably well understood scientific laws and theories that would refute the capability you assert. Those would be the theories of relativity and statistical mechanics, and the laws of energy conservation and thermodynamics.

Hydrogen injection can yield some tangible benefits to an internal combustion engine. It has a very high specific energy as well as a high flame temperature (and hence increased thermodynamic efficiency). However, it also produces some nasty NOx emissions (due to high temp), and must use severely retarded ignition timing to prevent a backflash up the intake channels (also very prone to knock).

If the hydrogen were produced external to the vehicle's system, and if you used a separate injection system, i.e., 2 intake valves with one normal, one hydrogen), then your we're beginning to talk progress (of course then we're back to hydrogen distribution and storage issues). As it stands, IMO, you have not advanced enough scientific or otto engine expertise to make a convincing argument. Simply stating, "Have you tried it" is insufficient. I haven't hit myself in the head with a hammer, but I'm pretty sure it would hurt. I base my opinion on several years of being an ASE certified auto mechanic (long expired though) and a PhD in Applied Physics.

On what do you base your opinions?

BTW, the sci.energy.hydrogen site has a post outlining a video taped test wherein the water4gas proponent found himself with 2 less mpg when checked by an outside source, as well as having suffered two engine servicing routines while being tested (engine knock induced problems would be my guess - and yes that's a guess vice having any theoretical basis).

Dont start talking about ignition timing or potential engine problems, that can be worked on. Engine that run on hydrogen already exist so I dont know why you have to bring that worries in. The obstacle is to be able to produce hydrogen from water efficiently, shall we leave it at that?

It really make no difference if the hydrogen is made on board or off board. If it can be produced to run a car cheap/efficient then you have winner.

Parts sourced from one company (water4gas) and tested by someone concludes that hydrogen does not work? Time to pack up, close the book, go home and lets all forget what hydrogen can do?

or maybe its time to go back to the drawing board?

david69leonard · 07-19-2008, 07:35 PM

I wonder if i can get my car to run on breast milk? Hmm electrolisis machine + Breasts = instant hydrogen and 500MPG

Chairboy · 07-19-2008, 08:24 PM

Are our schools to blame for this aggressive strain of ignorance? Or society?

lbridges · 07-19-2008, 08:32 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by JS8531

...It really make no difference if the hydrogen is made on board or off board. If it can be produced to run a car cheap/efficient then you have winner....

Oh, but it does if someone claims to be producing more output than the input they started with - it's the old saw, "There's no such thing as a free lunch." Unless a way has been found to overturn some basic laws and theories, the system as proposed can NEVER work.

Don't get me wrong, I have great admiration for those with a creative spark, those who tinker, those who pursue innovations. But I also have issues with those who lie and deceive, like the oil additive crowd: Slick 50, Motor up, Duralube, STP oil treatment, and Prolong. And like the guy selling this idea when it's patently false (Note: I am referring to on-board hydrogen generation schemes, not hydrogen as a fuel or supplemental fuel).

And one final point before I give up on this thread. It's almost a fact of existence that many of us are practically idiots on some things and almost geniuses on others. I am most definitely not asserting you, or another else on this thread, are trying to deceive (unless of course you are part & parcel of those trying to bilk money from people who don't understand the science behind this sort of proposal). In conclusion, a reference on the subject just to show the topic has been under serious investigation for some time (I'm sure there are older references, this was just the easiest for me to find): Hydrogen as a Fuel for Vehicle Propulsion, by K.S.Varde, G.G.Lucas., from the Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs. vol.188 26/74 p.365-372 (1974).

Tidder · 07-19-2008, 08:46 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Chairboy

Are our schools to blame for this aggressive strain of ignorance? Or society?

I blame the government and chemtrails.

JS8531 · 07-19-2008, 09:04 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by lbridges

Oh, but it does if someone claims to be producing more output than the input they started with - it's the old saw, "There's no such thing as a free lunch." Unless a way has been found to overturn some basic laws and theories, the system as proposed can NEVER work.

Don't get me wrong, I have great admiration for those with a creative spark, those who tinker, those who pursue innovations. But I also have issues with those who lie and deceive, like the oil additive crowd: Slick 50, Motor up, Duralube, STP oil treatment, and Prolong. And like the guy selling this idea when it's patently false (Note: I am referring to on-board hydrogen generation schemes, not hydrogen as a fuel or supplemental fuel).

And one final point before I give up on this thread. It's almost a fact of existence that many of us are practically idiots on some things and almost geniuses on others. I am most definitely not asserting you, or another else on this thread, are trying to deceive (unless of course you are part & parcel of those trying to bilk money from people who don't understand the science behind this sort of proposal). In conclusion, a reference on the subject just to show the topic has been under serious investigation for some time (I'm sure there are older references, this was just the easiest for me to find): Hydrogen as a Fuel for Vehicle Propulsion, by K.S.Varde, G.G.Lucas., from the Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs. vol.188 26/74 p.365-372 (1974).

Like I said on my previous post, most device if not all that are being sold online/ebay or the one that are heavily advertised are just there to take advantage of some poeple. I must add, its strange, this thread start advertising water-hydrogen kit, this forum never used to be like this.

I posted a link that direct the OP to a forum and a site which talk about hydrogen generation in a non comercial way. It is up to him to join the forum, participate, research, learn and decide for himself if he should try it or not. He may or may not succed, thats irrelavent here. The point was, he want to try and hope to get a result.

Thousands of people around the world are trying to split water as a hobby for years, they must be getting something out of it. I think it is wrong to discourage anyone trying to get into it, this what I hate about some poeple in the forum, without fully understanding whats involved, they blurt out negative words about the subject. Like I said, dont stand in front of the man who want to find out something for himself. Wether he is going to acheive it or waste his time on a project, thats his problems, its not mine, its not your, as long as no one died, hurt or whatever there is no problem.

Anyway I posted what I need to post, the informations are there for him to read, plenty to read. Thats my contribution to this thread, and its probably the only one that answered his question.

My only advice is, dont beleive any comercial site, most are BS. Exchange ideas with the others who have the right background and OP is going to get something going for sure.

84RegalRider · 07-20-2008, 02:19 AM

I think most people have high hopes to become a hydrogen society.
Just we need to start building the fission plants now. haha or make a mini sun(fusion).

we are really just attacking this belief in "free" energy.

Chairboy · 07-20-2008, 11:05 AM

JS8531.... in your mind you sound completely reasonable. But you're ignorant, and you seem to embrace this ignorance. The static and covalent bonds are very strong, and the energy needed to break them apart is MUCH higher than you can get from the fuel.

Your "let's just see what happens" approach is like saying "maybe the tooth fairy exists, it's irresponsible to tell people that it doesn't".

It's ok to have an open mind, just make sure it's not so open that your brains fall out.

danielkh · 07-20-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Chairboy

JS8531.... in your mind you sound completely reasonable. But you're ignorant, and you seem to embrace this ignorance. The static and covalent bonds are very strong, and the energy needed to break them apart is MUCH higher than you can get from the fuel.

Your "let's just see what happens" approach is like saying "maybe the tooth fairy exists, it's irresponsible to tell people that it doesn't".

It's ok to have an open mind, just make sure it's not so open that your brains fall out.

There was a time when people that didn't believe the earth was the center of the universe were executed for heracy. All the "scientists" were SO sure that they would do anything to stop any opposition. Pretty much the same as the new scientists and global warming (anyone that doesn't believe in global warming is a nazi and should lose all credentials).

I see 2 sides that are so commited to their beliefs they aren't willing to "wait and see".

There was also a time when fire was an element. "Facts" change and theories are just that. Calling people ignorant really isn't helping your cause. I'v e been on sites where people try to explain how wind gerators CAN work on a car, and people call them ignorant for not understanding high school physics and putting a windmill on a car. What they fail to see is the possibility of using current drag coeffecients to use wind WITHOUT increasing drag of the vehicle. If there is a will, there might just be a way. If you are so certain you are right, then revel in your glory of ultimate insight.

Chairboy · 07-20-2008, 11:45 AM

Gotcha, so Ozzie Freedom (the water4gas guy) is Galileo and Copernicus in one.

One thing's for sure, when you finally figure out that it doesn't work, you won't come and admit it. Your kind never does.

danielkh · 07-20-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Chairboy

Gotcha, so Ozzie Freedom (the water4gas guy) is Galileo and Copernicus in one.

One thing's for sure, when you finally figure out that it doesn't work, you won't come and admit it. Your kind never does.

My kind? What does that mean?? I don't care about any of this. I don't pay for my gas.

I am having a really tough time understanding why you are so passionate in saying it can't be done, that you resort to insults and namecalling (ignorant and "your kind"). If you are so right, I would think you would just find humor in everyone trying. But to get angry......heck, that says you are questioning your own faith. Wow.

What I do know is I would be bagging groceries if I had listened to everyone that told me "don't even try because I know everything and you can't do it".

Seems pretty easy to test all this out though.......little work for even the guy that says it can't work.

http://www.theodoregray.com/Periodic...1.1/index.html

I mean if a 9v battery can produce that much hydrogen in 5 minutes, I wonder what a car battery/alternator and say 10 electrodes could do? Almost makes me wish I did care.

And you can insult me all you want.

Chairboy · 07-20-2008, 12:33 PM

There isn't a rolling:eyes emoticon big enough to express how silly I think you're being.

danielkh · 07-20-2008, 12:34 PM

Oh, so that means you did the experiment and you are here to give us your results?

JS8531 · 07-20-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Chairboy

JS8531.... in your mind you sound completely reasonable. But you're ignorant, and you seem to embrace this ignorance. The static and covalent bonds are very strong, and the energy needed to break them apart is MUCH higher than you can get from the fuel.

Your "let's just see what happens" approach is like saying "maybe the tooth fairy exists, it's irresponsible to tell people that it doesn't".

It's ok to have an open mind, just make sure it's not so open that your brains fall out.

Actually you are the ignorant here,

Remember what I said earlier? if you dont believe it, dont get in a way of the man doing it. You dont have an invertors mind, with your narrow minded attitude, sorry to say but you not gonna go very far.

I tell you what? why dont you tell the scientist to stop tinkering about hydrogen generation? maybe you can become the hero that you wish to be. Tell over unity forum with 1000s of members that they are wasting time and they are all bunch of ignorants fools. Last time I check poeple who hang out there know their stuff.

What do you know? From your old text book? and what you read is still stuck in your little mind?

Stop going around in a circle, we all know you cant split water efficiently with simple electrolysis, thats old news. I bet you were the guy who put together 2 bolts in a jar, water, acid then stick a 12V supply and expect miracles to happen. Sorry to tell but theres more to it than that.

Now tell me what have you contributed? show us your work then? if your contribution to science is, "IT CANT BE DONE" That says alot about you.

Heres, make a thread titled, "HYDROGEN GENERATION CANNOT BE DONE"

Dont crap on thread that talk about hydrogen generation, make your own thread and stay there with your rigid little mind.

Chairboy · 07-20-2008, 01:16 PM