Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This technology has been around for some time. You would think that it would get nationwide attention but it does not. Do you think there is a effort to suppress technology like this?
I'm not sure what it'd really do for the average Joe. So I have a car that runs off of water. Ok....it would probably cost $20k more. Yes, it would be nice to not have to put gas in it...but it wouldn't save any money.
We're seeing that with the new Nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt....both seem like good vehicles...and almost seem like legitimate cars...but having to pay so much more for them just isn't reasonable.
Here's the deal, people: There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
There is energy in water. Chemically, it's locked up in the atomic bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. When the hydrogen and oxygen combine, whether it's in a fuel cell, internal combustion engine running on hydrogen, or a jury-rigged pickup truck with an electrolysis cell in the bed, there's energy left over in the form of heat or electrons. That's converted to mechanical energy by the pistons and crankshaft or electrical motors to move the vehicle.
Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics haven't changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and you're losing energy, not gaining it--period.
Here's the deal, people: There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
There is energy in water. Chemically, it's locked up in the atomic bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. When the hydrogen and oxygen combine, whether it's in a fuel cell, internal combustion engine running on hydrogen, or a jury-rigged pickup truck with an electrolysis cell in the bed, there's energy left over in the form of heat or electrons. That's converted to mechanical energy by the pistons and crankshaft or electrical motors to move the vehicle.
Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics haven't changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and you're losing energy, not gaining it--period.
Perhaps instead of plagiarizing the writings of others who have questionable knowledge of the subject, you could enlighten us with what you personally know about the technology.
The fact is that it does take energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen. The question is what is the difference in energy between the small amount of electricity it takes to make "browns gas" and the extremely explosive power of a hydrogen/oxygen mix.
The electricity needed to make browns gas can be derived from a car battery and then recharged by a solar charger while the vehicle is parked.
This in fact, until they begin charging for sunlight is a "free lunch".
Anyone who has done the simple science class experiment of making hydrogen with a 9volt battery and a bowl of water can take that one step farther and trap that gas with a plastic bag and test the power of browns gas by igniting it.
I would caution you to do it outside, to prevent blowing all the windows out of your house.
Then you may want to explain to me which is more powerful, the gas or the battery.
The fact is that it does take energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen. The question is what is the difference in energy between the small amount of electricity it takes to make "browns gas" and the extremely explosive power of a hydrogen/oxygen mix.
...
Then you may want to explain to me which is more powerful, the gas or the battery.
"Powerful" is a bad word - ask yourself which has more energy stored, the battery or the gas mixture. Answer: The battery. 2nd law of thermodynamics - you can't win, you can't break even, you can't leave the game.
Now, there can be situations where it's more useful to have an O2/H2 mixture than having a battery, but you're not gaining any energy. None.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
