Sciencetific laws are meant to be bent. Laws are written explainations of human interactions with the subject at hand and laws have been adjusted when found to be faulty. Although, very few are adjusted anymore since some look at the laws as being flawless. I guess being a scientific rebel isn't all its cracked up to be. I wouldn't want to be looked at like a crack pot like Edison, Franklin, or the likes. Those idiots, what were they thinking.

 

I think johnnydmetal's argument makes since; however, according to the laws of the world we think that we know right now, the science might not make since. But that is the reason his argument is good. He is questioning science. We would still be in a world where the earth was the center of our solar system if Copernicus didn't question science. It turned out that he was right.

Pointing out flaws in his argument is good. That is what shapes our thinking and what will eventually lead us to find a way to use water as a fuel. No, not actual water, of course there is no combustion there. But using water in a reaction to create hydrogen as a byproduct is certainly a possibility.

 

Always question men. Men are not perfect and do not understand how everything works.

Hydrogen isn't a byproduct of water, it is actually a component. Without hydrogen water does not exist.

The problem explaining how one can get more power from burning hydrogen and oxygen than it takes to split the molecules, is that many in the scientific community hear a catch phrase and then apply it to all things they don't understand. They tend to turn off their thinkers when you try to explain that combustion is different than electrolysis.

 

I didn't read all of these but if someone didn't say it. The only way to make a thing like
this work is to run it on H2O2 and have a catalyst split the H and o2 since it reacts
with just about anything and liberates it with just contact(no electricity) Of course
you need more purer than your medicine cabinet 3% Hydrogen peroxide. Rocket fuel
is 97% + pure H2O2 and you can see the obvious power potential in using it as a fuel
Of course you will get a visit from several agencies if you start making your own hi grade H2O2 but you could probably get motor to run on 70% pretty easy with a bit of
alcohol in the mix to attach to the water molecules that make up the rest of the percentage. One day If I get the money and garage space I will make a hydrogen
peroxide powered vehicle and give the plans away for free. I really believe this is what
they are working on and keeping us busy with all these other fanciful ideas like pure H
or ethanol and pure electric cars. All of a sudden they are going to come out with the
H2O2 car and be like this is it BUT you are not allowed to make your own h2o2 or even
distill it yourself like amateur rocketeers are doing now, That way they can still control
and tax the fuel!!

 

H2O2 can be used as an oxidizer, especially in absence of atmospheric oxygen, and it's often one of the component of a bipropellant rocket fuel, but it's not a fuel in itself.

It is a somewhat dangerous chemical over 20% or so, and it is fairly dangerous and somewhat unstable at over 70% -- it's not something you want to spill on your clothing or skin, or have it make contact with anything (i.e. oil or grease) that can be oxidized. People actually did create engines that would run on it, but there are some good reasons why it was not used much. As for distillation, gaseous H2O2 have a tendency to go up in a big *BOOM*.

In any case, I can't believe this thread is still going....

 

I haven't read all of this thread, but seems like we are going from one problem to another.
Sure we'll run out of oil eventually, but, if we switch to water, we'll run out of that too.
So, I think, if we could create a more efficent internal combustion engine and fuel it with some source of renewable fuel it'd be the ticket.

 

Running out of water would be interesting.

When you burn Hydrogen with oxygen you get water back.

Running out of drinkable water is always an issue.

 

First, water will never going to be used as a fuel, ever. It will be used to make hydrogen, which can be considered a fuel, but that's not the same thing as water. Since roughly 3/4 of the earth is covered by water, that means a practically endless supply, even though most of that is not drinkable.

 

"I guess being a scientific rebel isn't all its cracked up to be. "

Scientific method demands proof. Repeatable, verifiable experiments that can be duplicated. Insisting on proof is basic. Assertions that cannot be experimentally proven are BS. Rebels are welcome to bring PROOF. People who cannot prove their assertions deserve to be treated as fools.

"I really believe this is what
they are working on and keeping us busy with all these other fanciful ideas like pure H
or ethanol and pure electric cars. All of a sudden they are going to come out with the
H2O2 car and be like this is it BUT you are not allowed to make your own h2o2 or even
distill it yourself like amateur rocketeers are doing now, That way they can still control
and tax the fuel!!"

Got a link to the law where "they" ("they" are a mysterious bunch) won't let you make H202? Businesses and others who take the proper precautions can do it, so be a business and comply with the standards. Letting everyone play with dangerous oxidizers who feels like it is not exactly brilliant from a public safety perspective.

 

I been doing a lot of reading on this subject and had to ponder what if it did work. The government wouldn't be able to tax everyone on fuel. Big Money for Federal government as well as state. Utilities would probably go away from the consumer because they could get generator that could be ran on H20 converted to HHO. Middle East would fall of the map causing all sorts of problems and of course they would blame us. I see one day vehicles will get 40-50 miles a gallon but the price of fuel will probably be $7 dollars a gallon. Really no gain if you ask me. They had electric cars in the latter 70's that could do 55mph. What happened? Conspiracy if you ask me. The guy that tried to pattened the HHO technology in the US was denied he had to apply in Europe. Very interesting story cloak and dagger.

 

I explained it in the beginning of this thread that "HHO technology" is nothing more than scam that targets those who skipped chemistry and physics classes.

 

"The guy that tried to pattened the HHO technology in the US was denied he had to apply in Europe. Very interesting story cloak and dagger."

No cloak and dagger if he released it under the Creative Commons license and gave it to the world, then made money from consulting. NOTHING is stopping anyone from putting all their plans and data on the web to prove themselves.

"They had electric cars in the latter 70's that could do 55mph. What happened? Conspiracy if you ask me."

Gee, the designs were available in public, and there is a strong EV hobbyist community. How about "the designs were very limited in performance so no one would buy them in quantity so no one in their right mind would invest in mass producing such primitive products" as a more logical explanation? "They" were not going to throw away money because a tiny subset of folks liked the idea of EVs and an even tinier subset might actually buy one. What EV companies are you buying stock in???

Science isn't voodoo, and there is a vast amount of data available to anyone who is interested. Want an electric car? BUILD ONE:

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/?

"I explained it in the beginning of this thread that "HHO technology" is nothing more than scam that targets those who skipped chemistry and physics classes."

It targets people who don't think critically. There is plenty of free educational info available on the web, but nonsense rantings/sales pitches/delicious conspiracy theories are emotionally appealing.

 

That also plays a role, but first, one need to know some basics, such as the law of conservation of energy, and some elementary chemistry to apply some critical thinking.
Yes, but there are probably more misleading info, and if someone doesn't have the foundation, it may be hard to differentiate between BS and sound science.

In some cases it can be truly difficult to know whether something is BS or not, but this ("water as a fuel") is a very simple case of a BS/scam.
Fairy tales are always more appealing.

 

Monkey Do a search on the guys who are making their own rocket belts, They have
a hard time getting HTP and have to distill their own(as long as it is done properly it
isn't that hard or deadly) Email them and ask about suprise visits and inspections of
the accounting (amount made v used) Saying that "letting everyone play with
"dangerous oxidizers" is not exactly brilliant from a public safety perspective" Sounds
a bit like fear mongering and trying to sway folks away from even looking into H2O2
since it is a evil oxidizer, What about bleach? really that is a powerful oxidizer if spilled
on your clothes/skin it is very harmful, If inhaled it can be deadly, If it is mixed with
ammonia look out(both common) And H2O2 can be used as a fuel it creates a big
blast of steam on a catalyst bed and can be used to spin a turbine to turn a generator
and make a electric vehicle that is fueled up in about the same as a gas car. EV does
not always mean you need a battery pack that has to be charged overnight and there
are some ideas stuck in peolpes heads that are no longer correct!! Like solar powered
doesn't mean it has to be a solar cell, Check out the new solar wind turbine it uses a
giant "greenhouse" to heat the air and funnel it to a tower where basically a wind mill
is contained and the heated air rising turns the thing and even at night it will make
power from the trapped heat inside the "greenhouse" That is the future of solar and
if it is coupled with traditional cells and water heating for even more heat storage, It
can up the conversion efficency. Since more energy strikes the surface of the planet
in one hour than is used in a day it should be where development is focused.

 

Not sure where you're getting all this non-sense about H2O2, but using it as a "fuel" (monopropellant, to be precise) doesn't make sense under most circumstances.

H2O2 can be used as an oxidizer when there's no atmospheric oxygen is available (i.e. in space, underwater, etc.) or when there's a need for *lots* oxygen, more than what is available from the air.

When used in itself, yes, one can make steam on a catalyzer bed, but it's a **** poor "fuel" in comparison to gasoline or diesel, plus it takes a lot more energy to make it than what you can get back. H2O2 can be useful in a few selected circumstances, but in general, there are much better fuels (real ones) with a lot higher energy content.