Okay... this could get long and complicated.

I've been researching this whole "water as a fuel" thing.

Mainly the principle of the process is to use electrolysis to seperate the hydrogen from the oxygen in water, and by pumping this hydrogen into your engine it (this is the part i'm not sure about) supposedly makes the engine burn gasoline more complete (i'm told an engine only burns about 40% of the fuel that runs through it)

I've posted this question on yahoo a couple of times

and I've been told that the Law of Thermodynamics states pretty much that "you can't get something for free" pretty much that the energy used to seperate the hydrogen is more than the energy produced.

BUT, if I understand this correctly, the introduction od the hydrogen into the combustion chamber makes the gasoline burn more efficiently, so it wouldn't be "creating" energy, it would be harnessing energy that is otherwise wasted.

Fuel saving gadgets - a professional engineer's view
Truckers Choose Hydrogen Power

The technology exhists... theres no doubing that, it's there, it works, but i'm thinking in terms of the do it yourself kits sold all over the net. nobody seems to think they work.

Also other answers I recieved say "if it works, why aren't they doing this to all cars?" - well, it's not the most efficient hybrid, an electric/gas hybrid is much more efficient than the water/hydrogen/gas hybrid I speak of, BUT this would be a good cheap upgrade for the millions of cars on the road now.

Sorry so long.... i'm looking for more research and answers if anybody can help.

thanks

 

The answers are in the links--inefficiency and cost. $4000 to $14000?

It sounds like this is in the shake-out phase.

At present, you can still buy a lot of gas for $4000, let alone $14000. And from the sounds of it, you may have to burn $5 worth of gas to make $3 of Hydrogen. Why would you saddle yourself with such a set up?

Like I said, it's being shaken out and if it holds promise, it will move into wider use.

 

here is a hydrogen generator for less than $4000
http://hydro4000.com/

 

OK, put your $1200 out there and let us know.....

 

maybe after july... when that newstation tests it again.

Did you guys read that story? durango went from 9.4 to 23 mpg.

Then some engineer said it was fake because theres no way that durango could be getting only 9.4 mpg.

I've met alot of engineers in my profession... but that one takes the cake, a durango, loaded with god knows how much cargo (it was the news van, full of equipment im sure) and poorly taken care of, could easily get 9 mpg.

Heck... my f150 is SUPPOSED to get 16 mpg... but guess what? it gets 10.

but they are retesting the contraption in july (with the engineers assistance) and will have another story. Then MAYBE i would consider dropping $1200 on one. if my truck went from 10 to 23 mpg... it'd pay for itself pretty quick.

 

To get the mileage it says on the window sticker, you have to use the same method the EPA does for testing. "Highway" mpg is tested at 45 mph on flat ground, driver only, no passengers. Windows are up, AC is off, car carries half a tank of fuel.

Can you drive 45 mph on the highway and not get run over by a semi or threatened with death for holding up traffic? For 30 years there have been attempts to make the testing more realistic, but the Big Three cry foul whenever the government suggests changing the testing standards. They're paying for their deception now.

 

As always "follow the money"

The first problem with cost can probably be fixed by mass production. Anything that is made in "onesy twosy" costs a lot more than just rolling off an assembly line. For example a fuel pump for my Motorcycle costs $500, for my car much less than $100. The reason I was told by a motorcycle guy was that most motorcycles especially mine, were low production in comparison to cars. So the fuel pumps are not made in high enough volume to be cheap. Detroit or even Asia are masters of mass production, so if hydrogen generators really work they will be made in China and cost maybe fifty cents.

Besides the reasons you already found from Thermodynamics etc, is that if Detroit or Japan could boost gas mileage more than 100% with a gadget, you could bet your last dollar, they would do it.

There are proposals now that will require car fuel mileage to increase a lot by 2015. If the car makers don't make the increases required there will be huge "Gas Guzzler Taxes". So if Detroit could mass produce a hydrogen generator to increase mileage 100%+ they would jump on it like flies on poo.

Detroit is getting clobbered by the Japanese cars now because they don't get as much gas mileage. Some automakers could be on the verge of going out of business if they can't increase sales by selling fuel efficient cars. So making a cheap cost efficient hydrogen generator to increase mileage 100% would probably be #1 on the to do list.

But you don't see it happening because all the automakers, who are all viscious competitors looking for an edge and who have thousands of engineers working on fuel mileage, just don't see this technolgy as the solution to their problem. But all you see are some guys in a garage or a rinky dink company making wild claims.

In otherwords, if it actually does work and if it can be done cost effectively, All the automakers of the world would be lining up at the doors to develop this gadget.

I might be wrong, but if hydrogen generators actually worked, you would see it on every vehicle coming out in the next decades.

I wish hydrogen generators worked, I also wish cold fusion did too, but until you can prove it over and over, it ain't gonna happen. I actually think there is something to cold fusion and would love to see it succeed, but you have to prove it in the field first.

So if they can prove these hydrogen generators work at reasonable cost under SCIENTIFICALLY CONTROLLED CONDITIONS, then we will see these on every new vehicle. Tll that happens this is just another Fish Carburator or a Magnetic Fuel Mileage Improver.

Just my opinion,

Jim Henderson

 

So what you're saying is that you actually have no clue about how the EPA determines fuel economy.

It's done on a chassis dynomometer. The vehicle's inertia and road load horsepower are determined by testing and programmed into the dyno. These dynos are WAY advanced from what you see at the hot rod shop to measure rear wheel horsepower.

The road load power and inertia are determined from a vehicle with one passenger and a small amount of cargo, and the windows are up and the A/C is off, but a horsepower figure is added in to the total to account for A/C.

There are two tests. A city test and a highway test. The city is all stop and go, with a maximum speed of about 55 MPH for a short time. Most of the test is below 35 MPH. The highway test starts from a stop and ranges between 50 and 60 MPH for almost the entire test.

These tests were used through the 2007 model year. In 2008 the EPA required a new test that has higher speeds and faster accelerations. I had already left Ford so I have not seen this test. I do know that my wife's 2005 Five Hundred was rated 2 MPG higher than her 2008 Taurus. I believe the difference is in the new test.

 

The only part that I think you're wrong is that if this really worked in would have been on every vehicle YEARS ago, not in the coming decades. This bogus technology has been known and available for DECADES.