Water for Fuel
I just did an interview with Channel 46 News in Atlanta about using water as fuel and/or fuel supplement in automobiles. This is old technology which has been suppressed by those who wish to continue using petroleum as a means of controlling the masses.
This really works folks, my dad actually had an engine running on water in the '60s! Hydrolysis is initiated using the 12V supply already existing with alternator output that has traditionally been wasted. Water molecules are broken down into hydrogen and oxygen atoms and this product gas is tubed directly into the intake for combustion. I have read reports that over-unity has actually been achieved once the electrolysis process is started because of the inherently unstable nature of water, molecules the atoms spontaneously begin to separate.
People have been killed to keep a lid on this, but now that we have global communications and rapid internet dissemination of information they can't keep this knowledge from spreading.
Let's see how much of this interview actually makes it on the air!
Learn the facts then comment!
Sorry for the re post but this time I put the links into one post. Just click, watch the news release then click to learn how it’s done, then discus the topic with the new knowledge you have.
Video:
http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/water_for_gas_is_it_a_p...
How to do it for free
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/
PDF e book on free energy, about 20 mb’s so it may take a while to load, then save, 1700+ pages.
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PJKbook.pdf
Beginners guide
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Hydroxy%20Boosters.pdf
All info is free so no need to worry about a scam. If you’re truly interested join a research group on line.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Hydroxy/
IMPORTANT NOTICE!! This is for all forms now so help keep Mike out of trouble here on RPD when you post! This is from the Hydroxy form:
The common term "HHO" has been applied for twice as a trademark, and the application is pending. As such, this term is now trademark pending, and has been prohibited for use by members of this forum. Anyone posting this term, or replying to a post containing this term without editing it, will be banned from this group. This is a zero-tolerance policy, there will be no exceptions. If you have a problem with this, do not join this group! If you would like to try to do something about this injustice, contact the US Patent Office and voice your complaint, or pay the fee ($300 each) to file "notice of opposition" on these two applications. Both applications were made by the following entity;
Headwaters Incorporated
10653 S. River Front Parkway, Suite 300
South Jordan, UT 84095
United States
US Patent Office records pertaining to these applications can be found at;
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=77180550
and
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=77180591
Drive free or Die!
I apologize for using a trademark pending term
I will refrain from using it in the future.
As for the links you have posted (many times), I have looked at several of them. I could take many hours that I do not have refuting many of the errors in those documents, and you would not listen to me if I did, so what is the point?
I will point out that the link to the video of a the car running on water still requires gasoline or some outside energy source. The one time he ran the car on water only, he had to let the hydrogen pressure build before he could start the car. The only way that he could do that was to use the energy stored in the battery to electrolyze the water. The only way the battery could have energy stored in it was to run the car using gasoline first. The car will run on a stored tank of hydrogen gas, I do not dispute that.
My goal is not to attack attempts to use alternative energy, nor to discourage ways to improve fuel efficiency. I am trying to analyze how something works and discuss possible options for improving the technology.
No apology need to me, I just want to help educate people.
No apology need to me, I just want to help educate people.
Forgive me for my many posts, and yes there are many hours needed to do what you have set out to do I know I have been trying to do it since the eighties and have found these sources for information to be very helpful and functional.
As you pointed out about the short video, he did run it on gas first then switched to Brown’s gas. The stored energy used to produce the browns gas is created by the alternator during the operation of the motor. As the motor runs, it makes what is needed and that is controlled by the voltage regulator. So when it’s running on Brown’s gas the alternator is making what is being used. The time it takes to produce the pressurized gas on a cold start will vary from cell to cell depending on the design, normally less than five minutes in a high production cells.
As far as your goal, maybe you should explore Tesla’s car he made, it seems more to be what you’re looking for. Here is part of the story, you will find it half way down on the page, link is below.
“It is speculated that Nikola Tesla was able to somehow harness the earth's magnetic field that encompasses our planet. And, he somehow was able to draw tremendous amounts of power by cutting these lines of force or causing them to be multiplied together. The exact nature of his device remains a mystery but it did actually function by powering the 80 h.p. A.C. motor in the Pierce-Arrow at speeds up to 90 m.p.h. and no recharging was ever necessary!”
http://www.keelynet.com/energy/teslafe1.htm
Enjoy the full length article.
My purpose here is to help people do something on their own now so they don't have to wait for some oil company to buy up the patents and put them on the shelf as they have done many times in the past.
Thanks for your many posts, and I pray that you will accomplish your goal!
Drive free or die!
Their is more than one way to power a battery.
Like you said once he got the car going well the electrolyzed water is the fuel.
Think if you stored up that power through a solar panel then got the car running off of water.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
That is a possibility....
That would be one way to create a solar powered car. Not sure if that would be more efficient than charging a big battery and making the car pure electric, but it might be. The battery system's weight might well be significantly greater than the hydrogen system, making the hydrogen based system more efficient. The extraction of the hydrogen would have to be solar assisted, but that is as good an alternative energy source as I can think of.
Here's the system I've been
Here's the system I've been designing in my head using stuff available now. Thinfilm solar array charging a moderate battery bank. Electrolysis producing HHO gas burning for the purpose of heat to create steam. The ceramic lined steam engine then turns 4 wheel mounted hydrolic pumps. Range is dependent on how big your battery bank is and how much gas you can produce.
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever." - Thomas Jefferson
"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it."
I think I may understand how hho helps
For those who don't buy the idea of using water for fuel (myself included), I think I may have figured out how hho is improving fuel economy. This is speculative at best, but I have heard too many reports of improved fuel economy from too many sources to completely discount the idea.
Since the generation of the hho gas takes more energy than it can directly contribute to the system, it is not the burning of the hydrogen that is adding to the fuel economy. However, hho gas is the perfect mix for rapid ignition. It should flash very quickly when the spark plug fires, causing the gasoline fumes in the cylinder to fire more rapidly and completely. Remember the old Honda CVCC engine that used two fuel mixes to enable the engine to run on an overall leaner mixture? This may be a similar effect.
The reason I bring this up is that, if this is true, it should be possible to engineer an engine that more effectively uses this effect, like the CVCC engine, instead of just injecting the hho gas into the air intake. I am in no position to conduct any sort of experiment with this idea, but perhaps someone would be able to do something with it.
Nope you're wrong.
it's plain and simple, Put in hydrogen, Lean Fuel, Engine get's better gas mileage cause you are using less gas. You have a bunch of extra energy coming off your alternator that is being wasted.. So really you aren't losing energy you're using it instead of letting it go to waste.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
That is essentially what I said
If my speculation is correct, the reason you can lean out the fuel is because the hydrogen helps ignite the leaner mixture.
I have never made a statement about hho not improving fuel economy. The only statement I have made is that you can not use water alone to provide energy for an engine.
What I am trying to do is understand what is really happening with this process to see if it can be improved. I am an engineer, it is how I approach technology. I do not work with engines, so I do not have a lot of expertise in this area. I am hoping that perhaps I can bring up some points in the discussion that will further the development of this technology.
I know that this was posted in a thread somewhere, but I do not have time to search for it. What is the rate of hho production for the best generator you have come up with so far. I want to see if I can figure out the potential energy added by burning the hydrogen itself. I suspect that it is far less than you think, but I am not sure.
No you're missing me.
The Hydrogen is more many times more explosive and expansive than the Gasoline Vapors.. It replaces the Fuel.. Look up I.C.E. engines.. they are running cars solely on Electrolyzed Water.. or HHO.
mine is 2 liters a minute. and it's a crappy prototype. It works though. Trust me people who own oil and gas don't want to loose control.. If people could run their cars on water alone think of the IMPACT.. We could all be free.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
One more question
When generating 2 liters of hho per minute, what is the rate of water consumption. That will make it a lot easier for me to determine how much actual hydrogen is being generated. Thanks!
Hydrogen carries more energy than gasoline
by mass, not by volume. There is a big difference. Two liters of uncompressed hho gas does not have near the mass of two liters of liquid gasoline. Plus, you have to remember that only 20% of the mass of hho is hydrogen. The total mass of hydrogen you are generating is relatively small. I am not trying to argue against the effectiveness of what you are doing, I am just trying to get to the core of the physics of the situation.
The idea that a workable
The idea that a workable idea can be "suppressed" by "Big Oil" or "Big Car Makers" is ludicrous.
If this technology really worked and there was a legitimate business plan behind it, there are millions of millionaires (e.g. Angel Investors) who would gladly pony up startup money to get this going.
There isn't a damned thing "big oil" could do to stop them.
Ideas that work end up being produced. Ideas that are nonsense and claim "suppression" end up on Youtube and become favorites of the "tin foil hat" crowd.
Hell, if you can put me in contact with someone who can prove this technology works and is economically viable, I'll be the first to invest in it...
www.ronpaul2008.com
www.ronpaul2012.com
Let me guess.
You think 19 terrorist Blew up three buildings with two planes because they hate our freedoms don't you.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
http://www.preignitioncc....
http://www.preignitioncc.com/hope/?gclid=COCYoce1o5UCFRNOago...
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever." - Thomas Jefferson
"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it."
PS
As a friend of mine says ... "The more I hear to debunk something, the more I pay attention. Why are people so intent on debunking ... if you don't believe it, then just don't believe it. Why is so much energy spent on naysaying?" It is certainly true in this case. As someone else said, people have been killed to keep this technology under the lid. Now with the internet, it's way out of the bag, thank goodness. The best they can do now is just try to do their best to debunk it. Well, I proved it for myself. And if you do too ..... you'll see for yourself whether or not it works.
Some people....
Some people (like me) are refuting the idea that the energy is free. So, if the claim is that water can replace gasoline, I am a naysayer. And I likely won't be proven wrong on that front.
But if the claim is that the spare electricity produced in your alternator can be used to create an efficiency gain, I am supportive. I just want to be clear about what is happening.
My Shelfari page
I'm adding my voice
On my old 1994 Honda Civic (185000 miles), my city mileage improved from 23 to 40 mpg. Consistently. The highway mileage went from 27 to 45-50 ... but more inconsistently. This is using an HHO electrolyzer, a fuel heater, a vaporizer, and a PVC enhancer. Anybody can say what they want .... but while the naysayers are busy naysaying, the doers are paying 25-50% less for the miles they travel. I know which group I'm in. Nobody should naysay before trying it for themselves. And I'm a girl, too. No excuses. All the rest of my vehicles are getting this pronto, as soon as I can get the time.
Listen People
Listen People
Some of you know that I just got layed off from Hewlett Packard. There is interest in some that I know at HP in this.
Many say that you cannot get more out than you put in. This is basically correct. However...my schooling is in Nuclear and Mechanical engineering...so I pose you this question. I take a small, but very accurately machined charge and use it to uniformly compress Uranium-235. It breaks the very powerful(relatively atomic bonds) and release 1000x+ the energy. It doesn't create more energy, but through careful and accurate manipulation of the small charge releases the inherent stored energy already existing.
Molecular bonds are by many factors weaker than atomic bonds...this is fact. On Los Angeles class submarines...we used brute force high current to break H2O to refill our O2 banks to stay submerged for basicaly...forever. This is the common modern method...however...if a more precise method using high voltage/low current(barely any power use) with a pulsing frequency can bust the relatively weak molecular bonds...so be it...it could actually be feasible. There may be a method to break this bond and release its stored energy just like an atomic bomb. Remember P=IV which is Power= I(current) x V(voltage). If power is constant and voltage increases...then current decreases. Then if by using specific harmonics/frequencies....supposedly 19 khz(this one is considered great) or above you can bust those molecular bonds...with low current(almost no real energy output[current is like fluid flow in a mechanical/fluid system) and high voltage(really just like pressure in a fluid system, but instead electrical) then maybe this is feasible. Many have done it and are working on it.
Here in Oregon...we have been working to set up a group of people(some really amazing Hewlett Packard people and others to test this out).
This is no overunity system...it is not about magic or bullcrap...it is about breaking the molecular bond in an organized/directly focused way. Just like we have busted the much stronger atomic bond in an organized/focused/direct focused way to get a high yield atomic explosion...the energy is already there...overunity is not involved. Those of you looking for some free sort of socialistic energy are missing it. The stored energy is already there the key is breaking the molecular bond. Once again I will add that the molecular bond is a wuss compared to the atomic bond that needs to be broken in a nuclear bond(to detonate a nuclear charge)....so what are we waiting for. It does not hurt one iota to explore this to every level.
Peace out....Long Live the Republic
=======
Federal Reserve to the American People:
"Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."
================
Who is John Galt? Vote ███ ███ 2012!
Molecular bonds are by many
Molecular bonds are by many factors weaker than atomic bonds
Agree. Nuclear stability is greatest at Iron (Fe) and the feasibility of fission increases with elements heavier than Fe. The feasibility of fusion decreases leading up to Fe and becomes a negative ROI thereafter.
Water has an enthalpy of formation of about 420Kj/mol (if I remember correctly) given H2 and O2 as starting material. I don't doubt that there is a way to break the bond in a less ham-fisted manner, but how do you prevent all your gains from being lost in the switching electronics? I can't seem to build a switching power supply with an efficiency better than about 0.90.
In my experience, the bigger problem is electrode corrosion. I could easily solve the problem using a gold-plated anode, but that gets spendy really quick when your output is proportional to the surface area of your electrode. I've also been using high concentrations of MgSO4* (epsom salt) as my electrolyte, as the reduction potentials of those ions are well above that of H or O. The problem then becomes dealing with the corrosive alkalinity of the solution as the hydroxide ion is harder to rip apart than the water was. Any help?
What does your sig mean?
* Advice to anyone trying this:
Do not use table salt as your electrolyte. The chlorine will reduce out of solution before the oxygen, and chlorine attacks steel and kills chemists. Bad for motors and people, respectively.
My Shelfari page
I've been watching the
I've been watching the progression of many a HHO gen makers and the one thing i've noticed is a major push toward better electrodes. I know of several end users that rant about having to replace electrodes too often and many makers upping their quality of materials used and prices. At this point I'm wondering if the added cost does not omit economic gains.
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever." - Thomas Jefferson
"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it."
I didn't read the comments at all
I didn't read the comments at all. I hope that American science education isn't so bad that this point hasn't been brought up yet. But I will bring it up JIC.
There is no such thing as an over-unity engine (or a engine that operates at unity). There never has been. There never will be. It is not possible.
For those who haven't studied any physics, when someone measures the efficiency of a machine, you do it with a formula that boils down to this:
(Work done by a machine)
---------------------------------------------- = Efficiency
(Work done on the machine)
Unity is a fancy name for the number one. When the above equation evaluates to "1", it means that the machine isn't losing energy by doing work. When the efficiency is greater than "1", it means that the machine is actually creating energy from nothing.
The First and Second Laws of thermodynamics prevent this. People have been trying to break these laws for centuries.
You can use measurement sleight-of-hand to make a machine appear to be running at or above unity, but in such cases, you can always demonstrate the effect of an unaccounted for energy input into the machine.
The only way it would be practical to run a car on water would be if the energy to split the water (not a small amount of energy) were provided by a source that was free, IE, the sun. If you are using an alternator to split the water, you would achieve greater efficiency by simply not using the alternator at all, and letting the extra torque that would have been needed to run it power the car forward instead.
Even a car that is completely solar powered would only be about 20% efficient with todays technology.
My Shelfari page
News report Water for Gas! A must see!
I know what some say it cant be done, please tell this guy that because he is doing it!
http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/water_for_gas_is_it_a_p...
If you watch this you will see that there are people doing it now! Then scroll down in this thread and go to the links I have posted to get the FREE plans and info how to do this.
Join the revolution, drive free or die!
Fabulous! Where can I wire
Fabulous! Where can I wire my money NOW! Outstanding! Violates all known laws of thermodynamics! $$$$!!!
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore
In 1672 first internal combustion engine which was fuelled by...
A friend mentioned Harley Davidson is having their 105th anniversary this year now with me being totaly ignorant about bikes still I was surprised they had been around that long. So I searched "when was the first car made" and found this.
1672 - First internal combustion engine which was fuelled by a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen and develop the world’s first vehicle to run on such an engine.
1885 - Karl Benz built an automobile powered by an Otto gasoline engine. He received a patent in the 1886 for the same. Mr. Benz is generally credited with the invention of the modern automobile.
However these days the design of modern cars is handled by a large team of designers, scientists and engineers.
Wow, they had it right to begin with.
I Did It! Went from 20.5 mpg to 26.3mpg with a crude one
Now I'm building a more complex one with harmonics in the dc pulses. I don't care what the na sayer say, I'm getting 6 mpg more that i did with out it. And I thing I'll get more.
Remember that in the begining of many great discovery they all said it was IMPOSSIBLE. Did it stop the Wright Brother? Did it stop any of the great inventors?
Well it can't stop the fact of 6 mpg or ME!!!!
Run these numbers :
15gal X 20.5mpg = 307.5 miles
15gal X 26.3mpg = 394.5 miles
394.5 m - 307.5 m = 87 miles
87 miles / 20.5mpg = 4.25 gal SAVED
4.25 gal X $4.18/gal = $17.765per fill up SAVED
$17.765 / 15 gal = $1.18 PER GALLON LESS
So, is that right? I'm paying $3.00 per gal? You go ahead and pay $4.18 I'll pay $3. Is my math right? I beleive so.
And now I'm building a better one!
HAAAAA! HA! HAAA! HAAAA! HA! HAAA! All the way to the BANK!
JonQ.Publik
P.S. I built the frist one in 8 hours @ $20/hr = $160 plus materals. $200 / $17.77 = 11.25 fill ups and it will be paid for! About 1 1/2 months.
JonQ.Publik
Resistance is not futile, what's futile is non-resistance.
Live Free or Die! Because if you are not free you’re dead already!
Wisdom from Walt
“Around here, however, we don’t look backwards for very long. We keep moving forward, opening up new doors and doing new things… and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths.”
–Walt Disney
Just laughable
Submit these claims to some critical diagnosis by university-level engineers and call me in the morning.
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore
I could care less if you beleive it!
All I care is if my pocket book believes it! If you wish to criticize then you need to prove it is faults. That would mean you would have to get to the workbench in your garage and try it. Other wise you’re speaking from a position of ignorance.
I've proven it works, that's all that matters to me and my pocket book.
JonQ.Publik
Live Free or Die! Because if you are not free you’re dead already!
JonQ.Publik
Resistance is not futile, what's futile is non-resistance.
Live Free or Die! Because if you are not free you’re dead already!
I believe you, Jon
I believe you when you say that you increased your gas mileage. And you may indeed get more mileage gains out of it. But you will eventually hit a brick wall, and you will always need to provide the energy to the system (gas).
Here is where your "extra energy" is coming from:
When your alternator fully charges your battery, the electrical load that it services is less than its maximum output. But the car still turns the alternator anyway.
By using this extra room in the load graph to split water and feeding the product into your car's intake, you have essentially increased the efficiency of your car. You aren't crazy. I congratulate you for your success.
Here is what you will start to see happen if you carry this idea forward:
You car battery will not recharge while your car runs, because all the current is being used in your electrolytic cell. Keep an eye on the voltage of your car's electrical system, or you are likely to wind up with a dead battery. If you get really ambitious and put enough electrolytic cells in service, your car will run at a net electrical deficit (fed by your battery) and your car will simply die while you are driving it when the battery doesn't have enough juice to run the car's computer and ignition coil.
But seriously, good luck with your tinkering. People who test ideas turn the world.
My Shelfari page