HHC Fuel (Hydro Fuel) Discussion and Ideas
06-19-2008, 08:45 PM
#26
Re: (Niles)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Niles »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> "I know something you don't but I'm not telling!" </TD></TR></TABLE>
Ok, here are 4 technologies pursued by GT manufacturers that helped them break the 59% efficiency barrier.
CMC
MMC
single crystal manufacturing
low friction coatings
None of this stuff is secret or hidden.
Ok, here are 4 technologies pursued by GT manufacturers that helped them break the 59% efficiency barrier.
CMC
MMC
single crystal manufacturing
low friction coatings
None of this stuff is secret or hidden.
06-19-2008, 10:56 PM
#27
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (mar778c)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mar778c »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Ok, here are 4 technologies pursued by GT manufacturers that helped them break the 59% efficiency barrier.
CMC
MMC
single crystal manufacturing
low friction coatings
None of this stuff is secret or hidden.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, which is why those technologies are already in use on production automobiles.
Here, I'll throw out another random engineering technology. A single fiber of cubic boron nitride can support in excess of 70 pounds. Carbon geodesic dome structures are similarly insanely strong. They should just build entire cars out of it to make them lighter. To bad even an Isetta built from the stuff would cost billions of dollars.
Mods, go ahead and lock or delete this thread, it's useless. I'm out.
Ok, here are 4 technologies pursued by GT manufacturers that helped them break the 59% efficiency barrier.
CMC
MMC
single crystal manufacturing
low friction coatings
None of this stuff is secret or hidden.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, which is why those technologies are already in use on production automobiles.
Here, I'll throw out another random engineering technology. A single fiber of cubic boron nitride can support in excess of 70 pounds. Carbon geodesic dome structures are similarly insanely strong. They should just build entire cars out of it to make them lighter. To bad even an Isetta built from the stuff would cost billions of dollars.
Mods, go ahead and lock or delete this thread, it's useless. I'm out.
06-20-2008, 03:32 AM
#28
Re: (Niles)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Niles »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Yeah, which is why those technologies are already in use on production automobiles.
Here, I'll throw out another random engineering technology. A single fiber of cubic boron nitride can support in excess of 70 pounds. Carbon geodesic dome structures are similarly insanely strong. They should just build entire cars out of it to make them lighter. To bad even an Isetta built from the stuff would cost billions of dollars.
Mods, go ahead and lock or delete this thread, it's useless. I'm out.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, that post pretty much shows just how much you actually know.
'Random Technology', yeah right.
Since those 'random technologies' are beyond your ability to understand how they are being used. I'll layout it for you.
CMC - block
MMC - Piston and rings
single - crystal sleeves
Low friction coatings - bearing surfaces
Its called advanced engine technology. Maybe you should read a little more.
But I guess it doesn't exist because you don't know anything about it.
Modified by mar778c at 7:09 AM 6/20/2008
Yeah, which is why those technologies are already in use on production automobiles.
Here, I'll throw out another random engineering technology. A single fiber of cubic boron nitride can support in excess of 70 pounds. Carbon geodesic dome structures are similarly insanely strong. They should just build entire cars out of it to make them lighter. To bad even an Isetta built from the stuff would cost billions of dollars.
Mods, go ahead and lock or delete this thread, it's useless. I'm out.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, that post pretty much shows just how much you actually know.
'Random Technology', yeah right.
Since those 'random technologies' are beyond your ability to understand how they are being used. I'll layout it for you.
CMC - block
MMC - Piston and rings
single - crystal sleeves
Low friction coatings - bearing surfaces
Its called advanced engine technology. Maybe you should read a little more.
But I guess it doesn't exist because you don't know anything about it.
Modified by mar778c at 7:09 AM 6/20/2008
06-20-2008, 08:01 AM
#30
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Republic of Texas
Posts: 3,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
stop hitting yourself
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mar778c »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I don't see how you got I blame american auto makers for lack of progress in the development of IC engines. [/i]</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mar778c »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Some of this lacking is due to poor vision by american auto makers[/i]</TD></TR></TABLE>
I don't see how you got I blame american auto makers for lack of progress in the development of IC engines. [/i]</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mar778c »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Some of this lacking is due to poor vision by american auto makers[/i]</TD></TR></TABLE>
06-20-2008, 10:07 AM
#31
Honda-Tech Member
Re: HHO Fuel (nowtype)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nowtype »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Niles is 99% right. The only thing I don't agree with is how hard the prices will crash. Well, I take that back somewhat. If gas gets up to $6 and falls to $3, that'd be a hard crash but I don't see myself spending less than $3 a gallon any time in the near future.
Mr.E.G.: You should be really mad at the gov't for using corn to make ethanol than. Thankfully people in other markets are using things like switch grass to make ethanol. I saw an interesting show on PBS about how in Pittsburgh this group was taking urban youth and going around and in all of the vacant spots around the area growing switch grass in the fields. From there, they'd farm it and bring it over to almost dying company which made lubricants. They converted some of their distillers to convert the switch grass into biofuel and are now looking to expand their operation because it has been so profitable. Makes me almost consider move to Pittsburgh. ALMOST.</TD></TR></TABLE>
actually that does **** me off. i think ethanol has it's benefits but the concept of paying farmers not to grow it and all of that is bs. plain and simple.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nthai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">niles +9
mar778 -2
hahah</TD></TR></TABLE>
i think your score is off a little. I deduct extra points for people that argue based entirely on semantics.
Mr.E.G.: You should be really mad at the gov't for using corn to make ethanol than. Thankfully people in other markets are using things like switch grass to make ethanol. I saw an interesting show on PBS about how in Pittsburgh this group was taking urban youth and going around and in all of the vacant spots around the area growing switch grass in the fields. From there, they'd farm it and bring it over to almost dying company which made lubricants. They converted some of their distillers to convert the switch grass into biofuel and are now looking to expand their operation because it has been so profitable. Makes me almost consider move to Pittsburgh. ALMOST.</TD></TR></TABLE>
actually that does **** me off. i think ethanol has it's benefits but the concept of paying farmers not to grow it and all of that is bs. plain and simple.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nthai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">niles +9
mar778 -2
hahah</TD></TR></TABLE>
i think your score is off a little. I deduct extra points for people that argue based entirely on semantics.
06-20-2008, 04:43 PM
#32
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: HHO Fuel (Mr.E.G.)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr.E.G. »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thanks Niles. You basically just said everything I wanted to tell him. lol.
The really shitty part (other than the discouraging "i want to punch myself in the face" feeling associated with knowing that we live in a world where most people dont understand high school physics) is that every so many years some douche will claim that they can turn water into fuel, the local news media will run a story on it, and some politician will throw money at it in the form of a grant or some such bs.
it is so goddamn frustrating seeing these people put on a little dog and pony show for the media and no one thinks to ask basic questions. the part that is even more frustrating is that person making the claims knows that they are full of ****.
Niles, have you ever heard of the James Randi Educational Foundation? (JREF)
James Randy is a former magician turned bullshit police and he devotes his life to debunking pseudo science and superstition. That might be right up your alley.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Not trying to rain on anyones parade...BUT I have heard that Chevrolet is currently working on water fueled vehicle. My friends dad knows a GM R&D manager and he said they should be done testing their vehicle by early 2009 and will have a few testing on the streets with consumers and hopefully in production by 2010. That guy that was on youtube with his water torch is working with GM. Like I said.. it is hearsay but her dad has nothing to lie about. He has quite a few friends that work high up at GM.
The really shitty part (other than the discouraging "i want to punch myself in the face" feeling associated with knowing that we live in a world where most people dont understand high school physics) is that every so many years some douche will claim that they can turn water into fuel, the local news media will run a story on it, and some politician will throw money at it in the form of a grant or some such bs.
it is so goddamn frustrating seeing these people put on a little dog and pony show for the media and no one thinks to ask basic questions. the part that is even more frustrating is that person making the claims knows that they are full of ****.
Niles, have you ever heard of the James Randi Educational Foundation? (JREF)
James Randy is a former magician turned bullshit police and he devotes his life to debunking pseudo science and superstition. That might be right up your alley.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Not trying to rain on anyones parade...BUT I have heard that Chevrolet is currently working on water fueled vehicle. My friends dad knows a GM R&D manager and he said they should be done testing their vehicle by early 2009 and will have a few testing on the streets with consumers and hopefully in production by 2010. That guy that was on youtube with his water torch is working with GM. Like I said.. it is hearsay but her dad has nothing to lie about. He has quite a few friends that work high up at GM.
06-20-2008, 07:43 PM
#33
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: HHO Fuel (8mpg)
The you tube water torch thing is funny. It shows him burning water, but notice the vial is fixtured in what is more than likely a high frequency radio wave emitter. (I'm actually assuming radio wave, it could be anything in the spectrum, like microwaves, etc.) So it looked like he was burning water, but really he was burning the hydrogen coming off of the water as it was split.
The energy to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen is more than you get out of burning it, (once again the second law of thermodynamics) because no conversion process is 100% efficient. Burning water is like welding razor blades. Once you see the trick it's no big deal, but there's no practical application for it beyond just being a parlor trick, because it takes more energy to split the water than it makes while you burn it.
Otherwise we'd all just power everything with water and never need coal or gas or nuclear power again.
Now, there is another way to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. This was explored for super long term battery power. Basically you can split it by using the particles given off during radioactive decay. You can then recombine it in a hydrogen fuel cell and just cycle it over and over. Only problem is the process is pretty slow and only useful for generating small amounts of power.
Are you sure they said water fueled and not something like hydrogen fuel cell? The "skateboard chassis" concept they had (which did function and drive, you might be able to find the clip from top gear where james may drove it around) was pretty sweet. If they're bringing that out to consumers it probably means they've taken a hard look at potential kinks and pitfalls and sorted them out. I've always been a GM guy. I love my GM truck.
The energy to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen is more than you get out of burning it, (once again the second law of thermodynamics) because no conversion process is 100% efficient. Burning water is like welding razor blades. Once you see the trick it's no big deal, but there's no practical application for it beyond just being a parlor trick, because it takes more energy to split the water than it makes while you burn it.
Otherwise we'd all just power everything with water and never need coal or gas or nuclear power again. Now, there is another way to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. This was explored for super long term battery power. Basically you can split it by using the particles given off during radioactive decay. You can then recombine it in a hydrogen fuel cell and just cycle it over and over. Only problem is the process is pretty slow and only useful for generating small amounts of power.
Are you sure they said water fueled and not something like hydrogen fuel cell? The "skateboard chassis" concept they had (which did function and drive, you might be able to find the clip from top gear where james may drove it around) was pretty sweet. If they're bringing that out to consumers it probably means they've taken a hard look at potential kinks and pitfalls and sorted them out. I've always been a GM guy. I love my GM truck.
06-20-2008, 08:08 PM
#34
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (mar778c)
Originally Posted by mar778c
Yeah, that post pretty much shows just how much you actually know.
'Random Technology', yeah right.
Since those 'random technologies' are beyond your ability to understand how they are being used. I'll layout it for you.
CMC - block
MMC - Piston and rings
single - crystal sleeves
Low friction coatings - bearing surfaces
Its called advanced engine technology. Maybe you should read a little more.
But I guess it doesn't exist because you don't know anything about it.
Modified by mar778c at 7:09 AM 6/20/2008
Honda engine blocks 10 old or more have used MMC sleeves (how many of you guys have had to sleeve an H motor because the fiber sleves were incompatible with other pistons, honda gets by because of the piston coating they use.), MMC is more applicable here than in piston manufacture. So there's two of your technologies that you say automakers aren't using already.
Single crystal manufacturing for a block or sleeve as you suggest, completely discounts the FMEA (that's failure mode and effect analysis since I can see you claim to be some kind of high dollar parts designer but are in fact not) in something like an engine. It would also be pretty needlessly expensive to cast material in conditions to allow the resolidification of material consistent with supercrystal formation.
So what benefit would it be of if those things were not a concern? You could make your sleeves a little thinner and lighter. That doesn't help efficiency, and in fact would probably decrease it due to thermal stress causing greater deformation and loss of seal than if the sleeve was more thermally stable. Having the more abrupt temperature differential across the thinner sleve would also be a pretty major issue. We had this issue testing single crystal ytrium aluminum garnite. (SC YAG, not sure of the spelling
). It's sometimes ok, but instead of taking it like a man, this **** will just explode. and Low friction coatings and tribological research, in addition to what I mentioned above, are so widely used it's not even funny. Companies have been micropolishing, using bearings impregnated with lubricants, and even developing nanocoatings for things like crankshaft bearings (note that these nanocoatings as I understand are just things in the pipeline right now). This is in addition to surface hardening (often nitriding) and precision finishing (see BMW example below).
Your use of CMC for an engine block is questionable depending on what specific material you would be using.
So the fact that you choose unreasonable applications, or applications where these technologies are already very widespread tells me you probably googled "engineering technology" and just tried to confuse people to look smart. Then you threw in a number and the term "GT manufacturers" to try to validate a weak argument.
For anyone who doesn't know, alot of this information is available online. Check out places like "matweb.com" (materials website) or the eng-tips.com forums or even wikipedia.
CMC is ceramic metal composite. Think brake pads. These materials are brittle, but well suited for high temperature and compression loading.
MMC is metal matrix composite. Small fibers are used to reinforce the structure of the metal.
single crystal manufacturing: all metals are crystaline, think of a shaker full of salt if all the small crystals were stuck to each other. Steel for example is a mix of crystals of iron with little bits of carbon and some other alloying elements mixed in (so like if you mixed salt and pepper and it all stuck together)
Now if you could do that as one big crystal it would be stronger, but it would shatter really easily when it did go, so it becomes a technology for really specialized applications.
So all the technologies you say aren't used, either are used, or are of such little benefit (if any) they don't justify the cost. What is your next argument? The automakers brainwash people into having families so they have to buy minivans and big cars?
What about powder metallurgy. BMW builds one piece powder metal connecting rods and will shear them in two. That way instead of having to machine the surfaces where the two halves of the rod touch when bolted together, and having to worry about machining marks messing up how flat the surfaces are and how precisely round the holes are, they know that since it started out as one piece then the two halves are precisely mated to each other (they are that ****. crazy germans
)
06-21-2008, 07:14 AM
#35
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: HHO Fuel (Niles)
I heard it uses some type of electrolysis to split the water but all the info is handed from a R&D guy to a guy who doesnt know that much about cars much less thermodynamics. From what I have heard the consumer testing should be early 2009 unless it gets pushed back. We will have to wait and see :D
06-21-2008, 10:59 AM
#36
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Arlington
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (nthai)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Niles »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Alot of the smartest people I've ever met never went to college actually. And alot of the people I've met who are completely out of touch with reality and lacking common sense went to some really big name schools. I think anyone who's spent time on a shop floor would agree. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
06-21-2008, 04:29 PM
#37
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Republic of Texas
Posts: 3,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (carchitect)
he...he...one of my favorite quotes of all time is "you have to go to college for a really long time to be able to say something that stupid."
Probably not a quote a physics major should laugh at, but oh, wait, that whole string theory thing. . . . .
Probably not a quote a physics major should laugh at, but oh, wait, that whole string theory thing. . . . .
06-21-2008, 07:37 PM
#38
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hudson, NH, 03051
Posts: 3,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: HHO Fuel (Hydro Fuel) Discussion and Ideas (iBrandon)
This has also been a new interest of some of my friends.One has been playing around with hydrogen generation on a small scale.And yes.it take a lot of electricity to generate a little hydrogen.I believe it was Greenland that has been using Hydrogen power for years.They have access to nearly unlimited geothermal energy to generate it.
06-22-2008, 02:45 PM
#39
Honda-Tech Member
Re: HHO Fuel (8mpg)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 8mpg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I heard it uses some type of electrolysis to split the water but all the info is handed from a R&D guy to a guy who doesnt know that much about cars much less thermodynamics. From what I have heard the consumer testing should be early 2009 unless it gets pushed back. We will have to wait and see :D</TD></TR></TABLE><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 8mpg »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Not trying to rain on anyones parade...BUT I have heard that Chevrolet is currently working on water fueled vehicle. My friends dad knows a GM R&D manager and he said they should be done testing their vehicle by early 2009 and will have a few testing on the streets with consumers and hopefully in production by 2010. That guy that was on youtube with his water torch is working with GM. Like I said.. it is hearsay but her dad has nothing to lie about. He has quite a few friends that work high up at GM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i am not disputing that it can be done at all. it just takes electricity to do it and electricity isnt free.
if you had solar power at your house and it could handle the additional load of the high amount of energy needed to convert the water to fuel (which in most people's dog and pony show it's done using the methods mentioned above) then sure, it might be grand.
it's kind of like saying "i need to burn all of this brush to clear some property and the kerosene i was planning on using is too expensive. but wait, i can just use my plasma cutter"
sure you dont have to buy the kerosene in that analogy but the power it takes to run your plasma cutter to burn each bush one by one (so maybe bushes arnt the best example, but you see where im going with this) isn't free.
Not trying to rain on anyones parade...BUT I have heard that Chevrolet is currently working on water fueled vehicle. My friends dad knows a GM R&D manager and he said they should be done testing their vehicle by early 2009 and will have a few testing on the streets with consumers and hopefully in production by 2010. That guy that was on youtube with his water torch is working with GM. Like I said.. it is hearsay but her dad has nothing to lie about. He has quite a few friends that work high up at GM.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i am not disputing that it can be done at all. it just takes electricity to do it and electricity isnt free.
if you had solar power at your house and it could handle the additional load of the high amount of energy needed to convert the water to fuel (which in most people's dog and pony show it's done using the methods mentioned above) then sure, it might be grand.
it's kind of like saying "i need to burn all of this brush to clear some property and the kerosene i was planning on using is too expensive. but wait, i can just use my plasma cutter"
sure you dont have to buy the kerosene in that analogy but the power it takes to run your plasma cutter to burn each bush one by one (so maybe bushes arnt the best example, but you see where im going with this) isn't free.
06-22-2008, 02:46 PM
#40
Honda-Tech Member
Re: (Top Ramen)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">he...he...one of my favorite quotes of all time is "you have to go to college for a really long time to be able to say something that stupid."
Probably not a quote a physics major should laugh at, but oh, wait, that whole string theory thing. . . . .</TD></TR></TABLE>
string theory owns your mom. dont bring that noise in here.
Probably not a quote a physics major should laugh at, but oh, wait, that whole string theory thing. . . . .</TD></TR></TABLE>
string theory owns your mom. dont bring that noise in here.
06-24-2008, 07:59 PM
#41
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Republic of Texas
Posts: 3,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Mr.E.G.)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr.E.G. »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
string theory owns your mom. dont bring that noise in here. </TD></TR></TABLE>
The history of string theory (abridged):
Oh, and
string theory owns your mom. dont bring that noise in here.
</TD></TR></TABLE>The history of string theory (abridged):
Oh, and
06-26-2008, 08:57 PM
#42
Honda-Tech Member
Re: (Top Ramen)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Top Ramen »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
The history of string theory (abridged):
Oh, and
</TD></TR></TABLE>
hahahahahaha
The history of string theory (abridged):
Oh, and
</TD></TR></TABLE>hahahahahaha
06-29-2008, 01:49 AM
#43
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: (Mr.E.G.)
Well it is true that it takes high levels of electricity to split the water, however i believe the process could be improved upon greatly given significant amounts of research. Adding a simple electrolyte to the water aids in the splitting process. Adding a frequency pulse generator further improves the process and cuts down on the current needed to produce the same amount of hydrogen.
Electricity is produced by a little alternator being turned by the crankshaft. You also have 4 wheels spinning the majority of the time you are in your car. I'm sure it is possible to implement alternators for each axle. Engineers are very crafty. I really doubt that much effort has gone into improving the efficiency of alternators either. Producing the amount of electricity necessary is very possible.
If you asked someone 20 years ago if it was possible to download movies through the air to the phone you carry in your pocket you'd probably have been institutionalized. What you think can't be done more than likely can be done. It's just finding the way that takes time and a little bit of luck sometimes. Who would have thought you could get over 700hp from a 1.8L engine?
As far as the oil industry not having a chokehold on the world economy, that is a joke. If anyone said tomorrow that gasoline was not necessary the economies of most major countries would be destroyed. I guarantee the oil companies' lobbyists pay for way more strip club escapades for the US senators and reps than anyone pushing for stricter fuel efficiency standards.
For those arguing if it is possible or not, anything is possible. I have no doubt we will have cars running on hydrogen alone produced onboard through electrolysis within the next 20-30 years. For those who think i'm just a dreamer, someone has to dream it will happen for it to happen. If noone dreamed we could have people working in a space station orbiting the earth it wouldn't be happening right now either.
Electricity is produced by a little alternator being turned by the crankshaft. You also have 4 wheels spinning the majority of the time you are in your car. I'm sure it is possible to implement alternators for each axle. Engineers are very crafty. I really doubt that much effort has gone into improving the efficiency of alternators either. Producing the amount of electricity necessary is very possible.
If you asked someone 20 years ago if it was possible to download movies through the air to the phone you carry in your pocket you'd probably have been institutionalized. What you think can't be done more than likely can be done. It's just finding the way that takes time and a little bit of luck sometimes. Who would have thought you could get over 700hp from a 1.8L engine?
As far as the oil industry not having a chokehold on the world economy, that is a joke. If anyone said tomorrow that gasoline was not necessary the economies of most major countries would be destroyed. I guarantee the oil companies' lobbyists pay for way more strip club escapades for the US senators and reps than anyone pushing for stricter fuel efficiency standards.
For those arguing if it is possible or not, anything is possible. I have no doubt we will have cars running on hydrogen alone produced onboard through electrolysis within the next 20-30 years. For those who think i'm just a dreamer, someone has to dream it will happen for it to happen. If noone dreamed we could have people working in a space station orbiting the earth it wouldn't be happening right now either.
06-30-2008, 03:54 AM
#44
Honda-Tech Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA, United States
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I doesnt matter that it takes more power if that power source is free...
Efficient cheap solar power can make hydrogen for you all day then just figure out some sort of secondary injectors to get consistent distribution...
I believe the fuel to air ratio for hydrogen was like 33:1. You could tune your car to run the appropriate ratio for fuel+hydrogen.
but i wonder whats more efficient... installing an electric engine to assist your engine and running it off a hydrogen fuel cell....
Electrolysis produces oxygen and hydrogen... if we just burn hydrogen we dont really have any use for oxygen... but in a fuel cell hydrogen and oxygen plus a catalyst produce a current in addition to water.
maybe a combination of both... running gasoline+hydrogen and a hydrogenfuel cell as well....
i am planing on doing this to a degree by using the suns free energy...
I know a lot of people are gona debate me and say that its not efficient or its too expensive.... but really if u expect me to read it im probably not gona see this thread again and im not interested in your CANTS.
look up solar stirling engine
Efficient cheap solar power can make hydrogen for you all day then just figure out some sort of secondary injectors to get consistent distribution...
I believe the fuel to air ratio for hydrogen was like 33:1. You could tune your car to run the appropriate ratio for fuel+hydrogen.
but i wonder whats more efficient... installing an electric engine to assist your engine and running it off a hydrogen fuel cell....
Electrolysis produces oxygen and hydrogen... if we just burn hydrogen we dont really have any use for oxygen... but in a fuel cell hydrogen and oxygen plus a catalyst produce a current in addition to water.
maybe a combination of both... running gasoline+hydrogen and a hydrogenfuel cell as well....
i am planing on doing this to a degree by using the suns free energy...
I know a lot of people are gona debate me and say that its not efficient or its too expensive.... but really if u expect me to read it im probably not gona see this thread again and im not interested in your CANTS.
look up solar stirling engine
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
