Posted on 05/23/2006 9:27:27 AM PDT by floridaobserver
Though the developer of a technology that uses water to produce a flammable gas says it provides a solution to high gas prices plaguing the nation, detractors claim the businessman's idea is a scam.
Denny Klein is president of Hydrogen Technologies Applications in Clearwater, Fla. His patented machine uses an electrical charge to separate the atoms of H2O into HHO, a gas he calls "Aquygen."
"You get a huge energy response," Klein told the Tampa Tribune. "But this gas is very, very safe."
He first used the fuel to power a welding tool, but soon tried it out in a hybrid automobile.
The flame, though on its own registers just 259 degrees Fahrenheit, heats up to the melting point of whatever substance it touches, explained Steve Lusko, project manager for Hydrogen Technologies Applications.
"For example, when you ignite our flame and touch it to steel, it will cut right through it at 1,400 degrees," Lusko told WND.
"It will melt a hole right through a brick at 4,500 degrees. … It reacts to whatever it touches."
So, Lusko says, the gas has the ability to bond to whatever fuel it is mixed with, like gasoline in a hybrid car.
"Upon combustion, you get a dramatic increase in energy BTUs," he said, "and you get an equally dramatic decrease in emission pollution, because the burn is so highly efficient, what would have come out of the tailpipe as an emission ends up getting burned up and used."
An "electrolyzer" in Klein's 1994 Ford Escort uses electricity from the alternator to initiate the electrolysis process to make the HHO gas out of water, explained Lusko. That gas is then pumped to the manifold and into the gas tank.
"The gas then bonds with the gasoline in the gas tank," Lusko said, "and then upon combustion, that's when you get the reaction, giving you higher gas mileage and cleaner emissions."
Why not run a car with exclusively HHO gas?
"We have combustion engines here that have run completely on our Aquygen," Lusko said, "but it would be a matter of engineering."
Lusko says in tests the mileage of the hybrid vehicle has improved anywhere from 25 to 53 percent.
Dates back at LEAST to the Carter gas crisis in the 70s.
IIRC, some folks wound up being prosecuted for mail fraud back then.
Have you read the White Paper referenced above? I have, and it is the McCoy.
They appear to have stumbled onto something important here.
Almost the exact same theory was proposed back in the 70s, it's obviously been tweaked a little and they've rung in some new names, but this is not new.
Discovery Channel's Myth Busters debunked this last week. THey tried all kinds of things, including this. Althought the contraption does make hydrogen, it did not generate enough to be of significance. So the guys tried pumping hydrogen into the car. All it did was make a cool explosion.
However, they strained used fry vat oil in a diesel and it got nearly the same mileage as diesel gas. They did not check ling term use to see if the impurities screwed up anything, though.
It's far from being a legit paper. It is pure nonsense. It's technical terms wrapped around meaningless, pretty graphs and isn't even in the format of a scientific paper. Nowhere are the test methods even recorded. I wonder if all the firms he cites appreciate the publicity from his work!
Supply and demand market forces, yes? Cents/KWH ; $/gal of gas...it all comes down to the cost of doing business, yes? Solar? Sure, it's there, it's just too expensive. Wind? Sure, it's there, it's just too expensive. Nuclear? Sure, it's there, it's just too expensive. Ethanol? Sure, it's there, it's just too expensive....So everyone, get used to it, cheap energy days are either over, or just over the horizon.
Great IR spectroscopy explanation, Doc30! I think it's time to have a FreeRepublic booth at PITTCON. ;)
I won't be at the next one. Chicago is just too cold for someone who's spent 11 year acclimatising to Florida. When it comes back, I'll be there! I just hope the wireless connection works better next time. I couldn't effectively Freep during the last one!
Hehe. Yeah, they "discovered" a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. I hate to call your Irish buddy a liar, but take my word for it: there's nothing new here.
The chinese think it's their millenium to shine, which is why they are girding themselves for WAR with US. Did you know where "US" comes from? WE is the usual english word for plural, US comes from the revolutionary period where we americans became US, for the United States. US also referred to ourselves as the "continentals" vs the british "marines". You may want to look at George Washington's vision wherein the angels told him that there will be 3 great victories : rev war, civil war and WWIII wherein africa(muslims)europeans(under the anti-christ)and asia(china/russia)will all gang up on us. Why do you think china will invade the middle east(har megiddo)with 200 million troops? ans : to lap up the last dregs of oil. They are already all over the world trying to buy up all the CxHx energy they can. So, millions of americans will die in this coming conflict but heavenly forces will help us beat them back and US will be victorious. Have faith brother, good overcomes evil, and a new and better world will rise from the ashes.
Very interesting. I've never heard of the GW business.
I do know that the Chinese have almost no women under the age of 10 (one child, aborting females).
As a result, their population is going to crash.
Correction on my figures, it's like 120 males to 100 females, but it's still causing a crash. Big "no people" gap between young and old, too.
The fear of losing the only sons is also causing problems because they won't go into "high risk" professsions --- that is, career armed forces.
http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=27319
Oh yeah, you really have to watch out for that inscrutable Chinese hydrogen-powered perpetual motion car conspiracy!
Seriously though, you don't have to know squat about science. Once the psycho patrol start screeching off on tangents like this one, you KNOW you're talking about a crackpot theory.
Oh, the thread is dead, might as well talk about the Chinese. At least it is not immigration.
(And for the record, every single one of my posts pointed out that this was a scam.)
Here’s my take on this mess. After nearly 20 years of trying to invent efficient power apparatuses of nearly every persuasion bordering on perpetual motion, and the imminent explosions, frost burns, fires and wrecked up contraptions that followed, I decided to go back to college at 40, for a mech engineering degree. At only midway thru year 2, and with some basics in real science, Chem/Physics, the Skunkwurks (my flamed out shell of a garage) has seen far less destruction, and I feel safe in screaming B.S. on this HHO “miracle of atomic or diatomic (more like diabolic) structure". Enter the real mad scientist to set this one straight.
1. Burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. Been there, done that, have 3 of 8 pistons with quarter sized holes in the domes as proof of concept. Premature detonation. The concept was: Modern engines have fuel management in the form of injectors and a computer that controls the pulsewidth of the injection cycle based on NO2 or O2 post combustion, O2 sensors. Problem, injection of fuel takes place pre compression. Attempt, inject (stream via copper tube) hydrogen and the O2 sensor will see a rich condition and start shortening up the PW of the injector, hence burning less gas. This actually worked to a certain extent. With the laptop jammed all up in the 5.4L computer I could see a noticeable difference in PW and it was coming down. Never one to be satisfied with small success we cranked open the H2 micro valve and stabbed the throttle. Needless to say the 5.4 became a 4.8, then a 4.0, then a 3.3, before we could get the mangled rotational mass stopped. Conclusion, as levels of hydrogen increased the fuel mixture was loosing its octane. As the octane dropped detonation took over. Without some sort of direct injection like a diesel or possibly a gas turbine, which I feel has some real possibilities with H2, the H2 is just to volatile to be compressed rapidly without prematurely igniting. Small quantities of H2 did look promising before the “hold my beer, I’m flooring it” episode. Nuff said about that experiment.
2. H2 is just al little volatile. Although controllable, it is not for the inexperienced to be tinkering with. Example: Skunkwurks “Master” electrolysis machine consisting of a 12v 100 amp booster charger with the dwell time circuit disabled and set to full throttle. System also had the usual split KOH generator section with dual bubblers for O2 and H2 and containment using a modified acetylene tank to function like a metal halide containment system (don’t ask). We are partying in the Skunkwurks research facility when a friend fires up the BBQ in the lab to see if it has propane. We all herd the click of the igniter, and that was about it. My bug (CAR) was slammed up against the far bench and all of the neighbors in the lab were thrashing around on the floor, and spilling beer. Never even saw a flame to speak of. Fortunately I was able to pass it off as a “really close” lightning strike. It was stormy out, but obvious to me there might be a leak somewhere. Had the door been shut the lab would be gone, but on to the science. Unless these guys have a Tokamak built into their car to make the neat mangled picture of the non-dipole HHO, electrolysis results in 2 H’s being given off and 1O. The H’s pair up and the O’s pair up and rise thru the bubblers. Although I only got a B in GenChem1, we did not build on of these HHO’s with the stick and balls, most likely because it does not exist.
More on Skunkwurks projects to follow.
Scott
They need those retards from the Wendy's commercial as their PR team. "It's not a solid or a liquid, it's a soquid..."
Is this worth investing in?
That’s not completly accurate. I am a former Bubblehead (submariner) and Mini-Sub pilot. USN Submarines use Honeycomb Graphite batteries, as due ROVs, DSRVs and lastly, the Mars Lander. They were using that technology when I mustered out, and that’s been a while. They used it before the civillian market got it.
My B.S. degree was in Biology, but I minored in Physics. I now have a Doctorate (Holistic Health). The mathematics just aren’t there. You can’t get something for nothing. This stated process violates many basic natural laws. And the ‘smoking gun’ is this: Water + electrons = electrons + water. That alone tells you that nothing was lost in the energy process, and that is impossible. You cannot create energy, nor destroy it. You can change it from one form to another, with a measureable loss to the conversion process, but that’s all. Even a nuclear reaction simply releases energy that was already present in the subatomic structure. It does not create ‘new’ energy.
I believe this to be another Pie-In-The-Sky scam.
If, however, I actually personally meet someone who has had this conversion done to their car, and it really works, I will revise my opinion accordingly. Until then, I will be keeping my wallet close.
Actually, no one ever said that to the Wright Brothers. The comment is much much older than that, going back to the time of Otto Lillienthal and his hang gliders, that provided the basic science and principles of Heavier-Than-Air Flight.
All the engineering was in place for powered flight by the mid 1890s. There was no doubt that within the next 20 years, someone would build a powered aircraft. All that was missing was a (relatively) lightweight power source. This came from auto/motorcyle development, and once it became practical, it was simply a bet as to who would do it first, the Wrights, Glenn Curtis, Karl Jatho, Alberto Santos-Dumont, or Louis Bleriot.
This is a different situation. The early flight pioneers based their engineering on proven, well known scientific theories that had been demonstrated hundreds of times in manned gliders. The questionable ‘Browns Gas’ has no theory to back it up, such as a description of the ‘Browns Gas’ molecule, it’s atomic compostion (how it’s put together different than water), etc.... If it simply separates hydrogen and oxygen, those element’s properties have been well known for quite a long time, and they do not match the behavior of ‘Browns Gas’. How about a mathematical formula on how the ‘Browns Gas’ produces energy? There are none, not even on the Patent Applications.
With all due respect to Dr. Brown, the Emperor still has no clothes on....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.