Hydrofuel Technologies Ltd. promotes onboard hydrogen/oxygen electrolyser for petrol/diesel cars

www.autoindustry.co.uk ^ | 05-18-2008 | Staff PR

[Smokin' Joe]

From your link: The HHO trademark is associated with an unproven state of matter called magnegases, and a discredited theory about magnecules,[12] which is the basis for a number of fraudulent claims, and third party water-fuelled car scam attempts.

It is a free country, and you can try this if you want, your car, your money.

While water injection has been shown to be beneficial for a limited array of applications, and hydrogen fueled vehicles exist (hopefully, with advancements in technology), there is no shortage of gadgets which appear during times when fuel costs are up to magically make you get better mileage. If they were really beneficial, the expense a one-time deal, why weren't they marketed when prices were lower? Not all of the ideas are fresh off the drawing board.

[Impostor]

Interesting, but I think I’ll let you go first. ;-)

[anymouse]

Yep, snake oil sells every time - to the gullible. ;)

[ovrtaxt]

The energy comes from the alternator, which is producing electricity whether you use it or nor. For example, if you turn on the radio or the headlamps, your alternator puts just as much load on the belt as if it were off. That’s my understanding.

This system simply makes use of the untapped electrical current to power the hydrolyzer, which opens up the chemical potenial of the HHO for combustion.

I suppose you could say that you’re recouping the mechanical loss of the alternator, and utilizing the untapped potential energy of the water.

[SampleMan]

The energy comes from the alternator, which is producing electricity whether you use it or nor.

That's the part that is wrong. The alternator is spinning, but its not running a constant load. That is what the old generators did. Its ability to fluctuate is why it is called an "alternator".

Even generators do not have constant draw. My storm generator burns much more gas if I am using a lot of electricity than if I'm not.

[ovrtaxt]

I think they’re called alternators because they produce alternating current.

That being said, I need to research this particular issue. You’re saying the increased load translates to an increase of magnetic conflict between the rotor and stator, the source of produced current, right?

This guy has installed a stand alone alternator to power his HHO cell. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGE4d2R8HF4

Have you heard of Aquygen? They claim a patented (pending)hydrolyzing process which produces much more HHO by volume with much less energy input. They make HHO torches that burn at 9k to 10k degrees, and have an automotive module coming out next year.

[thackney]

The energy comes from the alternator, which is producing electricity whether you use it or nor.

The alternator is spinning whether you use it or not. But the load applied through the belt requiring additional power from the engine varies with the load on the electrical system.

[thackney]

Its ability to fluctuate is why it is called an "alternator".

No. The alternator gets its name from the fact that it generates alternating current (AC).

http://www.misterfixit.com/alterntr.htm

[ovrtaxt]

Okay, here’s my next question:

I understand the conservation of energy argument. The power needed to liberate the HHO structure from H20 comes from an increased load on the alternator, thus increased gas consumption.

But the chemical potential of combusting HHO is possibly a net gain over the electrical requirement needed to perform the electrolysis. In other words, the energy is already stored in the molecules by nature of their chemical bonds. The act of rearranging the compound takes X amount of energy, but the energy resident in the compound is greater than X. Reasonable?

So you introduce HHO into the engine to supplemnt the gas/air mixture, to produce combustible power to the drivetrain.

Then, if you modify the O2 sensor at the exhaust pipe to disallow the ECM’s fuel enrichment correction, you will utilize less gas to produce the equivalent power.

Where am I wrong?

[SampleMan]

It always takes more energy to split HHO than is provided by combining them. Otherwise we wouldn't have so much stable water on this planet.

So, for this to work the hydrogen and/or the oxygen would have to produce a catalyst effect in the fuel mixture burn that would release a greater amount of energy than is usual and in excess of that required to split H2O.

I'm no chemist, but this appears very unlikely. Additionally, if you've ever watched electrolysis occurring from your standard wall outlet, it would take all day split a teacup of water.

[SampleMan]

I tell you what, if it works I’ll buy it.

[ovrtaxt]

That darn Isaac Newton.

I guess I’m just looking for a whacked out, string theory quantum physicist to tell me different so I don’t have to pay so much in gas.

But that Aquygen thing does look promising. I hope it isn’t just PR scam for them to sell more welding equipment.

[thackney]

But the chemical potential of combusting HHO is possibly a net gain over the electrical requirement needed to perform the electrolysis.

No.

If that was possible, think it through.

The combustion of (2) H₂ and O₂ produces (2) H₂O.

If what you described was possible:
you could attached an air cooled, natural draft condenser to the exhaust,
recovering the water vapor exhaust to liquid water,
feed the water to the electrolysis chamber
drive off in your perpetual motion machine.

If the unit works, why do they need gasoline?

In other words, the energy is already stored in the molecules by nature of their chemical bonds. The act of rearranging the compound takes X amount of energy, but the energy resident in the compound is greater than X. Reasonable?

Not reasonable. It takes more energy to break the molecular bond than the bond contains. If this was not true, the bond would not exist.

[ovrtaxt]

So the overall theory behind this HHO device is to take otherwise wasted energy and convert it into usable energy. Since the alternator uses/produces variable energy according to demand, using it to produce another energy source isn’t the answer.

Heat, however, might be. Someone suggested earlier that using otherwise wasted heat to drive a supplemental turbine might work. Makes more sense than a supercharger, which is belt driven.

Otherwise wasted kinetic energy during slowdown (brake heat) is the mechanism a Prius uses to recharge electrical cells.

I’ve also seen schematics in the past which suggest a good-sized (relatively massive) flywheel could be used to gain speed. Perhaps one at each wheel, put into motion from braking action and engaged by clutch at acceleration.

Where else could we find energy waste that could be captured?

[Palmetto]

Heat, however, might be. Someone suggested earlier that using otherwise wasted heat to drive a supplemental turbine might work.

Yes. It would be great if there were some device that were invented that could take exhaust heat and use it to increase the efficiency and/or power of an engine. Perhaps use that energy to, I dunno, maybe pre-compress the intake air. That would be marvelous, if only such a device existed.

If we ever come up with one, maybe we should call it a turbocharger. ;)

Seriously, there are an infinite number of ways to incrementally increase the efficiency of an IC engine. Some will result in tiny gains and are relatively affordable - driving habits, more efficient air cleaners, proper vehicle maintenance, etc. Others will result in fairly significant gains and are not economically justifiable even at $5/gal gasoline - hybrids, electric vehicles, etc.

[thackney]

otherwise wasted energy

Additional electrical load on the generated consumes additional fuel and is subjected to the same engine inefficiencies that exist for the drive train. It consumes more fuel and is not a "otherwise wasted energy".

Since the alternator uses/produces variable energy according to demand

Yes, it adds load to the engine consuming more fuel when the electrical demand rises.

Heat, however, might be.

Yes, heat is a huge energy "waste" for an combustion engine. But the capture of the heat is still subject to Carnot limits of a heat engine, which is why the engine (also a heat engine) cannot become extremely efficient compared to an electric motor. Unfortunately, most of our electricity is generated by a heat engine (coal, natural gas, nuclear)

If "waste heat" could be economically recovered it would not only boost our automobile efficiences but our electrical power generation as well.

[ovrtaxt]

lol I know about turbos. :) I was thinking of them as I wrote the post, but that’s more of a kinetic thing than a heat thing. In fact, heat is the enemy of a turbo, whereas I was thinking more of a self contained steam producing module.

As for hybrids, hydrogen cars, electric, the initial costs should drop with mass production. The new nanofiber lithium batteries look promising, and gallium solar cells are coming along too.