Fueled by H2O?

www.bendbulletin.com ^ | 12-26-2008 | By Andrew Moore

[Red Badger]

Can a car run on water?

Bend businessman Rob Juliano claims it can, despite ample skepticism from scientists and automotive experts.

Although the average price of fuel has slipped dramatically from a summer high of more than $4 per gallon, Juliano believes water — specifically the hydrogen contained in water — can be used to power an internal-combustion engine at a fraction of the cost of gasoline.

Hydrogen is being pursued as a fuel by car manufacturers. Honda earlier this year debuted its FCX Clarity, a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle powered by an electric motor. BMW has developed a car that can use either gasoline or hydrogen to power a traditional motor.

Juliano, however, is peddling something a bit different. Through his company — UnitedH2O.com — the 1984 graduate of Bend’s Mountain View High School builds and installs electrolytic hydrogen generators. They are small, footlong canisters that use electricity from a car battery to break water into its gaseous components, hydrogen and oxygen.

The gases are then funneled into the engine, where — due to the combustive nature of hydrogen — it is used to help drive an engine’s pistons. The process means less gasoline is injected into the piston cylinders, hence the car can travel farther on less gas, thereby increasing the car’s fuel efficiency. In other words, Juliano says cars with his system get more miles per gallon.

Lincoln City resident Linda Young, who paid roughly $1,100 to have Juliano install the system, says her gas mileage has increased nearly 65 percent. Her Nissan Maxima used to get roughly 17 miles per gallon, but the last time she checked, it was getting 28 miles per gallon, she said.

[Sudetenland]

MR. P.T. BARNUM! Paging MR. P.T. BARNUM!

Sir, your guests have arrived.

[Sender]

Engines have been made that ran successfully on pure water, after it was heated by burning wood or coal.

[Kevmo]

Is there some kind of “Magic Energy Device” Ping list? I find these things fascinating.

[PackerBoy]

Bottom line: You have to expend more energy separating H2O into Hs and Os than the Hs will produce when burned. It's simple physics.

Reading suggestion: Physics for Future Presidents by Richard A. Muller

[AntiKev]

First Law of Thermodynamics

Second Law of Thermodynamics

In layman's terms:

• Zeroth Law: You must play the game.
• First Law: You can't win.
• Second Law: You can't break even.
• Third Law: You can't quit the game.

[Sudetenland]

The layman's three laws of thermodynamic:

• You can't get something for nothing,
• The best you can do is break even.
• You can't break even.

[NVDave]

That’s the first time I’ve had a good laugh in one of these hydrolysis threads.

Thanks for the chuckles.

[FBD]

Rainbows and unicorn farts are a more reliable source of energy.

[KarlInOhio]

If the conversion was 100% efficient, you would get as much energy out of burning the hydrogen as you put in to tearing apart the water to get the hydrogen. That energy has to come from burning the gasoline. So at best you have a zero sum game. Since nothing is 100% efficient, you should be losing mileage by doing this unless by adding hydrogen you are somehow improving the efficiency of the engine.

Some suggestions from when this popped up a few months ago:

1. placebo effect: the driver is gradually accelerating and braking to drive more efficiently.
2. adding hydrogen to the fuel-air mixture improves the way it burns so you get more useful energy out of the fuel
3. When adding the device the installer changes the engine control program so that the engine burns fuel more efficiently, but at the possible expense of more pollution or faster engine wear.

[Sudetenland]

Ouch! Should’ve seen that one coming.

[Sudetenland]

Nice picture! Where’s the auxiliary hydrogen tank that he filled up at the welding hut hidden?

[Vroomfondel]

Yay! Netflix has it! I’m so happy!

[RobRoy]

If I break either of the laws of thermodynamics will I get a ticket? If the ticket is cheap enough it may be worth it!

[Oberon]

Okay... I’m as aware of the Laws of Thermodynamics as the next guy, and I understand that they cannot be broken. I understand that if you burn hydrogen, in doing so you can only release as much energy as it took to originally electrolyze the hydrogen from the oxygen in the first place, less a chunk for inefficiency. So, if you were hoping to fuel an engine that would drive a generator that would electrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen which you would then burn in the engine, of course you could never achieve a self-sustaining system. The engine wouldn’t run.

But let’s do a little thought experiment here. Let’s discount the thread’s title for a moment, because the device described in the article isn’t the sole fuel source for the cars it’s installed in. “Fueled by H20” isn’t quite accurate.

So we know that the Otto cycle engine is in its own right relatively inefficient at extracting mechanical energy from gasoline, correct? What if the addition of hydrogen into the combustion chamber along with the gasoline fuel charge wasn’t just adding the BTUs from the hydrogen to the mix, but was also promoting a more efficient burn of the gasoline?

From a thermodynamic point of view, it is not impossible that introduction of hydrogen into the combustion chamber could increase the efficiency of the engine at burning gasoline, thereby scavenging energy from the gasoline that would have otherwise been blown out the manifold with the exhaust. It’s likewise not impossible that the quantity of energy scavenged from the gasoline through a better, cleaner burn might exceed the quantity of the energy initially required to electrolyze the hydrogen from the water.

I’m not saying I endorse the guy’s invention. I’m just presenting it for the sake of argument. Maybe the guy’s not absolutely stupid.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Because it takes more energy to split the hydrogen and oxygen than you get back when you burn the hydrogen.

Plus, it takes a LOT of hydrogen at atmospheric pressure to run a car, not just the small stream of bubbles this contraption generates.

[LegendHasIt]

Not to mention that since the vehicle’s electrical system is providing the power to run the electrolysis, the alternator has to work harder, robbing the system of horsepower that otherwise would go to the wheels.

[massgopguy]

And if this worked it would do what to the price of water?

[AntiKev]

Fortunately, these laws can't be broken (with the usual disclaimers about present technology, presently unknown forms of matter, etc.).

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

This is not so new - Brown’s Gas is generated and introduced into the engine as monoatomic H & O, producing much more energy than H2 & O2. In this case it is used with gasoline and really does improve fuel mileage. A lot of these devices are available today, and they work, though I have not seen any that improve fuel economy by 65% - about half that or less.

Systems have been made and installed that will run the car on Brown’s Gas without using gasoline. These require a source of electricity to convert the water to H & O. It is still efficient. There have been a few vehicles powered this way that required no fuel to produce the electricity. A lot of you reading that will yell for the tinfoil hats - so be it. I am an engineer, I have seen lab scale versions of fuelless energy generation, and I believe it.

Tesla knew how to power vehicles without fuel, and did so. There are those who do not want this to be, and will do what they can to stop it. We do not need to be dependent on petroleum for energy generation. We do not need a grid for energy distribution to our homes. I have seen a 40 KW generator that runs without fuel.

[cc2k]

RC2 wrote:

---

Please explain. I would like to know the reasoning why it can’t work.

---

Basically, it takes energy to break water into hydrogen and oxygen. For various reasons, you don't get all the energy back when you burn the hydrogen and oxygen. The engine isn't 100% efficient. The charging system that recharges the battery isn't 100% efficient.

You can't get as much energy from burning the hydrogen and oxygen as you had to expend to break the water apart.

So the only thing this type of system will do, at best, is run the car's battery down over time, requiring it to be recharged to keep the cycle going. If you recharge it by driving it, you're hurting your fuel economy. If you plug in a battery charger and hook it up, you're using electric power to make up the energy losses.