In my view the arguments you are setting here are an example of what one can do to misinform with the supposed authority of an engineer…

You set the wrong arguments and lead to results on your false assumptions making everyone believe that you know the subject…

In fact you know very little of it.

Besides the arrogance of the type “I have no time to waste” as somebody else said here is returned to the sender…

If you do not have the time to try get out to this Blog… Do not pollute our environment with your biased assumptions, probably paid by the same people who killed the maker of the most efficient of the electrolysis devices in the first place…

Thank you Admin for your cool replies with substance and reasoning…

Here’s some other links that show the legitimacy of HHO technology:

http://www.chechfi.ca/pdfs/hydrogen_injection.pdf

http://www.hydrorunner.com/data/atds.pdf

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/Guidelines-H2-Fuel-in-CMVs-Nov2007.pdf

By the way the Canadian Hydrogen Energy Company, the largest player in the field guarantees a 10-percent minimum fuel mileage gain for truckers.

The National Hydrogen Association, the largest and most well respected industry organization also endorses this technology.

http://www.h2andyou.org/caseStudies/injection.asp

Also, here are 10 HHO websites filled with inventors and other happy users of this technology. Please argue with the hundreds or thousands of them and convince them that the results they have first hand experience getting aren’t real.

http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/blog2/index.php/hydrogen-gas-savers/hydrogen-generator-message-boards-offer-support/

Not true! Unless of course you know about some new previously undescribed form of physics. I do have a PhD in Chemistry and this is pure BS. This is part of the problem, some of you guys have no training in chemistry. Where’d you get this,? It’s totally bogus..

Hydrogen boosting is a pure scam:

Ronn Motors is selling stock and may be just another stock swindle. Like the GenH injection system that has magnets to “energize” the fuel. Do any of you actually believe magnets can “energize” carbon hydrogen bonds? Come on! I spent 3 years running a 600 MHz NMR, this is pure clap trap.

Just read the aardvark and consumer affairs articles.

This is an excellent web site on hydrogen boosting fraud from New Zealand: http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

Consumer affairs has an article: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/07/water4gas.html

If you truely believe in the develpment of a greener world, then these con artist should really piss you off.

You CANNOT significantly, if at all, increase the mileage of a gasoline powered car by using hydrogen electrolysis, certainly not a retrofit.

The NASA article from the 70′s that these guys quote used a generator that made a HUGE amount of hydrogen from methanol, not in any way what these guys are selling.

If you could do this, GM and Ford would be all over it, so would Boeing, Fedex and Cessna. Not to mention Volvo, BMW, Toyota and the Chinese Military.

The excuse is always that they are in bed with the oil companies. Sure, ALL OF THEM?

Have these things tested by someone that is not sellign anything, Ronn Motors is hardly unbiased.

I know a bright guy who’s tried to get one to work on his car for months. I’m smart enough not to waste my time.

I’m converting a truck to electric, now that will work. That will make a difference. And it won’t just enrich some shylock who’s selling junk…

Those who are saying that because one does not have one of these systems that arguments to the contrary are not valid. I think this is a bit backwards thinking. Perhaps this argument could be settled once and for all by a simple test.

Drive a car with one of these systems at 60 miles an hour down a straight highway with the HHO system off.

Now turn the HHO system on without changing the gas pedal position. If this system works as is claimed the car should accelerate to a percentage equal to the claimed increase in power.

Have you tried it yourself? Why don’t you post your results for us to see? If not, I think you owe it to us HHO’ers to do just that before commenting on anything..

And by the way, this has nothing to do with violating the law of conservation of energy. There is no law-breaking going on. The process simply releases energy that is already there, naturally compressed in the water in the first place.

This process works and has worked for many, many individuals. Fleet operators are using this technology and saving hundreds if not thousands per week. I myself have utilized this system in both my vehicles and observed a modest 20% gain in fuel economy. I don’t know about you, but an extra fifth of a tank is worth something to me.

I plan on improving my design and hope to see an even further increase.

Thanks for listening!

• Hydrogen burns much more rapidly than gasoline so in mixing with the gasoline would cause the fuel mixture to combust more rapidly thus the energy produced would be within a more useful range of the power stroke
• The quicker the combustion process takes place within the cylinder the cooler the exhaust gases are when the exhaust stroke takes place thus cooler exhaust flows through the head of the engine and engine runs cooler
• Increased evaporative cooling due to added steam being formed, which leads to a cooler running engine
• Also in burning rapidly more of the fuel would be burnt in the allotted power stroke time thus the gasoline is more completely and purposely used
• The system is based not on the ability of the hydrogen to be burnt and produce power, as this would be a system that is over unity in efficiency, which is impossible. The system is based on the hydrogen acting as a catalyst, thus releasing more useful energy from the ‘power packed’ gasoline

The only doubts I have for the system is the ability of the electrolysis process to produce the amounts of hydrogen the would be needed. But this can be easily remedied with proper system design and catalyst selection

Mechanical\Energy Engineering Major

I want to point out that “water based hydrogen fuel” systems sound great. Too good, in fact. Especially when marketed in these times of rising oil prices and concern about the planet’s future. But, if you please, I want to walk through a few numbers that can be validated in any college chemistry text. Boring stuff, but bear with me.

In the “runs your car on water” systems, your car’s battery, which is charged by the rotation of the engine, splits water into hydrogen gas. The hydrogen is then pumped into the carburetor, and ignited in the ignition chamber. This is a version of a scientifically impossible “perpetual motion machine.”

How so?

First off, there exists in science a law called the First Law of Thermodynamics: In any reaction, energy cannot be created or destroyed.

To split Water (as a liquid) into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen gasses requires 286 kilojoules (kJ) worth of energy. When the oxygen and hydrogen recombine to liquid water, 286 kJ of energy will be released. In short… the exact amount of energy used in the electrolysis.

A zero-sum game?

Yes. But the actual results these systems deliver will even be worse in real-life conditions.

In the heat of the engine, the hydrogen and oxygen will produce water as a gas. This reaction will only release 242 kJ worth of energy: a 15% loss of efficiency. The universe reclaims this remaining 15% outside of the car’s tailpipe, when the water vapor becomes liquid water again. It is of no use to us there!

Further, internal combustion engines are only 20% efficient, since they produce so much unused heat. Using this efficiency rating, you will get only between 41 kJ worth of energy out of the combustion of the hydrogen. And that is assuming that the electrolysis chamber is 100% efficient, and all hydrogen produced goes directly into the cylinders, which is highly unlikely.

To sum up, you send 286 kJ of energy into the water, and get out 41 kJ at. That is a 15% efficiency rating versus 20%. You are much better keeping those 286 kJ producing at the 20% and omit the water-as-fuel system all together. You will get much better gas mileage, and produce less greenhouse gasses this way.

There is no such thing as a free lunch (Okay mom, you’re right. Again!).

The moral? Spend your money on something that will make a difference. Donate to one of the excellent charities that will allow you offset your carbon footprint by investing in truly effective green technologies, such as solar panels and wind farms. Grow trees, herbs and vegetables instead of grass to produce O2 and remove CO2 by fixing it into the plant material. And watch out for PT Barnum, whose expecting one born every minute.

And heed your mum!