Fuel cell add on?

maninthestreet

Herbalist wrote: »

Nope - it apparently (actually does) generate hydrogen (from electricity being generated anyway). Now what the effect perceived or otherwise of that is is another matter . I accept the idea of a possible placebo effect (however if there IS an effect then that might be seen as a benefit.

He has promised to fill the van and run it without the cell then do the same with it on. For now I'm happy to have an open mind - I prefer not to think of people as idiots until they prove they are . Cheers Herby

It isn't a hydrogen fuel cell, in the generally accepted meaning of the term.
Do you have any links to any independent research on this device?

thescouselander

I put one of these devices on my girlfriends 1.6 Megane - it now has over 300 BHP and the petrol tank actually fills up as you drive along - all I have to do is empty the tank occasionally and put the petrol in my car. I'd totally recommend it, go and get one today!

Herbalist

Fair enough - I stand corrected. I understand from a press release I saw that Transport for London are testing them out. Google - hydrogen from water for fuel - gives plenty of hits quite a few of which are obvious junk. The energysavingtrust has some info too which is related I guess (can't post the links - too "new"!). Cheers Herby

Eric_Pisch

snake oil

as much use as fitting a magnet to the fuel pipe in an attempt to affect a hydro carbon

it takes as much energy to take apart a water molecule as was released when the hydrogen was oxidized to form water. In fact, some energy would be lost in converting water to hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen because some heat would always be produced in the conversions. Releasing chemical energy from water would therefore violate the first and/or second laws of thermodynamics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car

catflea

Herbalist wrote: »

Fair enough - however they run off the car's alternator. Assuming the battery is healthy there is little effect (the current ones do not require additional batteries).

And the increased resistance in the alternator powering this device will require more fuel. You dont get owt for nowt.

sebdangerfield

It's been discussed on here many, many times before. Just search for the thread.

Here's why it doesn't, hasn't and never will work;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics

There are several, simple laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy which explain;

You dont get owt for nowt.

Cheers catflea!

Kurtis_Blue

As stated you cannot create energy from nowt, but you can use what would otherwise be wasted or use it in a more efficient manner..

Such as a turbo using exhaust energy.

Braking re-gen feels a little strange at first but also works very well.

http://www.teslamotors.com/bl!!!/?p=58

sebdangerfield

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

As stated you cannot create energy from nowt, but you can use what would otherwise be wasted or use it in a more efficient manner..

Such as a turbo using exhaust energy.

Braking re-gen feels a little strange at first but also works very well.

http://www.teslamotors.com/bl!!!/?p=58

Thats a little different to be fair as the energy's still being wasted, the engine's still making the same amount of heat and light and motion. A turbo or regen braking is just using some of the energy that has already been wasted (transferred into heat/light/motion).

This hydrogen piece of rubbish is apparently making more energy in the first place. Again, totally against all laws of physics, specifically the first law of thermodynamics.

Kurtis_Blue

sebdangerfield wrote: »

Thats a little different to be fair as the energy's still being wasted, the engine's still making the same amount of heat and light and motion. A turbo or regen braking is just using some of the energy that has already been wasted (transferred into heat/light/motion).

This hydrogen piece of rubbish is apparently making more energy in the first place. Again, totally against all laws of physics, specifically the first law of thermodynamics.

It is different thats why I stated the difference.

However I have not seen this devices specs so could not rule it out until then, suggestions that belt driving devices from the engine cannot achieve results are wrong and have been used for forced induction of air since the beginning of time so changing that to forced induction of another gas may well be achievable and doesn't break any laws, it just using one energy and trying to use it more efficiently, its not perpetual motion.

newfoundglory

Reminds me of that Steorn thing which was meant to produce free energy. There was so much hype about it, and they still claim it produces more energy than it uses.