Water4Petrol Water4cars -Scam or Miracle?

Cardelia

Yes, it's too expensive and the government should lower the duty on it.

Not at all. The water vapour problem has a relatively straightforward solution (in theory) in that the vapour could be condensed and stored as liquid water instead of emitting it into the atmosphere. But afaik, nobody knows whether this is necessary because nobody knows what happens when you suddenly dump a load of water vapour into the atmosphere.

With regards shifting freight onto railways, I can't see how that would ever work. Our rail network is already stretched, there simply isn't the capacity to put on more passenger trains, let alone shifting the thousands of tons of goods from road to rail. You'd need to invest billions, possibly even trillions, of pounds into upgrading and improving the rail system for it to ever be a realistic possibility. Once you've done all that, all the money you've saved from road maintenance will then have to be diverted into rail maintenance. And then you've got to find a way of generating all the electricity for the increased rail usage. And if that wasn't enough, you'd still need large lorries for transporting goods from the freight yards to the shops. Shifting freight to rail will never work, a better idea would be to reduce the need for moving large loads in the first place.

superscaper

Cardelia wrote: »

Not at all. The water vapour problem has a relatively straightforward solution (in theory) in that the vapour could be condensed and stored as liquid water instead of emitting it into the atmosphere. But afaik, nobody knows whether this is necessary because nobody knows what happens when you suddenly dump a load of water vapour into the atmosphere.

With regards shifting freight onto railways, I can't see how that would ever work. Our rail network is already stretched, there simply isn't the capacity to put on more passenger trains, let alone shifting the thousands of tons of goods from road to rail. You'd need to invest billions, possibly even trillions, of pounds into upgrading and improving the rail system for it to ever be a realistic possibility. Once you've done all that, all the money you've saved from road maintenance will then have to be diverted into rail maintenance. And then you've got to find a way of generating all the electricity for the increased rail usage. And if that wasn't enough, you'd still need large lorries for transporting goods from the freight yards to the shops. Shifting freight to rail will never work, a better idea would be to reduce the need for moving large loads in the first place.

Although considering the number of rail lines that have been shutdown over the years, I think reopening them would at least allow some significant increase in capacity. Even right now as I type this I'm only 100 m from a train station that has been shut for years and the railway line (still there intact) abandoned. I know I'd make use of it if it were open surely freeing up "passenger" capacity elsewhere.

You're right there probably needs to be a lot of investment but my own personal opinion is that the current management and strategies are rubbish and there's a lot of improvement that could be made even without putting more money into it but more efficient use of the existing money.

sovereignvids

Going back to the original question about Water4Gas (Hybrid conversion).

I am pleased to say that I have purchased this ebook and also the "Run a car on water" ebook. Firstly, some people seem to be under the impression that you buy a kit, you don't and others say it a scam, its not

To start with the last, if this is a scam, I manage to get a full refund as the ebook I downloaded was missing a large number of images, so that eliminates the scam theory. On the first point, I have yet to see any of these kit on the market, you are instructed to source all the required components from the high street stores. This proved to be the hard part as the jars and distilled water was hard to find instead I used a stainless steel storage jar and produced my own distilled water..

Only this week I installed the HH0 generator in my car and so far is working well. I have seen my average fuel consumption go from 25.5mpg to 29.5mpg. In about a months time I plan to go my local MOT station to check the CO2 emission and to repeat over the next year.

I for one would highly recommend Water4Gas ebook but the "Run a car on water"
gets very technical and unless you know how to read a circuit diagram and build the circuit boards for the pulse generator, give this one a miss.

Remember you are only buying a book, its up to you whether to go for a refund or use the instruction to your benefit, after all, if like my wife who has purchased dozens of diet books and none seem to work and has never got a refund them at least you do with this one.

sovereignvids

PEAB wrote: »

I believe the first is a scam.

I cannot believe you have cited the second. Don't you ever bother to look at links you before you provide them? The second link is about a hydrogen powered electric car. It is NOT about a car powered by an HHO fuel cell. How many more times must we point out to you the differences between HHO and hydrogen fuel cells?

It's very evident to me that you don't know about this at all, you need to look at the two sites very closely, they are very closely linked with the produces. (I am not talking about fuel cells but HHO hybrids)

Also, Hydrogen Power has a stand at the Bristish International Motor Show, Excell in London on 23rd July to 3rd August 2008. Don't take my word for it, check it out for yourself at the show.

sovereignvids

sovereignvids wrote: »

It's very evident to me that you don't know about this at all, you need to look at the two sites very closely, they are very closely linked with the produces. (I am not talking about fuel cells but HHO hybrids)

Also, Hydrogen Power has a stand at the Bristish International Motor Show, Excell in London on 23rd July to 3rd August 2008. Don't take my word for it, check it out for yourself at the show.

Plus sales of hydrogen generators to laboratory and industrial use is common place today and is the very same principle as mentioned i.e. applying electricity to water to produce hydrogen gas.

superscaper

sovereignvids wrote: »

Plus sales of hydrogen generators to laboratory and industrial use is common place today and is the very same principle as mentioned i.e. applying electricity to water to produce hydrogen gas.

I don't think anyone denies the existence of electrolysis. Nor combustion (performed both in my scientific research). But doing it in a contained cycle added to an existing process to make it more efficient and breaking the laws of thermodynamics is quite a bit different.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Yes, it's too expensive and the government should lower the duty on it.

sovereignvids wrote: »

Plus sales of hydrogen generators to laboratory and industrial use is common place today and is the very same principle as mentioned i.e. applying electricity to water to produce hydrogen gas.

Well done on telling us how to suck eggs. Now please explain how it is possible to create Hydrogen without expending energy.

Then please do tell us why this wonderful technology isn't an integral part of all motor vehicles.

sovereignvids

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Well done on telling us how to suck eggs. Now please explain how it is possible to create Hydrogen without expending energy.

Then please do tell us why this wonderful technology isn't an integral part of all motor vehicles.

If you don't believe me, then go to the Motor Show In London this weekend and/or scan the net.

As I have said before, Hydrogen Generators are common place for Hydrogen-on- demand. Now, if people wish to apply this to the combustion engine, then what's wrong with that. Also, checkout YouTube, many people have done the very same, but also look at the clips from news reports (Fox News for one) from around the world. Its not difficult to find many industries using this technology in the work place, also.

I have no need to explain myself, I'm only telling you what I have seen for myself both on the internet and on the TV. I have nothing more to add to this subject because of all the sad disbelievers on this thread who are out to question every single thing without checking it for themselves....

superscaper

sovereignvids wrote: »

I have no need to explain myself, I'm only telling you what I have seen for myself both on the internet and on the TV. I have nothing more to add to this subject because of all the sad disbelievers on this thread who are out to question every single thing without checking it for themselves....

I for one have NEVER said that hydrogen combustion isn't used. But it is not an energy SAVING technique, you still need energy to extract the energy in the same way you'd need to spend energy refining oil into petrol. You can't gain energy from a system. Fundamental science. End of. There's a difference between being cynical and being sceptical, I've seen more than enough and having a science background it' pretty easy to pick up all the fiction and made up pseudo science these sites use (in fact the critical thinking institutes such as the Randi Education Foundation classify it as supernatural!). I think you really need to try and learn at least the very simple basics of science and logic because you're demonstrating ignorance simply by not understanding the difference between completely different technologies and the difference between simply using an alternative fuel and claiming that you can "create energy" within a contained system. There are cars that run on compressed air (France have developed a good one) but there's no claim it uses less energy or is able to develop the compressed air on board to positive energy gain. It still requires a lot of energy to compress the air and then it is used. The same with electrolysing and combusting hydrogen and oxygen. The CANNOT get more energy from combusting hydrogen and oxygen than the energy you put into electrolysing it. THAT is perpetual motion and breaks the laws of thermodynamics and the laws of physics "energy can neither be created nor destroyed".

I've seen many many pseudo science sites etc in my time, every thing from psychics putting "quantum" into every other sentence to people building perpetual motion machines who don't understand GCSE level physics of momentum and acceleration. Stringing scientific words together randomly "to sound sciency" doesn't make it science. There are plenty of good popular science books you could pick up to get you started.

And since hydrogen electrolysis and combustions IS used by scientific institutions etc (used myself) how come they (who'd be able to measure it properly) have never been able to develop a system that's 100%+ energy efficient? Especially as it's a case of simply adding them together? I've never personally seen an energy difference from electrolysing to combusting other than negative (losses) and if I had I'd have damn sure verified and published, if not patented. But I suppose the big oil companies were sneaking in and altering my equipment and changing the results and calculations I'd written. :rolleyes:

superscaper

The ONLY conceivable way of getting out the actual stored energy in Hydrogen itself is either by fusion or annihilation. Billions has been spent on the former already (hardly brushed under the carpet by the oil industry is it?, I mean funny how they never suppressed fission either if they really were trying to suppress alternative fuels) and it's still a long way off an entire viable power plant. But since we're not talking about either fusion or annihilation, we're only talking about normal chemistry which can't extract the stored energy in hydrogen other than the chemical energy that's put in in the first place I don't see how anyone in their right mind would think that they're achieving something even a GCSE student could point out the flaws in the logic?

I can conceivably see you may possibly be able to use hydrogen combustion to make the petrol combustion more efficient but that would mean it wasn't burning properly in the first place and simply replacing the spark plugs and tuning and cleaning the cylinders would esssentially have the same effect. You wouldn't be gaining energy from the system, merely reducing existing problems in the engine (but for more money than simply rectifying the problem by a mechanic anyway).