Go to this link on the general discussion forum to get more info:

http://forums.aaca.org/ubbthreads.php/topics/515843/4/Hydrogen_Generators_for_Cars.html

Read the whole thread before you get too excited.

Dave, don't run something down until there is time for improvement or actual factual data.

Remember, they told Columbus that he was nuts too!

Wayne

Wayne, I learned in my 8th grade Physics class that energy is neither created or destroyed in any process, only transformed. That is what "a simple conservation of energy problem" means. There is no way physically possible for any device to make more energy than is added to it's system. These things use electricity from the car's alternator and water (with a bit of an electrolyte tossed in to facilitate current flow). That's it.

It is not "running something down" to say that it violates basic scientific principles (or that it claims to).

Dave,

Your persistence in claiming you know what can't be done has grown very old and tired.

As I said in the other forum, I know of two credible auto repair shops that have installed hydrogen generators and are reporting good results.

You're not doing yourself or the readers of this forum to be so skeptical.

Without getting into whether this system is possible to work or not (I have no clue), I have been hearing about this for the last month ad nauseum from my ex-business partner who is currently remodeling my house. Let me say this. During the day he listens exclusively to pirate (read: conspiracy) radio. He voted for Ron Paul, he loves Alex Jones, etc. He also told me about the 100 mpg carburetor. He also loaned me "truth about 9/11" dvd's. (read: extreme nutjobs)

I would love it if this worked. I think it would be better for the economy, the environment, the world. But I too will believe it when I see it.

Mike

Skepticism is occasionally earned.

As with any other improvement?/enhancement?/modification; one needs to test.

Would be very interesting to know if the "two credible repair shops" did a baseline on the vehicles prior to the installation of the unit; and then a comparison under the same driving conditions after.

Back when I was in college in the early 1960's, a guy I used to ride with would purchase every gas-saving device that J.C. Whitney sold. After about 3 months, we used to have to stop at the gas station each morning, so he could unload the excess fuel made overnight to the station. LOL
All joking aside, the law of "Conservation of Energy" applies to most of these devices.

Personal belief is that electricity is the answer (this from a carburetor guy), as electricity may be generated from many forms of currently wasted energy.

Jon.

While pumping gas during the 70's and the "energy crisis" I saw many devices come and go. They all managed to boost MPG. Reason: People drove different after the installation, then once it became "old hat" guess what happened. MPG returned to what it was before. I think its a good concept, just like the car that would run on half oxygen, half hydrogen--Popular Mechanics, many years ago. I have not seen one of these in actual operation, skeptical yes, but I am open to new concepts. Just not gonna plunk hard earned cash on anything.

I think getting people worked up by saying it is a WORKING hydrogen generator and that it is coming soon is misleading. All other basic physics and chemistry issues notwithstanding, nobody's been able to adequately explain this one simple problem: how is the hydrogen being contained and funneled into the engine? It's the smallest molecule of all. It goes through the smallest cracks. It will go through rubber, plastic, metal castings, and even some glass. It will percolate through virtually any liquid (like, say, the motor oil used to seal piston rings). This really is one of the most undisputed facts in the universe, even among non-science, hope-and-a-prayer, everything-has-two-sides pundits. Seriously, guys, have any of you looked at the intake tract of a car or thought about the reality of this?

*Plastic airbox secured with a hose clamp
*cast aluminum mass-air sensor secured with a hose clamp
*plastic intake hose secured with a hose clamp
*aluminum throttle body secured with cork or phenolic gasket to an aluminum or plastic intake manifold
*another gasket into the cast aluminum lower intake
*another gasket to the intake ports of the heads
*past the rubber O-rings on the injectors
*into the cylinder but not out through the valve stem seals
*compression stroke forces it out through imperfectly sealed valves and rings (show me how a metal-on-metal seal can possibly contain hydrogen, especially under pressure).

By the time the spark plug fires, where's the hydrogen? Sorry, it's long gone.

Physics and chemistry got us to the impossible moon, but it took billions of dollars, the best brains in the world and 8 years. Nevertheless, Steve the corner auto mechanic has solved our energy problems with saltwater? My neighbor really is a rocket scientist at NASA-Glenn and has about the biggest brain I've ever seen. He personally invented a nuclear-powered plasma engine designed to push asteroids around (the small-scale prototype, amusingly, uses a modified MSD igniton system from Summit Racing to light the fires). He is the holder of more than 70 patents. When I asked him about this on Saturday, he asked if I was joking. When I said no, he replied (jokingly), "I guess I grossly overestimated the intelligence of the masses." And this is a guy who believes compressed air is a viable power source for vehicles, so he's a willing participant in this quest for cheap energy.

There are solutions. There may even be a solution that works like this. But this ain't it.

PS: Who among us will be first to put up their own money on this?

Matt
All valid arguments if the hydrogen is introduced under pressure, but in these systems it is introduced into the intake air stream, a slight vacuum. Even in the combustion chamber during compression it is mixed with other components, air and gasoline, so even then little would escape. Besides your thesis suggests that the working 100% hydrogen fueled cars cannot work.
Willie

How?

Putting a hydrogen generator on an existing gas engine probably won't work for the reasons I stated plus the many, many issues with the science behind this particular contraption. But that's a long way from me suggesting that it won't ever work on any car.

Of course containment systems can be built to hold hydrogen. An intake tract can be made so that it doesn't leak. Engine sealing can be improved to keep the gas in the combustion chamber. In fact, BMW has an internal combustion engine in a 7-Series sedan running on hydrogen right now. It certainly can be done, and I don't doubt it may find its way under the hood .

I'm not suggesting that because I don't believe this bolt-on thing for your garden-variety car won't work, internal combustion hydrogen technology never will.

I saw a show on PBS about this just last week. They had a production car modified to run on hydrogen. I don't think they were not storing the hydrogen, but using batteries for storage and a fuel cell to generate the hydrogen on demand.

Check out this link. The Honda Clarity is a Hydrogen powered car ready for production.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/

That's what we need.

Wayne

All,

I like the input about various theories and information about fuel cell cars, but that isn't what I was talking about when I started this string.

I'm talking about a hydrogen generator for EXISTING cars. From what I have heard from other since I started this post, a hydrogen generator needs to generate about 1 liter per minute or 50-60 liters per hour in order for this to have a significant impact on a car's gas mileage.

Personally, it makes sense if there is a working system to put a $1500-2000 device on an existing car, especially if it is paid for, than to invest $25,000 to $50,000 on a totally new system. (BTW, the Honda fuel cell cars have a true cost of more than $100,000 each; they are being 'leased' for $600 per month as an experiment. These are NOT ready for market cars.)

So, to go back to the beginning, I'm hoping there will be a widely available, affordable, provable hydrogen generator for your current car or truck on the market in the next coupld of months.

Joe

(CRASH SOUNDS THEN: BOOOOOOOM! )

Was that the sound of a '48 Lincoln hitting the wall? Oh, never mind.... This IS a Buick forum, little sympathy for fords here.

But seriously, the hydrogen isn't STORED....like, say, 20 gallons of highly explosive gasoline?

It is produced and used due to the vacuum on the intake manifold drawing the gas into the engine.

So, if the system is producing 1-2 liters per minute, then in the few seconds during which time the car stops running and the system stops, there is what, 50-100 milliliters of hydrogen gas?

Let's assume that's true (whatever "significant" meant to the author/salesman).

The electrolysis of water requires an energy input of 4.5-5 kWh for every cubic meter of hydrogen produced ( Stoji, Mar etaa, Soviljb and Miljani, University of Belgrade, 2003 ) There are 1000 liters in a cubic meter, and 1000 watts in a kilowatt, therefore a 5 watt current will produce 1 liter of hydrogen in 1 hour. To produce 1 liter of hydrogen in 1 minute it would take 60 times 5 watts (assuming no efficientcy losses in scaling up the unit), or a 300 watt draw on your alternator. In a 12 volt system that's a 25 amp draw.

So far so good, except that this assumes no losses to resistence in the system, and makes no allowances for the car's other system requirements. Assuming minimal resistence in the unit, the least that would need to be done to the car to make a funcitioning system out of one of these contraptions is to upgrade the alternator/generator by at least 25 amps, which may not be possible for some newer cars with 100-120 amp systems already in place.. Of course a suitable voltage regulator would need to be fitted as well.

To handle that kind of current these "hydrogen generators" would need to be suppied with near battery cable-like supply cables (8 guage at least, preferably larger since--unlike a starter--they're pulling current continually while the car's running).

Water consumption at this rate would be about 0.9 liters per 1000 minutes of driving. This at least appears reasonable.

And yes, this is assuming 1 liter of hydrogen per minute is enough.

(BTW, guess where all that extra power draw to generate the additional electricity is going to come from!)

I should also point out that 1 liter of hydrogen per minute sounds like a lot, until you compare it to a typical car's needs. At idle it may be of some significant quantity, as much as 0.2% of the intake stream by volume assuming a 20 cfm draw at idle (less than a 3'x3'x3' box), but it wouldn't be serving any purpose since the car isn't performing any work.

If you applied that rate of hydrogen production to a Holley 650 cfm carburetor under full acceleration, the hydrogen component of the intake stream would be 0.00543%. Hydrogen occurs naturally in the atmosphere at a concentration of 0.00006%.

The Southwest Research Institute has published a report on May 28, 2008 stating this technology DOES work! Here is the link to the report:
http://www.gasadvancesystem.com/Sothwest%20Research%20Test.pdf

The dealer installing them here in Florida is located here:
www.masterautotech.com

You can click on his link about "Fuel Cell Information Website" which links to the Huffman Foundation, which is the ower of the site that published the SWRI report.

Joe
Great links and even better great news. Matt Harwood and Dave@Moon had the chemistry and physics dead right, but did not take into account the enhancing effect of the combination. Another well know enhancing agent...Nitrous Oxide (sound familiar).
I wonder if BCA judging will take off points for an installed system? Who cares.
Willie

I'll paste the same post here that I put on the AACA forum:

========================================================



O.K. Last line of the report:


And the shocker, guess who they are and what they sell. (see link)

This is not an independent test. It also is a test of cars leaned out to the max, with multiple additional modifications of zero description beyond name ("simple fuel heat exchanger installed", "computer device installed and adjusted to 350 milivolts", "halo plus spark installed", and several more {see page 8}), and with tires pumped up to 50 psi (including on a Dodge truck! ).

The most interesting part of the data tables is that the best mileage increase comes in the last line, when the only difference is listed as "driving", defined as "all the driving techniques in operator's manual were implemented". I'd love to know what kind of instructions in the "operator's manual" they were ignorring to get 15 mpg (city) out of an already thoroughly modified 2004 Dodge Ram that, when followed, brought the mileage all the way up to 22 mpg. I'd also be willing to bet that the "operator's manual" is something that came with the unit and is basically a hypermiler drivers instruction manual (shut it off and coast, draft trucks as close as possible, run stop signs, etc.).

(The link is to an article in Mother Jones Magazine on a guy who gets 59 mpg out of a stock Honda Accord. The sales pitch web site for this device lists their Honda Accord as getting 55.9 mpg. An awfully similar result. I wonder..... )

I seriously doubt the cars modified as they were for this test would last more than a few weeks in normal use. I also seriously doubt that the final testing procedure ("driving") is anything like normal use.

There may be some benefit in using hydrogen to lean out the fuel mixture and gain some mileage that way. It would be nice if that were true. But if these are the ends that have to be gone to to make this thing work, I can't imagine wanting any part of it.