10 to 30 % fuel saving with much lower emission, for or against ?

[mudman]

Cajun seasoning is real and turkey is real. If I inject cajun seasoning in a turkey and fry it, it tastes good.

[Jimbo1490]

Water injection serves the same function as 'power enrichment', nothing more. EFI engines need a lot less power enrichment than did carburated engines. This is because part of the function of PE in a carburated engine is to prevent the mixture from going excessively lean (fuel 'drop out') due to the rapid change in manifold pressure as the throttle plates are opened quickly. This does not happen with EFI since there is never any fuel in the intake manifold. So the last remaining function of PE is to cool the combustion process down a bit by simple evaporation. Water actually does a better job of this than fuel owing to its greater transitional heat energy than any fuel, and of course it's way cheaper. The extra fuel of PE is not burned, of course, just evaporated contributing to unburned HC emissions. But EGR has replaced most, if not all, of even this last function of PE as EGR cools the combustion process also.

So what function could water injection have in such an engine?

I smell snake oil.

Jimbo

[marshmat]

Damn, Jimbo, just when we were starting to get some good aimless rambling, you go and start talking about real technology....

PAR, you got any of those good 10-foot alligators on that property, or just the little guys?

[rasorinc]

As a kid freinds and I made a potato cannon. Using black powder we got about a 100 yards with it. Par, I've got some flat land in Nevada you can throw in to sweeten the deal. A point in fact my 2005 Subaru STI race car had a water injection button that when pushed gave you about 10-15 extra horse power. To be used only on hot days as the purpose was to cool down the fuel/air mixture. Can't say I really noticed any difference but with 400HP at the wheels in a 2,400 lb. car 10-15 more HP would be hard to notice. Boy did I love that car.

[AmbitiousAmatur]

One thing that has been tried and proven by home tinkerers is Brown's Gas Generation. The process involves using the surplus electric current produced by your alternator to power a cell that generates and injects H2 and O directly into your air intake in the proper ratios. There are even companies that sell devices commercially as well. It is just like electrolysis in high school chem lab. Makes more sense than injecting liquid water (non explosive) into your cylinders. You can even purchase high amperage alternators which do not use much more engine horsepower than standard alternators to supply extra energy for such a cause. I have a design in my head that would be bolt-on for any engine and quite controllable and it overcomes some of the problems that other users have stated. I just need to find the time to build it. Propane injection has proven to have similar effects in diesel engines. Many of the people developing devices seem to be just "rednecks" who have worked on cars all of their lives and understand the inner-workings of an engine and some basic chemistry.

[Jimbo1490]

Hydrolysis of water is energy net negative. Water is after all, burned hydrogen. You get less energy back when you burn it than you put in to split it into H2 and O2.

Jimbo

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by AmbitiousAmatur

One thing that has been tried and proven by home tinkerers is Brown's Gas Generation. The process involves using the surplus electric current produced by your alternator to power a cell that generates and injects H2 and O directly into your air intake in the proper ratios. There are even companies that sell devices commercially as well. It is just like electrolysis in high school chem lab. Makes more sense than injecting liquid water (non explosive) into your cylinders. You can even purchase high amperage alternators which do not use much more engine horsepower than standard alternators to supply extra energy for such a cause. I have a design in my head that would be bolt-on for any engine and quite controllable and it overcomes some of the problems that other users have stated. I just need to find the time to build it. Propane injection has proven to have similar effects in diesel engines. Many of the people developing devices seem to be just "rednecks" who have worked on cars all of their lives and understand the inner-workings of an engine and some basic chemistry.

Ambitious ! Great, never give up !
Amatur : wonderful !, it means you love what you do.

Is water a source of energy, yes.
But this question is not the good question as the answer is known for almost 100 years
The question is why don't we burn it and shall we burn water ?
And to me the answer is NO, it is a false good idea
Water is our life, our soul...
Just try to think of the idea of burning water, does it make you feel good ?


An hydrolyser producing brown gaze is a quantum machine.
Digging also the question of the quantum machines, it appear that they will also have a drawback as they create vortex, small black holes.
So as well as learning quantum tech, we must learn how to compensate these black holes.
As a basic rule, do it small, do it like acupuncture, never forget zero point energy is unlimited so exponential effect will happen. Do it small. Small volts, small amps, connect it, stop it, never let it run all day, else : Infinite Accident !

Safe solutions that should be preferred above all the others:
Air energy
Solar energy
Bio gaze

Till then i really like dual fuel, like a gaze with a diesel
This is an excellent retrofit option to gain mileage and cut emissions drastically

Good search !
Do not give up

[wardd]

there is no surplus alternator energy as energy was used to make the current in the first place

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Ok no universe, no hybrid, no E.P.R, no CASIMIR, no quantum, no vortex, no black hole, no plasma, no sonoluminescence, no thermoacoustic, no orgon, no ehter, ...n0 overheating,n0 chemtrails, n0 haarp,

2 serious questions

1. Do you know where the energy comes when hydrocarbons are burnt? Or hydrogen or carbon alone for that matter. Can you please describe this (layman terms is fine)

2. Can you provide basic explanations to:
- orgone
- ether
- plasma

Thanks,
H

[mydauphin]

Originally Posted by wardd

there is no surplus alternator energy as energy was used to make the current in the first place

Exactly, it take HP to generate the amps need produce electrolysis, more energy than it produces by burning H2 and O2...

[mydauphin]

kistinie, has concepts from alternative universes.

[apex1]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Ambitious ! Great, never give up !
Amatur : wonderful !, it means you love what you do

Good search !
Do not give up

I still prefer to make it short if it is you..... Idiot.......

Regards
Richard

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by kerosene

1. Do you know where the energy comes when hydrocarbons are burnt? Or hydrogen or carbon alone for that matter. Can you please describe this (layman terms is fine)

2. Can you provide basic explanations to:
- orgone
- ether
- plasma

Thanks,
H

Burning is ageing.
E comes from an accelerated ageing. The energy a tree will broadcast during all his life including its decomposition time is used in a second and sent away in space.

Orgone is the term used by W.R
Ether is the antique Greece name. This physical phenomena was also known by Egyptians, Inca ...
I think orgone and ether is a very complex thing as it is resulting of the interaction of 7 strings plus our 4 dimensions, that statistically will bring a high combination number.
Equations tell us Orgone can be a time distortion...


Plasma, is the matter level above gaseous state.(above plasma...i do not know if there is another state)
Plasma is used in decorative lamps or cutter using compress air and electricity like this:
http://www.plasma-cutter.com/
Cold fusion from the plasma state is old as the first strike lightning that touched the earth

You are welcome.

Originally Posted by mydauphin

kistinie, has concepts from alternative universes.

String theory is one.

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Burning is ageing.
E comes from an accelerated ageing.

--------

Orgone is the term used by W.R
Ether is the antique Greece name. This physical phenomena was also known by Egyptians, Inca ...
-------
Equations tell us Orgone can be a time distortion...
-----

---------
You are welcome.

Thanks. That clears a lot and gives a me a great point to exit this discussion.

[Jimbo1490]

Originally Posted by mydauphin

Exactly, it take HP to generate the amps need produce electrolysis, more energy than it produces by burning H2 and O2...

Ahhhh! So this is the little misunderstanding which is the source of your irrational exuberance over hydrogen!

Kistinie, don't you think that if this were really true, then we'd all be

• Driving cars fueled by hydrogen
  
  
• Producing electricity using hydrogen fueled power plants

Beacuse all we'd have to do is use fossil fuels to generate electricity, then split water with that electricity, then burn the H2 and have MORE ENERGY than the electricity (produced by fossil fuel) that we expended into splitting the water!

In fact, after an initial start-up on fossil fuel, our magic power plant would no longer even require further fossil fuel, but simply run on hydrogen produced by splitting water since that process is, according to Kistinie, energy 'Net Positive'.

Finally: Perpetual motion realized

Think about it logically:

If you burned something, like wood, and collected all the smoke, combustion gases and ash carefully, then attempted to synthesize cellulose out of those combustion by-products, what do you think the odds are that you would expend more energy in re-synthesizing cellulose from smoke and ash than you got from burning the wood in the first place? I'd say you have NO CHANCE of using less energy in synthesizing cellulose from smoke than you get from burning cellolose.

It will be less negative for water, which is after all, burned hydrogen. Hydrogen is the simplest atom in the universe, so re-synthesizing H2 from H2O will certainly be less energy intensive that trying to make wood from smoke. But the laws of conservation of energy will not allow us to recover more energy from even the simplest reduction reaction of H2O back to H2. So in the end 'less negative' is not good enough because it's still NEGATIVE!

More energy is required for splitting water than you get back by by re-combining the H2 and O (burning). The only way this makes sense is if the energy for splitting the water is essentially 'free' such as produced by solar. Still, more energy goes in than comes out, but then we can transport the hydrogen and use it far from the solar collectors. So then the hydrogen has become only a storage media, like a battery.


But that is not what you keep promoting; you keep promoting the idea of using electricity produced by burning fossil fuel to split the water, then re-burning the H2.




This is energy 'Net Negative'

Jimbo

P.S.

You could argue that the same thing is true for all fuel molecules: Far more energy was expended in producing them than we can recover by burning. But with fossil fuels, we don't have to synthesize them, only mine them.