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

[kerosene]

Jimbo - your arguments are very solid and accurate - however - more or less same arguments have been laid out before to Kistinie and other HHO fanatics. None have been able to explain where this extra energy comes from.

I recommend unsubscribe from the thread and forget this discussion - it will save your brain and plenty of time. No point in reasoning, it will be just waste of time.

[AmbitiousAmatur]

[quote=PAR;279496]Some one's been reading 1970's back issues of "Mother Earth News" again . . .

This is much like the "Famous Healers" that pray on fools in weird church settings and religious overtones. They place "hands" on poor helpless victims of some incurable illness and suddenly they're cured. It must be a miracle!


Here in Jackson County Alabama they handle snakes and swear by it. "Any kind people catch so long as their poisionous."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObhvOeNCKhs

[AmbitiousAmatur]

I can see some legitimacy to a device that separates water through electrolysis as hydrogen does have 3 times the energy per mass of octane by volume. You are actually using surplus energy from your alternator so it still fits into the law of conservation. The question then becomes how much extra strain is produced by extra draw against the alternator vs. how much extra power is achieved. Injecting the oxygen part of water works similarly to NO2 on a smaller scale so I could see some benefit there, but once again all things considered is there an actual gain overall?

Some companies are now pitching a propane injection system for diesels that claims to fill wasted space at the top of the cylinder with propane because it exist as a gas in its natural state. but as any educated person knows:
a.) propane when compressed to 30,000 PSI in a cylinder turns back into a liquid.
b.) If this does in fact work, too much will blow the head right off of an engine.

[AmbitiousAmatur]

Originally Posted by mudman

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

Does this work on Turkduckens too?

[AmbitiousAmatur]

I do however have to say that an Indian car company has developed an engine that runs on compressed air. It has a range of close to 150 miles and speeds up to 80 mph. The main problem that I see is that the tank is compressed to 4500 PSI. It would take quite a blunt force to cause rupture with that amount of internal pressure, but a puncture would cause quite the catastrophy.

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by kerosene

it will save your brain and plenty of time. No point in reasoning, it will be just waste of time.

Or just the opposite ?
;-)

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by AmbitiousAmatur

I can see some legitimacy to a device that separates water through electrolysis as hydrogen does have 3 times the energy per mass of octane by volume. You are actually using surplus energy from your alternator so it still fits into the law of conservation.
.

Nope - alternator's resistance depends on the load running the electrolysis setup adds load to the engine - there is no "surplus alternator power".

Besides that 100w of electricity even when with 100% efficient electrolysis would give 30w from the engine as the combustion engine has efficiency in 30% range (at best).

However these dudes advertise 30-90% fuel consumption reductions.

[kerosene]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Or just the opposite ?
;-)

No point wasting time, it will be just reasoning?

nope that makes no sense.

[mudman]

Originally Posted by AmbitiousAmatur

I do however have to say that an Indian car company has developed an engine that runs on compressed air. It has a range of close to 150 miles and speeds up to 80 mph. The main problem that I see is that the tank is compressed to 4500 PSI. It would take quite a blunt force to cause rupture with that amount of internal pressure, but a puncture would cause quite the catastrophy.

I believe that when trains made the conversion from steam to diesel electric, they were running on compressed air. The only problem was that they had to have so many fill stations to keep the train going and it proved unacceptable.

Newer designs of compressed air engines though recirculate the expended air back into the holding tank. If it works, and is cost effective, I believe that I'd take the chance of the tank going boom. I mean, right now I drive with 20 gallons of highly combustable material under the floor.

I think that the pnumatic motors are far more likely to be used than some HHO nonsense.

[kerosene]

pneumatic systems are interesting - there are some french city cars that use it and other small "non-constant-use" vehicles like fork lifts I believe.

Energy intensity is not the greatest but still pretty promising tech. There was a thread in the forum about using it for boats.

But its worth stressing that the air works as a store of energy (battery really) rather than source of energy. You need outside source to run the compressors.

[mydauphin]

Air is a very bad store energy. You need 60hp to compress to get 30hp out.
A battery/capacitor is more efficient and can store a lot more per Cubic whatever size. A hydraulic drive is more efficient but not for storing.