| Skeptics |
|
|
|
| Background - Further Information |
|
Hydrogen boosting is not a new idea. For years it has slowly started to creep its way into the public with its amazing boasts of "increased mileage". But there are skeptics out there, people who will argue that it is not possible and that you’re stupid to think it is. I am going to talk about the different arguments used by the 'skeptics' to discredit the technology.
Its Breaking the Laws of Physics and/or ThermodynamicsThis is probably the number one argument against hydroxy boosting. Physicists and engineers will argue this till they are blue in the face. Here is the rundown: Conservation of energy basically states that you can't get more energy out, then you put in. Physicists say that we are breaking this law because we are using energy from the vehicle's alternator (which is powered by an engine) to power a booster that separates out h2 (hydrogen) and o2 (oxygen). Then we take the gas (hydroxy) and put it back into the engine, see image below:
The physicists would be absolutely right if this were the case. If the engine above could run this way, it would basically be a perpetual motion device, but this is not the case. There is also gas going into the engine and it is the gas that fuels the motor, not the hydroxy. I am in no way claiming that you "can run your car on water". I am just claiming that my car runs on gasoline (yours could be diesel, that's ok too). I am also claiming that you can use hydroxy to make your car run more efficient, which is NOT breaking any laws. It takes so much EnergyIt’s a fact that it takes a lot of energy to break apart a water molecule into h2 and o2 via electrolysis. It certainly takes more energy than what you get out of exploding the hydroxy afterwards. So the argument often used is that since it takes more energy to make hydroxy than you get out of it, there's no way to use it to increase your MPG. But, the skeptics keep forgetting, hydroxy isn't used for fuel. So however much energy you get from the 'boom' isn't really important. It's used as a catalysis not a fuel. My ICE is More Efficient than Your ICEAn internal combustion engine (ICE) is not very efficient, I'll be nice and say that its 20% efficient. Most of the energy you get from your fuel is dumped out of your tail pipe via heat (or just dumped out... that's the black cloud some of you have behind your car). Lets say hydroxy raises your engines efficiency by 12% (that’s a nice even number). That means your engine is now 32% efficient which is a 60% gain. Now, subtract the energy we used to make the hydroxy which is about 3% of the total system, giving us an 29% efficient engine, which still equals a 45% gain. That means a 25 MPG car would now be about 36 MPG boosted, but what if efficiency increased more than 12%..... Why does Hydroxy make Fuel More Efficient?Earlier I said that hydroxy acts like a catalyst to fuel. As such, it changes the properties of the-o-so-slow-burning-gasoline, and speeds up its rate of combustion causing much more of the total combustion process to take place in the engine (rather than in the exhaust). This translates into more mechanical energy and a more efficient engine.
Hydrogen Facts
(1) Hydrogen is less flammable than gasoline. Being the lightest element (fifteen times lighter than air), hydrogen rises and spreads out quickly in the atmosphere. So when a leak occurs, the hydrogen gas quickly becomes so sparse that it cannot burn. Even when ignited, hydrogen burns upward, and is quickly consumed. Hydrogen is a naturally-occurring element in the atmosphere. By comparison, all petroleum fuels are asphyxiates, and are poisonous to humans. When pure hydrogen is burned in pure oxygen, only pure water is produced. Granted, that’s an ideal scenario, in any case, when a hydrogen engine burns, it actually cleans the ambient air by completing combustion of the unburned hydrocarbons that surround us. Compared with the toxic compounds (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrogen sulfide) produced by petroleum fuels, the products of hydrogen burning are much safer. So some evidence that hydrogen fuel supplementation is possible: A writeup from NASA But it doesn't worksee the real scientific evidence at http://www.geocities.com/a57ngel/gas/index.html |





