guy - 23-7-2007 at 23:38
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6Rb_rDkwGnU
Apparently the reaction is H2O --> HHO ---heat realease--> H2O
Is this a big deal? You have to use energy to perform the electrolysis which still means burning fossil fuels.
[Edited on 7/23/2007 by guy]
Nicodem - 24-7-2007 at 02:15
It is incredible what kind of crap do you get to see on TV. However, I wish you would not have posted that link and I wish I would not have clicked on
it. I always get a bit seek watching any type of propaganda or TV in general. After all that is why I don't have the TV in the first place. Please,
next time at least mark it as a TV snippet.
[Edited on 24/7/2007 by Nicodem]
Sauron - 24-7-2007 at 08:27
DETRITUS
franklyn - 25-7-2007 at 04:29
Welding is useful , what's so objectionable about that.
http://www.plasticsmag.com/ta.asp?aid=3172
16MillionEyes - 25-7-2007 at 07:37
The reaction then is simply H2 + O2 --> 2H2O. Why would you/they say it's HHO. Is this supposed to be a 'molecule' in which the hydrogen is bonded
to another hydrogen and that hydrogen bonded to a O atom? But this doesn't seem to make much sense since H doesn't form 2 bonds as far as I know.
So the above equation is correct (and as that leaflets explains) is the actual reaction. Please someone correct me if necessary.
12AX7 - 25-7-2007 at 14:09
It's HHO viewed from the side. 
Such torches are certainly useful, as they are cleaner than an arc torch (which is an equivalent electrically-powered source of intense heat), and
probably a sharper flame as well, and consume no expensive fuel or oxygen (as oxyfuel torches do).
Tim
guy - 25-7-2007 at 17:04
Yeah theres no problem with it just being used for torches but the video claims to be better than fossil fuels.
bio2 - 4-12-2007 at 15:10
Well, here is some technical data (the 2007 patent) that attempts to explain it.
I'm surprised that so many are willing to condemn an idea based on so called "conventional wisdom" without doing at least a little research.
When Bell invented the feedback circuit all the experts ridiculed him and maintained his device could never work. There are numerous examples similar
to this throughout history beginning with the "earth is round" hypothesis.
The data presented in the patent by the "independent", apparently well known,
labs do indicate some anomalous findings on the properties of the gas. The inventors
"theory" ,as I see it, is presented as to the structure of the HHO molecule.
That being said there are some unanswered questions in my mind that aren't explained regarding how this so called new gas "HHO" is produced rather
than H2 and O2 mixture as would be expected. If it burns in a torch it is logical that it would burn otherwise as in an engine.
Take a look at this patent US2007/0151846A1 and related US2005/0258040A1, US2004/0149591A1
It proposes a molecule HHO which is an unstable gas supposedly decomposing at
250 deg and burns at 9000 deg. There is analysis from some independent labs that determine the weight is 17 instead 18 and the structure is the
hydrogens are adjoined vertically with the oxygen.
This is one of the patents by the Klein inventor in the video which demonstrates the torch and shows the hybrid car he uses the gas in.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cCwfUzJbZBg
He has a commercial welder on the market that uses the same so called HHO gas electrolytically produced.
There is no explanation as to why his electrolyzer (detailed in the patent) produces HHO instead of H2 and O2 although he hints at electrode surface
area and internal mixing.
The making of hydrogen and oxygen via electrolysis will certainly work.I have the parts already to assemble. The question is as to it's effectiveness
as an auxiliary auto fuel.
This patent, US6209493B1 & US5231954, have test examples documenting a 25% fuel consumption decrease when a small electrolyzer (1-3 amps 12v) is
connected to a car engines intake.
The emissions are drastically reduced as well. There are a lot of articles that explain the effect of the hydrogen increasing fuel
burn efficiency in this application. This would be the primary cause of increased gas mileage rather than the hydrogens heat value itself when only a
small amount of gas is introduced.
Needless to say the conversion of electricity to hydrogen/oxygen then back to electricity is a losing proposition or energy in versus out in general
via electrolysis of water.
So it seems there is some voodoo in this as the claims on increased fuel efficiency (mileage),depending on the source, vary from 25%-300%. There is
very little information given however to evaluate the actual amount of electrolytically produced gases or the electrical input for a fair evaluation.
This is a design for a water electrolyzer that the inventor uses to power his motorcycle on pure hydrogen.
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/
D20.pdf: A simple and cheap electrolyser design capable of running small engines directly from water alone.
Apparently the key to hydrogen being produced most effieciently is the use
of a PWM (pulse width modulated) power source tuned to the resonant frequency
of the cell electrodes. It is said this then produces more hydrogen than predicted
by Faradays laws. It is well known that PWM has advantages in electroplating
and will desulfate lead/acid batteries.
[Edited on by bio2]
DrP - 5-12-2007 at 04:07
This has been discussed before in this thread called 'Brown's Gas'.
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?goto=lastp...
chemrox - 5-12-2007 at 23:28
Is this another one of those psuedo science things like "wetter water?" and "ionized water?".
MIG welders are a little more costly and a lot more versatile. This is a hydrogen welder as was said above. I suspect that getting enough H2 out of
the water at a time to make a decent weld would use as much juice as my MIG.
Spargine - 6-12-2007 at 08:50
This is detritus.
However there is a thermodynamically sound way to use water as a fuel. Take for example, the puskas engine which uses a difference in humidity
levels to produce movement. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQjZwkia00&feature=relat...