I may be stupid, but with all the technology, why can't they get a car to run on water?

Question

like the old time trains did, steam engines, if you can microwave water, why cant there be microwave type engines to produce steam in little car motors? Man on the moon, but we can not conquer the gas problem, or can we?

Answer 1

Well,actually we study it.

Their is a proposal by a scientist,I think his a Filipino? Not sure.

He had a molecular splitting converting it to energy causing a water-based car.

Answer 2

Adam is right, hydrogen is an energy storage medium, not an energy source and oxygen isn't a fuel at all. It takes more energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen than those gases will generate on their own, even in a fuel cell. This is why perpetual energy schemes always fail, you don't get something for nothing in nature. It's also why steam engines ran on coal or wood, the coal bin was the fuel tank.

We can boost the efficiency of electrolysis to 85%, if QSI's nano-materials work as advertised, which is probably enough to power your car with a fuel cell, tank of water and some batteries. You'd still need to charge the batteries so additional energy has to be input but not as much as prior to QSI's technology. If there was some way to use the same technology that fish use that would be even cheaper. A fish uses it's gills and membranes to extract oxygen from water, which would leave the hydrogen theoretically available for use in a fuel cell but I don't know of anyone doing serious research in that area.

Honda's new FCX uses hydrogen in a fuel cell but it needs to be refueled at home using a home refueling system. If enough hydrogen fueling stations open that may change but right now it limits it's range. The refueling system uses electricity to extract hydrogen from natural gas, releasing some CO2 and natural gas is a fossil fuel, so it's not perfect yet. You also need to haul around a tank of combustible gas with you, which had bad results for the Hindenburg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_129_Hind... Using electrolysis to produce hydrogen only when it's needed would be a safer approach.

Keep in mind that the stories of giant oil companies in a vast conspiracy to suppress new technologies overlooks the fact that the oil companies only represent a small fraction of oil production. Most oil comes from nationalized industries, not from Exxon or Shell so the oil giants don't call the shots anymore. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pet...

Answer 3

you are, they can, first one released this week.

Answer 4

There is an incredible amount of energy in garbage and in sewage if there is anyone smart enough to figure it out! Raw sewage produces methane naturally. Why can't it be used rather allowing it to escape into the atmosphere! I think you ask a great question!

Answer 5

The Laws of Thermodynamics.  Maybe in the future they might, but as of right now, it uses much more energy to split water up into its components than those components would yield to propel a vehicle.  As far as microwaving water, that would cost way way more than the energy the steam would produce.

Answer 6

Water can be used as a medium for energy transfer but doesn't have any useful residual energy in itself - that is, it is not a fuel.

It can be used - as you point out - in steam engines but there the fuel is actually coal or wood so they aren't "running" on water.

More high tech is to use electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen then burn the hydrogen in an engine (thus returning to water). Although hydrogen is the fuel, the original source of the energy was whatever was used to electrolyse the water in the first place -this is currently being done using mains electricity (generated by nuclear, coal, oil, hydro, etc).

Bottom line: Water is no more a source of energy than, say, dirt

Edit:

I see a number of references to cars that currently do run on water - read the links people give; they are usually referring to Honda's car that runs on hydrogen with water as an exhaust (as described above) - there are no cars that run on water

Answer 7

there has been many proto type cars running on other fuels but it would be the end for the oil people. So they generally buy the inventors idea and give them lots of money so they can stay in business. Invent such a car or a way the rest of us can turn our existing cars over to an alternative fuel, something we can fill up ourself and will not need a fuel station. Do this, dont sell out to the oil people but give the ideas to the ordinary people. Something that wont cost an arm and a leg for and we all will do it. I believe we are on the verge of such.

Answer 8

trains did not run on water..they ran on wood/coal/oil there is no carbon energy in water no matter what thee drive free on water for only 69.95 people say

Answer 9

I dont think I would want to see cars running around producing gamma rays, would be a different kind of pollution.

Answer 10

actually there is a car that run on water that was discovered in japan.it involves electrolysis and instead of fuel it uses disilled water.so be more keen before exploding on the scientists.

Answer 11

They already have.

Answer 12

we are not as smart as you might think

Answer 13

Actually they have.  Honda unveiled a car that runs entirely on water.

http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Revo...

Answer 14

they are running

Answer 15

The old steam engines burned coal to turn the water to steam.

Fundamentally, water is not a fuel.  Quite literally, it hydrogen fuel that was burned eons ago when it oxidized with the first oxygen atoms it encountered.

The reason its talked about in environmental issues is because the water molecule can be un-burned or "cracked" back into hydrogen and oxygen gases, but that process requires much electricity that today comes from a fossil fuel power plant.  The hydrogen can be used as a fuel at that point , but the trick was in creating it with electricity made from a non polluting power station.

Answer 16

because we are low on water too!