Why is using hydrogen from water as an additive to burn gasoline more efficiently so poorly understood?

Question

The hydrogen/gasoline mixture results in a rise in gasoline combustion efficiency, increased power, better mileage, and emissions so low that catalytic converters are no longer needed. It's laughable for anyone to deny the facts. Hydrogen as the sole fuel would be too dangerous to use with current technology, but the generation of hydrogen, on demand in small quantities, and added to the fuel mix is proven technology, and does improve mileage. Case closed.

Answer 1

It should be fairly simple for someone to set up a public demonstration with sceptics invited.

Now By that I mean that septics should be able to request evidence that can be measured.

This should not be done after a million people have paid their $65 for an information kit or $150 for a parts and info kit, but before, and if the demonstration does not work out, the facts would be required to be presented whenever anyone proposes we buy these.

Answer 2

I am a believer Ray F, if only you can show me peer reviewed double blind studies that support your idea.  Do you?  Or do you have unsubstantiated claims similar to one of the answerers of your 'question'?  Come on, you are making the claim, give us the information!!

Answer 3

Injecting hydrogen and oxygen into the engine will cool the cylinder between combustion cycles.  This allows you to lean your air/fuel ration from 12.6;1 to 16;1 and in some cases, as much as 20;1 with a big enough electrolyzer.  It is possible to double your fuel economy, if the engine is set right.  There will be a power loss, but it won't be substantial.  

There is no magic, and it's not free energy.  It is simply a way to cool the combustion chamber without lossing much power when running very lean.  The reason that a lot of people who use "hydrogen boosters" don't see a significant increase in fuel economy is because they are not setting thier air/fuel ratio lean enough, or their electrolyzer is too small for the application.

Answer 4

I would like to see some controlled experiment proving the concept.  And some metallurgical tests on engines that have been running hydrogen proving that they have not been damaged through hydrogen embrittlement.

Answer 5

There's a sucker born every minute. First law of thermodynamics states nothing can create more energy than is put into it, hence no perpetual motion machines. The energy it takes to break down water into it's basic components is in fact MORE than the resulting hydrogen produced for this "miracle" "gas mileage gimmick. Check with any physics expert. Will hydrogen burn in a infernal combustion engine? of course, but as stated above, it cannot result in a net gain over the power required to break the molecular bonds of water and hydrogen. Nice fantasy though. It is feasable to use solar cells to provide the required power, but to make enough to run a vehicle would require panels the size of a football field.

Answer 6

Call the thermodynamics police I am in violation!

I have a car and a small truck using supplemental hydrogen, both are healthy and get better mileage.

I installed my first on a 1992 ford ranger 4.0l, after install my average mileage went from  17.1 to 23.7. A side benefit is that my engine knock when pulling hills is gone.

Install #2 is my 1977 Mercedes 240D (2.4L / 64 horse power). mileage went from  27.2 to 36.4 using bio-diesel 80.

I am using both homemade and commercial   electrolizers  to generate  hydrogen, I get about 1.2L/min of  brown’s gas (HHO). Currently I am working on a new design and hope to get at least 3.5 L/min .

One device I have experimented with produces 7 to 8 L/hr of browns gas using 12 volts at 30 amps (360 watts). The problem with this one is that it is in a 50 gal barrel.

The alternator in most vehicles are capable of generating  50+ amps, more than enough for most current electrolizer designs, Using about 1-2 HP.

The problem with applying the laws of thermodynamics / conservation of energy  to  hydrogen assist combustion in vehicles is  that internal combustion engines are so very inefficient . One estimate  is that only about 1% of the available energy in hydrocarbons if  utilized to move the occupants of vehicles , Even if we used 5%  that leaves a lot of  room in the back seat for  improvement.

If hydrogen assist is a bad idea why are GM and other automakers spending millions on R&D?

Hydrogen embrittlement is a problem in engines using only hydrogen as fuel, it has yet to be documented in vehicles using small amounts of supplemental hydrogen .

Why the resistance to hydrogen assist in vehicles?

If I sell you one you will break something and sue me.

Remember the Hindenburg?

Snake oil salesmen:

There are a lot of web sites that will sell you plans for a hydrogen generator (electrolizer) . Many of these plans are fine for kids science fair projects but produce very little hydrogen. Some of these devises  look like a mayonnaise jar with wires coming out of the top with old forks for electrodes, and recommend using baking soda for an electrolyte…. Not something I recommend to attach to your vehicle!

New idea:

Stages of new ideas

1) heresy!!  burn him at the stake!

2) that can’t  work!

3) Maybe  I’ll take a look at that

4) I actually thought of that years ago.

As the cost of  fuel rises many of us will look  for something to ease the pain. Hydrogen assist is not magic, voodoo, or free energy,  it does not violate the laws of  thermodynamics, it just increases efficiency of the vehicle.

Bill

Answer 7

Besides the energy sapped from the engine through the alternator belt to keep the water cell going, the other problem with these schemes is that your engine is designed to compress air plus gasoline vapor, not a combustible hydrogen-oxygen-gasoline mix.  Such a mixture will detonate in the cylinder before the spark plug can fire, resulting in engine knock and probably engine damage.  

We mix anti-knock ingredients into gasoline precisely so it will not decompose into hydrogen and carbon under pressure and heat on the compression stroke and then detonate.  

Since adding hydrogen to the mix will exacerbate engine knock, it's become my impression that these devices don't produce enough hydrogen and oxygen to make the slightest bit of difference to the engine.  And it's fairly easy to see this if you place your hand over the air intake when the engine is running and feel the volume of air that the engine breathes in.  At each revolution, a two-liter engine pulls in, well, two liters of air, and it makes perhaps a hundred revolutions per second.  Compare this four hundred liters of air per second with the small stream of gas that might bubble out of one of those water cells.  That gas won't make any more impression on your engine than the exhaust from the truck in front of you.  

When someone submits his miracle water-for-fuel vehicle to a properly-certified independent testing laboratory I'll be glad to look at the results.  But nobody has, and they're not likely to do so.

Answer 8

Petrocheap.com has all the answers and proof you need. I get 75 miles to a gallon in my chevy Malibu. And GM has approved the modification my car's warranty is in tact.