Thread: Hydrogen Fuel cell/ Joe cells with Landys

I'll apologise before I start for not having read the whole thread, but I feel that the worst I can do is reiterate what someone else has already said. The simple answer is:

No form of electrolysis (or any other onboard fuel generation) is going to improve your mileage.

Hydrogen fuel (HHO) from water might sound like the answer, but because of some very simple, but ever so important laws of physics it cannot gain you any power (or mileage). The simple fact is, that to generate enough electrical power to make the gas will take more energy from your engine than can be gained by using that extra fuel in the engine.

You have a nett loss of power. End of story,... sorry.

Originally Posted by ozzirt

I'll apologise before I start for not having read the whole thread, but I feel that the worst I can do is reiterate what someone else has already said. The simple answer is:

No form of electrolysis (or any other onboard fuel generation) is going to improve your mileage.

Hydrogen fuel (HHO) from water might sound like the answer, but because of some very simple, but ever so important laws of physics it cannot gain you any power (or mileage). The simple fact is, that to generate enough electrical power to make the gas will take more energy from your engine than can be gained by using that extra fuel in the engine.

You have a nett loss of power. End of story,... sorry.

your logic is sound if you were looking at only an H2o to H and O conversation and then a H and O to H2O to run you vehicle. perpetual motion, you are correct it just will not work.

However if you are looking at producing Hydrogen onboard and adding that to the hydrocarbon fuel ( in some manor) the things start to look a bit different.
the original post stated "Joe cells" what i have written above is not what these "Joe cells" claim to do.

Originally Posted by bruiser69

I was only referring to the Solar feed in tariff. I doubt very much that this will remain so far in excess (4 times) of normal tariff as this will only accelerate the price hike.
I know that Govt wants to reduce demand for new coal fired power stations, hence the $8000 rebate that is now scrapped due to over subscription. If Govt really serious about lowering carbon emissions they would legislate to have coal fired stations modified to run on natural gas instead of shipping it to China!
Natural gas is much cleaner burning than even the best coal. I read a report stating that if natural gas used, that there would be no need for expensive CO2 geosequetration.
Another option currently being pioneered by Carbon Energy CarbonEnergy in a trial plant in Qld . This Underground Coal Gassification produces very little emissions & the gas can be used directly to generate clean electricity. The Syngas can also be converted to sulfur free diesel & many other products.

Cheers..b

i agree with you, the disparity between the buy and sell price of electricity will be eroded as more suppliers come on board and as the producers are allowed to.
one thing about russia is that thay have been using gas for everything for decades, it is in away how thay have managed to pipe there gas all over russia, with local power stations, water plants etc. every thing is smaller and more localized.

Originally Posted by clean32

However if you are looking at producing Hydrogen onboard and adding that to the hydrocarbon fuel ( in some manor) the things start to look a bit different.

No they don't unfortunately as the same rules still apply. You will be using energy generated from the hydrocarbon to create browns gas. If this is then added to the fuel mixture and combusted, you will get back exactly the same amount of energy you originally used to generate the gas in the first place, minus losses due to inefficiency along the way. There will be no surplus energy generated that you can use to drive the car.are

I have me people who were illegally running their car on browns gas. It first of all sounded like "Perptual motion" to me, but too manyhave met have already done it. One guy removed the generating system for the gas after his car back fired and realised he could blow up the whole town, as it generates hydrogen gas--as in the Hindenberg disaster. As one man pionted out, you can get other things out of the exaust other than water by burning hydrogen and oxygen. For example H2O2--hydrogen peroxide, H2CO3--carbonic acid, etc. I have seen welders that use browns gas, but have a wopping great big transformer to generate it. But by using a catylyst it may be posible to generate it with less energy. do not know, but met too many who claim to be running their cars on it already.

Just a side issue, on TV last night, chanel nine I think, they were talking about in the Solomon Islands they run diesel motors on up to 80 percent coconut oil, 20 percent deisel. said it is a slower burn.

Originally Posted by bruiser69

Joe cells & Browns gas generators are all a load of Bollocks!!

Einstien has never been proven wrong. Even the enormous energy produced by relativly small amounts of matter in fission or fusion reactions can be calculated & accounted for using his equations. Mind you, you can make a lot of money selling the 'Secret' of how to do this at room temperature!
Given that all forms of energy production introduce losses, either from thermal, friction etc, you can [B]never get more energy out than you put in.

What we should be looking at is how to get more 'bang for the buck' from our current technology & there are many devious ways of achieving this, often with Govt backing.

For instance, I have installed solar hot water & halved my power bill.
I did this wih the Govt rebate & RECS scheme & payed remainder off interest free over 12months. Living in Qld I have never seen the electric booster cut in.
I also used the water tank rebate scheme to get a nearly free 3000L water tank with pump installed, so my council rates are now much lower.
I have three vegy gardens plus a variety of citrus & fruit trees & produce most of our requirements at minimal cost.
I have resisted going solar electric as I believe it is not viable. Currently you receive 44c/KW input for solar to the grid. This is unsustanable & will only drive up prices for everyone in the short term. Those who installed these expensive solar generators will find that the input prices will dramatically drop in the future, and they will be left with a system that produces electricity when they are not home to actually get the benefit. Early morning & late afternoon/night you are using 100% power from ulility, as none of these systems has battery storage.

Cheers..B

Originally Posted by Matplat

No they don't unfortunately as the same rules still apply. You will be using energy generated from the hydrocarbon to create browns gas. If this is then added to the fuel mixture and combusted, you will get back exactly the same amount of energy you originally used to generate the gas in the first place, minus losses due to inefficiency along the way. There will be no surplus energy generated that you can use to drive the car.are

as i said adding hydrogen to a hydrocarbon is a bit different. If you are talking about a simple H2O - H 2 + O - H2O then your argument would be correct, but if you are adding Hydrogen to a hydrocarbon fuel then your logic becomes floored as we are no longer looking at a h 2 0 to H2o reaction

thats why manufactures of hydrocarbon especially diesel add hydrogen!!

Originally Posted by clean32

as i said adding hydrogen to a hydrocarbon is a bit different. If you are talking about a simple H2O - H 2 + O - H2O then your argument would be correct, but if you are adding Hydrogen to a hydrocarbon fuel then your logic becomes floored as we are no longer looking at a h 2 0 to H2o reaction

thats why manufactures of hydrocarbon especially diesel add hydrogen!!

Refiners add hydrogen to larger molecule hydrocarbons to shorten the carbon chain, and reduce the viscosity, as well as to modify the cetane rating. Nothing to do with the energy content of the fuel. The available energy from burning a hydrocarbon can be calculated from the exothermic reaction of H2 + O2 and C + O2, less the energy needed to break the H-C and C-C bonds. No commercial fuel contains free hydrogen, as it is too dangerous (greatly lowers the flash point) and would soon be lost in any case.

The only possible advantage of adding minute quantities of "Brown's Gas" (or any other form of hydrogen)to the intake of a diesel would be to improve the combustion process by making up for poor atomisation or flame front progression to some extent. While this may make a perceptible improvement in an older diesel or one in poor condition, it is very unlikely that it would make any measurable difference in a modern diesel in reasonable condition. More difference would in many cases result from the effect of water carried with the "Brown's Gas" from the producer acting as a pre-cooler, and this would account for any observed results. But a water injector would be simpler, cheaper and more effective.

John

Thank God the water molecule is so difficult to crack, it's inherent stability allows us to exist in the first place.

Cheers..B