It's cool, but not practical. First, their fuel requires fossil fuels to make, and does the electricity it takes to make the hydrogen from the fuel. They say that the electricity could come from solar panels or wind turbines, but why not just use electricity to directly power the car?
Why isn't this in production? I've been following these guys since 2005. Its one thing after another. I don't believe it really works anymore. Of course I can't see the advantage in not putting it into production. They aren't seeking investors or selling stock. Currently on their web site they are claiming financial hardship as the reason for not going into production. Sell stock, approach investors, pre sell kits. If they really had a product it would be out there now.
I wouldn't believe anything Bob Lazar says because he also claims to have worked on alien space ships at area 51. If you don't believe me look it up. Also if this worked the oil and car companies would be all over it in a heartbeat because they could dominate their competition. A multi billion dollar product isn't going untouched by the most greedy people in the world.
@G0ttaBeFresh they aren't missing it, this system would put alot of countries under, the amount of tax revenue from fuel is unbelievable, everyone is cashing in on it, but if you can make your own fuel in your own backyard then how are they going to explain taxing you for something which you got for free?? what's a percentage of zero? it's alot harder for them to get the money off of you so that's why this thech is being held back
@JCB411abuser They could still create a tax for it if they wanted and you can produce it in your backyard if you had a massive array of solar panels or used grid power but in that case you would still be paying for it. There is no such thing as free fuel. Oh and hydrides have been in development for years and there still hasn't been a major breakthrough. These are some of the metal hydrides being tested now MgH2, NaAlH4, LiAlH4, LiH, LaNi5H6, and TiFeH2
The change is slower than it has to be, cause people wants to make more money from the oil. Also burning the oils makes as much (if not more) trouble (destroys environment what we live in) as changing to other technology with all speed. DON'T BELEIVE THE LIES OF OIL COMPANIES!
"global economical meltdown" ? We are in one right now! Thanks to the banks. "Coud go to WAR" Than you say, that USA goes in a war with Iraq, so we have WARs now already. "fossil fuels WILL run out" It's already started, the gasoline prices gets higher and higher, so more and more people can't afford it, and it also drives the world to crimes and maybe wars. You ARE a victim of global campaigns of oil companies.
There are many who aren't ready for this, if suddenly ALL cars were converted to hydrogen engines it would create a global economical meltdown- stock markets would collapse as millions and millions of stocks and shares in the oil business! Coud go to WAR! we already had Iraq invading Kuwait for there oil, then George Bush invading Iraq for theirs!
However, fossil fuies WILL run out, so if we introduce hydrogen power slowly like Arnie did with his hydrogen highway, we should be fine.
Simple concept: you're putting in more energy (electrically) to break down the H2O than you'll be able to get out of burning the hydrogen, do to countless losses (heat lost during electrolysis, energy lost via EMF from electrical wires, and than energy lost to mechanical friction when driving the engine. There is not such thing as a loss less system. At this point you might as well just run an efficient electric motor off of the energy you were using to break down the water into hydrogen.
The text over the video near the end refers to lithium 6 deuteride, which may well be controlled by the Department of Energy. But nobody would want to use the deuterium isotope as a chemical fuel, either for internal combustion or for fuel cells. It's too expensive. Lithium hydride may be the best hydride to use for hydrogen fuel storage but there are many safety concerns that will have to be addressed.
Why don't we see this guys name, credentials, or see his car driving around?
@duckfuller "Lithium hydride may be the best hydride to use for hydrogen fuel storage but there are many safety concerns that will have to be addressed."
I am no scientist but what did Einstein do? He broke apart the nuclear cores of atoms. We can't find a way to break a "simple" double bond to get the energy as we did with nuclear energy?
Albert Einstein "It is very depressing to live in a time when it is easier to split the atom than to break down a prejudice"
That's a lie syn. That argument drives me nuts.The energy of hydrogen is in the double bond of H2. You don't need need to charge it as if it's a battery. You need to excite the electrons to break the bond.
As little as I liked chemistry, I understood that. Ever read up on Brown's gas or metals etc that can split the double bond? I have.
... ignore my previous comments. This guy is a complete moron. You need a particle accelerator to make a hydride... and it's considered an illegal substance used in nuclear weapons?
wtf.
My face just exploded from hitting my palm too hard.
@syn010110 i thought that he just, through this video, demonstrated how to extract hydrogen from the water to run and also demonstrated that the gas was flammable... hrrrm either i mistook what i saw as information that is substantiated with fact or your ... wrong?
@jawbraeka It's not what he did, but what he said that's facepalmy. He said that hydride (which is when hydrogen is bound to a more electropositive element) is an illegal substance (they are not, see NiMH rechargeable batteries) and must be produced in a particle accelerator (this is ridiculous, they can be produced with normal chemical processes).
@syn010110 i think possibly? at that time it may have been banned or something... i can't really say but i can only speculate.. when did NiMH batteries start being made?
Er, this argument is specious at best. The amount of energy released by burning hydrogen gas is less than the amount of energy required to crack water molecules via electrolysis.
Hi, Bob, it's good to see you back on the stage, living dangerously as always... And I don't mean the risk of blowing up from hydrogen (the gas is not even really explosive until it mixes with oxygen, is it?) Ever thought about migrating ?
Whatever you do, keep doing it, this is the real thing - not the kind of hydrogen cells usually on the internet, that seems to try to make people believe hydrogen is just a scam hype...
@Baldurs89 His Solar panels most likely refuel cells in this application. Think of how you utilize rechargeable batteries, or how solar powered lawn lights light up when it's dark.
@lordbeaker Ummm I know that you retard. I am obviously referring to opening up more offshore drilling that every extreme leftist would ban completely, even though it would create less need for foreign oil.
I think the possibility of hydrogen exploding outweighs its value as an alternate source. Zeppelins are further proof of the necessity of helium powered cars, sure its much less efficient, and people are going to breathe it in, but its a much safer alternative.
@SaladofStones Helium as a rare resource and our supply is expected to be depleted there within the next eight years. Hydrogen is a sustainable resource with no limit to production. If a storage unit can be built that can even be shot at with no chance of explosion, like this one claims to be, then it is a much better alternative.
Your statement is defying very basic principles of chemistry. Helium is inert; as in non-reactive. Therefore you would not be able to fuel any type of engine with it. Also Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. It is our atmosphere, and you are breathing far more often than you might realize.
@N8dean There is almost no molecular hydrogen in the atmosphere of the earth. Nearly ALL hydrogen in the world is obtained from processing natural gas, not extraction from the atmosphere and water, because it requires more energy to extract hydrogen from water than the hydrogen produces by combustion.
@lordbeaker Actually, dipshit, I was commenting on other peoples comments. Not on the video. What the hell does a big mac have to do with it? I am a vegan so no thank you anyway.
A particle accelerator is just about the most inefficient way to produce Li-6-D. I imagine he employs a standard gas centrifuge method for the enrichment of the Lithium-6, since it has a 7.6% abundance in natural lithium. Or perhaps via isotope exchange between LiOH and Li amalgam, kind of like the Girdler Sulfide process for deuterium enrichment.
@kcj1993 How is anything inefficient by gathering something as sustainable as the sun's light? Please note that the only thing that comes out the tailpipe of a hydrogen powered vehicle is water. You use simple water, plus sunlight, to create power, and the waste is basically that same water. In fact, the only part I would be suspect about is what waste material is created by the particle accelerator?
Is there a way to incorporate palladium into that hydride? Although expensive, it does have good hydrogen absorbing properties. Or maybe just replace it altogether so the government doesn't freak out over it?
No one knows how much oil is on the planet. It's safe to assume that it's far more than we have currently tapped. The peak oil theory rests in large part on the erroneous assumption that we have already discovered all there is - or close to it. But super deep wells are already changing that (i.e. the latest Exxon gulf find of 700M barrels.)
Obviously as we come up with better and better ways to generate electricity it will eventually make gasoline powered cars obsolete, but why bother converting the electrical energy into chemical energy when you can simply run the car off of electricity without the added inconvenience?
@soldier9599 i see your logic, but electric itself still isnt efficient enough compared to gas-power, however hydrogen- assisted cars are much more efficient than anything else, cuz, you can gain more power and increase mpg significantly. and it isnt that hard to make, it also doesnt take that much electricity and the +power you make will make up for the electrical parasitic loss. on a motorcycle (my world), electrics are still the slowest of powered motos and they have big tech in them too.
@Ryknfjor Are you saying that electrolytic hydrolysis followed by hydrogen combustion is more efficient than charging a battery and expelling it into an electric motor? If so I find that very hard to believe, especially since some electrically powered cars in fact recovery some of their energy lost to things like friction. Regarding speed, electric cars have much greater power to weight ratios and a constantly peaked torque, which gives them a huge performance advantage over internal combustion.
@soldier9599 i misunderstood, i agree with everything you said except the speed part, cuz as a matter-of-fact gas engines or 'internal combustion' engines still have a better power to weight ratio- the only advantage the electric cars have is the superior torque it has. the best motorcycles that are electric still arent as quick and cant run as long and are 1.5 times heavier than 'IC' powered motorcycles. the killacycle total drive train weighs near 400lbs! the FASTEST electric bike
@Ryknfjor If you look at the Wankel engine you'll find the pinnacle of internal combustion power-to-weight ratios in automobiles. Perhaps the most common is the Renesis, which accomplishes an impressive 1.5kW/kg. However, it is typical of lithium-ion polymer batteries to pump out 2.8kW/kg. You might suggest that the electric motor should be considered as well, but they typically weigh less than the transmission you wouldn't need, giving you an even greater overall power-to-weight ratio increase.
@soldier9599 yes, but whats the price tag on that? plus the battery tech is old- the killacycle's motors weighs 174lbs itself, which isnt bad (other bike engines weigh about that including trannys)- but the battery is 200lbs! the wankel is awesome for its volume/mass power but it suffers from guzzling gas a bit more than piston engines. are views are different - IC piston BIKE engines put out better power/weight than wankel. entire bike= 440lbs wet, 1K CC's=165hp, 40mpg, 100K miles easy
@soldier9599 basically im coming from bikes and your coming from cars so its kinda hard to compare, but you have enlightened me more about electric motors+batteries.
@Ryknfjor I believe the only point here is that, while this internal hydrogen combustion propulsion system is inferior to an electric motor's efficiency, it is much easier to convert your own gasoline powered car into a hydrogen powered car than an electrically powered car.
Who the fuck wants a noiseless car that is slow as fuck. I bought a E55 AMG because of the supercharged 5.4ltr V8, what the fuck is so good about the electric car? Who wants fuel efficiency, is that really what you want? You sir are a fag. A real man drives a V8, Jesus, what's happened to men these days, they're because cowards day by day. FUCK the environment, I drove past a green-convention last month and they were giving me nasty looks I just laughed at them, stupid hippies, they have no life
@princepersia1 First off, I'd much rather drive my G37S's twin turbo V6 than your oh so manly V8 autotragic prestige car. However, I'm not so sure I see where you're coming from. I was addressing the future here. Already, electrically powered cars have more potential to put a lot of power to the ground at a given weight than internal combustion. Haven't you heard of the Tesla roadster? Get a clue, electric cars are the way of the future, be it for efficiency or performance.
@soldier9599 honestly, alcohol powered cars, like the ones you see in dragsters, cannot be replicated by an electric motor, not at least anytime soon and im adamant about that
I actually had a run with a Tesla on the highway a while back, the back is good to 60mph in 4 secs but after that my car crippled it, there was 9-10 car lengths between us, it's also quiet and looks girly, too expensive and not enough range. The answer to gas is hydrogen, because it needs only mods to a standard engine to work, do you really think every car in the world can be destroyed and replaced by electric? The cost would be comedic. Electric is definitely not feasible.
@princepersia1 My point is that 100 years from now, none of the cars we drive today will be on the road. I'm not saying it will be a quick transition. Yes, hydrogen is a good answer for people today that already have internal combustion vehicles, but you don't need to destroy them for them to gradually get phased out. They destroy themselves given enough time.
@soldier9599 because a battery is expensive and heavy and it's using rare earth material. If you can create the electricity green then splitting water into hydrogen for fuel is not so bad.
They are however experimenting with Ultra capacitors and nanotubes technology, which should improve the capacitors by at least 10 times, so then you can use that as a inexpensive lightweigthed battery, which you can charge in 2 minutes
@moonsmilelucide Lithium is far from a rare earth metal. Even if in the future its supply were to become an issue, Sodium-ion battery cells are already in development. There's no doubt that sodium is a highly abundant metal. This battery type allows for a much longer cell lifetime than Lithium-ion battery cells and when mass-produced is a much cheaper alternative as well.
@moonsmilelucide Also, just some numbers to think about. There are 600 million cars in the world today. There are 11,948,400,000,000 million (1.19484 × 10^19) tonnes of Lithium on Earth.
"Exxon makes major oil discovery in Gulf" announcement just came yesterday. 700 million barrels are estimated conservatively from this super deep well in the gulf. "Peak oil" is another dismissive buzzword that has little scientific evidence. More finds are being made all the time.
This man have foresight, he knows that fossil fuel is not going to last forever, hydrogen is the future, I'll be laughing, if a hydrogen car can drive faster than any sport cars out there while using less fuel than the sport car
@marinesnip Check out Jaguar's concept car CX75. It can use a variety of fuel sources, including Hydrogen, and it powers up two micro jet engines to power 4 electric motors; 1 on each wheel. It travels over 200mph and it's quite quiet. Not to mention, stunningly beautiful to look at. It's definitely better than adding a HHO cell in your car! lol
@fasantupp You're absolutely correct and I actually only just noticed that the isotope was different as I pressed the 'Post' button. I just couldn't be bothered to add a new statement saying I was mistaken at the time. I still think solar/wind power to electrolyze water day and night in a trickle-down effort of electricity is a good point to make. You get the panels and wind turbine, charge batteries, electrolyze water, separate the gases and you've got yourself a slow constant fuel source.
Wait wait wait, did the description just call bob lazar a "scientist"......... Bahahahaha! Bob lazar was a well known conartist (with absolute no education, despite the bullshit claims he made), he had a habbit of going around claiming alot of random shit etch story would contradict the other.
@SingleSpiral Because Hydrogen vehicles are a lot cheaper to build and operate, easy to convert from a gasoline engine and they will last longer (Driving distance and the age of the engine during use). I used to work on the Volt on the cold weather testing dyno project and I still cannot see replacing gasoline engines in the near future. The technology is still not there yet for wide spread use!
@SingleSpiral That true but think of this, say you're driving an electric vehicle and you go a long distance that drains a majority of the battery. Let's say you can charge the battery in the parking lot, I'm pretty sure that it'll take several hours to fully charge that battery for the trip back but you're only staying for 30 minutes. With hydrogen however, you just fill up at a fueling station in a matter of minutes and away you go. Charging up a battery takes a significant amount of time.
It's not a war for oil. Turns out that's just the cover story. It's a spreading of the New World Order. They want to stop religious fanatics from having ridiculous rules. Soon our planet will be our country. Maybe we will soon have interplanetary relations.
@derman077 Yeah but then you may run into THX1138 Type World, We are already very close to THX1138. The religious mind needs to go but who do you want running the planet, nwo or everyone being intelligent and realizing we live in a world of abundance if we manage our resources, but at our present rate consider earth paralysed after 50 years. Anyway the earth will always go on but we may suffocate ourselves out of existence if the nwo doesnt change the plan.Lazar's video proves solutions do exist
Bob Lazar worked at Area51(watch?v=vmJIhQSICSc&feature=related). He knows all kinds of amazing technological advancements and government projects the public isn't made aware of. Some say he's a government "plant" and a "disinformationist", I'll let you decide.
I did something like this for my science fair at school 2 years ago. I used a negative and positive coil, baking soda to speed up the reaction and a car battery to charge both coils but they corroded so it doesn't work as well as it did when I first used it.
this man is a genius .we need people like him . to make a change .
yet we got the oil maffia preventing a lot of this ,sadly .
i think its a great thing that he built . and hopefully i can study this and make my own hydrogen extractor . im no scientist . but i think this is awesome .and would love to be able to make something similar . imagine this on every vehicle .
and the amount of money people would save .fuck the corrupt oil maffiosi .
The truth of the matter is that many scientists have developed efficient energy devices that have not been placed in front of the public eye. These scientists have been threatened verbally and physically by high ranking government officials to terminate their project. If a device that produced enough energy without the need for oil, then the world would collapse because all the high fliers that rule the world with their oil money would go broke and they simply won't have that.
The United Nuclear site say's "Target price for the complete system (which includes the home Hydrogen generator station, associated solar or wind power unit, and vehicle conversion kit is in the $10,000 range"
How do you get around the issue of not being able to sell hydride? The potential customer doesn't have to have a home particle accelerator also do they? Also, is it a one time need or do you need to change the hydride over time?
@farufon Yes but we can use desalination plant water. That way this wont effect the rate of desertification. Of course desal plants require a lot of energy to run but like the one in sydney it can be run on renewable energy.
First of all the main problem with hydrogen car is that they emit water. This could be a huge problem to the ecosystem of deserts if everyone in lets say Arizona had a hydrogen car they would be emitting so much water that they could actually change the ecosystem of the desert. Which in turn would kill a lot of biomass.
@page2340 ??? A lot of Bio mass in a desert? also inst a desert caused by lack of rain fall due to climate, that same climate that evaporates so much water, wouldn't the water evaporate for the most part before it makes it far form the city centers?
How does the hydrogen affect the engine and systems like cylinder walls, plugs, valves, etc. Any corrosion/oxidization issues, I assume the exhaust would have to be made of stainless steel
@zaibervaireus hmmm. the oxygen itself will improve combustion . so oxygen combined with a the powerful hydrogen gas . will make a nice bang in your engine block .
and ofcourse we can breathe the stuff aswell hahaha atleast it is a lot better than breathing in carbon dioxide fumes . and untreated water is drinkable so very usefull for everyone
@undergroundmasterrr He says the excess oxygen is vented into the air. Can't it be compressed and donated to medical companies or someone that might be able to use compressed air? Maybe make a backup compressed air motor.
@zaibervaireus Yes the excess oxygen could be stored, then sent to a medical facility where they clean the oxygen so that it is 100% clean of particulates and toxic material.Then you could sell it to whomever, btw the world governments must have known that if they originally invested in solar to make hydrogen then sell the hydrogen via water electrolysis that in some number of years it would pay for itself The sad point is the lithium we need is made illegal by dumb politicians,we need scientist
These guys were set to start making kits a few years back but from what I remember the government confiscated alot of their stuff having to do with the hydride. From what I understand they have it worked out now and on their website they are set to start manufacturing sometime this year. I think the cost is about $10000 for the kit but it also includes the solar powered hydrogen machine.
I just saw on the news today they have discovered a new storage method. Maybe that will help this along
Does someone knows if mr. Lazar still alive and if it is possible to get in contact with him !? I would realy love to create comparative project like this one were i live.
This is a good start, but he did say it consumes a lot of electricity. He also mentioned you need platinum, or some kind of non-corrosive metal for the electrodes, very expensive. Solar energy isn't cheap to set up. Photovoltaic panels are very expensive.
The expense for the apparatus is very high. Plus you need electricity you make a fuel to make electricity, remember you can never get 100% efficiency. So in the end, electrolysis at this stage is not viable. Hope for the future though.
Bob Lzar Please post these plans online so we can revolt against the oil companies and Illuminati. Please bob It's all getting worst. Now more than ever.
I've been watching these guys for years... I'm waiting for the launch.... My f-150 craves this... I hope they can overcome the lithium-6 deuteride issue. The rest of the system conversion is much like converting to propane I think... minus the converter....
It's almost as if the Rockerfellers or Duponts want t ohave their own material which they could patent so you have to pay them much like nylon did to hemp. Then I see that is happening with nanotechnology as a British company claims to be the first to do what you have been doing for ages:
New Hydrogen Technology - A fuel that uses nanotechnology to safely store hydrogen in tiny microbeads. UK based business Cella Energy has developed the potentially revolutionary....... There you go!
Sounds like you have have to expend energy to make the hydride, then you have to expend more energy to make the hydrogen. Then you have to expend more energy to get the hydride to release the hydrogen. Sounds every energy inefficient. How is this a viable way of powering our cars?
Better off just getting an electric car. Much more energy efficient, less complicated, and less of a hassle.
@Vulcan750L Well, I like both electric and hydrogen. But if there perhaps is more energy produced than the customers use, then it's shouldn't be electric inefficient.
If Hydrogen uses more energy than it replaces, and gasoline and electric are more efficient alternatives than Hydrogen, then what is the point of switching to Hydrogen?
Now factor in the greater cost and complexity and the need to build a whole new infrastructure to support hydrogen distribution. Hydrogen is an utterly stupid way to go.
@Vulcan750L Well, gasoline is near its end. Electric should be the way to go I assume. Electric is much more cheaper and the most important thing, environmentally friendly. If they develop better, more persistent batteries. It would probably be they rebirth of electric power vehicles. :)
@Vulcan750L Hydrogen production using standard electrolysis with current technology is up to 73% efficient. There are other developing technologies including 1 which use organic waste and microbial action to achieve efficiencies up to 350%. Even the lower rate of 73% is not that bad considering that Bob's hydride tanks could also be used effectively as batteries to store energy collected from solar panels. A hydrogen distribution costs would be determined by the market. How is that stupid?
It is stupid because it is less efficient and more costly than EVs and gas engines. It is stupid because it requires the building of a whole new costly infrastructure and it will soon by obsolete as soon as they come up with a more efficient battery.
Current battery technology is good enough, but once they come up with the 500 mile range battery, something they are working on, everything else will become obsolete. EVs do not require any additional infrastructure.
@Vulcan750L "Stupid" is a label which you use to conveniently dismiss a technology based on your presumptions of efficiency. Efficiency is tied directly to total costs of consumption. What will you say when/if your "fossil" fuels go up to $300/barrel? EVs use electricity primarily generated by a "declining" resource of HCs. Your "costly infrastructure" argument is also presumptuous. Google "Hydrogen lets drivers step on the gas" and see Reuters video for more info.
"Efficiency is tied directly to total costs of consumption. What will you say when/if your "fossil" fuels go up to $300/barrel? EVs use electricity primarily generated by a "declining" resource of HCs."
And where do you think Hydrogen comes from, Hydrogen trees? You're a Moron.
Electricity does not have to come from HCs, so to inextricably tie it to HCs is a faulty argument and you're an IDIOT for not recognizing that, and the fact that Hydrogen also requires electric or HC.
This is basically a solar system (if powered by solar panels) and rather than storing the electricity in batteries (an inefficient storage media) he is storing it in hydrogen by splitting away the hydrogen in water. As long as there are sunny days this is reasonably "green". But if the electricity source is switched to the coal of fossil-fuel powered grid, the "green" goes away.
As for Lithium 6 Deuteride, is this material not radioactive and toxic? If so, its not "green".
Where do people think we are going to get all of this energy to produce hydrogen? Thin air? It's much more efficient to just charge an electric car than it is to produce hydrogen to power cars.
Im not defending some of the things being said here so dont get me wrong. But I do want to comment that storing energy in batteries is ok for short term storage... but hydrogen can be stored long term without the inevitable energy loss (loss of charge) problematic with batteries.
As for where the energy will come from, I suppose an array of solar panels running all day every day might be sufficient to accumulate enough hydrogen, but, I havent run the numbers to see. Maybe not.
@SeaWolfe59 I don't know why storing it is even relevant, cars are used daily by the vast majority of people. The energy needed to make hydrogen could come from PVs, but the area of PVs needed to charge an EV is already quite large. Using solar energy to make hydrogen to power a car would require an even larger area of PVs.
Ive run some numbers on area needed and, I agree, to run our cars and homes the way we do now would take a very large array of PVs. And I, like you, am skeptical of all the talk about alternate energy sources. People have been duped into thinking ethanol is the same as gasoline, or PVs are as good as fossil fuels. Theres a lot of ignorance and misinformation flying around and politicians are complicit. Funny part is a guy like Obama couldnt pass a 9th grade science test.
@SeaWolfe59 I believe in alternative energy, just not hydrogen. In the future there might be a way to make it practical, but I haven't seen anything showing much promise of that.
Also, I've known people who live quite normally completely off the grid (except for their cars), it is something that's possible to do right now. And I don't know what Obama has to do with any of this, but most politicians (by far) are very ignorant when it comes to science and technology and that's a very bad thing.
I agree...nothing delivers the bang like fossil fuel.
I was only using Obama as an example of all the scientifically ignorant politicians.
Many politicians pushed Ethanol and now we know its outcome...it caused food shortages. Nothing can be done in a vacuum and there are always unanticipated consequences. Another interesting aspect about Ethanol that is little known is that it carries less energy per gallon than gasoline. 76 kBTU vs 116 kBTU. So its fuel economy is much weaker.
@SeaWolfe59 Fossil fuel is a myth. Have you ever seen any evidence or scientific study showing that oil comes from compressed plants and dinosaurs? There is none. The Russians are getting their oil from wells 5-6 miles deep. This is proof of abiotic oil, since the layers from which it come precede the geological period associated with so-called fossilization of plant material. Do a search on "abiotic oil" to find out more.
Even if oil is abiotic, even that is a finite resource. Is new oil being produced at the rate of current consumption? If not, then it is not an unlimited resource.
If the world consumes 85 million barrels a day and it takes the planet through geological chemical processes a million years to make 85 million barrels, then you will soon run out of oil. Can the planet produce 85 million barrels of new oil a day?
@Vulcan750L Oil may actually be constantly be being renewed as we speak through processes going on at the earth's core. Lab tests using a combination of natural minerals under extreme heat/pressure have been able to produce rudimentary hydrocarbons. Whether or not some oil originates from organic plant/animal life (the science on this is dubious and speculative), the FACT is that hydrocarbons exist throughout the universe as determined using spectral analysis. Are these all from dinosaurs?
@Vulcan750L The real issue is not can the planet produce what we are consuming each day, but can we harvest enough each day to support our long term needs. "Finite" becomes irrelevant on that basis. It's another one of those dismissive labels like "fossil fuel" and "carbon footprint" which carry so many presumptions that most people don't dare challenge them, because it would require too much thinking. If the supply is large enough, it can be "virtually infinite".
Sure, if the supply is large enough, it can be practically infinite. The sun is practically infinite. And what makes you think the supply is that large? Does half the earth consist of oil? I highly doubt it. I don't think it is anywhere close to that. So I don't think we are talking about a very large supply.
We will soon be off of oil anyway, maybe within the next 50 years, so it doesn't matter. It's a moot point.
@SeaWolfe59 The point is not how many scientists agree - of course that is the accepted THEORY, so nearly all will agree. My point is that there is very little EVIDENCE for this THEORY. Andi this THEORY does not explain how the Russians are getting oil from 6 miles below the surface. This level clearly precedes the Pleistocene era -- the era believed to have produced the "fossil" fuel by some magical and mysterious unproven process of transformation of plant life into oil.
@SeaWolfe59 Oops, I meant to say that the accepted theory is the fossil fuel theory. Most scientists accept the myth as fact, when it's never been proven. Actually, the abiotic theory came first. To see a complete history of the development of both theories, as well as the best expose of the fiction of fossil fuel, I would suggest reading "Black Gold Stranglehold" by Jerome Corsi and Craig Smith. The first 3 chapters are eye opening.
@idontcare80 This is a good point. Lazar makes it sound like you can collect enough energy with a single solar panel daily to recharge the hydride tanks. I wonder if it actually takes many days or many panels in one day to get enough solar energy for a full charge. This could make his system infeasible.
Don't you hate stupid, ignorant politicans who think they are so brilliant that they know how to design, manufacture and in general run our lives? Such bullshit the only reason they jump on the 'green' bandwagon is so that they can be seen as more self-rightous than they already are.
If this wasn't on a corvette it wouldn't be nearly as cool!
Only bad part is the metal engine parts will corrode when exposed to hydrogen over a long period of time. I've seen people who ran hydrogen kits on their 4-cyl aluminum engines and large pieces of the aluminum intake manifolds broke loose and got sucked into the combustion chamber. DOH! Plus piston rings, rods, and pistons are usually not able to withstand long term hydrogen exposure. But this will be the future eventually.
who's killing the hydrogen car??? THE OIL INDUSTRY! because those mofo's want to get your well earned money so they can spend them om some girls to suck thier dicks
I give Bob Lazar props. After all these years he still saying F&*K You to the government. He obviously is Down for truth and revolution, but to his avail, i believe age and hope have left him for making those changes possible. We NEED A revolutionist today. Someone step up.
Cost and technological limitations are killing the hydrogen car. I'm going to make a video entitled "WHO'S KILLING THE TIME MACHINE?!" and see how many suckers I can get.
No one is selling anything here. You guys are so wound up to just hear yourself critique anything... because it's there. Even your last response is based on not reading. NO ONE IS SELLING ANYTHING!
@farufon How is the power output compared to gasoline, in your corvette v8? were there major modifications needed to the fuel injection system or timing etc???
OK, my bad... he didn't say they were bulletproof, just that they aren't dangerous.
But, you need a particle accelerator to make the "hydride material" classified as a weapon. WTFBBQ.... He's selling the effin Brooklyn Bridge with a new name:
@MrObviousMan01 Maybe if you actually watch the video and listen without trying to find something wrong with everything he says you would learn something and not make yourself look like an ass.
Hydrogen IS the way to go, it just can't be produced cheap enough YET.
Full of it... who actually believes those standard aluminum bottles are bullet proof??? Any SCUBA diver will recognize those bottles for what they are.
If he needed to LIE about that, it certainly casts much doubt on his credentials with me.
The point was, a BULLET or CHAINSAW would not ignite the Hydrogen, even if you shot the tanks up with incendiary bullets. The point was about the safety of the HYDROGEN stored in the Hydride material that wouldn't blow up! Unlike a liquid fuel tank on a car. Listen up before you insult people.
Please... shoot those bottles with incendiary rounds... he said they are impenetrable. (at 1:00) NFW is that possible. He is full of BS. This car doesn't actually work yet. NutJob, crackpot.
@MrObviousMan01 its the real deal my friend. i converted an old 1.5ltr. '93 honda civic to run on hydrogen using 3 hydride tanks and a propane carburettor. the problem is that standard hydride tanks behave like batteries, they can be used for a limited amount of time before they stop working. There is only so much hydrogen a hydride can absorb before it perishes. Bob seems to have got his hands on a hydride material that will last far longer than anything on the market right now.
@MrObviousMan01 He didn't say they were impenetrable, he's saying it's safe if they are shot open and won't burn, why else would he say incendiary bullets instead of regular bullets? Think before you speak.
It's cool, but not practical. First, their fuel requires fossil fuels to make, and does the electricity it takes to make the hydrogen from the fuel. They say that the electricity could come from solar panels or wind turbines, but why not just use electricity to directly power the car?
CillersFan 22 hours ago
That is amazing. Suppression of technology by the ptb ?
frea1able 5 days ago
Why isn't this in production? I've been following these guys since 2005. Its one thing after another. I don't believe it really works anymore. Of course I can't see the advantage in not putting it into production. They aren't seeking investors or selling stock. Currently on their web site they are claiming financial hardship as the reason for not going into production. Sell stock, approach investors, pre sell kits. If they really had a product it would be out there now.
oldschoolgreentube 3 weeks ago
@oldschoolgreentube IF they did that, they would draw too much attention and end up like Stan Meyers..DEAD.
ObsessedCyclist 2 weeks ago
@oldschoolgreentube United Nuclear makes these kits.
PocketBeemRocket 1 week ago
@oldschoolgreentube are you serious these guys would be killed if they tried to go public with this stuff
elysianfury 6 days ago in playlist Quacks? or Heroes...?
I wouldn't believe anything Bob Lazar says because he also claims to have worked on alien space ships at area 51. If you don't believe me look it up. Also if this worked the oil and car companies would be all over it in a heartbeat because they could dominate their competition. A multi billion dollar product isn't going untouched by the most greedy people in the world.
G0ttaBeFresh 1 month ago
@G0ttaBeFresh they aren't missing it, this system would put alot of countries under, the amount of tax revenue from fuel is unbelievable, everyone is cashing in on it, but if you can make your own fuel in your own backyard then how are they going to explain taxing you for something which you got for free?? what's a percentage of zero? it's alot harder for them to get the money off of you so that's why this thech is being held back
JCB411abuser 1 month ago
@JCB411abuser They could still create a tax for it if they wanted and you can produce it in your backyard if you had a massive array of solar panels or used grid power but in that case you would still be paying for it. There is no such thing as free fuel. Oh and hydrides have been in development for years and there still hasn't been a major breakthrough. These are some of the metal hydrides being tested now MgH2, NaAlH4, LiAlH4, LiH, LaNi5H6, and TiFeH2
G0ttaBeFresh 1 month ago
@JCB411abuser Watch THRIVE. It will become seriously evident who is behind alternative energy suppression.
ObsessedCyclist 2 weeks ago
They are killing peoples pocket and they are killing the planet hearth and all the beings that lives here they are ASSASINS....
MsMartinsguilherme 1 month ago
The change is slower than it has to be, cause people wants to make more money from the oil. Also burning the oils makes as much (if not more) trouble (destroys environment what we live in) as changing to other technology with all speed. DON'T BELEIVE THE LIES OF OIL COMPANIES!
DominusDetre 1 month ago
"global economical meltdown" ? We are in one right now! Thanks to the banks. "Coud go to WAR" Than you say, that USA goes in a war with Iraq, so we have WARs now already. "fossil fuels WILL run out" It's already started, the gasoline prices gets higher and higher, so more and more people can't afford it, and it also drives the world to crimes and maybe wars. You ARE a victim of global campaigns of oil companies.
DominusDetre 1 month ago
There are many who aren't ready for this, if suddenly ALL cars were converted to hydrogen engines it would create a global economical meltdown- stock markets would collapse as millions and millions of stocks and shares in the oil business! Coud go to WAR! we already had Iraq invading Kuwait for there oil, then George Bush invading Iraq for theirs!
However, fossil fuies WILL run out, so if we introduce hydrogen power slowly like Arnie did with his hydrogen highway, we should be fine.
RoqueFortStu 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Simple concept: you're putting in more energy (electrically) to break down the H2O than you'll be able to get out of burning the hydrogen, do to countless losses (heat lost during electrolysis, energy lost via EMF from electrical wires, and than energy lost to mechanical friction when driving the engine. There is not such thing as a loss less system. At this point you might as well just run an efficient electric motor off of the energy you were using to break down the water into hydrogen.
mdibound 2 months ago
The text over the video near the end refers to lithium 6 deuteride, which may well be controlled by the Department of Energy. But nobody would want to use the deuterium isotope as a chemical fuel, either for internal combustion or for fuel cells. It's too expensive. Lithium hydride may be the best hydride to use for hydrogen fuel storage but there are many safety concerns that will have to be addressed.
Why don't we see this guys name, credentials, or see his car driving around?
duckfuller 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@duckfuller "Lithium hydride may be the best hydride to use for hydrogen fuel storage but there are many safety concerns that will have to be addressed."
Such as...
kirkey99 2 months ago
@duckfuller Why don't we see this guys name, credentials, or see his car driving around?
He wants to stay alive.
ObsessedCyclist 2 weeks ago
@ObsessedCyclist Search it on Youtube and you will see it, Audi, BMW, etc. have H cars
XSpt 1 week ago
I am no scientist but what did Einstein do? He broke apart the nuclear cores of atoms. We can't find a way to break a "simple" double bond to get the energy as we did with nuclear energy?
Albert Einstein "It is very depressing to live in a time when it is easier to split the atom than to break down a prejudice"
bestshot1 3 months ago
That's a lie syn. That argument drives me nuts.The energy of hydrogen is in the double bond of H2. You don't need need to charge it as if it's a battery. You need to excite the electrons to break the bond.
As little as I liked chemistry, I understood that. Ever read up on Brown's gas or metals etc that can split the double bond? I have.
bestshot1 3 months ago
LMAO, "powering your cars on dinosaurs"
I always wanted to know how fossil remains turn into fossil fuel. But it's like the evolution theory. The crucial link is missing.
bestshot1 3 months ago
@bestshot1 immense pressures causing the solids to heat and liquefy
JCB411abuser 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
metals used in nuclear weapons to.
mze1111 4 months ago
6:52 its a horse yey.
mze1111 4 months ago
... ignore my previous comments. This guy is a complete moron. You need a particle accelerator to make a hydride... and it's considered an illegal substance used in nuclear weapons?
wtf.
My face just exploded from hitting my palm too hard.
syn010110 4 months ago
@syn010110 i thought that he just, through this video, demonstrated how to extract hydrogen from the water to run and also demonstrated that the gas was flammable... hrrrm either i mistook what i saw as information that is substantiated with fact or your ... wrong?
jawbraeka 3 months ago
@jawbraeka It's not what he did, but what he said that's facepalmy. He said that hydride (which is when hydrogen is bound to a more electropositive element) is an illegal substance (they are not, see NiMH rechargeable batteries) and must be produced in a particle accelerator (this is ridiculous, they can be produced with normal chemical processes).
syn010110 3 months ago
@syn010110 i think possibly? at that time it may have been banned or something... i can't really say but i can only speculate.. when did NiMH batteries start being made?
jawbraeka 3 months ago
Er, this argument is specious at best. The amount of energy released by burning hydrogen gas is less than the amount of energy required to crack water molecules via electrolysis.
syn010110 4 months ago
Hi, Bob, it's good to see you back on the stage, living dangerously as always... And I don't mean the risk of blowing up from hydrogen (the gas is not even really explosive until it mixes with oxygen, is it?) Ever thought about migrating ?
Whatever you do, keep doing it, this is the real thing - not the kind of hydrogen cells usually on the internet, that seems to try to make people believe hydrogen is just a scam hype...
happyfox711 4 months ago
back in the day, they said the same thing about gasoline tanks. PEOPLE WERE AFRAID OF CARS BLOWING UP THIER HOMES.
BUT HERE WE ARE.......
1VAHNFANEL 5 months ago
I think I was more shocked at who that chap is... Bob Lazar
CrashOrgasm 5 months ago
@CrashOrgasm Bob Lazar....surprised hes not fueling up his ufo with hydrogen lol
magicmanj32 5 months ago
How do you re-fuel your car during the night, when the sun doesn't shine?
Baldurs89 5 months ago
@Baldurs89 His Solar panels most likely refuel cells in this application. Think of how you utilize rechargeable batteries, or how solar powered lawn lights light up when it's dark.
lordbeaker 5 months ago
I love it when Liberals bash the government that they try so hard to keep in power. You don't want wars for oil (as if)? Drill in America!
sabina616 5 months ago
@sabina616 We do drill in America douche. I suggest the movie GasHole for the people ill equipped to do research for themselves.
lordbeaker 5 months ago
@lordbeaker Ummm I know that you retard. I am obviously referring to opening up more offshore drilling that every extreme leftist would ban completely, even though it would create less need for foreign oil.
sabina616 5 months ago
@sabina616 Woooo buddy... calm down. You suck your momma's dick with that mouth?
lordbeaker 5 months ago
@lordbeaker
I think the possibility of hydrogen exploding outweighs its value as an alternate source. Zeppelins are further proof of the necessity of helium powered cars, sure its much less efficient, and people are going to breathe it in, but its a much safer alternative.
SaladofStones 5 months ago
@SaladofStones Helium as a rare resource and our supply is expected to be depleted there within the next eight years. Hydrogen is a sustainable resource with no limit to production. If a storage unit can be built that can even be shot at with no chance of explosion, like this one claims to be, then it is a much better alternative.
lordbeaker 5 months ago
@lordbeaker
Your statement is defying very basic principles of chemistry. Helium is inert; as in non-reactive. Therefore you would not be able to fuel any type of engine with it. Also Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. It is our atmosphere, and you are breathing far more often than you might realize.
N8dean 4 months ago
@N8dean There is almost no molecular hydrogen in the atmosphere of the earth. Nearly ALL hydrogen in the world is obtained from processing natural gas, not extraction from the atmosphere and water, because it requires more energy to extract hydrogen from water than the hydrogen produces by combustion.
syn010110 4 months ago
@sabina616 Another dime a a dozen Douchebag.
lordbeaker 5 months ago
Comment removed
lordbeaker 5 months ago
@lordbeaker Actually, dipshit, I was commenting on other peoples comments. Not on the video. What the hell does a big mac have to do with it? I am a vegan so no thank you anyway.
sabina616 5 months ago
A particle accelerator is just about the most inefficient way to produce Li-6-D. I imagine he employs a standard gas centrifuge method for the enrichment of the Lithium-6, since it has a 7.6% abundance in natural lithium. Or perhaps via isotope exchange between LiOH and Li amalgam, kind of like the Girdler Sulfide process for deuterium enrichment.
noxious890 5 months ago
I love it when nerd's nerd out. You built a particle accelerator? yup.
tvekelectric 6 months ago 2
This is a rather inefficient way to store the suns energy. Making bio-fuels from algae would be a lot more efficient.
kcj1993 6 months ago
@kcj1993 does it cost less? does it pollute less?
filename84 5 months ago
@kcj1993 How is anything inefficient by gathering something as sustainable as the sun's light? Please note that the only thing that comes out the tailpipe of a hydrogen powered vehicle is water. You use simple water, plus sunlight, to create power, and the waste is basically that same water. In fact, the only part I would be suspect about is what waste material is created by the particle accelerator?
lordbeaker 5 months ago
is that bob lazar?
brettcompton420 6 months ago
I am puzzled about how you generate hydrogen at night with solar panels. Also I am interested in how many square feet of solar panel you are using
farmrdave 7 months ago
knowledge is power
GohanMH1 7 months ago
Is there a way to incorporate palladium into that hydride? Although expensive, it does have good hydrogen absorbing properties. Or maybe just replace it altogether so the government doesn't freak out over it?
schunmann 7 months ago
This guy has a fucking particle accelerator!
stussySLAYER 7 months ago
Discover it for yourself. Keep it to yourself. If not, you may disappear!?
troutdaletim 7 months ago
in this day and age you develop this for yourself, and do not share it or you might disappear. isn't that the s&*$s?
troutdaletim 7 months ago
No one knows how much oil is on the planet. It's safe to assume that it's far more than we have currently tapped. The peak oil theory rests in large part on the erroneous assumption that we have already discovered all there is - or close to it. But super deep wells are already changing that (i.e. the latest Exxon gulf find of 700M barrels.)
axe2grind911 7 months ago
Obviously as we come up with better and better ways to generate electricity it will eventually make gasoline powered cars obsolete, but why bother converting the electrical energy into chemical energy when you can simply run the car off of electricity without the added inconvenience?
soldier9599 7 months ago 2
@soldier9599 i see your logic, but electric itself still isnt efficient enough compared to gas-power, however hydrogen- assisted cars are much more efficient than anything else, cuz, you can gain more power and increase mpg significantly. and it isnt that hard to make, it also doesnt take that much electricity and the +power you make will make up for the electrical parasitic loss. on a motorcycle (my world), electrics are still the slowest of powered motos and they have big tech in them too.
Ryknfjor 7 months ago
@Ryknfjor Are you saying that electrolytic hydrolysis followed by hydrogen combustion is more efficient than charging a battery and expelling it into an electric motor? If so I find that very hard to believe, especially since some electrically powered cars in fact recovery some of their energy lost to things like friction. Regarding speed, electric cars have much greater power to weight ratios and a constantly peaked torque, which gives them a huge performance advantage over internal combustion.
soldier9599 7 months ago
@soldier9599 i misunderstood, i agree with everything you said except the speed part, cuz as a matter-of-fact gas engines or 'internal combustion' engines still have a better power to weight ratio- the only advantage the electric cars have is the superior torque it has. the best motorcycles that are electric still arent as quick and cant run as long and are 1.5 times heavier than 'IC' powered motorcycles. the killacycle total drive train weighs near 400lbs! the FASTEST electric bike
Ryknfjor 7 months ago
@Ryknfjor If you look at the Wankel engine you'll find the pinnacle of internal combustion power-to-weight ratios in automobiles. Perhaps the most common is the Renesis, which accomplishes an impressive 1.5kW/kg. However, it is typical of lithium-ion polymer batteries to pump out 2.8kW/kg. You might suggest that the electric motor should be considered as well, but they typically weigh less than the transmission you wouldn't need, giving you an even greater overall power-to-weight ratio increase.
soldier9599 7 months ago
@soldier9599 yes, but whats the price tag on that? plus the battery tech is old- the killacycle's motors weighs 174lbs itself, which isnt bad (other bike engines weigh about that including trannys)- but the battery is 200lbs! the wankel is awesome for its volume/mass power but it suffers from guzzling gas a bit more than piston engines. are views are different - IC piston BIKE engines put out better power/weight than wankel. entire bike= 440lbs wet, 1K CC's=165hp, 40mpg, 100K miles easy
Ryknfjor 7 months ago
@soldier9599 basically im coming from bikes and your coming from cars so its kinda hard to compare, but you have enlightened me more about electric motors+batteries.
Ryknfjor 7 months ago
@Ryknfjor I believe the only point here is that, while this internal hydrogen combustion propulsion system is inferior to an electric motor's efficiency, it is much easier to convert your own gasoline powered car into a hydrogen powered car than an electrically powered car.
soldier9599 7 months ago
@soldier9599 i'm assuming its because of the fact that you dont need batteries(expensive and heavy)
jambwoy876 7 months ago
Who the fuck wants a noiseless car that is slow as fuck. I bought a E55 AMG because of the supercharged 5.4ltr V8, what the fuck is so good about the electric car? Who wants fuel efficiency, is that really what you want? You sir are a fag. A real man drives a V8, Jesus, what's happened to men these days, they're because cowards day by day. FUCK the environment, I drove past a green-convention last month and they were giving me nasty looks I just laughed at them, stupid hippies, they have no life
princepersia1 7 months ago
@princepersia1 First off, I'd much rather drive my G37S's twin turbo V6 than your oh so manly V8 autotragic prestige car. However, I'm not so sure I see where you're coming from. I was addressing the future here. Already, electrically powered cars have more potential to put a lot of power to the ground at a given weight than internal combustion. Haven't you heard of the Tesla roadster? Get a clue, electric cars are the way of the future, be it for efficiency or performance.
soldier9599 7 months ago
@soldier9599 honestly, alcohol powered cars, like the ones you see in dragsters, cannot be replicated by an electric motor, not at least anytime soon and im adamant about that
angrygunsmith 7 months ago
I actually had a run with a Tesla on the highway a while back, the back is good to 60mph in 4 secs but after that my car crippled it, there was 9-10 car lengths between us, it's also quiet and looks girly, too expensive and not enough range. The answer to gas is hydrogen, because it needs only mods to a standard engine to work, do you really think every car in the world can be destroyed and replaced by electric? The cost would be comedic. Electric is definitely not feasible.
princepersia1 7 months ago
@princepersia1 My point is that 100 years from now, none of the cars we drive today will be on the road. I'm not saying it will be a quick transition. Yes, hydrogen is a good answer for people today that already have internal combustion vehicles, but you don't need to destroy them for them to gradually get phased out. They destroy themselves given enough time.
soldier9599 7 months ago
@soldier9599 because a battery is expensive and heavy and it's using rare earth material. If you can create the electricity green then splitting water into hydrogen for fuel is not so bad.
They are however experimenting with Ultra capacitors and nanotubes technology, which should improve the capacitors by at least 10 times, so then you can use that as a inexpensive lightweigthed battery, which you can charge in 2 minutes
moonsmilelucide 6 months ago
@moonsmilelucide Lithium is far from a rare earth metal. Even if in the future its supply were to become an issue, Sodium-ion battery cells are already in development. There's no doubt that sodium is a highly abundant metal. This battery type allows for a much longer cell lifetime than Lithium-ion battery cells and when mass-produced is a much cheaper alternative as well.
soldier9599 6 months ago
@moonsmilelucide Also, just some numbers to think about. There are 600 million cars in the world today. There are 11,948,400,000,000 million (1.19484 × 10^19) tonnes of Lithium on Earth.
soldier9599 6 months ago
"Exxon makes major oil discovery in Gulf" announcement just came yesterday. 700 million barrels are estimated conservatively from this super deep well in the gulf. "Peak oil" is another dismissive buzzword that has little scientific evidence. More finds are being made all the time.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
Oxygen by itself is not completely safe; also "scientist" bob here could be reselling the oxygen rather than letting it out. Kinda dumb.
robertmathenia 8 months ago
Bob Lazar looks like G-Man
insanity54 8 months ago
This man have foresight, he knows that fossil fuel is not going to last forever, hydrogen is the future, I'll be laughing, if a hydrogen car can drive faster than any sport cars out there while using less fuel than the sport car
spartan1004 8 months ago
@marinesnip Check out Jaguar's concept car CX75. It can use a variety of fuel sources, including Hydrogen, and it powers up two micro jet engines to power 4 electric motors; 1 on each wheel. It travels over 200mph and it's quite quiet. Not to mention, stunningly beautiful to look at. It's definitely better than adding a HHO cell in your car! lol
Itsmeeman1 8 months ago
Comment removed
Spydiggity 8 months ago
@fasantupp You're absolutely correct and I actually only just noticed that the isotope was different as I pressed the 'Post' button. I just couldn't be bothered to add a new statement saying I was mistaken at the time. I still think solar/wind power to electrolyze water day and night in a trickle-down effort of electricity is a good point to make. You get the panels and wind turbine, charge batteries, electrolyze water, separate the gases and you've got yourself a slow constant fuel source.
Itsmeeman1 8 months ago
Wait wait wait, did the description just call bob lazar a "scientist"......... Bahahahaha! Bob lazar was a well known conartist (with absolute no education, despite the bullshit claims he made), he had a habbit of going around claiming alot of random shit etch story would contradict the other.
Lokivoid 8 months ago
To itsadeadmansparty
1) Clean Oxygen of toxic materials? Oxygen IS a TOXIC material!
2) Lithium is legal! It's a prescription drug! Anti-depressant, anyone? lol
3) Why don't YOU invest in solar power? Go on, buy your own cells, power an electrolyser and make your own Hydrogen! There you go!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1 Just want to point out that lithium-6 (the isotop they are talking about in the vid) is illegal. Ordinary lithium however is not.
fasantupp 8 months ago
I don't understand how this is better than electric cars. You have to make the electricity first before the car will work anyway.
SingleSpiral 9 months ago
@SingleSpiral Because Hydrogen vehicles are a lot cheaper to build and operate, easy to convert from a gasoline engine and they will last longer (Driving distance and the age of the engine during use). I used to work on the Volt on the cold weather testing dyno project and I still cannot see replacing gasoline engines in the near future. The technology is still not there yet for wide spread use!
marinesnip 8 months ago
@SingleSpiral That true but think of this, say you're driving an electric vehicle and you go a long distance that drains a majority of the battery. Let's say you can charge the battery in the parking lot, I'm pretty sure that it'll take several hours to fully charge that battery for the trip back but you're only staying for 30 minutes. With hydrogen however, you just fill up at a fueling station in a matter of minutes and away you go. Charging up a battery takes a significant amount of time.
Zoowey07 7 months ago
It's not a war for oil. Turns out that's just the cover story. It's a spreading of the New World Order. They want to stop religious fanatics from having ridiculous rules. Soon our planet will be our country. Maybe we will soon have interplanetary relations.
derman077 9 months ago
@derman077 Yeah but then you may run into THX1138 Type World, We are already very close to THX1138. The religious mind needs to go but who do you want running the planet, nwo or everyone being intelligent and realizing we live in a world of abundance if we manage our resources, but at our present rate consider earth paralysed after 50 years. Anyway the earth will always go on but we may suffocate ourselves out of existence if the nwo doesnt change the plan.Lazar's video proves solutions do exist
itsadeadmansparty 9 months ago
Bob Lazar worked at Area51(watch?v=vmJIhQSICSc&feature=related). He knows all kinds of amazing technological advancements and government projects the public isn't made aware of. Some say he's a government "plant" and a "disinformationist", I'll let you decide.
The4LA2Baker0 9 months ago
I did something like this for my science fair at school 2 years ago. I used a negative and positive coil, baking soda to speed up the reaction and a car battery to charge both coils but they corroded so it doesn't work as well as it did when I first used it.
HawaiiMclovin69 9 months ago
Isn't this the UFO guy that claims to have worked at Area 51? I'm not even joking.
Novacayn 9 months ago
@Novacayn yes
HawaiiMclovin69 9 months ago
the grey haired guy sounds like a therapist: mhm mhm right mhm uha
lkschlosser 9 months ago
this man is a genius .we need people like him . to make a change .
yet we got the oil maffia preventing a lot of this ,sadly .
i think its a great thing that he built . and hopefully i can study this and make my own hydrogen extractor . im no scientist . but i think this is awesome .and would love to be able to make something similar . imagine this on every vehicle .
and the amount of money people would save .fuck the corrupt oil maffiosi .
they are cockroaches .pardon my french hahaha
undergroundmasterrr 9 months ago
@undergroundmasterrr Your so right,
He is a great man, he even told the world how alien space ships work, duhh element 115
itsadeadmansparty 9 months ago
Comment removed
locouk 9 months ago
The truth of the matter is that many scientists have developed efficient energy devices that have not been placed in front of the public eye. These scientists have been threatened verbally and physically by high ranking government officials to terminate their project. If a device that produced enough energy without the need for oil, then the world would collapse because all the high fliers that rule the world with their oil money would go broke and they simply won't have that.
Number1plus0 9 months ago
i don't see any cars moving..?
fawnication 9 months ago
The United Nuclear site say's "Target price for the complete system (which includes the home Hydrogen generator station, associated solar or wind power unit, and vehicle conversion kit is in the $10,000 range"
How do you get around the issue of not being able to sell hydride? The potential customer doesn't have to have a home particle accelerator also do they? Also, is it a one time need or do you need to change the hydride over time?
simplemind111 10 months ago
at the rate of desertification, I think we're just fine.
farufon 10 months ago
@farufon Yes but we can use desalination plant water. That way this wont effect the rate of desertification. Of course desal plants require a lot of energy to run but like the one in sydney it can be run on renewable energy.
jim30775 4 months ago
First of all the main problem with hydrogen car is that they emit water. This could be a huge problem to the ecosystem of deserts if everyone in lets say Arizona had a hydrogen car they would be emitting so much water that they could actually change the ecosystem of the desert. Which in turn would kill a lot of biomass.
page2340 10 months ago
@page2340 ??? A lot of Bio mass in a desert? also inst a desert caused by lack of rain fall due to climate, that same climate that evaporates so much water, wouldn't the water evaporate for the most part before it makes it far form the city centers?
traindude70 10 months ago
@page2340 From a desert baby,all come on, give me a break.
DBSpy1 9 months ago
@page2340 Your comment is absurd considering the fact that H2O is also emitted when burning gasoline.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
How does the hydrogen affect the engine and systems like cylinder walls, plugs, valves, etc. Any corrosion/oxidization issues, I assume the exhaust would have to be made of stainless steel
stonethk 10 months ago
Can't the oxygen be donated?
zaibervaireus 10 months ago
@zaibervaireus hmmm. the oxygen itself will improve combustion . so oxygen combined with a the powerful hydrogen gas . will make a nice bang in your engine block .
and ofcourse we can breathe the stuff aswell hahaha atleast it is a lot better than breathing in carbon dioxide fumes . and untreated water is drinkable so very usefull for everyone
undergroundmasterrr 9 months ago
@undergroundmasterrr He says the excess oxygen is vented into the air. Can't it be compressed and donated to medical companies or someone that might be able to use compressed air? Maybe make a backup compressed air motor.
zaibervaireus 9 months ago
@zaibervaireus Yes the excess oxygen could be stored, then sent to a medical facility where they clean the oxygen so that it is 100% clean of particulates and toxic material.Then you could sell it to whomever, btw the world governments must have known that if they originally invested in solar to make hydrogen then sell the hydrogen via water electrolysis that in some number of years it would pay for itself The sad point is the lithium we need is made illegal by dumb politicians,we need scientist
itsadeadmansparty 9 months ago
These guys were set to start making kits a few years back but from what I remember the government confiscated alot of their stuff having to do with the hydride. From what I understand they have it worked out now and on their website they are set to start manufacturing sometime this year. I think the cost is about $10000 for the kit but it also includes the solar powered hydrogen machine.
I just saw on the news today they have discovered a new storage method. Maybe that will help this along
Malkurn2602 10 months ago
Does someone knows if mr. Lazar still alive and if it is possible to get in contact with him !? I would realy love to create comparative project like this one were i live.
HonKyTanKMaN 10 months ago
This is a good start, but he did say it consumes a lot of electricity. He also mentioned you need platinum, or some kind of non-corrosive metal for the electrodes, very expensive. Solar energy isn't cheap to set up. Photovoltaic panels are very expensive.
The expense for the apparatus is very high. Plus you need electricity you make a fuel to make electricity, remember you can never get 100% efficiency. So in the end, electrolysis at this stage is not viable. Hope for the future though.
sultanabran1 10 months ago
Bob Lzar Please post these plans online so we can revolt against the oil companies and Illuminati. Please bob It's all getting worst. Now more than ever.
MelbShufffler 10 months ago
I've been watching these guys for years... I'm waiting for the launch.... My f-150 craves this... I hope they can overcome the lithium-6 deuteride issue. The rest of the system conversion is much like converting to propane I think... minus the converter....
Elepski 11 months ago
It's almost as if the Rockerfellers or Duponts want t ohave their own material which they could patent so you have to pay them much like nylon did to hemp. Then I see that is happening with nanotechnology as a British company claims to be the first to do what you have been doing for ages:
New Hydrogen Technology - A fuel that uses nanotechnology to safely store hydrogen in tiny microbeads. UK based business Cella Energy has developed the potentially revolutionary....... There you go!
zappatx 11 months ago
wow this is so interesting how something like this exist but yet we continue to import millions of barrels of oil per day
calikiddlx 11 months ago
if we run cars on water there wil definitly be war over Canada for water
omgiTsmeJon 11 months ago
Sounds like you have have to expend energy to make the hydride, then you have to expend more energy to make the hydrogen. Then you have to expend more energy to get the hydride to release the hydrogen. Sounds every energy inefficient. How is this a viable way of powering our cars?
Better off just getting an electric car. Much more energy efficient, less complicated, and less of a hassle.
Vulcan750L 11 months ago
@Vulcan750L Well, I like both electric and hydrogen. But if there perhaps is more energy produced than the customers use, then it's shouldn't be electric inefficient.
gurra1351 10 months ago
@gurra1351
If Hydrogen uses more energy than it replaces, and gasoline and electric are more efficient alternatives than Hydrogen, then what is the point of switching to Hydrogen?
Now factor in the greater cost and complexity and the need to build a whole new infrastructure to support hydrogen distribution. Hydrogen is an utterly stupid way to go.
Vulcan750L 10 months ago
@Vulcan750L Well, gasoline is near its end. Electric should be the way to go I assume. Electric is much more cheaper and the most important thing, environmentally friendly. If they develop better, more persistent batteries. It would probably be they rebirth of electric power vehicles. :)
gurra1351 10 months ago
@Vulcan750L Hydrogen production using standard electrolysis with current technology is up to 73% efficient. There are other developing technologies including 1 which use organic waste and microbial action to achieve efficiencies up to 350%. Even the lower rate of 73% is not that bad considering that Bob's hydride tanks could also be used effectively as batteries to store energy collected from solar panels. A hydrogen distribution costs would be determined by the market. How is that stupid?
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@axe2grind911
It is stupid because it is less efficient and more costly than EVs and gas engines. It is stupid because it requires the building of a whole new costly infrastructure and it will soon by obsolete as soon as they come up with a more efficient battery.
Current battery technology is good enough, but once they come up with the 500 mile range battery, something they are working on, everything else will become obsolete. EVs do not require any additional infrastructure.
Vulcan750L 7 months ago
@Vulcan750L "Stupid" is a label which you use to conveniently dismiss a technology based on your presumptions of efficiency. Efficiency is tied directly to total costs of consumption. What will you say when/if your "fossil" fuels go up to $300/barrel? EVs use electricity primarily generated by a "declining" resource of HCs. Your "costly infrastructure" argument is also presumptuous. Google "Hydrogen lets drivers step on the gas" and see Reuters video for more info.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@axe2grind911
"Efficiency is tied directly to total costs of consumption. What will you say when/if your "fossil" fuels go up to $300/barrel? EVs use electricity primarily generated by a "declining" resource of HCs."
And where do you think Hydrogen comes from, Hydrogen trees? You're a Moron.
Electricity does not have to come from HCs, so to inextricably tie it to HCs is a faulty argument and you're an IDIOT for not recognizing that, and the fact that Hydrogen also requires electric or HC.
Vulcan750L 7 months ago
I invented something 10x better than you fellas.... unlimited power..
I'll give you a hint ..
People hate wires yet they still use the wires to cut their lawns.
20 dollars a day for gaz on a 4 stroke engine.
So simple to swap and use one rather than the other.
and as the |13,000watt generator turns you can self power and have unlimited power. Yet nobody see's it.
Batman & Robin from the 7'0's Think hard but not to hard and you will get it.
For I have invented it.
Dorisequador 11 months ago
@Dorisequador What the fuck are you talking about? Unlimited power?.... Perpetual motion??? IDIOT
rockshandify 11 months ago
@rockshandify Your retarded go have a donut and stay off the net.
Dorisequador 11 months ago
This is basically a solar system (if powered by solar panels) and rather than storing the electricity in batteries (an inefficient storage media) he is storing it in hydrogen by splitting away the hydrogen in water. As long as there are sunny days this is reasonably "green". But if the electricity source is switched to the coal of fossil-fuel powered grid, the "green" goes away.
As for Lithium 6 Deuteride, is this material not radioactive and toxic? If so, its not "green".
SeaWolfe59 11 months ago
Where do people think we are going to get all of this energy to produce hydrogen? Thin air? It's much more efficient to just charge an electric car than it is to produce hydrogen to power cars.
idontcare80 11 months ago
@idontcare80
Im not defending some of the things being said here so dont get me wrong. But I do want to comment that storing energy in batteries is ok for short term storage... but hydrogen can be stored long term without the inevitable energy loss (loss of charge) problematic with batteries.
As for where the energy will come from, I suppose an array of solar panels running all day every day might be sufficient to accumulate enough hydrogen, but, I havent run the numbers to see. Maybe not.
SeaWolfe59 11 months ago
@SeaWolfe59 I don't know why storing it is even relevant, cars are used daily by the vast majority of people. The energy needed to make hydrogen could come from PVs, but the area of PVs needed to charge an EV is already quite large. Using solar energy to make hydrogen to power a car would require an even larger area of PVs.
idontcare80 11 months ago
@idontcare80
Ive run some numbers on area needed and, I agree, to run our cars and homes the way we do now would take a very large array of PVs. And I, like you, am skeptical of all the talk about alternate energy sources. People have been duped into thinking ethanol is the same as gasoline, or PVs are as good as fossil fuels. Theres a lot of ignorance and misinformation flying around and politicians are complicit. Funny part is a guy like Obama couldnt pass a 9th grade science test.
SeaWolfe59 11 months ago
@SeaWolfe59 I believe in alternative energy, just not hydrogen. In the future there might be a way to make it practical, but I haven't seen anything showing much promise of that.
Also, I've known people who live quite normally completely off the grid (except for their cars), it is something that's possible to do right now. And I don't know what Obama has to do with any of this, but most politicians (by far) are very ignorant when it comes to science and technology and that's a very bad thing.
idontcare80 11 months ago
@idontcare80
I agree...nothing delivers the bang like fossil fuel.
I was only using Obama as an example of all the scientifically ignorant politicians.
Many politicians pushed Ethanol and now we know its outcome...it caused food shortages. Nothing can be done in a vacuum and there are always unanticipated consequences. Another interesting aspect about Ethanol that is little known is that it carries less energy per gallon than gasoline. 76 kBTU vs 116 kBTU. So its fuel economy is much weaker.
SeaWolfe59 11 months ago
@SeaWolfe59 Fossil fuel is a myth. Have you ever seen any evidence or scientific study showing that oil comes from compressed plants and dinosaurs? There is none. The Russians are getting their oil from wells 5-6 miles deep. This is proof of abiotic oil, since the layers from which it come precede the geological period associated with so-called fossilization of plant material. Do a search on "abiotic oil" to find out more.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@axe2grind911
Even if oil is abiotic, even that is a finite resource. Is new oil being produced at the rate of current consumption? If not, then it is not an unlimited resource.
If the world consumes 85 million barrels a day and it takes the planet through geological chemical processes a million years to make 85 million barrels, then you will soon run out of oil. Can the planet produce 85 million barrels of new oil a day?
Vulcan750L 7 months ago
@Vulcan750L Oil may actually be constantly be being renewed as we speak through processes going on at the earth's core. Lab tests using a combination of natural minerals under extreme heat/pressure have been able to produce rudimentary hydrocarbons. Whether or not some oil originates from organic plant/animal life (the science on this is dubious and speculative), the FACT is that hydrocarbons exist throughout the universe as determined using spectral analysis. Are these all from dinosaurs?
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@Vulcan750L The real issue is not can the planet produce what we are consuming each day, but can we harvest enough each day to support our long term needs. "Finite" becomes irrelevant on that basis. It's another one of those dismissive labels like "fossil fuel" and "carbon footprint" which carry so many presumptions that most people don't dare challenge them, because it would require too much thinking. If the supply is large enough, it can be "virtually infinite".
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@axe2grind911
Sure, if the supply is large enough, it can be practically infinite. The sun is practically infinite. And what makes you think the supply is that large? Does half the earth consist of oil? I highly doubt it. I don't think it is anywhere close to that. So I don't think we are talking about a very large supply.
We will soon be off of oil anyway, maybe within the next 50 years, so it doesn't matter. It's a moot point.
Vulcan750L 7 months ago
@axe2grind911
Interesting. I'll check it out. How many scientists agree with you that fossil fuels are a myth?
SeaWolfe59 7 months ago
@SeaWolfe59 The point is not how many scientists agree - of course that is the accepted THEORY, so nearly all will agree. My point is that there is very little EVIDENCE for this THEORY. Andi this THEORY does not explain how the Russians are getting oil from 6 miles below the surface. This level clearly precedes the Pleistocene era -- the era believed to have produced the "fossil" fuel by some magical and mysterious unproven process of transformation of plant life into oil.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@SeaWolfe59 Oops, I meant to say that the accepted theory is the fossil fuel theory. Most scientists accept the myth as fact, when it's never been proven. Actually, the abiotic theory came first. To see a complete history of the development of both theories, as well as the best expose of the fiction of fossil fuel, I would suggest reading "Black Gold Stranglehold" by Jerome Corsi and Craig Smith. The first 3 chapters are eye opening.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
@idontcare80 This is a good point. Lazar makes it sound like you can collect enough energy with a single solar panel daily to recharge the hydride tanks. I wonder if it actually takes many days or many panels in one day to get enough solar energy for a full charge. This could make his system infeasible.
axe2grind911 7 months ago
Don't you hate stupid, ignorant politicans who think they are so brilliant that they know how to design, manufacture and in general run our lives? Such bullshit the only reason they jump on the 'green' bandwagon is so that they can be seen as more self-rightous than they already are.
calladuz 11 months ago
If this wasn't on a corvette it wouldn't be nearly as cool!
Only bad part is the metal engine parts will corrode when exposed to hydrogen over a long period of time. I've seen people who ran hydrogen kits on their 4-cyl aluminum engines and large pieces of the aluminum intake manifolds broke loose and got sucked into the combustion chamber. DOH! Plus piston rings, rods, and pistons are usually not able to withstand long term hydrogen exposure. But this will be the future eventually.
brown55061 11 months ago
This is awesome! I want one! :D
thelegendbullet937 1 year ago
who's killing the hydrogen car??? THE OIL INDUSTRY! because those mofo's want to get your well earned money so they can spend them om some girls to suck thier dicks
NLmonsterNL 1 year ago
I give Bob Lazar props. After all these years he still saying F&*K You to the government. He obviously is Down for truth and revolution, but to his avail, i believe age and hope have left him for making those changes possible. We NEED A revolutionist today. Someone step up.
MegaAwesomeDan 1 year ago
Bob Lazar ne ha fatto di strada:da retroingenieria U.F.O. ad auto a idrogeno
vansecondomarco 1 year ago
If we could invest all the money thrown each day to oil wars dictated by the petro-Nazis the world's energy problems would already be solved!
basselyrique 1 year ago
Nobody is killing the hydrogen car.
Cost and technological limitations are killing the hydrogen car. I'm going to make a video entitled "WHO'S KILLING THE TIME MACHINE?!" and see how many suckers I can get.
sovietspyguy 1 year ago
No one is selling anything here. You guys are so wound up to just hear yourself critique anything... because it's there. Even your last response is based on not reading. NO ONE IS SELLING ANYTHING!
farufon 1 year ago 4
@farufon whats the name, model and price tag for the hydrogen generator thanks
ashmuz 11 months ago
@farufon When he does sell, I hope to be one of his first customers. Bob has got it together...
Hallaran 11 months ago
@farufon How is the power output compared to gasoline, in your corvette v8? were there major modifications needed to the fuel injection system or timing etc???
deannaber 11 months ago
@farufon I appreciate your video thanks...
deannaber 11 months ago
OK, my bad... he didn't say they were bulletproof, just that they aren't dangerous.
But, you need a particle accelerator to make the "hydride material" classified as a weapon. WTFBBQ.... He's selling the effin Brooklyn Bridge with a new name:
I call it "unobtainium".
MrObviousMan01 1 year ago
@MrObviousMan01 Maybe if you actually watch the video and listen without trying to find something wrong with everything he says you would learn something and not make yourself look like an ass.
J444123 1 year ago
Bob is full of sh1t....
Hydrogen IS the way to go, it just can't be produced cheap enough YET.
Full of it... who actually believes those standard aluminum bottles are bullet proof??? Any SCUBA diver will recognize those bottles for what they are.
If he needed to LIE about that, it certainly casts much doubt on his credentials with me.
MrObviousMan01 1 year ago
The point was, a BULLET or CHAINSAW would not ignite the Hydrogen, even if you shot the tanks up with incendiary bullets. The point was about the safety of the HYDROGEN stored in the Hydride material that wouldn't blow up! Unlike a liquid fuel tank on a car. Listen up before you insult people.
farufon 1 year ago
Please... shoot those bottles with incendiary rounds... he said they are impenetrable. (at 1:00) NFW is that possible. He is full of BS. This car doesn't actually work yet. NutJob, crackpot.
I wish it were true.
MrObviousMan01 1 year ago
@MrObviousMan01 its the real deal my friend. i converted an old 1.5ltr. '93 honda civic to run on hydrogen using 3 hydride tanks and a propane carburettor. the problem is that standard hydride tanks behave like batteries, they can be used for a limited amount of time before they stop working. There is only so much hydrogen a hydride can absorb before it perishes. Bob seems to have got his hands on a hydride material that will last far longer than anything on the market right now.
neilandrewporter 1 year ago
@MrObviousMan01 He didn't say they were impenetrable, he's saying it's safe if they are shot open and won't burn, why else would he say incendiary bullets instead of regular bullets? Think before you speak.
J444123 1 year ago
I liked it at 7:03 when they pause and take notice of the guy riding the horse that eats completely legal foliage.
4842Chuck 1 year ago
where you the guy in the video?
mrpontiacfirebird 1 year ago