KNOW THIS right now, it takes less watts to electrolyse water into its combustable gases of oxygen and hydrogen than is produced in the following hydrogen and oxygen explosion. Harness this in a design and you've got all it takes! Some of you look really stupid to me, and to think in 20 years or so when all of this hits mainstream your kids are gonna look at this and know you were a real dumb mouthy underachieving jack ass that doesn't do the work before they write something!
I pity halley because he is the only guy here that understands that YOU CAN NOT USE WATER AND CONVERT THAT INTO A GAS THAT GETS BURNED AND HAVE IT ACTUALLY WORK. You are spending more energy breaking down the water than you can EVER get by burning it.
This is a simple concept! The fact is that if you believe that an engine can break down water and burn the result and end up producing work and energy you are a total dolt. mrh and you other idiots have defective brains.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ok, Ok, the water (H20) is broken down through electrolysis ( the cars own 12v system) successfully producing hydrogen gas. This basic technique has been toyed with for many years, by many different people. ( read all you can about "Joe Cell" ) Although dangerous, in theory it would work.
You require energy to separate the water. Burning the hydrogen won't yield more energy than it took to produce it in the first place. You still need an external energy source. All this really does is waste energy by adding an extra conversion. You might as well use the energy to drive the car directly instead of throwing away 20% of it on generating hydrogen as an intermediary.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
are you stupid? the external energy source could be anything, and requires MUCH less energy than a combustion-based engine. hypothetically, a water-powered car could use electricity as it's external energy source... i don't know what you are arguing against, there are countless videos, articles, and studies done that prove there are DOZENS of more efficient ways to run cars, none of which are in use because OIL COMPANIES control the auto industry. if you don't believe that, you're stupid.
If you already have that much electricity on board, you would do better to use that electricity to drive the engines directly. That would be far more efficient than wasting 20% to 40% of it to add electrolysis to the mix.
Current battery technology renders electric cars something of a novelty right now, that's why hybrid cars are currently on the market. Hydrogen fuel cell engines have promise, because you can offload the electrolysis to the power grid, which can use solar, wind or nuclear.
On board electrolysis makes no sense in terms of energy efficiency. The energy lost to electrolysis would mean you'd be better served to drive the engine directly with whatever power source you were using to perform electrolysis.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
why are you going on about it so much, you making yourself seem either bored with ALOT of time on your hands or your trying to cover this up with your silly theory science, this isnt ctheory this is reality, just because high school science says its inpossible dosnt mean it is
This isn't just high school physics we're talking about her. This is the second law of thermodynamics. If this guy really could voilate that fundamental principle of the universe, then he'd go down in history as smarter than Newton and Einstein.
But hey, keep ignoring the science. It'll only make it easier for the next scam artist looking for "investors" to fleece you. Ignore the fact that if the second law of thermodynamics was mutable, modern internal combustion engines wouldn't work.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
well STOP GOING THE FUCK ON ABOUT IT THEN!!! JESUS CRIST are you 65 and retired or something only about 10 people have gone on this vid since you started wrighting your silly comments no one even bothers to read, if you want to live by your old 1950 science rules go ahead but where i come from you learn not every law is how it seems
and i know its you rating my comments down, seriously get a life
He doesn't believe anything unless it's published in a "peer reviewed" journal. No one willing to explore science beyond the antiquated "conservation of energy" will take him seriously.
You're joking, right? If not that is the clumsiest, most idiotic attempt at an Ad hominem attack I've ever seen. Is your channel full of videos about quantum physics and energy dynamics? No, it's not.
How could my choice of pet have ANY bearing upon my knowledge of science?
Please stop grasping at straws and try to find some actual DATA.
I pity you. In the message you sent me you claimed the military was using water powered vehicles. I hate to break it to you but amphibious vehicles are NOT water powered as you seem to think.
Your ignorance of science and lack of critical thinking skills will make you an easy mark for scam artists. I recommend you arm yourself by watching the free video "here be dragons" by Brian Dunning.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
what are you talking about i dont mean the us military lol i mean the japanese, russian ect lolm i pity you for spending so much time trying to proove me wrong beleiving that petrol is the only fuel on earth, lol what do you think water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, you csan seperate tham quiet easily with a certain frequency voltage ect and get hydrogen and oxyge,, when burned they form a new gas steam or h02 its science lol we even did it in science when i was in school, this is possible lol
Let me reiterate, I'm not claiming a hydrogen fueled vehicle is impossible. All I'm trying to point out is that performing the electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR is a bad idea and will not result in a viable engine. Burning the hydrogen yields less energy than it took to separate it.
What part of the above do you actually disagree with?
You'd be better off with a hydrogen tank that had been filled elsewhere using a renewable energy source.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i have an a* in science lol im probably one of the most intelligent people in britan and dont tell me how science works, have you got an a*in science i dont think so, please hydrogen technology is possible, they dont implament it as fuel companys and also OUR TAX! would loose not billions trillions of pounds a year!, the sad fact is my rose tinted glass friend that the world isnt the happy place you think it is, money always wins...
I'm not denying that hydrogen cell vehicles are possible. All I'm trying to point out is that performing the electrolysis in the moving car is a bad idea and will result in a net loss of energy. The claims of a vehicle that can run forever on water alone are, to be blunt, impossible. Anyone claiming they have a vehicle that can run on water alone is either a liar or an idiot.
You need to separate the hydrogen elsewhere and provide the car with a hydrogen tank if you want the thing to work.
dude you have no idea what is going on in the world, people with masters degrees in chem dont fully understand how to exact this process, if you are so amazing GET OFF THE INTERNET AND INTO THE LAB, DAM
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
ok lets scientifically explain it to you:
hydrogen x2 + oxygen = H2O ok, add a certain voltage to the water and you get Hydrogen which will instantly react with oxygen to form water again, but the hydogen is lighter than air, so the oxygen creates a think whitish looking layer of air over the tank, the hydrogen which has not reacted then gets sucked up through a large extractor fan, that then gets burned with oxygen very quickly under immense pressure and forms water h20 on the way out
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the oxyen compound which forms a whitish mist over the tank is oxygen which has reacted with the hydrogen to create water vapor, but most of the oxygen cannot react fast enough so forms a mist over the tank, the light hydrogen then floats through the pipe which has been pressurised and enters the combustion chamber, where combustion occurs, i haave an a* is chemistery, seriously what do you have a f lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
also sorry about any spelling mistakes, im getting very frustrated with some local trying to tell me how advance chemistery works lol, get back to feeding your rabbits rabbit boy lol
You just spent three posts writing about something that's completely irrelevant to what's actually being debated.
Please try to understand, I don't doubt that hydrogen can be burned to produce energy or that hydrogen could be used to power a car.
My point is that performing the electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR will result in a net loss of energy. You need more energy to perform the electrolysis than you can recover from burning the resulting gas.
Water torches are irrelevant to the question of if water powered cars would work, but that's a common mistake and one promoted by scam artists trying to bilk investors.
All water torches do is prove that you can burn hydrogen to generate a lot of heat. The thing that makes water cars impossible is the fact that it takes more energy to perform electrolysis on water than you can retrieve from burning the resulting gas.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Halleyscomet, it's fine by me if you want to cling to your cherished notions- who mentioned a "Water torch"? I SAID ATOMIC HYDROGEN TORCH, The process was invented by Irving Langmuir working with atomic hydrogen. The electric arc efficiently breaks up thydrogen molecules, which later recombine with tremendous release of heat, reaching temperatures from 3400 to 4000 °C. An acetylene
torch merely reaches 3300 °C
The hydrogen gas is diatomic (H2) and why would this man be trying to scam anyone?
Who cares how hot it gets? That's not relevant to this discussion.
You're still using more energy to perform electrolysis than you can recover from burning the hydrogen. Performing electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR results in a net loss of energy. You can bring up all the examples of hydrogen welding technology you want, but unless you get over the laws of thermodynamics you won't be able to build a working "water car."
Halleyscomet, obviously the issue eludes you, you are clueless! hence the hard headed statements..."who cares how hot it gets, yada yada. utterly stupid. You simply don't know what you a re talking about.-if you idd- you'd be embarrassed.
Accusing somebody of trying to deceive or scam because you don't fucking understand t he issue does not address the matter at hand. Ultimately whether you get it or not shit is happening- deal with it.
Well, by your logic the editors of Popular Mechanics must also be idiots:
"Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics havent changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and youre losing energy, not gaining it—period."
At the end of the day you don't know anything. regurgitating somebody else's bullshit does not mean YOU know what you are talking about. You don't, period.
You can't even read correctly and confusing water torch for hydrogen torch is no more than the sign of a lazy, ignorant mind. Your sources mean nothing leave science alone is not your forte dude. You are a bore, plain and simple and ignorant fucking bore. A waste of time too.
You bring up welding technologies as if they somehow supported your claim that a water powered car would work. You're ignoring the entire energy equation. Welders are just using the hydrogen to generate heat. It STILL takes more energy to perform electrolysis than you recover from burning the hydrogen. The Skeptoid article I posted about earlier goes into more detail.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
wow this is real, seperating hydrogren is easy fuel companys apparently assasinated him because he was threatening there profits, im planning to do the same once i leave collage so be on the lookout for me
uhhh you cant run just on water, there needs to be some input of energy such as electricity to transform that water or break it up. thats why he only couples water with his gasoline car and his welding thing needs electricity
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
yes the engine generates enough electricity to run itself, it breaks the laws of physics thats whats so amazing about it, thurver more you never need to refill because the water can just be seperated into hydrogen again and again!
Even if you had a magical means of converting energy forms with zero loss, you'd have energy leaving the system by doing the work of moving the car. There would be less and less energy with which to separate water, which means you'd have diminished volumes of hydrogen to work with. The car would grind to a halt after only a few cycles.
@dangflo if you have a car with a battery to give the initial charge, and an alternator to recharge the battery, then an automobile could run on water easily
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I totally believe it! I have seen cars run on water. Look up "Joe cell", it is being doine all over the world. I am just about done building mine. to quote- A mind is alot like a parachute- It only functions when open.On with the new technology!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
not really because it would be cheap, fuel companies have so much power so do electric companies, they minimise the exposure of technology like this in order to keep robbing us for energy that is free
I see, rather than face the fact that this "technology" is a scam, you rely upon silly conspiracy theories and vague bogyman multinational corporations to explain it's absence from the real world.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
yes, and the fact that you (and most ignorant americans) believe everything you're told by your government and on the news isn't "silly", or a pity whatsoever. keep making videos of bunnies, keep your head down, and don't question the government elite. good strategy.
The technology doesn't work. In order for it to work the way these videos claim, the designer would have needed to overturn the second law of thermodynamics. That's not exactly a small feat. It would be a physics breakthrough that would reduce Einstein and Newton to irrelevant footnotes.
Please, take a few actual physic courses in school. Learn a bit about how the these things work so you can more easily see through frauds and scams like this so called "water powered car."
So according to you, high school physics classes are government indoctrination?
Energy is used by moving the car. Even if you found some magical zero loss way to convert the electricity into hydrogen and then combust the hydrogen, you still lose energy in the process of moving the car. The initial battery charge will get whittled down and on each cycle you'll have less and less energy with which to perform electrolysis and thus less hydrogen to burn.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
not simple at all. the car companies would lose billions and billions of dollars if this technology caught on... so they buy it out, cover it up, and hide it from the public. the original "water car" creator was actually killed, and his patent mysteriously never went through.
Im sorry mate, but you are an idiot, i suggest you do some research before opening your mouth. Lets look at power generation, a billion dollar industry, now don't you think the power companies would use this technology to generate power if it worked instead of coal, hydro and nuclear...think about it, look at the money they could make.But it does not work,it is physics, it simply doesn't work.
I am still waiting to see in youtube two small motors running, one on petrol and one HHO. Then if it is scientifically done and the HHO one runs for a longer time than the petrol one i will be interested in it, other wise where is the proof apart form con men telling you it works and people like you believing them.
Oh, and this vid is 3 years ago, where is the con man and his invention now...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
you use a very botched method of logic: it's not used, and we don't know about it... therefore, it doesn't exist. unfortunately for you, the physics of it completely and absolutely work (electricity or some other source must convert H20 into energy, but this has been done with fusion many times). the reason we don't have access to it is because the powers that be don't WANT us to. the world is run by oil companies, retard. the original "water car" inventor was killed, and his patent destroyed.
While fusion sounds simple, the details are difficult and exacting. Heating, compressing and confining hydrogen plasmas at 100 million degrees is a significant challenge. It has taken a lot of science and engineering research to get fusion developments to where they are today. Both magnetic and inertial fusion programs are conducting experiments to develop a commercial application.
If all goes well, commercial application should be possible by about 2020, providing humankind a safe, clean, inexhaustible energy source for the future.
Plus:
Recreating it on Earth, though is an entirely different story. You see, those hydrogren atoms are both positively charged. Like the poles of a magnet, those similarly-charged particles have a tendency to repel each other, unless they can be heated to extremely high temperatures, i.e. millions of degrees Centigrade,
like the conditions found at the center of your average star.
This is the conundrum facing scientists trying to develop fusion as a practical source of power: if you can heat the particles to the extreme temperatures necessary to begin the reaction, one of two things will happen: either the hot reactive mass will destroy its container, or the container will cool and shut down the reaction. Either way, you can see, fusion is not going to be easy to achieve.
Of course, that hasn't stopped the scientific establishment - the laboratories and physicist withs the big government-funded budgets - from spending, literally, billions and billions of dollars over the past 50 years trying to get the genie in the bottle. They have tried to contain fusion with giant whirling magnets (magnetic confinement) and high-powered lasers (inertial confinement).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
sorry, i was using "fusion" in place of "enzymatic process", in which any form of cellulose or H20 compound, and converts it to hydrogen. some of the videos that can be found of water cars contain this process, and are most definitely operational and feasible. once again, the government retains advanced technology from us, amongst many other things. the military's technology is typically around 20 years in advance of whatever we have available to us.
It will only get harder to keep this technology under wraps. Back in the 1950's you needed a million dollar lab to build these engines. Before long every Tom, Dick and Harry will have the means to design, test and build a true over-unity generator. OPEC is running scared because the clock is ticking.
The first company to market a car that ran on water and not gasoline would become the #1 car company on the planet overnight. Do you have ANY idea how many people buy cars based in part on fuel efficiency?
I'm boggled at the confusion of ideas needed to think car companies would lose money if they could make cars that were cheaper to operate.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i'm not going to keep explaining the same things over and over for those of you that are too thick to understand what i'm saying. once again: the largest industry in the WORLD is OIL. do you understand the relevancy of that? meaning if suddenly, overnight, another method of running cars, factories, etc was invented... the largest companies in the WORLD would be out of their #1 surplus.
So what if ditching gasoline hurt OPEC? The auto industry isn't a subdivision of big oil. They have a close partnership now, but no businessman in their right mind would turn down a technology that would give them an immediate and massive edge over their competitors.
It looks to me like you're turning to conspiracy theories to avoid facing the simple fact that water powered cars are a scam.
Arguments about big oil conspiracies are irrelevant. Please try to stick to the science.
The technology doesn't work. If the laws of physics really were THAT different, then a good deal of the modern technology we actually use wouldn't work! This isn't some dirty little secret that could be buried.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
CONT: ever wondered why a 1985 honda civic gets 55 miles to the gallon, and cars nowadays (aside from the "green" cars, which are still held back from their maximum potential, IE, running entirely on electricity) get 20-30? it would be a massive, massive loss for oil companies for such technology to be commonplace in america. right now, gas is the most important resource in the world, and trillions of dollars in PROFIT are made each year for these oil companies. open your eyes.
The 85 Civic only got about 35 mpg in real world usage. 2008 Civics have been reported getting as high as 45 mpg highway. It says a lot about your argument that you need to make up numbers and then compare an 85 sedan to a modern SUV to make your case.
Due to the higher power engines, SUVs burn more fuel than a sedan. Even then, they burn less fuel than their 80's counterparts.
ok...people..think..IFFFF....this "invention" is so real and so good....WHY is his own car a water/GASOLINE hybrid? why not full water?? this is fake....wake up..whats the top speed?? whats the horsepower...? "on a 100 mile trip we use four ounces of water".....and what?? FIFTY gallons of gas?? wow..not impressed. again..why is car a water/GASOLINE hybrid? why not water only?? its worthless and fake
Because it's illegal to have a car running on something other than what's "approved" . And your dull minded comment dismissing this as fake is the sign of a lazy mind channeling those 2 other bores Randi the lousy magician and wind bag Carl Sagan. Yawn,.
ok idiot...you gave NO information..i asked specific questions..whats the horse power?? whats teh top speed? how much GAS was used in the 100 mile trip he used 4 ounces of water on?? you probably believe in "man made global warming" too dont you?? morons....YAWN...go ahead and buy this great invention. do you have it?? why not? i thought it was so good...again..IDIOT
you are a complete idiot, rare breed you are. i have met many idiots but never a complete one. where are the answers?? horsepower, top speed? if that engine exists then so do the answers ..ANYONEEE got the answers...NO cus they dont exist.. IDIOT
can you or can you NOT read? where is your proof? go buy that car....then ill believe you ..unitl then dude you and i are done talking...you are all mouth..no proof....SHOW ME or shut the fuck up, cunt
bless him for coming up with this. I remember watching a show called that's incredible when I was about 6 and a scientist had created a one person car that ran on about a cup of water. that was in the late 70s/early 80's imagine if he had been allowed/supported to develop that technology. so much pollution and so many wars would have been avoided.
let's pray this gentleman doesn't die of some "unfortunate accident" or "suddent illness".
This is not good for corporations or governments because they lose money. It exists but will never happen because the view of governments and corporations is: Money > the people.
nice but since water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen,what's the process he used to separate H2 to O2?there must be some kind of device.economically,if his invention will be used around the world, He just oil producing countries!
yea he was murdered by george bush because he knew about 911, you people are retarded !!! he's not dead, yes the government sucks, but this guy is alive and well !!!
Houston Local News :), that is Mike Barajas on the left, just for Trivia he is a high school dropout, got his GED studied Journalism, and is now a local well-known anchor.
wheres my red necks at land of the free right? you let jfk get assassinated federal reserve collapse your money supply voted a dictator in with nazi decedents jews buy the media create wars for bank profits secret society's trive goverment wipe there ass with you constitution your only way out is RON PAUL are JFK of are times
ppl ppl ppl, this guy was murdered more then 10 years ago, he was the first to do this kindah stuff makin a car run on water and nothing else he was murdered because like already mentioned the government doesn give a shit about saving the enviroment only about more money
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
all you people are correct, 1. gasoline is the main source of income for this country, 2. if it burns "hotter than the sun" it would've burnt the surrounding air up, 3. i don't think that any flame that'll melt brass will be cool to the touch, and 4. the water powered car? not a new invention, we've already done that, and it wasn't that efficient. same as electric cars, didn't go very fast.
uhh ya it did havent you seen the movie who killed the electric car watch it then say those cars dont go fast also i agree with you about the gasoline thing this goverment wont give up gas till the earth is bone dry
the goverment is all a joke they wount release these cars because there main priority is money and taxes from gas rather then the enviorment and saving the earth from polution
Hey, if it's on Fox, you KNOW it's got to be the whole truth, vetted and researched...
Sure, hydrogen-oxygen flames do just what Klein shows, but..."flame that feels only slightly warm to the touch...", yet melts brass? Where's the clip of the reporter--I think his name was Ace Douchebag-- holding his hand in front of the flame? (I'll pay to see that!) That bit should set off the ol' Numbnuts Reporter Alarm right there...and it happens in the first 10 seconds. (cont'd)
And he goes on, of course...saying that Klein thought his electrolysis invention would "...replace volatile acetylene fumes in welding factories". There's nothing more "volatile" than hydrogen in the universe, and not to be too picky, but there is no industry properly known as a "welding factory," except perhaps in Ace Douchebag's home town of New Jargonville.
(cont'd) If you're going to make up industry jargon and report it with authority, expect to be picked apart by people who smell your hydrogen. And "HHO gas?" What, Klein also invented a gas previously unknown to chemists? Gimme a BREAK! (cont'd...)
"On a hundred mile trip," says Klein, "we use about four ounces of water." Note that he DOESN'T claim that it's EXCLUSIVELY water.
(cont'd) How much GAS does that trip require to generate the vast quantity of hydrogen-- that indeed is available from four ounces of liquid water? Now THAT is the "burning" question, as spoken in annoying reporter-puns. Douchebag goes on to make the bold-sounding claim that the car can also run exclusively on water...and obviously this isn't for very long, since we figure the IC engine isn't there for decoration or to appease the oil companies.
(cont'd) So...we generate hydrogen using buckets of gasoline...so what? Tell us what the overall efficiency is, if you want to make any kind of honest claim...or at LEAST say what efficiency of electrolysis you claim to have achieved.
"...developing a Hummer for the US military that can run on both water AND gasoline." Why? "In case of extreme thirst, drink exhaust"? "Wouldn't it be cool if we had a Hummer that could run on water, as long as we had lots of gasoline around too?"
(cont'd) If true this would require an extensive cooperative effort of the Fed and AMC, when we can't even get existing Hummers fitted with armor... paradoxically, this is the most believable part of this stupidly-spun story.
I hope the oil tycoons have to sell they multi-million dollar homes for the price of one gallon of gas when they get run out of business. Payback is a wonderfull thing sometimes.
this person ought to make some money off this, no doubt, but it would break the backs of the oil tycoons if he offered it to all to make at home and put and end to the greedy one's responsible for raising fuel prices, which makes everything else go up. Imported fuel=greedy rich people. Exported work=greedy rich people! 3c
yes... IF he keep the technology a secret. Because then through his death its still a secret. If he outs the technology then they can't kill him to keep it silent, the cat would already be out of the bag.
it takes energy to break down the water. By the basic laws of thermodynaics, it will take him more energy to breakdown the water then to reassmble it in "his" reaction. Basically, I bet he has a pretty high home energy bill....
seriously, it's not hard to make an oxygen or hydrogen generator. it's hard to make a SAFE one, maybe, but water is pretty easy to break down.
taking into account that (1) his water/gasoline hybrid running EXCLUSIVELY on water went 100 miles on four ounces and (2) the electrolysis is done in the car, i would guess that it's safe to say that the electrolysis process isn't that much of a power consumer.
"electrolysis process isn't that much of a power consumer"...you would be wrong. The electrolysis process has a theoretical limit of about 80%. The practical efficiency with today's technology is about 40%.
I wouldn't mind having the welder.
KenMacMillan 1 year ago
yeah but we're running out of resources
hoboKelly420 1 year ago
KNOW THIS right now, it takes less watts to electrolyse water into its combustable gases of oxygen and hydrogen than is produced in the following hydrogen and oxygen explosion. Harness this in a design and you've got all it takes! Some of you look really stupid to me, and to think in 20 years or so when all of this hits mainstream your kids are gonna look at this and know you were a real dumb mouthy underachieving jack ass that doesn't do the work before they write something!
jessedenson 1 year ago
I pity halley because he is the only guy here that understands that YOU CAN NOT USE WATER AND CONVERT THAT INTO A GAS THAT GETS BURNED AND HAVE IT ACTUALLY WORK. You are spending more energy breaking down the water than you can EVER get by burning it.
This is a simple concept! The fact is that if you believe that an engine can break down water and burn the result and end up producing work and energy you are a total dolt. mrh and you other idiots have defective brains.
Dhadzinsky 1 year ago
where can i get 1
TrueGreatness73 2 years ago
Its not going to happen at least for us regular cevilians, the government wouldnt be able to regulate it .......at the begining at least.
XICANOXOC 2 years ago
3 years later...ho hum...
waderiver 2 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If cars can run or air (pneumatic ) why not water
arrghgarry 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ok, Ok, the water (H20) is broken down through electrolysis ( the cars own 12v system) successfully producing hydrogen gas. This basic technique has been toyed with for many years, by many different people. ( read all you can about "Joe Cell" ) Although dangerous, in theory it would work.
darikmc 2 years ago
You require energy to separate the water. Burning the hydrogen won't yield more energy than it took to produce it in the first place. You still need an external energy source. All this really does is waste energy by adding an extra conversion. You might as well use the energy to drive the car directly instead of throwing away 20% of it on generating hydrogen as an intermediary.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
are you stupid? the external energy source could be anything, and requires MUCH less energy than a combustion-based engine. hypothetically, a water-powered car could use electricity as it's external energy source... i don't know what you are arguing against, there are countless videos, articles, and studies done that prove there are DOZENS of more efficient ways to run cars, none of which are in use because OIL COMPANIES control the auto industry. if you don't believe that, you're stupid.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
If you already have that much electricity on board, you would do better to use that electricity to drive the engines directly. That would be far more efficient than wasting 20% to 40% of it to add electrolysis to the mix.
Current battery technology renders electric cars something of a novelty right now, that's why hybrid cars are currently on the market. Hydrogen fuel cell engines have promise, because you can offload the electrolysis to the power grid, which can use solar, wind or nuclear.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
On board electrolysis makes no sense in terms of energy efficiency. The energy lost to electrolysis would mean you'd be better served to drive the engine directly with whatever power source you were using to perform electrolysis.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why are you going on about it so much, you making yourself seem either bored with ALOT of time on your hands or your trying to cover this up with your silly theory science, this isnt ctheory this is reality, just because high school science says its inpossible dosnt mean it is
mrh112 2 years ago
This isn't just high school physics we're talking about her. This is the second law of thermodynamics. If this guy really could voilate that fundamental principle of the universe, then he'd go down in history as smarter than Newton and Einstein.
But hey, keep ignoring the science. It'll only make it easier for the next scam artist looking for "investors" to fleece you. Ignore the fact that if the second law of thermodynamics was mutable, modern internal combustion engines wouldn't work.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
well STOP GOING THE FUCK ON ABOUT IT THEN!!! JESUS CRIST are you 65 and retired or something only about 10 people have gone on this vid since you started wrighting your silly comments no one even bothers to read, if you want to live by your old 1950 science rules go ahead but where i come from you learn not every law is how it seems
and i know its you rating my comments down, seriously get a life
mrh112 2 years ago
Ignore him.
He doesn't believe anything unless it's published in a "peer reviewed" journal. No one willing to explore science beyond the antiquated "conservation of energy" will take him seriously.
Cornswalled 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i just cheked your channel your a rabbit lover what could you possibly know about the modern laws of science
mrh112 2 years ago
You're joking, right? If not that is the clumsiest, most idiotic attempt at an Ad hominem attack I've ever seen. Is your channel full of videos about quantum physics and energy dynamics? No, it's not.
How could my choice of pet have ANY bearing upon my knowledge of science?
Please stop grasping at straws and try to find some actual DATA.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
I pity you. In the message you sent me you claimed the military was using water powered vehicles. I hate to break it to you but amphibious vehicles are NOT water powered as you seem to think.
Your ignorance of science and lack of critical thinking skills will make you an easy mark for scam artists. I recommend you arm yourself by watching the free video "here be dragons" by Brian Dunning.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
Comment removed
Cornswalled 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what are you talking about i dont mean the us military lol i mean the japanese, russian ect lolm i pity you for spending so much time trying to proove me wrong beleiving that petrol is the only fuel on earth, lol what do you think water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, you csan seperate tham quiet easily with a certain frequency voltage ect and get hydrogen and oxyge,, when burned they form a new gas steam or h02 its science lol we even did it in science when i was in school, this is possible lol
mrh112 2 years ago
Let me reiterate, I'm not claiming a hydrogen fueled vehicle is impossible. All I'm trying to point out is that performing the electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR is a bad idea and will not result in a viable engine. Burning the hydrogen yields less energy than it took to separate it.
What part of the above do you actually disagree with?
You'd be better off with a hydrogen tank that had been filled elsewhere using a renewable energy source.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i have an a* in science lol im probably one of the most intelligent people in britan and dont tell me how science works, have you got an a*in science i dont think so, please hydrogen technology is possible, they dont implament it as fuel companys and also OUR TAX! would loose not billions trillions of pounds a year!, the sad fact is my rose tinted glass friend that the world isnt the happy place you think it is, money always wins...
mrh112 2 years ago
I'm not denying that hydrogen cell vehicles are possible. All I'm trying to point out is that performing the electrolysis in the moving car is a bad idea and will result in a net loss of energy. The claims of a vehicle that can run forever on water alone are, to be blunt, impossible. Anyone claiming they have a vehicle that can run on water alone is either a liar or an idiot.
You need to separate the hydrogen elsewhere and provide the car with a hydrogen tank if you want the thing to work.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
"i have an a* in science"
And how well did they cover thermodynamics in your "science" class? What topics have you actually studied?
"lol im probably one of the most intelligent people in britan "
If your self assessment is accurate, then I think we can all see why the empire fell.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
dude you have no idea what is going on in the world, people with masters degrees in chem dont fully understand how to exact this process, if you are so amazing GET OFF THE INTERNET AND INTO THE LAB, DAM
icecap6969 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ok lets scientifically explain it to you:
hydrogen x2 + oxygen = H2O ok, add a certain voltage to the water and you get Hydrogen which will instantly react with oxygen to form water again, but the hydogen is lighter than air, so the oxygen creates a think whitish looking layer of air over the tank, the hydrogen which has not reacted then gets sucked up through a large extractor fan, that then gets burned with oxygen very quickly under immense pressure and forms water h20 on the way out
mrh112 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the oxyen compound which forms a whitish mist over the tank is oxygen which has reacted with the hydrogen to create water vapor, but most of the oxygen cannot react fast enough so forms a mist over the tank, the light hydrogen then floats through the pipe which has been pressurised and enters the combustion chamber, where combustion occurs, i haave an a* is chemistery, seriously what do you have a f lol
mrh112 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
also sorry about any spelling mistakes, im getting very frustrated with some local trying to tell me how advance chemistery works lol, get back to feeding your rabbits rabbit boy lol
mrh112 2 years ago
You just spent three posts writing about something that's completely irrelevant to what's actually being debated.
Please try to understand, I don't doubt that hydrogen can be burned to produce energy or that hydrogen could be used to power a car.
My point is that performing the electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR will result in a net loss of energy. You need more energy to perform the electrolysis than you can recover from burning the resulting gas.
What part of this do you actually disagree with?
halleyscomet 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Halleyscomet-You need to acquaint yourself with "the Atomic Hydrogen first, then you can opine from an informed position.
Atomic hydrogen torch was invented at the beginning of the 2oth century.
issak 2 years ago
Water torches are irrelevant to the question of if water powered cars would work, but that's a common mistake and one promoted by scam artists trying to bilk investors.
All water torches do is prove that you can burn hydrogen to generate a lot of heat. The thing that makes water cars impossible is the fact that it takes more energy to perform electrolysis on water than you can retrieve from burning the resulting gas.
Welding is not an energy efficient process. :)
halleyscomet 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Halleyscomet, it's fine by me if you want to cling to your cherished notions- who mentioned a "Water torch"? I SAID ATOMIC HYDROGEN TORCH, The process was invented by Irving Langmuir working with atomic hydrogen. The electric arc efficiently breaks up thydrogen molecules, which later recombine with tremendous release of heat, reaching temperatures from 3400 to 4000 °C. An acetylene
torch merely reaches 3300 °C
The hydrogen gas is diatomic (H2) and why would this man be trying to scam anyone?
issak 2 years ago
Who cares how hot it gets? That's not relevant to this discussion.
You're still using more energy to perform electrolysis than you can recover from burning the hydrogen. Performing electrolysis IN THE MOVING CAR results in a net loss of energy. You can bring up all the examples of hydrogen welding technology you want, but unless you get over the laws of thermodynamics you won't be able to build a working "water car."
halleyscomet 2 years ago
Halleyscomet, obviously the issue eludes you, you are clueless! hence the hard headed statements..."who cares how hot it gets, yada yada. utterly stupid. You simply don't know what you a re talking about.-if you idd- you'd be embarrassed.
Accusing somebody of trying to deceive or scam because you don't fucking understand t he issue does not address the matter at hand. Ultimately whether you get it or not shit is happening- deal with it.
issak 2 years ago
Well, by your logic the editors of Popular Mechanics must also be idiots:
"Problem: It takes exactly the same amount of energy to pry those hydrogen and oxygen atoms apart inside the electrolysis cell as you get back when they recombine inside the fuel cell. The laws of thermodynamics havent changed, in spite of any hype you read on some blog or news aggregator. Subtract the losses to heat in the engine and alternator and electrolysis cell, and youre losing energy, not gaining it—period."
halleyscomet 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yawn.
issak 2 years ago
I suggest you read the following articles on the Popular Mechanics web site:
"The Truth About Water-Powered Cars: Mechanic's Diary"
"Water-Powered Cars: Hydrogen Electrolyzer Mod Can't Up MPGs"
They go into more of the science behind water powered cars.
I also recommend the Skeptoid article (Also available as a podcast "Water: Alternative Fuel of the Future?"
halleyscomet 2 years ago
3 big yawns.
issak 2 years ago
Yeah I can understand that. Real science and facts are pretty boring to people who are determined to believe in nonsense.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
Yawn.
issak 2 years ago
At the end of the day you don't know anything. regurgitating somebody else's bullshit does not mean YOU know what you are talking about. You don't, period.
You can't even read correctly and confusing water torch for hydrogen torch is no more than the sign of a lazy, ignorant mind. Your sources mean nothing leave science alone is not your forte dude. You are a bore, plain and simple and ignorant fucking bore. A waste of time too.
issak 2 years ago
A water torch IS a variety of a hydrogen torch.
You bring up welding technologies as if they somehow supported your claim that a water powered car would work. You're ignoring the entire energy equation. Welders are just using the hydrogen to generate heat. It STILL takes more energy to perform electrolysis than you recover from burning the hydrogen. The Skeptoid article I posted about earlier goes into more detail.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BREAKING NEWS: i just made a car that runs off of smiles and hugs PLUS the laws of physics are LIES propagated by oil companies!!!
uwill0se 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
uwill0se 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
wow this is real, seperating hydrogren is easy fuel companys apparently assasinated him because he was threatening there profits, im planning to do the same once i leave collage so be on the lookout for me
mrh112 2 years ago
uhhh you cant run just on water, there needs to be some input of energy such as electricity to transform that water or break it up. thats why he only couples water with his gasoline car and his welding thing needs electricity
dangflo 2 years ago 10
This comment has received too many negative votes show
yes the engine generates enough electricity to run itself, it breaks the laws of physics thats whats so amazing about it, thurver more you never need to refill because the water can just be seperated into hydrogen again and again!
mrh112 2 years ago
Even if you had a magical means of converting energy forms with zero loss, you'd have energy leaving the system by doing the work of moving the car. There would be less and less energy with which to separate water, which means you'd have diminished volumes of hydrogen to work with. The car would grind to a halt after only a few cycles.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
@dangflo if you have a car with a battery to give the initial charge, and an alternator to recharge the battery, then an automobile could run on water easily
popularopinion1 1 year ago
oh snaps! HYDE WAS RIGHT!
shabworthy 2 years ago 3
The car is a scam.
robertyt2 3 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
cool i hope they relaese it to stop global warming i live in houston
brandongiangman 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I totally believe it! I have seen cars run on water. Look up "Joe cell", it is being doine all over the world. I am just about done building mine. to quote- A mind is alot like a parachute- It only functions when open.On with the new technology!
darikmc 3 years ago
If this worked the car companies would be doing it...Simple isn't it.
waderiver 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
not really because it would be cheap, fuel companies have so much power so do electric companies, they minimise the exposure of technology like this in order to keep robbing us for energy that is free
Samwerly 2 years ago
I see, rather than face the fact that this "technology" is a scam, you rely upon silly conspiracy theories and vague bogyman multinational corporations to explain it's absence from the real world.
It's a pity really.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
yes, and the fact that you (and most ignorant americans) believe everything you're told by your government and on the news isn't "silly", or a pity whatsoever. keep making videos of bunnies, keep your head down, and don't question the government elite. good strategy.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
The technology doesn't work. In order for it to work the way these videos claim, the designer would have needed to overturn the second law of thermodynamics. That's not exactly a small feat. It would be a physics breakthrough that would reduce Einstein and Newton to irrelevant footnotes.
Please, take a few actual physic courses in school. Learn a bit about how the these things work so you can more easily see through frauds and scams like this so called "water powered car."
halleyscomet 2 years ago 4
So according to you, high school physics classes are government indoctrination?
Energy is used by moving the car. Even if you found some magical zero loss way to convert the electricity into hydrogen and then combust the hydrogen, you still lose energy in the process of moving the car. The initial battery charge will get whittled down and on each cycle you'll have less and less energy with which to perform electrolysis and thus less hydrogen to burn.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 3
"So according to you, high school physics classes are government indoctrination?"
HA!
You honestly think they aren't???
Cornswalled 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
not simple at all. the car companies would lose billions and billions of dollars if this technology caught on... so they buy it out, cover it up, and hide it from the public. the original "water car" creator was actually killed, and his patent mysteriously never went through.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
Im sorry mate, but you are an idiot, i suggest you do some research before opening your mouth. Lets look at power generation, a billion dollar industry, now don't you think the power companies would use this technology to generate power if it worked instead of coal, hydro and nuclear...think about it, look at the money they could make.But it does not work,it is physics, it simply doesn't work.
waderiver 2 years ago 7
Cont:
I am still waiting to see in youtube two small motors running, one on petrol and one HHO. Then if it is scientifically done and the HHO one runs for a longer time than the petrol one i will be interested in it, other wise where is the proof apart form con men telling you it works and people like you believing them.
Oh, and this vid is 3 years ago, where is the con man and his invention now...
waderiver 2 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you use a very botched method of logic: it's not used, and we don't know about it... therefore, it doesn't exist. unfortunately for you, the physics of it completely and absolutely work (electricity or some other source must convert H20 into energy, but this has been done with fusion many times). the reason we don't have access to it is because the powers that be don't WANT us to. the world is run by oil companies, retard. the original "water car" inventor was killed, and his patent destroyed.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
Fusion has been done many times???
Taken from: Fusion Education-What is Fusion
While fusion sounds simple, the details are difficult and exacting. Heating, compressing and confining hydrogen plasmas at 100 million degrees is a significant challenge. It has taken a lot of science and engineering research to get fusion developments to where they are today. Both magnetic and inertial fusion programs are conducting experiments to develop a commercial application.
waderiver 2 years ago 8
If all goes well, commercial application should be possible by about 2020, providing humankind a safe, clean, inexhaustible energy source for the future.
Plus:
Recreating it on Earth, though is an entirely different story. You see, those hydrogren atoms are both positively charged. Like the poles of a magnet, those similarly-charged particles have a tendency to repel each other, unless they can be heated to extremely high temperatures, i.e. millions of degrees Centigrade,
waderiver 2 years ago 6
Cont;
like the conditions found at the center of your average star.
This is the conundrum facing scientists trying to develop fusion as a practical source of power: if you can heat the particles to the extreme temperatures necessary to begin the reaction, one of two things will happen: either the hot reactive mass will destroy its container, or the container will cool and shut down the reaction. Either way, you can see, fusion is not going to be easy to achieve.
waderiver 2 years ago 6
Cont:
Of course, that hasn't stopped the scientific establishment - the laboratories and physicist withs the big government-funded budgets - from spending, literally, billions and billions of dollars over the past 50 years trying to get the genie in the bottle. They have tried to contain fusion with giant whirling magnets (magnetic confinement) and high-powered lasers (inertial confinement).
waderiver 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
sorry, i was using "fusion" in place of "enzymatic process", in which any form of cellulose or H20 compound, and converts it to hydrogen. some of the videos that can be found of water cars contain this process, and are most definitely operational and feasible. once again, the government retains advanced technology from us, amongst many other things. the military's technology is typically around 20 years in advance of whatever we have available to us.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
It will only get harder to keep this technology under wraps. Back in the 1950's you needed a million dollar lab to build these engines. Before long every Tom, Dick and Harry will have the means to design, test and build a true over-unity generator. OPEC is running scared because the clock is ticking.
Cornswalled 2 years ago 3
Why would car companies lose money on this?
The first company to market a car that ran on water and not gasoline would become the #1 car company on the planet overnight. Do you have ANY idea how many people buy cars based in part on fuel efficiency?
I'm boggled at the confusion of ideas needed to think car companies would lose money if they could make cars that were cheaper to operate.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i'm not going to keep explaining the same things over and over for those of you that are too thick to understand what i'm saying. once again: the largest industry in the WORLD is OIL. do you understand the relevancy of that? meaning if suddenly, overnight, another method of running cars, factories, etc was invented... the largest companies in the WORLD would be out of their #1 surplus.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
So what if ditching gasoline hurt OPEC? The auto industry isn't a subdivision of big oil. They have a close partnership now, but no businessman in their right mind would turn down a technology that would give them an immediate and massive edge over their competitors.
It looks to me like you're turning to conspiracy theories to avoid facing the simple fact that water powered cars are a scam.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 4
Arguments about big oil conspiracies are irrelevant. Please try to stick to the science.
The technology doesn't work. If the laws of physics really were THAT different, then a good deal of the modern technology we actually use wouldn't work! This isn't some dirty little secret that could be buried.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
CONT: ever wondered why a 1985 honda civic gets 55 miles to the gallon, and cars nowadays (aside from the "green" cars, which are still held back from their maximum potential, IE, running entirely on electricity) get 20-30? it would be a massive, massive loss for oil companies for such technology to be commonplace in america. right now, gas is the most important resource in the world, and trillions of dollars in PROFIT are made each year for these oil companies. open your eyes.
MattJoyce 2 years ago
The 85 Civic only got about 35 mpg in real world usage. 2008 Civics have been reported getting as high as 45 mpg highway. It says a lot about your argument that you need to make up numbers and then compare an 85 sedan to a modern SUV to make your case.
Due to the higher power engines, SUVs burn more fuel than a sedan. Even then, they burn less fuel than their 80's counterparts.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 3
The car companies themselves wouldn't but their Saudi backers would.
Cornswalled 2 years ago
ok...people..think..IFFFF....this "invention" is so real and so good....WHY is his own car a water/GASOLINE hybrid? why not full water?? this is fake....wake up..whats the top speed?? whats the horsepower...? "on a 100 mile trip we use four ounces of water".....and what?? FIFTY gallons of gas?? wow..not impressed. again..why is car a water/GASOLINE hybrid? why not water only?? its worthless and fake
HonGyakku 3 years ago 4
Because it's illegal to have a car running on something other than what's "approved" . And your dull minded comment dismissing this as fake is the sign of a lazy mind channeling those 2 other bores Randi the lousy magician and wind bag Carl Sagan. Yawn,.
issak 3 years ago
ok idiot...you gave NO information..i asked specific questions..whats the horse power?? whats teh top speed? how much GAS was used in the 100 mile trip he used 4 ounces of water on?? you probably believe in "man made global warming" too dont you?? morons....YAWN...go ahead and buy this great invention. do you have it?? why not? i thought it was so good...again..IDIOT
HonGyakku 3 years ago
Before you get your knickers in a twist some more- look up Atomic hydrogen. Obviously you have no clue
as to the fucky you are complaiinig about.
Any moron who takes the position that if something makes no sense to tjeir stunted little world and therefore it
must be fake; belongs in the category of doughy -arrogant jerk offs, too busy wanking off to anime porn instead of
getting real pussy. Now go to your room and shut the fuck up.
issak 3 years ago
you are a complete idiot, rare breed you are. i have met many idiots but never a complete one. where are the answers?? horsepower, top speed? if that engine exists then so do the answers ..ANYONEEE got the answers...NO cus they dont exist.. IDIOT
HonGyakku 3 years ago
Do you really want to know? stop grandstanidng, contact Jim Klein, tell him he's a fake, tell him you
can spot a fake because it takes one to know one.
Yeah, it's a conspiracy of deception meant to get tantrumy, self important assholes like you pissed off.
Well, guess what? in spite of the fact that your mommy keeps telling you how special and unique
you are- your fucking opinion does not matter. Shit goes on and happens whether you get it or not.
so deal with it.
issak 3 years ago
can you or can you NOT read? where is your proof? go buy that car....then ill believe you ..unitl then dude you and i are done talking...you are all mouth..no proof....SHOW ME or shut the fuck up, cunt
HonGyakku 3 years ago
yawn.
issak 3 years ago
Yea then water would cost more per gallon than gas.
pilotdave1970 3 years ago
Can you use this to heat homes to cut your gas bill?
MasterB8000 3 years ago
Yes, but defective, leaky, systems will cause your house to explode.
Art4Law 3 years ago
bless him for coming up with this. I remember watching a show called that's incredible when I was about 6 and a scientist had created a one person car that ran on about a cup of water. that was in the late 70s/early 80's imagine if he had been allowed/supported to develop that technology. so much pollution and so many wars would have been avoided.
let's pray this gentleman doesn't die of some "unfortunate accident" or "suddent illness".
on a lighter note....YAY THIS IS GOOD NEWS!
milkandkisses78 3 years ago
Look up "gullible" . Your picture's there!
CrudeDude 3 years ago
You are one gullible , pathetic cretin.
CrudeDude 3 years ago
Was this screened on the 1st of April?
arryhuk 3 years ago
And why the fuck don't we have this available to the public yet??
InvisiMan2006 3 years ago
This is not good for corporations or governments because they lose money. It exists but will never happen because the view of governments and corporations is: Money > the people.
infernalcross 3 years ago
nice but since water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen,what's the process he used to separate H2 to O2?there must be some kind of device.economically,if his invention will be used around the world, He just oil producing countries!
mannytubing 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The first water car inventor, Stan Meyer, was "suicided" by the CIA (just like the DC Madam)
I hope this guy has some protection and seek to just GIVE the technology to everyone, cause if he tries to sell it he'll be killed.
TheAgeofScarcitySCAM 3 years ago
Bullshit
CrudeDude 3 years ago 2
Cute claim.
Got a aource?
Oh, right, I forgot, the lack of evidence is considered proof of a conspiracy.
halleyscomet 2 years ago 3
yea he was murdered by george bush because he knew about 911, you people are retarded !!! he's not dead, yes the government sucks, but this guy is alive and well !!!
lkrfan66 3 years ago
Lies, he was NOT murdered. This first aired Jun 1st 2006.
Jaymz007 3 years ago
this guy was murdered
mustapha18 4 years ago
your thinking of stan meyer, now that guy is dead
321crash123 3 years ago
Houston Local News :), that is Mike Barajas on the left, just for Trivia he is a high school dropout, got his GED studied Journalism, and is now a local well-known anchor.
smashingpunk 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
falkminuteman 4 years ago
somebody help me make my car run on water
Norwood92jc 4 years ago
ppl ppl ppl, this guy was murdered more then 10 years ago, he was the first to do this kindah stuff makin a car run on water and nothing else he was murdered because like already mentioned the government doesn give a shit about saving the enviroment only about more money
silencebone 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
all you people are correct, 1. gasoline is the main source of income for this country, 2. if it burns "hotter than the sun" it would've burnt the surrounding air up, 3. i don't think that any flame that'll melt brass will be cool to the touch, and 4. the water powered car? not a new invention, we've already done that, and it wasn't that efficient. same as electric cars, didn't go very fast.
shasato 4 years ago
Please shut the fuck up. You have no idea what you are talking about.
RBM324 4 years ago 6
uhh ya it did havent you seen the movie who killed the electric car watch it then say those cars dont go fast also i agree with you about the gasoline thing this goverment wont give up gas till the earth is bone dry
Norwood92jc 4 years ago
actually, the gas companies bought them out and, also the tourch is true... it is all science with the periodic table... this man is genius
Fable98 4 years ago
the goverment is all a joke they wount release these cars because there main priority is money and taxes from gas rather then the enviorment and saving the earth from polution
polkj 4 years ago
George W will not let this get on to the streets!
Water powered engines are not a new thing they were around in the 70s.
No country could afford the loss of taxes and revenue gained by the use of fossil fuels for transport!!
This will never become mainstream i guarantee it!!!
bazrippa 4 years ago
Hey, if it's on Fox, you KNOW it's got to be the whole truth, vetted and researched...
Sure, hydrogen-oxygen flames do just what Klein shows, but..."flame that feels only slightly warm to the touch...", yet melts brass? Where's the clip of the reporter--I think his name was Ace Douchebag-- holding his hand in front of the flame? (I'll pay to see that!) That bit should set off the ol' Numbnuts Reporter Alarm right there...and it happens in the first 10 seconds. (cont'd)
808pants 4 years ago 4
And he goes on, of course...saying that Klein thought his electrolysis invention would "...replace volatile acetylene fumes in welding factories". There's nothing more "volatile" than hydrogen in the universe, and not to be too picky, but there is no industry properly known as a "welding factory," except perhaps in Ace Douchebag's home town of New Jargonville.
808pants 4 years ago 4
(cont'd) If you're going to make up industry jargon and report it with authority, expect to be picked apart by people who smell your hydrogen. And "HHO gas?" What, Klein also invented a gas previously unknown to chemists? Gimme a BREAK! (cont'd...)
"On a hundred mile trip," says Klein, "we use about four ounces of water." Note that he DOESN'T claim that it's EXCLUSIVELY water.
808pants 4 years ago 3
(cont'd) How much GAS does that trip require to generate the vast quantity of hydrogen-- that indeed is available from four ounces of liquid water? Now THAT is the "burning" question, as spoken in annoying reporter-puns. Douchebag goes on to make the bold-sounding claim that the car can also run exclusively on water...and obviously this isn't for very long, since we figure the IC engine isn't there for decoration or to appease the oil companies.
808pants 4 years ago 2
(cont'd) So...we generate hydrogen using buckets of gasoline...so what? Tell us what the overall efficiency is, if you want to make any kind of honest claim...or at LEAST say what efficiency of electrolysis you claim to have achieved.
"...developing a Hummer for the US military that can run on both water AND gasoline." Why? "In case of extreme thirst, drink exhaust"? "Wouldn't it be cool if we had a Hummer that could run on water, as long as we had lots of gasoline around too?"
808pants 4 years ago 2
(cont'd) If true this would require an extensive cooperative effort of the Fed and AMC, when we can't even get existing Hummers fitted with armor... paradoxically, this is the most believable part of this stupidly-spun story.
808pants 4 years ago 2
I hope the oil tycoons have to sell they multi-million dollar homes for the price of one gallon of gas when they get run out of business. Payback is a wonderfull thing sometimes.
partydave1 4 years ago
this person ought to make some money off this, no doubt, but it would break the backs of the oil tycoons if he offered it to all to make at home and put and end to the greedy one's responsible for raising fuel prices, which makes everything else go up. Imported fuel=greedy rich people. Exported work=greedy rich people! 3c
compton3c 4 years ago
Are you straight outta Htown?
3c
compton3c 4 years ago
Daniel Tingel was the first invented this technology...
wscalago 4 years ago
Wo is he and is this for real I wonder after reading the comments.
3c
compton3c 4 years ago
Why isn't this our top priority?
jootbooner 4 years ago
Because it doens't actually work.
halleyscomet 2 years ago
daniel tingel- the first who invented the water car..!!
gtjmm 4 years ago
I think coolest thing about this would be...if you get a big enough alternator to provide the electrolysis "in-car" you would never run out of fuel!
So what if it has less power per lb. than gasoline?
twoeightythreez 4 years ago
THEY ARE GOING TO KILL HIM!
mattooooooo 4 years ago
yes... IF he keep the technology a secret. Because then through his death its still a secret. If he outs the technology then they can't kill him to keep it silent, the cat would already be out of the bag.
thecitizine 4 years ago
its the corrupt US goverment that will not let this thing off the ground
babyarms 5 years ago
wonder how much power it takes to break down the water.... lol thermodynamics
shmoblar 5 years ago 4
lol thermodynamics? really?
hmm...if he gets 100 miles from FOUR OUNCES on his water/gas hybrid (using exclusively water), then i guess it can't be that much, huh?
grendelvs 5 years ago
it takes energy to break down the water. By the basic laws of thermodynaics, it will take him more energy to breakdown the water then to reassmble it in "his" reaction. Basically, I bet he has a pretty high home energy bill....
shmoblar 5 years ago 6
seriously, it's not hard to make an oxygen or hydrogen generator. it's hard to make a SAFE one, maybe, but water is pretty easy to break down.
taking into account that (1) his water/gasoline hybrid running EXCLUSIVELY on water went 100 miles on four ounces and (2) the electrolysis is done in the car, i would guess that it's safe to say that the electrolysis process isn't that much of a power consumer.
grendelvs 5 years ago
"electrolysis process isn't that much of a power consumer"...you would be wrong. The electrolysis process has a theoretical limit of about 80%. The practical efficiency with today's technology is about 40%.
gopmonster 5 years ago 4
From what you and everyone else knows... He says he uses a "very unique" process.
xhenxhe 5 years ago
wow...
dan123dbl 5 years ago